CAMBODIA COUNTERING TRAFFICKING- IN-PERSONS (CTIP) PROGRAM
YEAR FIVE ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT OCTOBER 1, 2019 – SEPTEMBER 30, 2020
October 30, 2020
Submitted to United States Agency for International Development Cambodia Mission
This report made possible by the generous support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of Winrock International and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. It was prepared by Winrock International under cooperative agreement AID-442-A-15-00002.
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ...... 3 ANNEXES ...... 3 ACRONYMS ...... 4 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 5 II. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...... 9 III. ACTIVITIES AND PERFORMANCE AGAINST OBJECTIVES ...... 12 PREVENTION ...... 12 Strengthen Savings Groups ...... 12 Small Grant for ARPs...... 18 Strengthen Market Linkage Strategies ...... 20 Soft Skills Training ...... 22 Soft Skills Radio Live Shows ...... 24 PROTECTION ...... 27 PARTNERSHIPS ...... 33 Bongpheak Job-Seeking Platform ...... 33 Partnerships with the Private Sector ...... 39 Partnership with Habitat for Humanity ...... 40 Workers’ Journey Study ...... 42 MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PRIMARY ACTIVITIES ...... 43 End of Project Learning Conference ...... 47 Project Management ...... 50 IV. CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS ...... 50
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 2
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1: CTIP Results Framework Figure 2: Soft Skills Video View Times Breakdown by Gender and Age-Range Figure 3: Total View Times by Each Video Figure 4: Demographic Breakdown of Audience Figure 5: Planned & Service Provision to TIP Survivors Figure 6: Types of Employment Figure 7: Examples of Infographics Shared Through Social Media Figure 8: Additional Examples of Infographics Shared by Open Institute for COVID-19 Prevention Figure 9: Monthly Breakdown of Bongpheak Users from October 2019 to June 2020 Figure 10: New Job Announcements Posted on Bongpheak Figure 11: New Job Seekers Seeking Employment via Bongpheak Figure 12: Announcements on Bongpheak Website from Different Sectors Figure 13: Bongpheak Income: Single Payments vs Subscriptions Table 1: Savings Group Performance in 2020 Table 2: List of IEC Materials Produced and Disseminated in Year 5 Table 3: Client Case Management Status Table 4: Cambodia CTIP Year 5 Trip Summary Table 5: Indicators Reported Through Baseline and End-line Studies Table 6: CTIP End-Line Study Data Collection
ANNEXES
Annex 1: Performance Indicator Tracking Table Annex 2: Savings Group Profile Annex 3: Small Grant Support Table Annex 4: Case Study Annex 5: End-Line Report Annex 6: Workers Journey
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 3
ACRONYMS
ACDW Association of Domestic Workers ARP At Risk Persons AAFA American Apparel and Footwear Association ARP At-Risk Person AYLA ASEAN Youth Leaders Association CCPCR Cambodian Center for the Protection of Children's Rights CEDAC Cambodian Center for the Study of Development in Agriculture CJCC Cambodian Japanese Cooperation Center CKCC Cambodian Korean Cooperation Center CLC Community Learning Center CSO Civil Society Organization CTIP Counter-Trafficking in Persons CTIPE+ Counter-Trafficking in Person Economic Empowerment FGD Focus Group Discussions ICT Information and Communication Technology IEC Information Education and Communication IJM International Justice Mission IO International Organization IR Immediate Result KAP Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice KTM Kampong Thom LSCW Legal Support for Women and Children Organization MEP Monitoring and Evaluation Plan MoEYS Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sport MOI Ministry of Interior MOJ Ministry of Justice MoSVY Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans, and Youth MOU Memorandum of Understanding MOWA Ministry of Women’s Affairs MoFAIC Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation NCCT National Committee for Counter-Trafficking NORC National Opinion Research Center NGO Non-governmental Organization NPA National Plan of Action PAC Police Academy of Cambodia PCCT Provincial Committees for Counter-Trafficking PPA Provincial Plan of Action RGC Royal Government of Cambodia RUPP Royal University of Phnom Penh SBCC Social and Behavior Change Campaign TOT Training of Trainers TWG Technical Working Groups USG United States Government VOT Victim of Trafficking
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 4
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) extended the four-year Cambodia Countering Trafficking-in-Persons (CTIP) Program in October 2019 to intensify, sustain, and consolidate selected models of prevention and protection related to reducing forced labor and human trafficking in and from Cambodia. In particular, CTIP committed to: • Strengthening the project’s savings group model; • Adjusting the content and improving the reach of the project’s soft skills trainings for at- risk populations; • Establishing market linkages to empower vulnerable populations and sustain efforts to reduce TIP; • Testing and implementing a sustainability strategy for the Bongpheak job-seeking platform to continue the provision of employment opportunities for Cambodian workers; • Engaging private sector to improve the identification and monitoring of systems to reduce the risks of TIP; and • Engaging government, private sector, and civil society organizations in sustaining services for vulnerable households and victims of human trafficking.
In year 5, Cambodia CTIP implemented its interventions with increased attention to ensuring the sustainability of results, attainment of targets and documentation of lessons learned.
Following the declaration of a global pandemic on March 11, 2020 by the World Health Organization, Cambodia CTIP implemented a modified, revised implementation plan through the end of the project in compliance with prescribed USAID, Winrock International, and government guidelines to safeguard the health and safety of its staff, communities, and stakeholders.
This annual report highlights the main accomplishments, challenges, lessons learned, and sustainability features of the Cambodia CTIP program during Year 5.
Prevention Prevention of TIP was a key feature of the extension period. The project aimed to achieve Outcome 1: Intensified implementation, consolidation, and dissemination of selected sustainable livelihood models for TIP prevention. The midterm evaluation established that most of Cambodia CTIP’s prevention approaches – such as cultivation of multiple income sources possession of a savings account and soft skills training – contribute to increased rates of safe migration among at-risk populations.
Despite to modifications necessary to comply with health and safety precautionary measures for the COVID-19 pandemic, Cambodia CTIP achieved moderate achievements this year. The strengthening of savings groups was intensified through practical skills building, focused on reviewing and regulating savings and loan policies, effective use of bookkeeping applications;
5 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
effective management and leadership; expansion of membership and levels of engagement; advocacy for the adoption of a savings culture among at-risk persons (ARPs); and implementation of complementary support interventions such as small grants, support by community animators, farm promoters, and chick farms. Toward the close of the program, Cambodia CTIP and the savings group themselves contributed funds for 30 computers to be used by the strong savings groups. Cambodia CTIP trained the savings group heads in applying relevant bookkeeping functions to increase the efficiency and analysis of savings group transactions, and to enable the groups to improve their regular reporting and decision making toward sustainable good performance. The performance of all 135 active savings groups was followed and supported throughout the year and resulted in the achievement of moderately good outcomes for all three categories (weak, medium, and strong).
The project exceeded its target for the soft skills component over the life of the program, reaching 52,247 at-risk individuals. During the year, the in-person trainings in the communes reached 1,245 ARPs and livelihood assistance through savings and producer groups and farm promotion. Chicken-raising trainings reached an additional 2,478 at-risk people. Due to COVID-19 restrictions CTIP replaced the traditional in-person trainings with Facebook live sessions and radio talk shows. The Facebook and radio live shows reached 300 returned migrants, providing them with additional information on migration, health, and safety protection fromCOVID-19.
Additional communications materials were disseminated to intensify the project messages on TIP prevention throughout the year, not only through project interventions but also through digital technology. Cambodia CTIP’s Facebook page reached 10,018,644 people (36% female), the majority of whom (75%) were 18-44 years. Considering the restrictions posed by the pandemic, the project invested in online technology for delivering key messages to target ARPs and returned migrants. The communication strategies aimed to promote behavioral change in preventing TIP for the target populations.
To strengthen the sustainability of prevention outcomes, Cambodia CTIP held a consultative meeting in August with community animators and three civil society organizations with similar and expanded livelihood interventions for vulnerable people in Siem Reap and other CTIP areas. Cambodia CTIP shared information on its key interventions and areas of coverage, together with specific data on the names of the animators, location, and, contact information of savings group members, farm promoters, producer groups, small grant beneficiaries, and location of demonstration farms.
Protection Outcome 2 targeted the consolidation and dissemination of a victim-centered case management model to improve services and prevent re-victimization of clients. Cambodia CTIP directly managed 21 cases for the year and achieved its target of closing 19 cases for clients1 that
1 Two clients could no longer be reached due to missing address/phone information. 6 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
reached step 52 within the case management system, Five continue to work with agencies to implement case plans and reach step 5 with CTIP strongly advocating for the provision of direct services to strengthen support for their reintegration given they remain vulnerable due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The pandemic affected Cambodia CTIP’s ability to conduct a more intensive and participatory case management practice among its targeted former protection partners. Based on a re- assessment of the case management improvement plan and training needs of CTIP’s past protection partners the program acted upon two specific training recommendations to improve the capacities of the organizations to implement effective case management systems for TIP survivors. Given restrictions impacting face-to-face trainings, Cambodia CTIP conducted two types of virtual trainings on case management for partners LSCW, ADHOC and Ratanak. The attendance was less than expected due to competing priorities and technical issues experienced during the training activity.
The proposed orientation on Liberty Shared’s victim case management data system did not happen due to protection partners’ reservations about the system when it was first introduced to the program, and the unavailability of Liberty Shared to follow through the intended activities for socialization of the system to organizations providing victim support services.
Cambodia CTIP documented its learnings from its case management practice and shared these more widely in some fora this year. It was agreed, however, that to maximize the value and application of these learnings, USAID Asia CTIP would integrate Cambodia CTIP’s case management experience in its current initiatives, notably its study on reintegration of TIP survivors and collaboration with Liberty Shared on victim case management system, and disseminate these to appropriate online knowledge platforms, conferences and affinity groups in the region.
Private Sector Partnership Outcome 3 aimed to expand private sector partnerships toward improved monitoring systems to reduce risks of TIP. Embedded in this outcome is the continuing support to promote ethical recruitment through improved employer participation in providing direct access to jobs for low-skilled and unskilled jobseekers through the Bong Pheak employment service.
Cambodia CTIP implementing partner Open Institute, which managed Bongpheak, experienced considerable challenges, including lack of support from its key technical partner Mekong Big Data, changes in Facebook policies, and the impact of the pandemic in the job-seeking service sector for vulnerable job-seekers in the country. To increase its relevance during the onset of the pandemic, Bongpheak adapted its messages to disseminate COVID-19 messages to its followers. However, as early as March, it became evident that Bongpheak could not financially sustain itself long-term. In June, Bongpheak’s performance metrics showed the target income of $13,500 to achieve sustainability by June was not attainable. When its sub agreement with
2 Step 5 refers to reviewing and closing the case after the determination a client has basically meet his/her needs; his/her life is free of exploitation and s/he has the capacity to make relatively sufficient income.
7 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Winrock ended in June, Open Institute continued to offer Bongpheak as a free service with no advertisements or oversight.
Cambodia CTIP operationalized its private sector strategy this year and began initiating shared value propositions with three partners, including one representing the hospitality industry (One Park Hotel) and two in the manufacturing sector (Gap Inc. and Cambodia Footwear Association). The project also completed a study on the journey of Cambodian internal migrant workers (“Workers’ Journey”) in three sectors – manufacturing (apparel, footwear, bags and luggage), hospitality and construction – to determine the risks to trafficking for forced labor and to serve as a platform for engagement of key stakeholders, including the American Association Footwear and Apparel (AAFA) in addressing TIP in their supply chains.
When the pandemic struck in March and the negative repercussions of COVID-19 started impacting the economy, the target companies prioritized actions to manage the crisis, notably supply chain disruptions and reduction of product orders from international buyers. Cambodia CTIP partners provided technical advice and recommended that their stakeholders (buyers and factories) comply with labor law provisions for factory shutdowns, loss of jobs, and management of COVID-19.
Cambodia CTIP continued reaching out to its partners and determined how best to work under the evolving circumstances. CTIP, during a Workers Journey webinar, noted partners’ interest in using ‘atun’, a free mobile application engaging workers developed by Labor Solutions working to solve labor challenges for blue-collar workers in Asia. Additionally, CTIP identified challenges in terms of improving the rights of construction workers. The webinar also called attention to the need for a stronger advocacy for a minimum wage for Cambodian workers and substantial labor policy reforms in the existing labor law.
USAID Asia CTIP will integrate the lessons learned and future actions on worker engagement and other appropriate partnership activities with key private sectors launched by Cambodia CTIP to determine how best to navigate the pandemic environment and maintain resiliency and focus in reducing risks to worker abuse and exploitation.
Habitat for Humanity, a key partner in sustainability of prevention and protection outcomes for Cambodia CTIP beneficiaries, constructed six houses to stabilize the economic and social outcomes for CTIP beneficiaries in Siem Reap. The USAID Mission Director, Cambodia CTIP’s Agreement Officer Representative, Habitat for Humanity, and Winrock staff held a build and handover activity for one Cambodia CTIP beneficiary in Siem Reap in August. USAID chose this partnership activity as a major event to highlight its humanitarian theme in commemoration of 70 years of Cambodia and US relations.
Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Activities
The project followed its monitoring and evaluation plan, highlighting the training on and use of data quality assurance procedures in tracking and reporting on project indicators. Winrock also conducted an internal data quality assurance process in August-September to ensure that
8 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
adequate safeguards and tools were employed to achieve validity, reliability, precision, integrity and timeliness of project data collected and reported to various stakeholders. Cambodia CTIP also participated in a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) working group meeting in February, where all Winrock monitoring, evaluation, and learning focal points developed a shared vision for existing projects in Bangladesh, Nepal, Thailand, Laos, Central Asia, and Cambodia. The meeting facilitated cross learning and strengthened coordination and support for meeting MEL objectives across projects in Asia.
The project online database system files were exported from the web hosting server to an external storage device so they can later be imported into a new online database system with Winrock. Cambodia CTIP and home office staff ensured that all data privacy and security requirements were followed in this process.
Tools to promote learning were provided to all staff and stakeholders. This year’s focus was on the use of a savings group assessment tool to ascertain and measure indicators for performance of assisted savings groups as well as a progress tracking tool for partners’ use in determining implementation progress over time.
An End of Project Learning Conference in July summed up the project’s key achievements and highlighted lessons learned as well as sustainable good practices in addressing the project goals. Various stakeholders reflected on the impact of the project’s implementation and noted sustainable benefits relevant to the prevention of TIP. Messages of commendation and future actions to continue combating TIP in Cambodia were delivered by the USAID Mission Director and the National Committee for Counter-Trafficking (NCCT) Permanent Vice-Chair.
Cambodia CTIP supported National Opinion Research Center (NORC) in conducting its field work for the impact evaluation done in November 2019 and provided inputs for the review of the draft report in July. Cambodia CTIP also completed its end line evaluation report and presented its findings and recommendations to USAID for review in September.
II. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The objective of Winrock International and its partners was to improve systems to combat TIP in Cambodia through a holistic, multi-pronged approach that bolstered the capacity of both communities and government actors in coordination with the private sector and key development partners.
9 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Cambodia CTIP improved systems to combat TIP through:
• Prevention efforts which delivered accessible information on safe and smart migration to vulnerable populations through Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools and migration services in Cambodia and destination countries; addressed root causes of TIP by expanding livelihoods options and skills through locally-relevant, market-driven partnerships; and strengthened the National Plan of Action (NPA) implementation through engagement and advocacy on national and sub-national levels. • Protection activities which standardized victim identification and facilitate victim- driven, trauma-informed case management; increased access to and quality of victim services; and built community safety networks to empower victims and vulnerable people. • Prosecution work which enabled TIP victims to access legal services and push for justice, and increased TIP reporting and improve the outcomes of TIP investigations and prosecutions through training of criminal justice actors and inter-agency collaboration. • Partnerships with the private sector, the National Committee for Counter-Trafficking (NCCT), and provincial and commune-level structures which advanced prevention, protection, and prosecution. Cambodia CTIP leveraged resources and expertise of civil society organizations (CSOs) and donors, such as USAID, to bring services to target communes.
10 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
To address the unique roles, risks, vulnerabilities, and the needs of males and females, Cambodia CTIP applied gender analysis to planning, implementation, and performance monitoring across objectives. Approaches for integrating gender included:
• Prevention: Working through youth networks, media, and schools, using messaging to challenge attitudes and behaviors that could lead to exploitative situations for both males and females. Livelihoods interventions emphasizing training and job placement for women, including women whose spouses or male family members have migrated. • Protection: Cambodia CTIP tailored gender-sensitive protection services to the expressed needs of men and women. A focus on community-based care and referrals provided men and women with time and space to recover from trauma while allowing them to reconnect with their families and communities. • Prosecution: Cambodia CTIP emphasized gender-sensitive prosecution techniques, helping justice system actors understand gender dynamics and respect and protect victims and witnesses.
11 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
III. ACTIVITIES AND PERFORMANCE AGAINST OBJECTIVES
The project’s performance against its year five targets and primary activities conducted during the reporting period is summarized below. Key activities in pursuit of its objectives for prevention, protection, and private sector partnership are summarized, showing highlights of performance during the first three quarters as well as more detailed information on quarter four activities. These sections are organized based on relevant indicators for the agreed outcomes on prevention and protection this year (refer to Annex 1. Performance Indicator Tracking Table).
PREVENTION
Outcome 1: Intensified implementation, consolidation, and dissemination of selected sustainable livelihood models for TIP prevention. Three major initiatives- strengthening of savings groups, strengthening of market linkages and soft skills training are incorporated in this outcome.
Strengthen Savings Groups • 24 existing savings groups in the weak category improved their performance rating from weak to medium or strong • 40 existing savings groups in the medium category improved their performance rating from medium to strong • 30 existing strong savings groups remained in the strong category • 10 of the strong savings groups supported savings groups in the weak and medium categories through coaching and sharing of good practices.
An essential part of Cambodia CTIP’s integrated livelihood approach has been the organization and support for savings groups among farmers and livestock raisers trained by the project. Cambodia CTIP’s midterm evaluation noted that having a savings account significantly reduces a beneficiary’s interest in migrating and regular savings resulted in better life conditions. Savings groups serve as a safety net and a key social protection mechanism to manage economic and social shocks among vulnerable populations.
This year, the project supported 1353 active savings groups in nine project areas, with the goal of moving 50% of the weak groups up to medium (26 out of 52); 70% of the medium groups up to strong (42 out of 60); and maintaining the performance of the strong groups so that 100% (23 groups) remained in the strong category.
The achievements of the assisted savings groups at the end of the year are shown in the table below. Annex 2 shows more detailed information for assisted savings groups.
3 After further verification, CTIP established that there were 135 (instead of the earlier reported figure of 134) savings groups at the start of Year 5. Targets for improvement of savings groups performance by category have also been revised accordingly. 12 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Table 1: Savings Groups Performance in 2020 Rating/Status 2019 2020 Target for Y5 Achievements/Remarks Dissolved 0 24 24 groups were dissolved due to limited support from Cambodia CTIP partners during the pandemic and internal performance challenges, which the groups were not able to resolve successfully.
Nineteen (19) weak groups and five (5) medium performing groups were dissolved during the period
Weak 52 1 from the 26 out of 52 In year 5, the project continued to original weak groups strengthen 52 weak groups with the goal group in improved to the of moving 26 to the medium category. 2019 medium category. As of August 2020, the groups’ rating 2 from the shows that: medium - 19 weak groups were dissolved performing (37%) groups in - 1 weak group remained weak; 2020 two groups from the medium category were assessed to have Total as of moved to the weak category. 2020: 3 - 19 weak groups moved to the weak medium category (37%) groups - 13 weak groups moved to the strong category (25%)
Assessment: 32 of the 52 (62%) weak groups either improved to the medium (37%) or the strong category (25%). Taken in its totality, this target was achieved.
Medium 60 42 42 out of 60 Based on the results in 2020: medium groups - 5 medium groups were dissolved improved to the - 2 medium groups moved to the strong category weak category
13 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
- 21 medium groups retained their medium performance - 32 medium groups moved to the strong category
Assessment: 53% of medium performing groups moved to the strong category. This target was partially met.
Strong 23 66 23 groups The status of strong groups is shown maintained their below as of 2020: strong status - 21 out of 23 strong groups remained strong - 2 strong groups moved to medium
Assessment: The project achieved 91% of its target for strong savings groups.
Total 135 135 Overall Assessment: The average performance for the three categories of savings groups is 69%, considered as a moderately good performance in Year 5.
In summary, the project achieved an average performance of 69% in meeting its objectives for savings groups. Working with Cambodia CTIP, the Cambodian Center for the Study of Development in Agriculture (CEDAC) is credited for the improved status of 100 savings groups in Prey Veng, Svay Rieng, Kampong Thom, Siem Reap, Oddar Meanchey, and Banteay Meanchey through the end of their sub agreement in May. It initially started with 124 groups but 16 were dissolved for the reasons listed below:
• Members moved out of their villages • Drastic decreases in group savings mainly due to numerous economic and social setbacks • Poor leadership • Members’ inability to pay back loans • Failure in running small businesses
During the first quarter, CEDAC’s technical support consisted of knowledge sharing visits where savings group members from strong groups shared their good practices, leadership experience and challenges. These were done together with community animators. 14 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Sovann Phoum’s efforts were focused in Phnom Penh and in Kampong Cham. Technical support to eight savings groups during this term consisted of coaching and training in savings and loan management; follow up visits focused on bookkeeping and review of group policies; better committee work; improved coordination and attendance in group meetings; and more active leadership by officers.
Winrock directly provided technical business support and monitored small grant beneficiaries in Koh Kong and supported five savings groups, coaching members on the productive use of loans to expand businesses and increase their deposits. Winrock also set measurable targets for each category of savings groups. Examples of targets set for medium and weak performing savings groups are:
Medium performing savings groups • Include a regular schedule of meetings to share progress, challenges and solutions; • Coach the committee to keep accurate records of savings; always have a safe place to keep all documents and make them accessible; • Include a plan to do home visits to learn about the progress of their small businesses; and • Continue technical support and coaching for savings group leaders and committee heads.
Weak savings groups • Work with community animators to organize monthly meetings; • Provide regular coaching to savings groups committees to regularly check the accuracy of savings in their savings book; • Follow up with members to deposit savings and pay back their loans; • Review savings group by-laws and update if necessary; • Develop and implement plans for increasing membership; • Conduct home visits to learn about progress of small businesses; and • Continue technical support and coaching for savings group leaders and committee heads.
Toward the end of the first quarter, Winrock introduced and trained partners on an assessment and planning tool for savings groups aimed at helping them objectively measure the level of their performance and provide benchmarks for identifying targeted interventions to raise their group performance. The tool provided guidance on objective measures for assessing group structures, systems and outcomes. It also helped Winrock and its partners plan differentiated technical support for each group based on its level of performance.
During the second quarter, savings groups showed improvements in key aspects of their work: • Better document preparation • Improved bookkeeping • Improved loan and savings procedures
15 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
• Regular meetings • Better committee work • Regular reporting and information exchanges • Transparency in expenditure and handling of funds • Better outreach to motivate community members to save • Proactive leadership • Improved relationship among members • Organization of learning exchange visits among stronger and weaker groups
By mid-March, with the outbreak of the pandemic, CEDAC, Sovann Phoum and Winrock implemented precautionary measures by postponing meetings and trainings involving large gatherings of beneficiaries. However, staff followed up with individual beneficiaries through phone calls during the early months of the pandemic. This limited group follow-on support and monitoring partly contributed to the dissolution of some groups. Once some restrictions were lifted by the Ministry of Health, CEDAC and Sovann Phoum were able continue in-person follow-up coaching with individual members through the end of their field implementation in May.
Winrock followed up on the initial training done by CEDAC for its 30 savings groups through August. Cambodia CTIP adapted CEDAC’s bookkeeping system to include applications that are needed to Picture 1: CTIP CoP, Ana Maria Dionela emphasizing the importance of computer bookkeeping skills improve the to Savings Group leaders savings group heads’ skills in analyzing their cash flow and loan management.
16 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
A two-day advanced training in bookkeeping was conducted in August for 30 leaders of strong savings groups organized by CEDAC, together with representatives from two strong savings groups in Koh Kong. Group learning and practice exercises helped the savings group leaders to gain more confidence in applying basic bookkeeping for their savings Picture 2: Heads of Savings Groups presenting the cash flow as part of their practice groups’ financial session on bookkeeping training transactions. Cambodia CTIP also created a Facebook Messenger chat for this group so that they can share information with each other after the project end.
Successes in supporting the savings groups can be attributed to several factors: • Conduct of needs assessment with the aid of an assessment tool as a basis for implementing practical skills building activities, with a focus on reviewing systems in savings and loan management; effective use of bookkeeping applications; strengthening leadership skills and committee-based work; expansion of membership; and calculation of the value of savings. • Provision of small grants to train savings group members in running and growing their businesses and encouraging increased deposits and productive loans. • Internal agreement among members to pay back the cash value of small grants received to their savings group to grow its loan portfolio. • Regular follow-on support by trained community animators based in the community, including support to savings group members to practice the skills they learned, implementation of post-training plans, and provision and use of small grants. • The existence of demonstration chick farms where chicken raisers (most of whom are savings groups members) could continuously learn better chicken-raising techniques and buy chicks at a discounted price. • The presence of trained farm promoters/model farmers, who were available for technical advice, many reaching out to ARPs (most of whom are also savings group members) to provide on-site coaching and demonstration of better farming and animal- raising techniques. • Strong motivation and leadership shown by savings group heads, many of whom occupy leadership positions in their community and were able to lead by example. 17 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Before the close of their sub-agreement, CEDAC provided 30 computers to 30 strong savings groups in their areas, while Cambodia CTIP donated two computers to two strong savings groups in Koh Kong. This move aimed to further strengthen the groups’ capacity to provide timely, accurate and complete recording of transactions and analysis of their financial performance on a regular basis. The savings groups provided 50% of the capital towards the purchase of these computers from their income.
Sovann Phoum also committed to sustain and improve the operation of one chick farm in Kampong Cham past the end of the program. The Koh Kong chick farm, which is currently managed well, will be sustained by the farm owner to benefit the community. Incubators from two chick farms (used to operate in Svay Rieng) have been transferred to Banteay Meanchey and Kampong Thom to support two well-managed chick farms, which serve the community, specifically ARPs.
Small Grant for ARPs
In-kind grants were provided to members of savings groups classified as ARPs to increase the beneficiaries’ incomes sources and augment their savings deposits. Prior to the provision of in- kind grant, Cambodia CTIP, with the support of community animators, conducted a simple feasibility study to determine additional grantees for the in-kind support as well as the types of productive activities that the proponents could undertake. ARP members of savings groups were prioritized for this assistance. In Year 5, 50 additional in-kind grants were given to 49 savings group members in Koh Kong (13), Siem Reap (8), and Kampong Cham (28), and one returned migrant in Kampong Thom. Detailed information about the small grant beneficiaries is summarized in Annex 3.
Community Animators Community animators are rural youth and other committed community-based volunteers in project communities who were trained by CEDAC and Winrock on the process of community mobilization and interventions such as savings groups, small grants support, integrated farm production techniques (chicken-raising, livestock, and farming), marketing support, and TIP messaging. Some community animators are Cambodia CTIP beneficiaries themselves who are willing to continue supporting the community in running their projects and disseminating relevant information to protect ARPs from unsafe migration. They are a key element in the project’s sustainability.
At the close of the project, 18 active community animators (7 females) trained by CEDAC demonstrated improved skills and continuing commitment to support the Cambodia CTIP beneficiaries. They stopped conducting large gatherings beginning mid-March, and intensified individual coaching through phones or home visits once they could do so. They have been very helpful in assessing the feasibility of small grant support and monitoring the progress of small businesses such as chicken-raising, vegetable production, sugar cane selling, and small trading activities. They also continued support to savings group operations, following up on agreements to return the cash value of in-kind grants from beneficiaries to their respective savings groups.
18 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
They began helping heads of strong savings group work with improving their bookkeeping skills.
Five animators from Koh Kong continued implementing their plans and used Facebook Messenger to provide advice and information to ARPs on various projects. As soon as was possible after the lockdown lifted, they conducted home visits to address improvements in savings group performances and monitored the small business activities of chicken raisers and other beneficiaries.
Prior to the end of CEDAC’s sub-agreement, several animators (particularly those who also serve as coordinators for other NGO programs in their area) began to explore opportunities to link CTIP beneficiaries with organizations providing services similar or complementary to Cambodia CTIP’s agricultural production interventions. As reported in quarter three, four community animators in Siem Reap provided the profile of Cambodia CTIP beneficiaries to some organizations, who could potentially expand their service reach to them.
In August, Cambodia CTIP organized a meeting with selected NGOs who were implementing similar livelihood initiatives for vulnerable people. After an orientation on CTIP and its achievements in selected areas in the northern provinces, two organizations shared their key livelihood interventions. USAID- CTIP E+ described its approaches in savings groups formation, small grant support, TIP messaging, marketing support, and technical training and mentoring. Agriculture Development Denmark Asia (ADDA) presented its programs in Picture 2: CTIP consultative meeting with Community Animators in horticulture, livestock, savings Siem Reap group and livelihood self-help group development, and agricultural cooperative formation up to the national level. One organization, Federation for Integrated Development of Agriculture in Cambodia (FIDAC) has temporarily stopped its operation and is currently awaiting the results of its proposal to China AID. The meeting resulted in affirmative action by USAID-CTIP E+ and ADDA to undertake steps to firm up the continuation of support to CTIP beneficiaries in common target communities. Value-added features integrated in their programs were discussed as possible additions to Cambodia CTIP’s livelihood interventions, particularly for the self-help groups/savings groups. Additional training for community animators was also presented as a strong possibility. ADDA offered to integrate TIP messaging in its programs. Cambodia CTIP provided ADDA and USAID-CTIP E+ information pertinent to savings groups, small grant beneficiaries, community animators, farm promoters, and demonstration farms in its project areas to facilitate more detailed planning of future support to CTIP beneficiaries.
19 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
The three community animators in Siem Reap also highlighted their roles in CTIP and affirmed their interest and availability to facilitate the expansion of the NGOs’ current programs for at- risk people in their areas.
Strengthen Market Linkage Strategies
During Year 5 Cambodia CTIP selected an expanded market strategy documenting and testing among its 23 producer groups. The activities below describe activities undertaken toward this goal.
To assess the market for vegetables in three selected sites, CEDAC conducted a simple market survey involving 18 farmers in Siem Reap and Prey Veng during the first quarter. The survey showed that there was still a great demand for locally produced vegetables and vegetable producers should develop a production and marketing plan to meet this existing demand.
CEDAC organized 51 producer groups and helped each member increase their production capacity. Trainings on better agriculture techniques was intensified, along with leadership, product promotion, and marketing strategies. Farmer promoters were among the producers, who shared their knowledge with other ARPs in the community. By the end of the first quarter, eight vegetable farmers reported a 10% increase in their production and market sales.
CEDAC also conducted a training to improve chicken production. Chicken producers started to work as a team to understand pricing for their product and market reach. By the end of the first quarter, 20 (39%) of 51 producer groups started to demonstrate capacity in implementing their production and marketing plans, marketing their products, and recording their sale of chicken and vegetables. Five producer group were able to intensify their production capacity and increase their income by 20%.
In January, an additional producer group was formed, bringing the total number of producer groups to 52. The groups varied in their capacity to increase production and establish strong and sustainable market linkages. The groups have primarily functioned as a venue for knowledge sharing about production techniques and market trends. Most of the producer group members still sold their produce as individual farmers. They call on their members in case they need to augment their products to meet market demand. Most groups were faced with challenges in meeting their production requirements due to inadequate land, limited water resources, limited labor among family members, and an unstable market access in their community.
A few groups managed to find a sustainable market for their chicken and chicken eggs, such as the organic market in Prey Veng. Another group of vegetable producer in Siem Reap cooperated with CEDAC to supply vegetables to a market in Phnom Penh and managed to increase their group income substantially compared to their previous earnings in Siem Reap. During the pandemic, and through the end of their sub agreement in May, CEDAC provided remote support through phone calls and limited in-person visits to individual producers since large group meetings were restricted.
20 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
At the close of CEDAC’s sub agreement, it assessed that only 29% of the established groups (15 out of 52 groups, composed of 169 members) could continue to meet their production and market requirements as individual producers. These consisted of eight vegetable growers groups from Prey Veng (1), Kampong Thom(2), Siem Reap (2), Banteay Meanchey (2) and Oddor Meanchey (1); and seven groups of chicken raisers from Prey Veng (1), Kampong Thom (2), Siem Reap (3), and Oddor Meanchey (1). CEDAC committed to continue providing voluntary support to these groups through their staff residing in CTIP areas. It will link those producing high value crops to markets in Phnom Penh to support the groups’ marketing efforts. Thirty-seven groups (27 producing vegetables and 10 raising chickens) are producing sufficiently to meet their household food requirements. They can potentially increase their production to establish more sustainable markets. CEDAC plans to link stronger groups to Husk Venture, a social enterprise, which improves smallholders’ livelihoods by transforming rice husk into biochar products to improve soil fertility, increase farmer’s yields and sequester carbon.
Sovann Phoum used their existing savings groups as the main production unit for vegetables and chicken. Anticipating that the chicken and vegetable producers from the eight savings groups can organize themselves into community collecting points, Sovann Phoum established fully functioning collection points in the Prey Chhor district in Kampong Cham to serve as the major marketing outlet for their products.
At the end of Sovann Phoum’s sub-agreement in May, the producers from the eight savings groups had not managed to increase their vegetable production to supply big markets in the area. Individual producers were able to sell their products to nearby smaller markets in Kampong Cham or to regular clients in Phnom Phen.
Furthermore, Kampong Cham producers continued to manage the effects of severe drought and chicken diseases. Many were not able to install costly water pumps to address water scarcity. The area experienced severe chicken diseases especially in the dry season. Vegetable growers stated many vegetables only grown during the rainy season and some were able to dig ponds and install water pumps while others shifted to raising other animals for sale in the community. Because of these unanticipated challenges, the project’s target of establishing functional community collection points and using technology (Facebook, websites and mobile applications) for advertisement and promotional purposes to connect buyers with producers did not fully materialize given they were not able to fully address the scarcity of water resources and recurring chicken diseases. It is anticipated that practices and lessons from Sovann Phoum’s CTIPE+ initiative could address the challenges which beset the producers from the CTIP area in Kampong Cham.
Year 5 laid the foundation for establishing and strengthening existing marketing linkages and increased producer groups from 23 to 52 (CEDAC-established groups only), more time and capacity was needed for the individual producers to establish themselves as fully functioning groups who are able to sufficiently produce for the identified markets and address constraints such as limited land, occurrence of seasonal chicken diseases, water scarcity in some areas, and the volatile market (especially during the pandemic).In a discussion with the follow-on project, CTIP E+, Sovann Phoum acknowledged that they had limitations in addressing recurring chicken
21 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
diseases in CTIP One lesson from this initiative is the project cannot set a uniform standard for all producers’ groups to mature at the same time and meet their production and marketing goals. A longer process may be needed, particularly during times of crisis, to establish, test, and use effective group norms for establishing functional and sustainable producer groups who have advanced skills in understanding and managing market forces for their group business. Similarly, capacities in the use of intended technology for growing the groups’ market needed to be gradually developed for group members.
CEDAC and Sovann Phoum have put plans into place to continue supporting the beneficiaries after the close of CTIP. This commitment is a sign of the partners’ resolve to sustain the economic and social benefits that are now improving the ARPs’ household security.
Soft Skills Training
In Year 5, the project’s targeted outputs for its soft skills component were: • Improved soft skills training developed and disseminated to 111 villages, 30 schools, and 10 universities • Soft skills training of trainers (TOTs) conducted for 50 participants • 151 soft skills trainings conducted to reach at least 5,285 at risk persons • At least 2 schools agree to adopt the soft skills toolkit in their non-compulsory school curricular program
The project also focused on updating the soft skills training with remittance and gender-specific information to raise the level of financial independence for women, in response to the mid-term evaluation of 2018, which noted the effectiveness of soft skills training in engaging youth in CTIP.
The Cambodia CTIP consultant completed the revised soft skills session plans in December 2019 and conducted a pilot class and training of trainers among 23 community animators, who were selected as facilitators for the updated sessions. The community animators prepared the community and ARPs, including high school students, to participate in the soft skills trainings conducted in CTIP areas. Together with Winrock staff, the community animators completed 38 trainings in March with 1,245 participants (918 females). CTIP accomplished 95% of planned trainings in March, reaching 27% of its targeted villages based on its March-June implementation period for this activity.
The reduced reach in targeted villages was due to COVID-19 travel restrictions, which forced Cambodia CTIP to revise its plan for the conduct of soft skills sessions during the second quarter and replace face-to-face trainings with Facebook Live sessions and radio talk shows. To ensure that returned migrants knew about the sessions and were able to receive the soft skill messages, the project used a list of returned migrants and created a Facebook group. The revised format aimed to reach ARPs as well as 300 returned migrants. To prepare for the shows and live sessions, the project assessed migrants’ needs, particularly in CTIP areas that showed the highest number of returning migrants. The project also collaborated with USAID Asia CTIP to gather up-to-date information on the risks and vulnerabilities of returned 22 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
migrants. Cambodia CTIP led five Facebook live sessions on i) finding local jobs; ii) working abroad; iii) importance of women working; iv) money management; and v) COVID-19 prevention. The project also broadcast five radio talk shows on the same topics and allowed listeners to call in during the live shows and ask questions in real time. The five videos gained millions of view times by Facebook users. Video one, focused on finding local jobs, gained more than 400 million views; video two, on working abroad, gained over 30 million views; video three, concerning the importance of women working, gained over 50 million views; video four, regarding money management, gained over 40 million views; and video five, on COVID-19 prevention, gained over 9 million views. Figure 2 below shows a demographics breakdown from the five Facebook live sessions on soft skills. Figure 3 shows total view times by each video from the five training sessions.
Cambodia CTIP decided to drop the plan to develop soft skills materials for university students after being advised by the Ministry of Education and the National Employment Agency that the NEA already had sufficient soft skills training, particularly job searching and placement. The project decided to include secondary school students in the village-level trainings for ARPs, rather than conduct these sessions in schools.
Figure 1: Soft Skills Videos View Times Breakdown by Gender and Age-range
23 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Figure 2: Total View Times by Each Video
Soft Skills Radio Live Shows
In August, Cambodia CTIP increased the distribution of soft skills content to CTIP communities, targeting both ARPs and returned migrants by holding five radio live shows hosted through the Women Media Center radio station FM 103.5 and its Facebook page.
Following the live shows, 50 rebroadcasts were made by WMC and another five rebroadcasts via USAID-CTIP Facebook page.
The station has it central broadcast from Phnom Penh via Women's Radio FM 103.5 MHz and four Picture 3: CTIP staff, Bunthan Eang, summarizing soft skill messages and relays in four emphasizing Covid-19 precaution messages during the final radio talk show 24 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
provinces (Kampong Thom, FM 104 MHz, Battambang, FM 106.3 MHz, Kampong Cham, FM 99.3 MHz, and Siem Reap, FM 107). Broadcast from these stations can reach up to 65% of the population in Phnom Penh municipality (about 1.5 millions) and 15 provinces of Cambodia including Battambang, Pursat, Pailin, Banteay Meanchey, Preah Vihear, Siem Reap, Kampong Thorn, Kampong Cham, TboungKhmum, Kampong Chhnang, Kampong Speu, Kandal, Prey Veng, Takeo, Kampot. Furthermore, the on-air radio program is also hosted on WMC's website (www.wmc.org.kh) and Facebook page (@womenradio).
Other Continuing Prevention Activities
Indicator 1.1.3: # of new and existing public awareness tools on TIP disseminated
The project developed and disseminated digital versions of new materials, including updates about Bongpheak job announcements, live streaming, and rebroadcast of soft skills trainings conducted via Facebook and radio. Communication materials containing updates on livelihood improvement alternatives to reduce risky migration and prevent trafficking in persons were also disseminated to CTIP areas.
Information, Education, and Communication on Safe Migration
This year, Cambodia CTIP produced and disseminated information, education, and communication materials on safe migration, including the production of audio-visual materials for the soft skills training sessions. Cambodia CTIP produced and disseminated 15 videos, including five announcement short video clips to inform audience prior to each of the five Facebook live sessions; five live streaming videos; and five rebroadcasts/replays of the five sessions after they were live-streamed. The project also produced soft-skills session plan packages, which included both Khmer and English versions, so that they can be referred to or used later by other organizations when conducting soft skills training. These audio-visual packages of soft skills sessions planning are uploaded to the Cambodia CTIP Facebook page for reference.
Cambodia CTIP used Facebook as its main social media platform to also continue delivering COVID-19 prevention messages to its audience. The Facebook page reached 10,018,644 audience (36% female), the majority of whom (75%) were in the age range of 18-44 years. Figure 3 below provides detailed information on the audiences reached.
25 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Figure 3: Demographic Breakdown of Audience Reached via CTIP Facebook
Demographic Breakdown of Audiences Reached (Sex and age-ranges)
10,018,644
7,510,298 6,378,433 4,905,412 3,640,211 2,604,886 1,623,839 788,768 835,071 884,507 246,557 637,950
13-17 18-44 Others Total 13-17 18-44 Others Total 13-17 18-44 Others Grand Total Female Male Total
Cambodia CTIP produced and disseminated 1,513 social media posts in Year 5 to target audiences to keep them informed about the existence of the Bong Pheak job-seeking platform and to update the audiences about job opportunities therein as well as to deliver soft skills sessions. These social media posts also contain information about project activities and updated news related to migration and migrant workers in neighboring countries, especially Thailand. Additionally, the project also used its social media platform to engage in public events and campaign including the 16 Days of Activism to End Gender-based Violence campaign (25 November to 10 December); Cambodia’s National Day against TIP on 12 December; International Migrant’s Day on 18 December; and the 70th anniversary of relations between Cambodia and the U.S.; the World Day Against TIP .
With regards to public awareness tools production and dissemination, Cambodia CTIP produced and disseminated 22,349 tools/materials in Year 5. Details about these materials are shown in the table below.
Table 2: List of IEC Materials Produced and Disseminated in Year 5 Type of Designed/ Disseminated Total Content material produced by Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Y5 Hotlines CTIP Program- Eco-bag phone 0 0 0 120 120 Winrock numbers Information card Hotlines and CTIP Program- 0 1,700 0 18,500 20,20 26 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Type of Designed/ Disseminated Total Content material produced by Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Y5 services Winrock 0 Printed photos Photos & captions & captions CTIP Program- for photo featuring Winrock 0 0 0 12 12 exhibition project CCPCR achievements Event/branding CTIP T-shirt 0 0 0 80 80 material 420 USAID Materials (200 Branding USAID 0 0 0 notebooks, 420 (pen, notebooks, caps) 200 pens & 20 caps) Social media Digital Materials CTIP 418 426 493 176 1,513 posts I-stand Banner & Event/branding other branding CTIP 0 0 0 4 4 material materials 22,34 Total 418 2,126 493 19,312 9
Social and Behavioral Change Communication (SBCC)
In Year 5, Winrock continued to implement the SBCC strategy for the project. The goal of the strategy is the prevention of at-risk people (ARP) from risky migration and human trafficking by developing opportunities for livelihood options; increasing access to local jobs; increasing soft skills (money management and decision making) for vulnerable communities; and advocating for an improved legal, safe, and accessible system for labor migration. The SBCC strategy continued to guide the design and implementation of activities, campaigns, and overall messaging about the project in year 5.
PROTECTION
Outcome 2: Consolidation and dissemination of a victim-centered case management model to improve services and reduce re-victimization of clients
Year 5’s major targets for its protection component included: • 4 Cambodia CTIP partners provided with technical support to continue improved case management practices • 10 NGOs receive orientation on Winrock’s case management model and socialized on
27 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
victim case management data systems • Learnings from Cambodia CTIP case management practices disseminated in at least three channels • 21 ongoing cases of TIP survivors successfully reach case management step 5
Technical Support on Case Management for CTIP Partners
In the first quarter, Cambodia CTIP met with ADHOC, LSCW and Cambodian Center for the Protection of Children's Rights (CCPCR) and learned that they faced with funding and operational challenges in applying their case management practices adopted in 2019. LSCW no longer had social workers, and CCPCR could only afford one social worker. ADHOC was able to assign some social work functions to provincial field coordinators to augment the work of two social workers but was not able to follow all of the case management practices that had been recommended.
The three former partners expressed their need for financial and technical assistance to support their clients this year. No funds could be provided to the partners, but CTIP conducted a comprehensive needs assessment among the partners and was able to provide some discrete technical support during the year.
Cambodia CTIP also organized a Survivor Forum in December to commemorate Cambodia’s National Day against TIP as well as increase the space for survivors to express their views, fulfill their rights, and informally assess their post-TIP living conditions. The stories shared during the forum also provided background information for identifying areas of continuing support in addressing the survivors’ integrated needs for healing and reintegration in their communities.
Technical Assistance in Case Management and Socialization on Victim Case Management Data Systems
In Quarter 2, Cambodia CTIP conducted an assessment of the former protection partners’ case management improvement plans to identify recommendations and resolve gaps in implementation. Cambodia CTIP recommended a targeted capacity development training for its former partners, along with practical activities to improve referral services and implementation of new indicators to measure the effectiveness of client services. Cambodia CTIP also engaged Ratanak International as a partner and participant of the training to improve its case management interventions for survivors of trafficking.
When the pandemic was declared in March, Cambodia CTIP had to adjust its plan for conducting the case management course in view of the restrictions for holding large gatherings and the departure of its trainer for the United Kingdom. Cambodia CTIP managed all technology-related challenges that arose from both the participants and the trainer. A two-part virtual case management training was conducted in June-July for ADHOC, LSCW, and Ratanak International. The first training program consisted of a one-day introduction and refresher training on the Five-Step Case Management System. The program specifically targeted staff and managers of the Cambodia CTIP team and its partners who are currently (one year after the
28 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
end of their CTIP funded program) involved in case management for clients who have suffered from labor exploitation or sexual trauma. The staff and managers had either attended a previous course in 2017-2018 or did not attend and needed an introduction to case management.
The refresher training aimed to introduce managers and staff who work with clients to some basic and practical ideas about case management and methods to improve their case management systems in compliance with minimum rights of TIP survivors. Thirteen participants – nine from ADHOC and four from LSCW – benefited from the training activity.
The second training program was a two-day Basic Supervision of Case Management training. This session was intended for Women and Children’s Department Managers, social workers for Cambodia CTIP clients, and LSCW and Ratanak International staff who work with survivors of trafficking and other forms of exploitation. The case management supervision training aimed to enhance trainees’ knowledge and skills in performing the functions of supervision for case managers who work with clients; identify their strengths; provide examples and practice supervision session processes; and provide feedback on those processes.
Although originally nine participants signed up for this training, only three (two managers from ADHOC and one social work supervisor from Ratanak International) were able to attend the full course due to the conflicting schedules and other more pressing priorities which came up during the scheduled training.
Trainees in the first training stated that the content helped them understand how to meet clients’ needs effectively and help them recover from exploitation or abuse. Provincial-level staff from ADHOC, however, found the introductory training on case management too fast and pointed out that they needed more training, citing that in-person trainings “would be better if it becomes possible in the future.” The case management supervision course also received positive evaluations. Ratanak supervisors cited the benefit of knowing the context of multiple aspects of case management rather than her customary focus on counsellors’ emotional support to clients as well as the four co-existing functions of supervision. The trainer noted that additional trainings in case management would help reinforce the content in these two short-term trainings and ensure improved provision of effective psychosocial and economic services to TIP survivors. Funding for a case management system, hiring of professional staff, and monitoring client outcomes against basic case management standards are integral elements to its institutionalization as a good practice of comprehensive care for TIP clients.
Although Cambodia CTIP reached out on several occasions to Liberty Shared to organize a series of activities to socialize its victim case management data system, the latter has not managed to follow-up on the proposed activities. Moreover, Cambodia CTIP’s former protection partners expressed some reservations with the system, which was informally introduced by Liberty Shared in Cambodia in Quarter 3.
Direct Case Management Support to 21 TIP Survivors
29 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Cambodia CTIP systematically addressed the need to provide quality and victim-responsive services to 21 clients turned over to the project by its former protection partner, CCPCR. Cambodia CTIP reviewed the case files of all clients, conducted home visits to verify each client’s status, and assessed additional services necessary for successful healing and reintegration.
During the first quarter, Cambodia CTIP determined that 16 out of 21 clients visited were in step 4 of the case management system, meaning that their case plan was still actively being implemented and constantly reviewed for relevance. This step includes referral of clients and/or their family members to appropriate services and continuing advocacy for the promotion of their rights. In quarter two, Cambodia CTIP was able to establish the status of an additional three clients, for a total of 19. The remaining two clients no longer resided at their reported address and no one could provide information about their whereabouts.
The first three quarters involved consultation with clients and their families; search for appropriate services providers; physical monitoring of clients’ living and working conditions and psychosocial condition, each visit resulted in a modified plan for comprehensive support to each client. Case plans were reassessed based on the clients’ needs as well as their psychosocial and economic situation. Within the support possible during the pandemic, Cambodia CTIP provided material support directly through small grant support, facilitated referral services, and identified possible trainers for trainings such as driving and motor-repair. Cambodia CTIP provided direct counseling support to all 19 clients and sought professional counseling for complex mental health issues for two clients.
During the third quarter, Cambodia CTIP noted that 14 out of 19 clients had reached step 5 of the case management system, with small improvements observed in their overall economic situation. Four clients expressed their need for jobs, as it has become more challenging to obtain jobs during the pandemic. Others wanted increased material support so that they could grow their small businesses.
At the close of the project, all 19 clients reached step 54 of the case management system. Table 3 below shows the status of each client by location. Cambodia CTIP provided them with multiple services based on their case plans. Twelve clients secured jobs and seven were self- employed. The table below shows the status of each client by location.
Table 3: Client Case Management Status Number of Clients Job Placement Status CM Status Province Total F M Employed Self-employed Kampong Chhnang 2 1 1 1 1 Step 5 Kampong Thom 1 1 1 Step 5 Kampot 2 2 1 1 Step 5
4 Step 5 refers to closure of the case. Client case is closed when needs are met, when their life shows freedom from exploitation, with capacity to make enough income. 30 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Kratie 5 1 4 4 1 Step 5 Phnom Penh 2 2 2 Step 5 Pursat 1 1 1 Step 5 Siem Reap 1 1 1 Step 5 Takeo 1 1 1 Step 5 Tbong Khmum 1 1 1 Step 5 Prey Veng 1 1 1 Step 5 Mondulkiri 1 1 1 Step 5 Kampong Spue 1 1 1 Step 5 Total 19 3 16 12 7 19
Figure 4: Planned & Service Provision to TIP Survivors Planned and Actual Services Provided to Clients 12 10 10 8 8 6 6
4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1
0 Counseling Vocational Baby basic Fishing Chicken raising Cow raising Housing support training needs
Plan Achievement
Case Plan Implementation Based on their case plans, clients received multiple services at the end of the project. Referrals were provided for counseling and housing support, but due to factors beyond Cambodia CTIP’s control, professional counseling and complete housing support was not possible during this year. One TIP survivor who initially indicated his need for a small chicken-raising business could not make a final decision to pursue this business. He expressed the desire to be trained as a hairdresser during one of the follow-up visits by Cambodia CTIP. Referrals were made with a master hairdresser, but due to COVID-19 restrictions, this training could not be provided.
Current Economic Situation of Clients
Although all 19 clients have reached step 5, stability is needed to ensure they will continue to 31 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
have enough income. Six of the clients who run their own business are showing good progress, while 12 who are currently employed were not able to put funds towards savings and were still paying their debts.
Six of the 12 clients had homes which required refurbishing, and they requested housing support from Cambodia CTIP. Through CTIP’s partnership with Habitat for Humanity (HfH), the clients’ housing situation was assessed; however, only two clients who live in HfH’s project area have a strong possibility of having their houses either repaired or rebuilt.
Types of Employment of Clients
All 19 of the supported clients are currently working in sectors ranging from small businesses to seasonal work (see Figure 5 below).
Figure 5: Types of Employment
Chicken Raising 1 Company 2 Seasonal Work 1 Scrapped Metal 1 Fishery 3 Factory 2 Construction 5 Groceries 1 Motor repair 2 Driver 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Dissemination of Learnings on CTIP Case Management Cambodia CTIP produced several documentation materials on the steps that the project took in developing and implementing a high-quality case management system for TIP survivors. The initiatives involved a series of steps in engaging its protection partners and other stakeholders in adopting and institutionalizing the system in their program. Capacity development, the provision of support resources, monitoring and provision of follow-up technical support were all done even prior to the last year of Cambodia CTIP.
Dissemination of learnings on the CTIP case management system was done through the Survivor Forum in December, as well as consultative meetings with its former protection
32 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
partners and partner organization Ratanak International. The End of Project Learning Conference held in July also served as a forum for more widely sharing Cambodia CTIP lessons and good practices in case management.
Discussions with USAID Asia CTIP confirmed there would be an added value to the regional project if the existing documentation of CTIP case management system is integrated into its current initiatives, notably its study on the reintegration of TIP survivors as well as collaboration with Liberty Shared on the VCMS. Moving forward, USAID Asia CTIP will work on consolidating and disseminating CTIP learnings on the case management system implemented in Cambodia to advocate for a more systematic adoption of a regional approach to case management among TIP actors.
PARTNERSHIPS
Prevention IR 1.1. # of partners (private sector partners, NGOs, IOs) providing material, in-kind, technical and financial support towards TIP prevention
Prevention 1R 1.2.# of private sector partners establishing monitoring or updating existing systems to combat TIP
Outcome 3: Expanded private sector partnerships improve monitoring systems to reduce risks of TIP
This outcome is part of Cambodia CTIP’s overall prevention strategy but was highlighted this year due to the significant role that private sector actors play in addressing forced labor and human trafficking. Cambodia CTIP’s fifth year was intended to pursue the private sector engagement strategy created in the past year with a focus on launching efforts to improve monitoring of trafficking in persons in private sector supply chains as well as supporting ethical recruitment through improved employer participation in providing access to low-skilled and unskilled job-seekers through the Bongpheak employment service.
Bongpheak Job-Seeking Platform
Bongpheak was created as part of the USAID Cambodia CTIP program to reduce TIP by eliminating intermediaries for unskilled and low-skilled workers and providing local jobs accessible for these vulnerable groups. It stayed as a free service until March 2019. In April 2019 the platform started charging for some of its services, aiming at becoming fiscally sustainable by the end of 2020.
Winrock and Open Institute agreed that the main objective during the extension period (through June 2020) was to reach sustainability by generating sufficient income to cover the expenses of Bongpheak, while maintaining its underlying mission to counter TIP. This path to
33 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
sustainability was planned in three stages, with technical support from Mekong Big Data,5 a private company specializing in data science. The first phase entailed the testing of communication strategies that might lead to stronger job seeker and employment engagement in the platform; an increase in jobs posted; an increase in quality applications with needed support from Bongpheak; and increased revenue. The second stage was designed to optimize the personalized marketing techniques found to work during the first stage, leading to an increase in job announcements, job applications, and revenue. By fully integrating these more workable techniques into the Bongpheak system, Open Institute would work toward scalability, streamlining, and automating key processes that reduced the need for human resources as the service grew. The final phase envisioned the consolidation of all good and scalable approaches as an integral part of a sustainable plan for Open Institute to continue the operations of Bongpheak, offering all its services and advantages to reduce the risk of TIP, counting only on Bongpheak’s own revenue to offer these services.
By the end of the first quarter, the work had not progressed beyond research and tool building but did place Bongpheak in a better position to move into the next stage, an expansion of the system. However, progress over the next two quarters continued to be very slow, in large part because the performance-based contract entered into between Mekong Big Data and Open Institute did not accomplish its goals. Mekong Big Data requested additional funding for its marketing strategy, which Cambodia CTIP did not have the funds to support. Mekong Big Data then committed to assigning a marketing person to work with Open Institute in implementing its commercial strategy, but it did not provide sufficient technical support. Over time, and as the pandemic began affecting the Cambodian market, Mekong Big Data stopped communicating with Open Institute and focused on managing the impact of the pandemic.
Open Institute continued its outreach to low-skilled work employers during this period and kept advertising to job seekers. While the month of March started with a growth over January and February in the number of announcements, the trend changed drastically in the second part of the month, mainly due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Not only did employers stop posting announcements, they also stopped interviewing candidates for jobs they had already posted for fear of contracting the illness from the candidates.
The announcements that received most attention from Bongpheak users and applications during this period were for jobs that appeared to not require experience, such as cashier or sales assistant, followed by the few semi-skilled kitchen jobs (demi-chef). The job seeker assistance team saw an important increase in the calls and contacts from job seekers in Siem Reap, mostly from hospitality workers. There were many calls from migrants, who returned from Thailand, whom were mostly interested in unskilled jobs (probably because their employment skills acquired in Thailand were not applicable locally).
5 Mekong Big Delta specializes in the use of big data and on personalizing contact with potential users (job seekers and employers), moving most contacts from boosting Facebook posts to personalized automated contact through Facebook Messenger (chatbots and other mechanisms).
34 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
This trend of few announcements and low-income opportunities continued, eliminating any hope of the platform reaching sustainability by the end of June 2020. As agreed with USAID, Open Institute used the Bongpheak’s service in April through June to reach out to its Facebook followers composed of vulnerable jobseekers to disseminate COVID-19 messages. Open Institute used the USAID-prepared infographic public service announcements and the USAID Asia CTIP communication package on COVID-19 to reach 265,000 BP Facebook followers composed mainly of low-skilled workers. The infographics were boosted through the Bongpheak Facebook page, reaching a total of 617,787 workers by the end of June 2020.
Figure 6: Examples of infographics shared through social media
35 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Open Institute likewise sought to reach vulnerable job seekers with relevant information about jobs during the pandemic. However, due to time limitation, the activity only produced a confirmed list of 7,741 job seekers.
At the end of May 2020, Open Institute decided not to close Bongpheak at the end of the June but to continue without outside funding by limiting the resources dedicated to it (only paying the hosting costs), and letting the service work unattended and with no advertising. To do this, Open Institute changed the service's code to make the service free again. Paid advertising stopped and posting of jobs in Facebook continued until the end of Open Institute’s agreement with Cambodia CTIP. As a result of making the service free, the number of announcements published increased five-fold.
Overall Results Figure 7: Additional example of infographics shared by Open In Year 5, Bongpheak was visited by Institute for COVID-19 Prevention 96,363 different job seekers and employers. The chart below shows a monthly breakdown of Bongpheak users. Figure 8: Monthly Breakdown of Bongpheak users from October 2019 to June 2020
36 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
The graph shows little variation in the use of the platform, which continued to charge fees until a spike in the number of users was observed in May despite very few jobs available because of the COVID-19 pandemic. By June 2020, 2,215 employers had posted 10,480 announcements in Bongpheak, offering 90,301 job openings.
Figure 9: New Job Announcements Posted on Bongpheak
Figure 10: New Job Seekers Seeking Employment via Bongpheak
The graph on job announcements shows that announcements started to drop in February and had a steady decline through May, mainly due to the impact of COVID-19. When Open
37 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Institute made the service free again in June, the number of job announcements increased dramatically.
In Year 5, 5,292 job seekers applied for jobs through June, with the highest number seen in May. Most of this applications took place through the Bong Pheak website, but 2,731 of them (52%) were placed through a normal phone, as a follow up to having received a reference to a specific job in Bongpheak from a friend of family member, as well as receiving an automatic phone call describing the job and permitting application directly from a simple phone.
Bongpheak classifies jobs provided through the platform in six sectors, illustrated in the Figure below. Figure 11: Announcements on Bongpheak website from different sectors
Slightly more male job seekers (52.8%) than women (47.2%) applied for these jobs.
In June 2020, Bongpheak had over 262,000 followers in Facebook. It was observed that 2,731 of the applications had taken place through a basic non-internet phone.
Income Figure 12 shows Bongpheak’s income from subscriptions and single announcements since the
38 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
beginning of Year 5. The Figure 12: Bongpheak Income: Single Payments vs. Subscriptions absence of June income reflects the fact the system is again free for all users. Subscribers whose period ended were refunded all payments corresponding to the period following June 1.
Figure 12 also highlights how Bongpheak’s income grew progressively, starting in November 2019, and peaked in February 2020. Unfortunately, with the unmet expectations from the partnership with Mekong Big Data and the effect of COVID-19, income was drastically reduced in March until it dropped to zero in June, when the service became again free.
Partnerships with the Private Sector
Prior to COVID-19, Cambodia CTIP stepped up its outreach efforts with the private sector in an effort to reach partnership activities aimed at increasing efforts to identify TIP in their supply chain and instituting systems to address forced labor. Targeted sectors were from the hospitality, manufacturing, and construction areas, since these sectors employ the low-skilled and unskilled job seekers identified as most vulnerable to human trafficking.
One Park Hotel was the first private sector partner, which expressed interest in a partnership with Cambodia CTIP to develop its corporate responsibility program and examine any risks to trafficking in its operations. At the request of One Park, CTIP engaged National Commission to Counter Trafficking (NCCT) through its Permanent Vice-Chair HE Chou Bun Eng in developing strategies for stronger collaboration between Government and its company. Due to changes in its management, the initial activities between the Government and One Park Hotel were not carried out. COVID-19 restrictions also resulted in the cancellation of an event that was being organized with One Park Hotel and the British Chamber. The event, which had “Women in Business” for its theme, planned to feature the project’s empowering examples of rural women entrepreneurs, who were overcoming barriers to productive community engagement. However, Cambodia CTIP did succeed in brokering an agreement between One Park and Bongpheak, resulting in the former’s use of the platform for one year to recruit its low-skilled workforce.
Cambodia CTIP also reached out to Cambodia Footwear Association (CFA) and GAP Inc. to explore shared value partnerships in the manufacturing sector. These initial meetings were followed with the support of USAID Asia CTIP beginning in February. The partnership with GAP Inc. focused on identifying areas of engagement in strengthening its current programs on
39 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
recruitment and improvement of the labor law enforcement for workers in the garment sector, in partnership with Better Factories Cambodia.
Initial training activities were proposed on subjects such as: compliance with internationally recognized responsible recruitment standards; innovative technology for worker well-being; compliance with local labor law provisions for factory workers; incorporating worker voices and feedback systems in factory supply chains; and addressing disputes and worker grievances. However, once the global pandemic reached critical mass in March, both organizations expressed strong concerns about the negative business repercussions of the pandemic on their operations and paused activities in support of this partnership.
More information on the impact of COVID-19 was, however, shared by GAP Inc and Cambodia Footwear Association in April. An online study during April and May 15, 2020, conducted by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in Cambodia confirmed that “the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all of the country’s most crucial business sectors, especially the tourism/hospitality, apparel (textile, garment and footwear), food, beverages, agricultural food production, and food processing industries.” The apparel and footwear industries were hit particularly hard, causing work stoppages by garments and shoe factories due mainly to business decisions by buyers in the United States and European countries and the lack of availability of raw materials from suppliers.
In late June, CFA reached out to Cambodia CTIP to express interest to learn about “atun”, a free and secure mobile phone application that encourages worker engagement. This was developed by Labor Solutions, a technology provider working to solve labor challenges for blue-collar workers in Asia. USAID Asia CTIP and CTIP discussed with Labor Solutions a possible roll out of this platform for workers in Cambodia and how USAID Asia CTIP may be able to support with atun user orientation. Other proposed CFA activities such as learning exchange fora among shoe factories on adaptive management practices, increasing job satisfaction even during the crisis, creative ways to improve workers’ productivity; development of proposals for improved government support to affected factory workers and improving health and safety measures to protect workers from COVID-19 will be reviewed, moving forward with the continuous engagement of USAID Asia CTIP.
Like the Cambodia Footwear Association, Gap Inc. prioritized actions to manage the crisis affecting its suppliers. Gap Inc. focused on helping affected factories comply with the labor laws for the benefit of their workers and in supporting the roll out of ‘atun’ among its suppliers to promote increased worker engagement during this crisis.
Partnership with Habitat for Humanity
Winrock signed a memorandum of understanding with Habitat for Humanity (HfH) in June. Both organizations agreed that HfH would build houses for ten vulnerable families who are Cambodia CTIP’s beneficiaries in their target areas. In accordance with HfH and WI’s MOU, six vulnerable families were provided new stable and resilient houses in Siem Reap. By the end of September, HfH turned over all six houses for CTIP beneficiaries in Siem Reap and Phnom
40 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Penh. The Cambodia USAID Mission Director and Agreement Officer Representative attended the handover ceremony with CTIP in August.
Picture 4: Blessing ceremony for the CTIP at-risk families upon receiving new house from Habitat for Humanity Cambodia
41 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Picture 5: Representatives from USAID Cambodia, Winrock International and Habitat for Humanity Cambodia giving a new house to CTIP beneficiaries
Cambodia CTIP also advocated for housing support to TIP survivors in Phnom Penh. The provision of housing support to vulnerable CTIP beneficiaries will strengthen the sustainability of current livelihoods and social protection benefits for them, as well as promote security and stability of their living conditions in the country.
Workers’ Journey Study
The Workers’ Journey study aimed to provide information contributing to Cambodia CTIP’s private sector engagement. The strategy involves actions by the private sector to improve and sustain monitoring of TIP in their supply chains. The study, which was concluded in April presented the profile of the Cambodian internal labor migrants and identified potential risks to human trafficking in their work journey from recruitment, hiring, and employment in the following sectors in Cambodia: manufacturing, apparel, footwear, bags and luggage, hospitality, and construction.
The Workers’ Journey involved a survey of 296 workers (195 manufacturing, 50 construction and 51 hospitality and tourism sectors) in three provinces of origin and two destination areas in the country. Through the survey, desk review, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews, the study identified key findings about the profile of internal migrants, their work 42 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
history, their motivations for migration, recruitment, hiring processes, perceptions, employment terms, and work conditions. The research uncovered different vulnerabilities of internal migrants to human trafficking for forced labor. The study comes with a Practical Guide for Employers containing recommended actions they can implement in response to the findings of the research. It highlights guidelines to improve employers’ respect for human rights as a global standard and offers a basic guide toward strengthening the community of practice among private sector actors.
Cambodia CTIP conducted an online survey in April involving 11 participants to validate the initial findings of the workers journey research initiative. Six out of 11 participants representing the trade union (2), NGOs (3), and Winrock (1) provided feedback incorporated in the draft report. Using the global determination of human trafficking to establish the presence of human trafficking, the study concluded moderate risks to trafficking for forced labor were present in the migrants’ recruitment and migration decision-making process and in some aspects of their employment.
In August, Cambodia CTIP held a webinar for four trade unions representing the hospitality, apparel and construction sectors; three NGOs; and the Solidarity Center. The forum elicited feedback on the study findings and recommendations and introduced the ‘atun’ free mobile phone worker engagement platform. The participants validated the findings of the study, noting the need to advocate more for the improvement of work conditions specific to construction workers. They also called attention to addressing sub-contracting work, the development of a minimum wage for sectors other than the apparel industry and generally continuing to work on labor policy reforms and enforcement. Cambodia CTIP encouraged participants to provide additional feedback on issues and recommendations not adequately covered during the webinar.
Moving forward, USAID Asia CTIP will collaborate with Labor Solutions to use the existing functionalities of atun to promote the rights and well-being of Cambodian factory workers and integrate information and tools to intensify their protection from forced labor.
MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PRIMARY ACTIVITIES
Project Database System
Cambodia CTIP continued to monitor its performance indicators (see Annex 1), especially those relevant to the three outcomes for Year 5, using the existing CTIP database. This database system and the user manual were shared with other TIP programs and partners from various countries in a regional workshop organized by the USAID Asia CTIP project. The regional workshop aimed to promote the use of M&E data to enhance Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (CLA) culture in USAID CTIP programs. Cambodia CTIP provided a series of refresher trainings on the CTIP database system to further improve the capacity of all CTIP partners and Winrock staff in uploading, generating and preparing data for reporting and analysis. The capacity building activities involved three separate training courses involving 25
43 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
participants, of which nine were from Winrock.
Data Quality Assurance
In compliance with its MEL plan and data quality assurance procedures, Cambodia CTIP M&E staff conducted a series of data verification exercises on the project’s key interventions, such as saving groups, agriculture cooperatives, producer groups, and small grants. During the process, supporting documents were assessed and analyzed to determine the accuracy, consistency and relevance of results reported. Furthermore, direct beneficiaries were selected for face-to-face interviews to verify whether they were really the target group members and whether they had received the assistance provided. Their comments/feedback were also gathered to determine participants’ views, challenges met and suggestions for improved support. In some of the data verification exercises, Cambodia CTIP noted there were some missing supporting documents pertaining to some project indicators. To gather all supporting documents (means of verification), another data verification exercise was conducted close to the project ending to gather all missing information for complete analysis.
Database Export/Migration During the fourth quarter, Cambodia CTIP discussed the steps regarding the CTIP database migration to the Winrock M&E and knowledge management system in support of future TIP programs. A plan was developed and executed for a final system clean up, including fulfilling requirements for migrating the database system to Winrock’s central database system. In compliance with Cambodia CTIP’s close out responsibilities, the project exported its database system files to an external storage so it can be imported to a more compatible M&E system. This migration ensured that data privacy and security protocols were followed.
Local Field Monitoring Trips
Beginning in March, in compliance with COVID-19 restrictions, Cambodia CTIP conducted limited field trips to monitor the implementation of critical activities when sub-partners CEDAC and Sovann Phoum ended their sub agreements in May. These trips were conducted to help collect information and materials on project best practices, key learnings, and information for case studies. Please refer to the case study and photo caption in Annex 7 of this report. Table 4 below illustrates the trips conducted throughout Year 5.
Table 4: Cambodia CTIP Year 5 Trip Summary Purpose of trip No. of trips Focus To visit and follow-up on beneficiaries/ARPs, CEDAC and Sovann Phoum, and provide Soft Skill trainings in Svay Rieng, Kampong Cham, Koh Kong, Kampong Thom, Siemreap, 47 Prevention Oddar Meanchey, Kampot, Prey Veng, Phnom Penh, and Banteay Meanchey.
44 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
CTIP clients (ARPs) visit to provide technical support to community animators to develop by-laws, workplan, communication, and reporting; and to monitor the progress of 4 Prevention saving groups and livelihood activities of ARPs who received a small grant in Koh Kong and Kampong Thom
CTIP clients home visits (to review and provide assistance to active cases of TIP survivors) in Tbong Khmom, Kratie, Kampong 30 Protection Thom, Takeo, Prey Veng, Phnom Penh, Kampong Speu.
Survivor Forum in Siem Reap (13 December) organized to commemorate the 12 December Cambodia’s National Day 1 Protection against TIP
CEDAC and Sovann Phoum to provide orientation, training, coaching, and technical support in Svay Rieng, Kampong Cham, 4 M&E and Banteay Meanchey provinces.
CTIP End-line Study
In 2019, Winrock contracted an independent consultant to conduct four interrelated end line study designed to measure effects of the Cambodia CTIP program in the geographic areas it serves. The study included:
• A knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) survey around safe migration in Cambodia among target groups of respondents; • A livelihoods survey designed to determine changes in economic access and opportunity; • A Children’s Alternative Care study, which describes the characteristics of those who support migrants by providing childcare for the children of migrants; and • A Commune Vulnerability Index to compare shifts in vulnerability to unsafe migration practices in communes where CTIP project activities took place.
The study was conducted to provide a descriptive picture of a suite of factors associated with safe and unsafe migration practices in Cambodia and the overall quality of life for at-risk persons in vulnerable communes throughout Cambodia. The studies also collected data in order to provide information on the indicators listed in Table 5 below.
Table 5: Indicators reported through baseline and end line studies. 1.1.1 % knowledge change in target population, who are exposed to behavior change campaigns, on protective behaviors to prevent TIP 1.1.2 % behavioral change to prevent TIP in the migration process in target population who are exposed to behavior change campaigns 1.21 % participating households at risk of TIP with improved livelihoods 1.2.3 # of communes with reduced vulnerability to TIP 45 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Cambodia CTIP led the implementation of the end line study, including the training for 39 enumerators (18 female) who were tasked to gather data from the field. A data collection exercise was conducted in eight target areas (seven provinces and one municipality) including Kampong Cham, Kampong Thom, Koh Kong, Oddar Meanchey, Phnom Penh, Prey Veng, Siem Reap, and Svay Rieng. The enclosed table provides information on the scope of data collection for the four-part end line study:
Table 6. CTIP End-line Study Data Collection Data Collected under the End-line Studies Components of the study Qualitative Data: Quantitative Data: Focus Group Household interviews Discussions (groups Types of data of 8-10 people) Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) 767 6 Children Alternative Care (CAC) 250 3 Livelihood 761 3 Commune Vulnerability Index (CVI) 0 38 Total 1,778 50
Taken as a whole, the study points to the success of the Cambodia CTIP project in meeting its objectives. The four indicators measured demonstrate modest but important progress across multiple dimensions of TIP. Forty-four per cent of respondents demonstrated knowledge around safe migration practices, compared to just 23.1% at baseline. The proportion of migrants reporting safe migration practices jumped from 3.4% in 2016 to 19.44% in 2019. The share of respondents reporting information associated with being at low risk for failing to meet a minimum threshold for livelihoods more than doubled over the three-year period, from 4.25% to 9.33%. It is difficult to accurately assess how many communes have reduced vulnerability to TIP, as the end-line CVI study included only 38 out of an original 65 communes. Even with that caveat, the proportion of communes considered low risk more than doubled from 2016 to 2019, and researchers observed an overall decrease in commune vulnerability to TIP.
The study findings include recommendations that future programs build on this work and consider applying a holistic approach to decreasing risk of TIP, itself a multidimensional problem. However, while several of the indicators show some success, the absolute levels of knowledge, safe behaviors, and sustainable livelihoods remain low, and communes’ vulnerability to TIP remains too high. The following recommendations should be considered:
• Continue to build on the robust legacy of Cambodia CTIP and other counter-trafficking programs in Cambodia through interventions promoting a holistic approach to tackling the multidimensional problem of TIP.
46 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
• Facilitate communication between current or former migrants and prospective migrants to ensure potential migrants can access information from trusted, experienced sources. • Support the increased grassroots communication around safe migration. • Assess whether the successful outcomes observed in this study are interrelated. For example, both knowledge of safe migration and behaviors associated with safe migration increased from baseline to end line. Future work should determine whether increased knowledge plays a causal role in facilitating safer behaviors. • Target support to caregivers for the children of migrants. The children of migrants may be at increased risk of unsafe migration or TIP, and support to caregivers could reduce their vulnerability. • Test and refine alternative models of assessing and reducing commune vulnerability. The Cambodia CTIP Project made important progress, but the factors leading to increased vulnerability at the commune level are many and complex. Future programs should include targeted interventions to address this vulnerability. • Conditions reported by returning migrants suggest elements of forced labor occurring in the destination countries. It is recommended other USAID CTIP projects, such as USAID Asia CTIP and USAID Thailand CTIP, liaise with local civil society groups in destination countries to improve working conditions for migrants, especially Cambodia migrants. • Many returned migrants also reported dealing with these issues on their own, so another focus in destination countries should be strengthening the communication channels between migrants and service providers in destination countries.
End of Project Learning Conference
Cambodia CTIP held its End-of-Project Learning Conference on July 31 right after the global commemoration of the World Day Against Trafficking-in-Persons (WDATIP) on July 30 with the theme of: “Committed to the Cause: Working on the Frontline to End Human Trafficking”.
The Learning Conference, attended by 50 participants6 from key stakeholders, presented the main achievements of the program, highlighted its good practices, and provided a roadmap for combating TIP more sustainably in Cambodia. The culminating event featured the program’s story through photos, videos, and testimonies from stakeholders.
6 The in-person event included 50 people following the guidelines during the pandemic 47 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Picture 6: CTIP beneficiary (first from the right) explains about sustainability of his chick farm in Koh Kong to H.E. Chou Bun Eng, Permanent Vice-chair of the NCCT and her colleagues
Picture 7: Sopheap Ky, representative of CTIP beneficiaries engaging in the panel discussion explaining about the growth and sustainability of her vegetable demonstration farm in Siem Reap
48 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Picture 8: Mean Sonyta, CTIP Goodwill Ambassador receiving appreciation from USAID Cambodia mission director during the Conference
Picture 9: Group photo of CTIP team, partners, and beneficiaries coming together to celebrate CTIP achievements
USAID Mission Director Veena Reddy and Her Excellency Chou Bun Eng, Permanent Vice-
49 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Chair of the National Committee on Counter Trafficking, delivered messages signifying the urgent need to sustain and intensify the movement to fight human trafficking in Cambodia. Certificates of Appreciation were given to stakeholders from government, CSOs, the private sector and Cambodia CTIP’s Ambassador of Goodwill to acknowledge their partnership and substantial role in addressing the program’s goals.
Project Management
Winrock adopted preventive health and safety measures to protect its staff and stakeholders against the pandemic, using its own protocols, and in compliance with country directives and guidance from USAID for its implementing partners. Cambodia CTIP participated in digital meetings organized by USAID and adhered to its guidance in managing the project during the global pandemic. Based on a continuing assessment of containment measures to manage the pandemic, Cambodia CTIP deemed it feasible to reopen its office in June under the conditions prescribed by health authorities and Winrock International.
Cambodia CTIP’s Deputy Chief of Party resigned in June and his responsibilities were assigned to the Prevention team headed by the Community Development and Youth Training Specialist.
Over the last six months of the project, in anticipation of final close-out, Cambodia CTIP adhered to milestones in the close-out plan related to meeting legal and statutory obligations; notification to all stakeholders; fulfilling USAID and Winrock guidelines on operations-related tasks; disposition of project assets; and personnel off-boarding. Cambodia CTIP also conducted a staff retreat in September to consolidate and document learnings about CTIP implementation as input to the final report, as well as analyzing good practices in selected program strategies for prevention, protection, prosecution and partnership. Cambodia CTIP closed most staff contracts in September (mid-September for six staff and end of September for five staff), and the final two staff were offboarded in mid-October.
Cambodia CTIP received the renewal of country registration to operate for another three years in Cambodia, which will be continued by the Sustainable Water Partnership.
IV. CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS
Prior to the official worldwide outbreak of the pandemic in March, Cambodia CTIP addressed issues concerning limited supervision and technical support for their partners’ and field staff developing mechanisms to provide increased, intensive monitoring and technical support to ensure that field staff understood the project’s technical deliverables as well as a plan for accelerating the activities in the CTIP communities given the timeframe for meeting expected interventions during the year.
With the health and safety precautions necessitated by COVID-19, Cambodia CTIP partners CEDAC and Sovann Phoum designed a contingency plan for field implementation, which in resulted in an earlier-than-anticipated closure of the two sub agreements in May. Cambodia CTIP carried on some of the allowed activities for its beneficiaries through August, focusing on
50 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
strengthening the savings and producer groups and conducting virtual trainings on an updated soft skills program for at-risk persons (ARPs) and returned migrants from Thailand, a new group which exhibited vulnerability to TIP upon their return to the country.
Past protection partners were constrained in implementing their case management improvement plans in 2020 due to the limited resources they had to meet all the requirements for institutionalizing a demand-driven case management system in their organizations. Cambodia CTIP coached the partners, assessed new needs, and provided follow-on virtual training in case management. This setting was less than ideal but nevertheless met some technical gaps in the effective use of case management for TIP survivors.
Cambodia CTIP’s private sector engagement offered a promising start, but staff quickly realized that it would be difficult to achieve the dedicated attention and continuity of commitment in the final year of the project. Cambodia CTIP engaged USAID Asia CTIP in this endeavor and developed a plan for more sustained engagement with private sector partners in the hospitality, apparel, and footwear sectors beyond the end of the Cambodia project.
Cambodia’s export business involving apparel and footwear also suffered a major setback beginning in April due to the global impact of the pandemic. Cambodia CTIP and USAID Asia CTIP jointly worked with its partners GAP Inc. and the Cambodia Footwear Association to understand their needs and present ideas for ensuring that workers’ well-being can be prioritized during this crisis. Cambodia CTIP’s webinar on its Workers’ Journey study for private sector and other stakeholders offered steps for incorporating preventive approaches toward reducing the risk of abuse and exploitation of workers in apparel, footwear, travel goods, hospitality and construction sectors. USAID Asia CTIP will continue to address priority needs of private sector in managing the impact of both COVID-19 and the partial withdrawal of tariff preferences granted to Cambodia under the latter’s Everything but Arms trade deal7
The project-established Bongpheak platform for increasing access of low-skilled unskilled job seekers in Cambodia could not be sustained this year as planned due to the inability of Open Institute’s partner Mekong Big Data to meet its commitments to introduce more innovative communication and marketing features to increase the usability of the platform. The economic impact of COVID-19 also contributed to the deceleration of the platform under a pay for service model.
7 The partial withdrawal of tariff preferences took effect on August 12, 2020. This decision will impact selected garment and footwear products, and all travel goods and sugar. 51 Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Annex 1: Performance Indicator Tracking Table
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 CTIP Year 5 Performance Indicator Tracking Table (Updated as of September 30, 2020)
Year Five Life of Project Remarks Performance Actual Q1 Actual Q2 Actual Q3 Actual % % To Indicators Target (Oct-Dec (Jan-Mar (Apr-Jun Q4 (Jul- Target Achieve Achieved Date 2019) 2020) 2020) Sep 2020) d PREVENTION IR 1: Enhanced National & Local Strategies to Prevent TIP 1.1: Number of Due to the Sixty-six Eighty Forty-four 0 N/A 520 1,630* 248% CTIP has already partners (private nature of employers employers employers (CTIP surpassed the life of sector partners, the Year 5 registered in registered in registered concluded the project target. NGOs, IOs, and UN work plan, Bongpheak; 387 Bongpheak in using sub- agencies) providing which new job Q2; 481 new Bongpheak agreement *Note: according to a material, in-kind, entails basic announcements job in Q3; 457 with IO on final table provided by technical, and and applied posted. announcements new job June 30). Open Institute financial support research, were posted. announceme containing data from towards TIP employers nts were the start of prevention. have no posted. Bongpheak, the "To specific Date" figure updated target incorrectly, showing number this 1,288 as of the end of year. Mar 2020. IO confirmed the correct figure for the "To Date" column should be 1,586 as of the end of Mar 2020 instead of 1,288. Therefore, 1586 + 44 (new companies registered in Q3) = 1,630 instead of 1,288+44 = 1,332 1.Number of private Year 5 Relationship- In progress In progress Relationshi 0% 100 4 4% A comprehensive plan sector partners targets building activities (Habitat for (Habitat for p-building for private sector establishing, private have started with Humanity Humanity activities engagement in the monitoring, or sector one hotel and Cambodia; One Cambodia; started priority industry updating existing partners in the Cambodia Park/Oakwood; One with one sectors is under systems to combat the Footwear Cambodia Park/Oakwo hotel and development with
Page 1 of 13
TIP. hospitality, Association. Footwear od; the USAID Asia CTIP. constructio Association; Cambodia Cambodia This follows on n, and GAP Inc.; Footwear Footwear engagement will take manufacturi Mekong Big Association; Association off from current ng sectors Data. GAP Inc., . arrangements with (apparel, Mekong Big Collaborati Cambodia Footwear footwear, Data. on with Association and Gap travel Habitat for Inc. goods). Humanity There's no Cambodia specific is in target progress; number of One private Park/Oakw sector ood; partners Cambodia set. Footwear Association ; GAP; Mekong Big Data. 1.3: Number of No target N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8 8 100% As of Y5Q1, eight assisted provincial set for this provinces, including committees indicator SRP, ODC, BMC, allocating and for Year 5 KTM, PVG, SVR, spending KCM, and KKG, have government budget approved their own for TIP. Provincial Plan of Action (PPA) for 2019. 1.4: Country rating Tier 2 Tier 2 Watchlist Tier 2 Tier 2 N/A N/A Tier 2 Tier 2 N/A The US Department on the host Watchlist Watchlist Watchl of State makes a government's ist rating in its 2020 capacity to protect Trafficking in Persons TIP victims (TIP Report. Tier ranking) (F 1.5.3-15 standard the USA. PREVENTION Sub-IR 1.1: Improved Knowledge Attitudes and Behaviors on Safe Migration
Page 2 of 13
1.1.1: Percent 53% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 34.65% 44.4% Recalculated figures knowledge change (New for target and baseline in target population recalcul 23.1% are explained at the on protective ated (New end line report. behaviors to target baselin prevent TIP. instead e set of the after initial the target recalcu of lation 53%). instead of the initial baselin e of 35.47% ). 1.1.2: % behavioral 29% N/A N/A N/A N/A To be 4.42% 19.4% change to prevent established (New TIP in the migration by the end- recalcul 3.4% process in the line study. ated (New target population target baselin instead e set of the after initial the target recalcu of lation 29%.) instead of the initial baselin e of 22.56% ). 1.1.3: Number of Year 5 plan Four hundred 2,126 493 (social 19,312 N/A 198,000 178,73 90% new and existing does not eighteen social (426 social media posts) 5 public awareness have target media posts media posts & tools on TIP activities reached 1,700 disseminated and results 1,136,935 information for this Cambodians this cards.
Page 3 of 13
indicator. quarter. disseminated in Q2 ) PREVENTION Sub-IR 1.2: Improved Ability of at Risk Population to Address Economic Root Causes of TIP 1.2.1: Percent of 73% N/A N/A N/A To be 70% 9.33% N/A participating reported as households at risk part of the 4.25% of TIP reporting end-line (Baseli improved study. ne) livelihoods. 1.2.2: Number of There is no 2,478 ARPs 1,256 21 0 N/A 24,470 52,247 213.51% vulnerable people to target received various (1,245 in soft (4 new TIP (including number of livelihood skill training + ARPs abused migrants) vulnerable assistance 11 in small received receiving assistance. people for through the grants). small grants Year 5 saving groups, in Koh Kong except for producer groups, and 17 in soft skills farm promotion Kampong training. training, chicken- Cham). raising training. Targets set pertain to: Savings group- 134 Producer groups- 23 ARPs reached by soft skills- 5,285
1.2.3: Number of 49 N/A N/A N/A N/A To be 49 Sixteen Thirty-eight communes with established comm communes studied in reduced by the end- unes the end-line study vulnerability to TIP line study identifi provided the data for ed this indicator. Eleven with communes were high either covered by the vulnera impact evaluation or
Page 4 of 13
bility; did not have the 18 complete suite of comm livelihood unes as interventions required a by the end-line study. mediu m; and four as low. 1.2.4: Percent of N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A This is an indicator ARPs that report added by USAID. The they know where to USAID impact look for work in evaluation study will Cambodia. measure it. 1.2.5: Percent of N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A This is an indicator ARP that is added by USAID. The currently looking USAID impact for work in evaluation study will Cambodia. measure it. PREVENTION Sub-IR 1.3: Strengthened National and Sub-National Strategies to Prevent TIP 1.3.1: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50 81 162% assisted communes activity and allocating and target per accessing funds for Year 5 TIP prevention approved activities. plan. PREVENTION: Access to Water HL.8.1-1 number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6,000 150 2.5% Achievement for this people gaining activity and indicator could not be access to essential target per assessed due to drinking water Year 5 challenges in meeting services as a result approved partnership of USG assistance plan. expectations with Coca-Cola. Winrock planned to partner with Coca- Cola in maximizing the benefit of the construction of three aqua towers. Coca-
Page 5 of 13
Cola was committed to building these towers, but in the end, it agreed to build only one tower in a CTIP project area. Due to the recent improvements in the local aqueduct, the aqua tower's impact became much less than expected.
HL.8.1-4 number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 5 167% Five schools- three in institutional settings activity and Siem Reap and two in gaining access to target per Banteay Meanchey essential drinking Year 5 reported having water services as a approved access to the basic result of USG plan. drinking water assistance. provided by an aqua tower built on the school premises. HL.8.3-2 number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 0 0% The restrictions action plans activity and placed on engaging in implemented for target per construction work water security, Year 5 affected the non- integrated water approved achievement of this resource plan. indicator. management, and water source protection resulting from USG assistance. PROTECTION IR 2: Strengthen Survivors Protection and Services for All Forms of TIP 2.1: Percent of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 75% 71% 95% assisted survivors target per (TIP victims and approved abused migrants) Year 5 plan. accessing multiple
Page 6 of 13 services responding to different needs 2.1.b: Percent of 100% Sixteen cases Nineteen cases 19 cases 19 cases 90% 65% 82% 126% 90% for Y5 (19/21). survivors (TIP 21 cases were assessed. A were assessed (the same victims and abused follow-up (All are at step 19 cases migrants) served support plan will four of the case from through improved be developed management previous case management after the system). quarters) systems (at least completion of four steps in a 5 home visits and step case assessment of management each case. system). 2.1.c: Number of 4 (Maintain 0 0 3 Three Three 4 3 N/A The project met CSOs that adapt or the result of organizatio organizatio (trainin challenges in providing apply improved case Year 3) ns trained ns were g was case management management on two trained, but conduc training on time due systems or courses of the project ted on to modifications procedures. case did not case resulting from the manageme have the manag COVID-19 nt. One opportunit ement) environment. There organizatio y to verify was no sufficient time n was their to observe the assessed as training participants' no longer skills during application of training requiring the 3rd and outcomes. additional 4th training. quarters. 2.2: Number of TIP There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 105 63 60% victims referred to activity and services for target per reintegration by Year 5 trained local approved authorities and plan. trained community key informants PROTECTION Sub-IR 2.1: Improved Victim Identification and Support 2.1.1: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 100 0 0% victims of TIP activity and
Page 7 of 13 identified and target per provided with code Year 5 through established approved National plan. Identification System (pilot) for TIP victims. 2.1.2: Number of 21 16 out of 21 19 out of 21 19 cases 19 cases 90% 1,356 1,549 114% TIP victims assisted cases to be cases were (the same (the same by USG programs (F followed up with followed up 19 cases 19 cases 1.5.3-18 standard needed with needed from Q2) from USAID). assistance during assistance previous the reintegration during the quarters) phase. reintegration phase. 2.1.4: Percent of TIP No target N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 70% 66% 94% victims who are set for Year served in programs 5. created, run, and assisted by USG funding (Indicator 1.5.3-20 standard USAID) PROTECTION Sub-IR 2.2: Strengthened Protection Support Networks 2.2.1: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3,300 3,772 114% host nation service target set providers who for Year 5. received USG- funded TIP protection training (1.5.3-22 standard USAID). 2.2.2: Percent of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 80% 79% 99% Sixteen service service providers target set providers from past showing an increase for Year 5. protection partners of knowledge in The number were trained on case technical TIP related of service management during issues with USG providers to the year. However, assistance. be trained only qualitative will be evaluation was done;
Page 8 of 13
determined hence, no percentage after can be established. consultation and needs assessment of past protection partners and potential new NGOs. Protection Sub-IR 2.3: Improved Cross-Border and Regional Responses to TIP 2.3.1: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 9 100% national or regional target set anti-TIP policies for Year 5. influenced by USG interventions. PROSECUTION IR 3: Increased Likelihood of Successful Prosecutions of TIP 3.2: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20 20 100% recommendations target set from justice system for Year 5. performance review addressed by RGC 3.2.b: Percent of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 55% 70% 127% Not applicable this criminal justice target set year. A study done by stakeholders that for Year 5. IJM in Year 3 showed report more that 70% of criminal confidence in the justice officials believe justice system to that the criminal prosecute TIP justice system has criminals improved in the prosecution of TIP victims since 2015. Fifty-one percent maintain confidence in the country's criminal justice system. PROSECUTION Sub-IR 3.1: Increased Access to Legal Services 3.1.1: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 42 50 119%
Page 9 of 13
TIP perpetrators target set convicted with USG for Year 5. support. 3.1.1.b: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 61 161 264% assisted TIP target set victims/abused for Year 5. migrants that win court/arbitration awarded compensation PROSECUTION Sub-IR 3.2: Increased Capacity of Criminal Justice Actors to Prosecute TIP 3.2.1: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 390 90 23% host nation criminal target set justice personnel for Year 5. who received USG- funded anti-TIP training during a project (police training). 3.2.1.b: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 200 568 284% host nation criminal target set justice personnel for Year 5. that attend training utilizing USG funded curriculum/modules. 3.2.2: Number of There is no N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 8 67% establishments using target set labor trafficking in for Year 5. business practices investigated (arrested/charged). CROSS-CUTTING Indicator 4.1: Number of There is no 4 7 4 N/A N/A 32 695 2,172% Four actions in Y5Q3: actions from target set 1. Continue small partners to for Year 5. grant for 1 Female promote gender ARP in Koh Kong and social inclusion. 2. Provided a small grant to 12 female
Page 10 of 13
ARPs in Kampong Cham 3. Provided technical assistance to Savings Groups in which the majority of members are female 4. Provided on-the- job training to female CAs.
Seven actions in Y5Q2: 1. providing coaching and training on bookkeeping, committee's capacity building on coordinating meetings and awareness on saving group concepts to 89 female savings group members; 2. providing technical assistance through formal technical training and on-the- job coaching and modeling to 9 female community animators; 3. sharing chicken raising techniques to 22 female farmers; 4. providing coaching to existing 43 female ARPs who received
Page 11 of 13
small grants from the project; 5. assisting in the development of a business plan for 21 female ARPs. 6. providing a small grant to 10 female ARPs to run their businesses such as chicken raising, groceries shop, and other small businesses; and 7. providing soft skill training to 918 female participants.
Four actions in Y5Q1: 8. Conducted survivor forum where 13 female survivors freely expressed their post-TIP experience; 9. Provided ToT on Soft Skill to 15 female ARPs/CAs; 10. Provided training on bookkeeping with female committee members; 11. We provided training on agricultural techniques, leadership, marketing, and promotion strategy
Page 12 of 13 to female farmer promoters.
Page 13 of 13
Annex 2: Savings Group Profile
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 CTIP Data
Reporting Period: From 2013-01-01 - To: 2019-06-31 (2019) Number of Active Province SGs (Active Dissolved and Strong Medium Weak Total Dissolved) Bantey Meanchey 9 0 0 4 4 5 Kampong Cham 18 2 5 1 8 10 Kampong Thom 33 3 17 7 27 6 Koh Kong 8 2 2 1 5 3 Oddar Meanchey 18 0 6 7 13 5 Phnom Penh 4 0 1 0 1 3 Prey Veng 26 3 2 4 9 17 Siem Reap 61 10 20 19 49 12 Svay Rieng 25 3 7 9 19 6 Total 202 23 60 52 135 67 Reporting Period: From 2013-01-01 - To: 2020-08-31 (2020) Dissolved
Number of SGs Active All (2019- (Active and 2020 2020) Dissolved) Strong Medium Weak Total 9 2 2 0 4 0 5 18 4 4 0 8 0 10 33 17 8 0 25 2 8 8 3 2 0 5 0 3 18 4 5 0 9 4 9 4 0 0 0 0 1 4 26 4 1 0 5 4 21 61 28 11 3 42 7 19 25 4 9 0 13 6 12 202 66 42 3 113 24 91
Annex 3: Small Grant Support Table
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 List of Beneficiaries Received Small Grant Support in Year 5
Current Address SG No Type of Beneficiary Date Type of Business Provided by Time Frame Village Commune District Province member
1Koh Por Pak Khlang Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ June 2019 Chicken Raising Winrock 2Koh Por Pak Khlang Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Mar‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 3Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Mar‐20 Fishing Winrock 4Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Mar‐20 Fishing Winrock 5Ta Chat Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Mar‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 6Ta Chat Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Mar‐20 Fishing Winrock 7Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Apr‐20 Fishing Winrock 8Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Apr‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 9Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Apr‐20 Fishing Winrock 10 Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Apr‐20 Fishing Winrock 11 Tuol Kokir Leu Tuol Kokir Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Apr‐20 Fishing Winrock 12 Srangae Thboung Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 24.12.2019 Sugarcane juice Sovann Phoum 13 Prasat Tong Rong Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 24.12.2019 Sugarcane juice Sovann Phoum 14 Prasat Tong Rong Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 24.12.2019 Selling grocery Sovann Phoum 15 Prasat Tong Rong Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 24.12.2019 Bread Selling Sovann Phoum 16 Prasat Tong Rong Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 25.12.2019 Snacks selling Sovann Phoum 17 Tasor Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 28.01.2020 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 18 Srangae Chueng Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 05.02.2020 Motor‐cart Sovann Phoum 19 Svay Prey Som Rorng Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 06.02.2020 Sewing clothes Sovann Phoum 20 Pak Nam Pongro Kaoh Soutin Kampong cham ARP √ 07.02.2020 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 21 Srangae Chueng Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 10.02.2020 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 22 Tropieng Rung Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 08.04.2020 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum From Oct 2019‐June 2020 (44 23 Svay Prey Som Rorng Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 09.04.2020 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum ARPs received small grant) 24 Svay Prey Som Rorng Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 09.04.2020 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 25 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 25.01.2020 Grocery selling Sovann Phoum 26 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 11.2.2020 Grocery selling Sovann Phoum 27 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 20.3.2020 Motor‐cart Sovann Phoum 28 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 20.3.2020 Motor‐cart Sovann Phoum 29 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 20.3.2020 Motor‐cart Sovann Phoum 30 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 20.3.2020 Grocery selling Sovann Phoum 31 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 17‐04‐2020 Seller‐Grocery Sovann Phoum 32 Or Piech Chey Yo Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 17‐04‐2020 Repairing Motorbike Sovann Phoum 33 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 22‐04‐2020 Chicken Rasing Sovann Phoum 34 Tropieng Rung Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 18‐04‐2020 Grocery selling Sovann Phoum 35 Tasor Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 21‐04‐2020 Motor‐cart Sovann Phoum 36 Svay Prey Som Rorng Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 21‐Apr‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 37 Svay Prey Som Rorng Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 23‐Apr‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 38 Svay Prey Som Rorng Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 9‐Apr‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 39 Tasor Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 23‐Apr‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 40 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 2‐May‐20 Grocery selling Sovann Phoum 41 Tasor Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 3‐May‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 42 Tasor Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 1‐May‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 43 Tasor Srangae Prey Chhor Kampong cham ARP √ 30‐Apr‐20 Chicken Raising Sovann Phoum 44 Porpreng Spueu Chamkar leu Kampong cham ARP √ 30‐Apr‐20 Sugarcane filter Machine Sovann Phoum 45 Au Kram Spean Thnoat Chikraeng Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 46 Au Kram Spean Thnoat Chikraeng Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 47 Au Kram Spean Thnoat Chikraeng Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Fish Raising Winrock 48 Samroung Spean Thnoat Chikraeng Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 49 Bos Tatrav Svay Chek Angkor Thom Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising & Vegetable Winrock From July‐August 2020 (12 50 Bos Tatrav Svay Chek Angkor Thom Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock ARPs/returned migrant received 51 Bos Tatrav Svay Chek Angkor Thom Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock small grant) 52 Bos Tatrav Svay Chek Angkor Thom Siem Reap ARP √ Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock 53 Koh Por Pak Khlang Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Jul‐20 Fishing Winrock 54 Koh Por Pak Khlang Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Jul‐20 Fishing Winrock 55 Koh Por Pak Khlang Mondul Seima Koh Kong ARP √ Jul‐20 Fishing and Chicken raising Winrock 56 Koun Tnoat Chey Kampong Svay Kampong Thom Returned migrant x Aug‐20 Chicken Raising Winrock
Annex 4: Case Study
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
Soft Skills Training During COVID-19 Era –
An Innovative Approach
COVID-19 pandemic could not Challenges prevent CTIP from spreading After the COVID-19 pandemic started in Cambodia in March, many things changed. The Cambodian government introduced important messages to its instructions to postpone the Khmer New Year celebration and intended audience. holiday, issued travel restrictions, and implemented social or physical distancing. Additionally, the government prohibited large group meetings and gatherings. The impact on the USAID Cambodia Countering Trafficking-in-Person (CTIP) project implemented by Winrock International was the postponement of soft skills training for people at risk of human trafficking, as CTIP planned to reach an estimated 5,000 people using the traditional face-to-face method of training.
Initiatives CTIP continued to liaise with its partners and determine how to adapt to the evolving circumstances. Due to the re- strictions associated with COVID-19, training could not be held, and the team decided to implement a new approach CTIP M&E and Communications Manager, Bunthan Eang (right), emphasizing soft skills and Covid-19 prevention messages during the final radio talk show with the to delivering important mes- radio host (left). sages without group meetings. CTIP revised its plan for the conduct of soft skills sessions by converting the traditional face- to-face training into live Facebook sessions, and radio talk shows focusing on five topics i) finding local jobs; ii) working abroad; iii) the importance of women's financial inde- pendence; iv) remittance and money management; v) COVID- 19 prevention.
The soft skills sessions emphasized the importance of safe mi- gration, particularly for many women, migrants. It also included job-related announcements in Thailand as well as health and safety information on COVID-19 prevention. To ensure re- turned migrants could receive the soft skill messages, especially in terms of local income-generating alternatives, the project compiled a list of returned migrants creating a Facebook group to receive information about the live radio talk shows and Fa- cebook soft skills information sessions.
Results The new social media training method used five Facebook live sessions and five radio talk shows on the same topics. The radio talk show also allowed listeners to call in and ask questions. CTIP completed the five Facebook live sessions in July. The five videos gained millions of view times by Facebook users in Cambodia. The first video focused on finding local jobs received 460 million+ views, the second video about working abroad over 30 million views, the third video regarding the importance of women's financial dependence 54 million views, the fourth video on remittance and money management 46 million views, and the final video on COVID-19 prevention received 9 million views. In addition to these live Facebook sessions, 50 broadcasts were provided by Women's Radio station (WMC) along with its four relay stations in four provinces. The broadcast from these stations can reach up to 65% of the Phnom Penh municipality (about 1.5 million). Those listeners are another 15 provinces, including Battambang, Pursat, Pailin, Banteay Meanchey, Preah Vihear, Siem Reap, Kampong Thorn, Kampong Cham, TboungKhmum, Kampong Chhnang, Kampong Speu, Kandal, Prey Veng, Takeo, Kampot. Additionally, the on-air radio program is also hosted on WMC's website (www.wmc.org.kh) and Facebook page (@womenradio), which allowed users to watch and listen to the replay of each session. From October 2015 to September 2020, USAID Cambodia, through CTIP, assisted more than 52,000 vulnerable Cambodian people based on their need assessments.
The content of this story is the sole responsibility of Winrock International and does not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.
Annex 5: End-Line Report
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020
USAID Cambodia Countering Trafficking-in-
Persons Program Endline Report
August 2020
Submitted to United States Agency for International Development Cambodia Mission
Submitted by Winrock International DISCLAIMER
This report is made possible by the generous support of the American People through the United State Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of Winrock International and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.
TABLE OF CONTENTS II. Introduction ...... 4 III. Knowledge, Attitudes, And Practices ...... 5 Methods ...... 5 Results ...... 7 Potential migrants ...... 7 Current Migrants ...... 15 Returned Migrants ...... 24 Discussion ...... 33 Potential Migrants ...... 33 Current Migrants ...... 35 Returned Migrants ...... 37 IV. Livelihoods ...... 37 Methods ...... 37 Results ...... 38 Discussion ...... 39 V. Children’s Alternative Care ...... 39 Methods ...... 39 Results ...... 40 Discussion ...... 41 VI. Community Vulnerability Index ...... 42 Methods ...... 42 Conceptual Model ...... 42 Study Population ...... 45 Limitations ...... 46 Results ...... 47 Overall Results ...... 47 Results by Variable ...... 49 Discussion ...... 59 VII. Discussion and Recommendations ...... 62
1
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CAC Children’s Alternative Care CIP Commune Investment Plan CTIP Countering Trafficking-in-Persons CVI Community Vulnerability Index FGD Focus Group Discussions HH Household KAP Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices NGO Non-Governmental Organization TIP Trafficking in Persons USAID United States Agency for International Development
2
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Cambodia Countering Trafficking-in-Persons (CTIP) program is a five-year program funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and implemented by Winrock International (Winrock). The CTIP program took a holistic approach to counter-trafficking while still following the 4P paradigm encompassing prevention, protection, prosecution efforts and the engagement of partners.
In 2016, Winrock hired a team of consultants to conduct a baseline study and in 2019 an endline study was conducted by another consultant team in order to measure the progress on four major indicators. The goal of these studies was to collect data from CTIP’s target population on what they know about TIP prevention, what behaviors they practice related to TIP prevention, and how vulnerable are they to TIP. Winrock analyzed the data collected during the endline survey and was able to make comparisons between the baseline and endline results.
Using the questions that were directly comparable between the baseline and endline survey, 23.1% of potential migrants during the baseline were able to express knowledge of safe migration practices, while during the endline 44.4% of potential migrants expressed knowledge of protective behaviors to prevent TIP (CTIP Indicator 1.1.1). Between baseline and endline, those surveyed reporting behaviors connected to safe migration (CTIP Indicator 1.1.2) rose from 3.4% to 19.4%, while this is a significant increase it still falls short compared to those expressing knowledge. This may show that while migrants may have increased knowledge of safe migration they may still face significant barriers preventing them from converting that knowledge into practice. The level of sufficient livelihoods from 2016 to 2019 was also studied. The baseline found only 4.25% exhibited sufficient livelihoods, which more than doubled by endline to 9.33% (CTIP Indicator 1.2.1).
One portion of both the baseline and endline studies was focused on analyzing commune vulnerability through a community vulnerability index (CVI) established during the baseline. The 65 communes from the baseline were compared against the 38 communes reviewed in the endline and it was found that communes exhibiting low vulnerability changed from 3% in 2016 to 10.5% in 2019. There were no significant movements from high vulnerability to medium vulnerability, but several communes were able to move from medium vulnerability to low vulnerability.
The indicators measured through the endline study demonstrate progress across multiple dimensions of TIP. The growth in knowledge expressed and behavior reported point to the effectiveness of CTIP’s information campaigns and outreach and that continued programming in this area should be pursued. In reducing vulnerability to TIP more generally the project had modest success especially considering the factors leading to increased vulnerability at the commune level are many and complex. It is recommended targeted interventions continue in this area and the models for assessing commune vulnerability be further tested and refined in the future. The study also offers targeted recommendations to better support Cambodian migrants in destination countries still reporting high levels of abuse and exploitation.
3
II. INTRODUCTION The Cambodia CTIP program is a five-year program funded by USAID and implemented by Winrock with the support of international and local partners. The overarching objective of the program is to advance human rights in Cambodia through a holistic, multi-pronged approach that bolsters the capacity of communities and government actors in coordination with the private sector and development partners.
The CTIP program follows the 4P paradigm for countering human trafficking, including prevention, protection, prosecution and partnerships. Prevention efforts focus on the delivery of accessible information on safe migration, addressing root causes of TIP by expanding livelihood options, and strengthening National Plans of Action through government engagement at the national and sub-national level. Protection activities will standardize victim identification, facilitate trauma-informed case management, and improve access and quality of services. Prosecution work will enable TIP survivors to access legal services and push for justice and aim to increase TIP report and outcomes of TIP investigations. Last, partnerships will be leveraged with the private sector, government and civil society organization to advance all components of the program.
Winrock engaged a team of consultants from Young Development Research & Consulting, led by Mr. Mak Sithirith, Mr. Se Bunleng, and Mr. Mak Puthea, to carry out a study to establish baseline figures for the indicators in the table below, as well as explore other areas of interest to the project and USAID. Topics for the study included knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) on safe migration, used to determine baseline figures for indicators 1.1.1 and 1.1.2, and a livelihoods survey to explore 1.2.1. An exploration of childcare for children of migrants was also suggested as an area of interest to USAID. For indicator 1.2.3 a CVI was created to measure the level of vulnerability to human trafficking in target communes, so that this could later be compared with the level of vulnerability measured toward the end of the program. The CVI study aimed to assess the extent of several variables connected to vulnerability factors (6 variables), sensitivity (4 variables) and program interventions (9 variables) so that effective prevention strategies could be developed and implemented. All studies covered 65 communes in nine provinces including Prey Veng, Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh, Kampong Cham, Kampong Thom, Siem Reap, Banteay Meanchey, Oddar Meanchey and Koh Kong.
Table 1: Indicators reported through baseline and end line studies. 1.1.1 % knowledge change in target population, who are exposed to behavior change campaigns, on protective behaviors to prevent TIP 1.1.2 % behavioral change to prevent TIP in the migration process in target population who are exposed to behavior change campaigns 1.21 % participating households at risk of TIP with improved livelihoods 1.2.3 # of communes with reduced vulnerability to TIP
4
In 2019, Winrock contracted with a team of four consultants including, Mr. Saing Hay, Mr. Sok Leang, Mr. Chan Vuthy, and Mr. Phok Sochea to conduct follow-on research. The team was made up of a Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist and Professional Researchers with expertise in quantitative and qualitative data collection. This team conducted four inter-related studies designed to measure effects of the CTIP program in the geographic areas it serves. These studies are:
1. A KAP survey around safe migration in Cambodia among target groups of respondents; 2. A livelihoods survey designed to determine changes in economic access and opportunity; 3. A Children’s Alternative Care study, which describes the characteristics of those who support migrants by providing childcare for the children of migrants; and 4. A Commune Vulnerability Index to compare shifts in vulnerability to unsafe migration practices in communes where CTIP project activities took place.
These studies covered 38 communes in eight provinces including Prey Veng, Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh, Kampong Cham, Kampong Thom, Siem Reap, Oddar Meanchey and Koh Kong. Overall, these studies provide an important descriptive picture of a suite of factors associated with safe and unsafe migration practices in Cambodia
III. KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, AND PRACTICES
METHODS In 2016, Winrock sponsored a baseline survey of KAP around safe migration in Cambodia. Although this survey did not involve random selection of participants, meaning that results are not generalizable beyond the study population, the baseline survey provided tremendously useful results on at-risk populations and communities that Winrock used to design and implement its CTIP activities.
In May 2019, Winrock’s endline evaluation consultant team conducted a KAP survey, this time with a target population of direct and indirect beneficiaries of the CTIP Project. Researchers purposively sampled 21 of 65 communes in which the CTIP Project operates, randomly sampling individuals where possible for a total of 767 respondents. From these communes, researchers created a list of households that met the following criteria:
1. Households with ID poor card (poor 1 & 2) (source: ID poor database, commune database, village book records, consultation with village chiefs, and household (HH) screening selection questions).
2. Low-income households. A low-income household was identified by the actual HH situation or by the village chief and/or village members. The criteria for assessing the HH situation included the home condition, home assets, having many members, and very few members with or no members with a job that leads to income generation. Mainly, the recruitment of low-income households was recommended by the village chief and/or village members.
5
3. Households whose members are potential migrants.
4. Households whose members are current cross-border migrants.
5. Households with members who are migrant returnees from their destination country.
A household was eligible for inclusion in the sample IF they fulfilled criteria 1 OR 2 AND 3 OR 4 OR 5 as specified above.
In theory, households were randomly selected from the list of those meeting eligibility criteria. In practice, in most communes studied, there were insufficient eligible households to randomly select a sufficiently large sample.
Once households were selected, household heads were invited to complete the first sections of the KAP questionnaire. If the head of household was a potential, current, or returned migrant, they were asked to respond to the relevant section of the questionnaire. If the head of household was not a member of the targeted groups, researchers would interview the member or members of the household who did fit one or more of these groups. The final sample included a range of 1 to 3 respondents from each household.
In order to be sorted into one of the target groups, potential respondents from qualifying households needed to meet the following criteria:
Potential Migrants:
• Left school before Grade 12
• Low income (ID poor holder and direct and indirect observation)
• Aged 15-39 (primary age range of migrants)
• No experience of cross-border migration
• Able to speak Khmer language
• Willing to take part in a face-to-face interview
Current Migrants:
• An existing cross-border migrant, which includes permanent or seasonal migration. Seasonal, visiting, or permanently returned migrations must have returned to their home of origin within one year of the survey to be included in this category.
• Aged 15 or over
• Able to speak Khmer language
• No problems with mental health
• Willing to take part in a face-to-face interview
6
Returned Migrants:
• A former cross-border migrant, including permanent or seasonal migration. All returned migrants must have been present at their current home for at least one year at the time of the study to be included in this category.
• Aged 15 or over
• Able to speak Khmer language
• No problems with mental health
• Willing to take part in a face-to-face interview
The final sample included a total of 767 participants from 767 households over a total of 21 communes. The results represent an in-depth examination of KAP around migration and TIP among potential, current, and returned migrants in areas in which the CTIP Project has implemented activities. The results, below, provide the reader with a detailed picture of each of the target groups. Results from this study are compared with the KAP study conducted at baseline in 2016.
Limitations
As mentioned above, while researchers did their best to ensure an element of random selection during the sampling process, this was not fully possible. It was similarly not advisable to combine the three groups of potential, current, and returned migrants and weight the samples in order to analyze results for the full sample. For this reason, and due to the previously noted lack of randomization at the baseline, it is important to interpret results with caution. Nevertheless, we believe the opportunity to understand how direct and indirect beneficiaries think about migration practices and TIP-related risk is invaluable.
RESULTS
POTENTIAL MIGRANTS
Background of Potential Migrants The endline study included 405 potential migrants, of which 76% were female and 24% were male. Among potential migrant endline survey respondents, 32% were 20 years of age or younger, 28% were between 20 and 30 years of age, 40% were between 30 and 40, and less than 1% were over 40. The distribution of ages in 5-year increments is shown in Figure 1.
7
Figure 1: Age distribution of potential migrants. Among potential migrant endline survey respondents, 23% identified as the head of household and 77% did not. The locations of the potential migrants surveyed are shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Locations of potential migrants. Province Kampong Cham 26.9% Kampong Thom 24.7% Oddar Meanchey 5.2% Phnom Penh 8.1% Prey Veng 8.6% Siem Reap 18.8% Svay Rieng 7.7%
Among potential migrant endline survey respondents, 49% reported working for income and 51% did not, while 60% identified as supporting their family’s daily expenses and needs and 40% do not. Among those who said they work for income, 51% said they participate in daily sales of labor, 23% said they have a small business, 11% said they are employed with salary in the public or private sector, and 17% had other employment situations. Of the respondents, 54% had poor ID certificates (24% Poor 1 and 30% Poor 2), 27% identified as poor but did not have a certificate, and 19% did not have a certificate.
8
Nearly half (47%) of potential migrants expressed interest in immigrating to Thailand, 27% did not know, 16% said Korea, 4% said Japan, 4% said Malaysia, 2% said other, and less than 1% said China, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Vietnam (see Table 3). Table 3: Destinations of interest for potential migrants. Potential Destination Country of Interest Thailand 46.9% Don’t know 26.7% Republic of Korea 15.6% Japan 3.7% Malaysia 3.5% Singapore 0.5% Vietnam 0.5% Saudi Arabia 0.2% China 0.2% Others 2.2%
Knowledge of safe migration The endline survey found that 44.4% of potential migrants expressed knowledge of protective behaviors to prevent trafficking in persons.1 More than half (58%) of migrants would contact their friends or family if they were having problems in their destination country, 31% would contact their local authorities, and 27% would contact the agency that recruited them. See additional responses in Figure 2.
1 Indicator 1.1.1: Percentage of knowledge change in target population on protective behaviors to prevent trafficking-in- person. The result of this indicator is based on the following: If you were in the destination country, what would you do if having any problems? (Q71). If the respondent made more than one response, except “I don’t know,” to Q71, then the respondent was counted under the indicator.
9
Figure 2: Contact points for potential migrants if they were to experience problems in the destination country. Migration channel Potential migrants were asked about migration channels that they would use. The endline study found that 53% of potential migrants would choose the recruitment agency channel, while 28% reported that they would migrate through assistance from their family members/friends/relatives, 7% through the broker channel, 1.7% independently, and another10% specified a different channel or didn’t know. The main reasons that caused them to select those channels for assistance to migrate abroad include the following:
• Over 73% reported that the above channels are safe for their migration.
• People trust the above channels (45%);
• The channel that they selected was certified by the government (14%); In terms of selection of a recruitment agency or broker, 55% of these potential migrants said that they would check with their family, 19.8% would check with the village chief, 17% would find out about the history of the broker, 16% would check with other migrants, and 11% said they didn’t know what they would do.
Consultation before migration Potential migrants reported that they would consult two main sources if they decided to migrate, namely friends and relatives or family members: 59% of potential migrants reported they would consult with friends or relatives before migrating across the border, 49% reported they would consult with their
10 family members,19% reported they would consult other migrants, and 18% said they would consult local authorities for information. Although 11% said they would give their family the contact number of NGOs working on their migration, less than 1% said they would give their family the contact number of their broker or recruiting agency or give their family a copy of their important documents (passport, ID, employment contract).
Documents required for migration Regarding the knowledge of potential migrants on documents required for cross-border migration, 68% said they would need a border pass, 66% said they would need a passport, 31% said ID card, 31% said work certificate, 9% said stay permit, 8% said other, 7% said employment contract, and 13.6% didn’t know. It was found that 83% of potential migrants would not provide their passport and/or ID card to their employer if they migrated outside Cambodia, while 17% said they would provide their passport and/or ID card to their employer. The reasons that they would provide their passport and/or ID card to the employer was because they don’t want to lose them (38%), because of workplace requirements (34%), because they have no choice (28%), and because they want to avoid losing employment if they keep those documents (14.7%) (see Figure 3).
Figure 3: Reasons for saying they would give their passport or ID card to their employer, among the 17% of potential migrants that said they would do so. Among the 83% of potential migrants that would not provide their passport and/or ID card to the employer/company, 50% said they that they need their passport and/or ID card when travelling somewhere outside the work area, 47% said they don’t feel safe giving their documents to the employer, 38% said the passport and/or ID card are their own documents so they don’t have to give them to the employer, and 8% mentioned other reasons.
11
Observations and opinions about migration When asked about their observations and opinions of outcomes for the majority of people who have migrated to another country, 33% of potential migrants said that migrants got beaten, 27% said that they had their wages deducted, 24% did not get paid for their work, 24% were able to build a new house, 19% have more money than before,19% were able to buy land, 17% were forced to work, and 12% were arrested by the local authorities (see Figure 4 and Figure 5).
Figure 4: Negative observations and opinions potential migrants had about migration.
12
Figure 5: Positive observations and opinions potential migrants had about migration. Loan use for migration The endline survey showed that 61.2% of potential migrants expected to use loans if they decided to migrate across the border. Of those, 62% would take out a loan from a bank or MFI, 20% from a local money lender, 5% from a savings group, and 13% from another source.
Sources of support during recruitment Many potential migrants understood how to contact persons or agencies if they needed help during the recruitment process. The endline study found that 56% of potential migrants reported they would contact their friends, family, or relatives, 36% would contact village or commune authorities,16% would contact police, 14% would contact labor unions/worker representatives, 10% would contact the embassy/consulate, 6% would contact local authorities including Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training, and 2.5% would contact NGOs, while 6% had another response and 5% didn’t know.
13
Figure 6: Contact points for potential migrants if they experienced problems in the recruitment process. Channels for remittances and communication Most potential migrants could identify a safe and effective channel for transferring remittances home: 67% of potential migrants reported they would use Wing, while 33% would use banks. Some of them mentioned that they would send money back home through their friends (5%), relatives (6%), middlemen/brokers (5%), recruitment agencies (4%) and money exchange counters (5%). Only 3% didn’t know of any channels through which to send remittances back home.
If the surveyed potential migrants decided to migrate abroad, 94% said they would communicate with their families via telephone, 41% said they would communicate through Facebook
Safe migration awareness activities The baseline study found that 41% of potential migrants attended awareness activities that relate to safe migration, while 59% of them had never attended such activities. Among the potential migrants that had attended awareness activities regarding safe migration 71% were involved through mass media (TV, radio, newspaper), 34% mentioned social media, 32% mentioned their involvement in outreach activities, 9% mentioned exposure to meetings/training workshops/seminars, 4% mentioned exposure to information, education and communication materials such as leaflets or brochures, 1% mentioned public events/concerts/street performances, and 5% mention other activities (see Figure 7).
14
Figure 7: Sources of safe migration information for the 41% of potential migrants who attended such activities. Both potential migrants who have attended and never attended awareness activities said that mass media is the most effective channel through which to provide information on safe migration to migrant populations (72%), while 34% mentioned that social media outreach activities are also an effective source of information sharing on safe migration, 27% mentioned outreach at the village level, 5% mentioned meetings, trainings, workshops or seminars, 2.0% mentioned information, education and communication materials such as leaflets or brochures, 2% mentioned public events, such as concerts or street performances, and 3% mentioned other sources. The potential migrant population mentioned five main reasons for the most effective channel they selected: 58% said that the channel is easy to understand, 49% said that it is easy to access, 46% said that it is easy to use, 37% said it is most popular, and 20% said that it is free.
CURRENT MIGRANTS
Background of current migrants The endline study included current migrants, of which 60% were female and 40% were male. Among current migrant endline survey respondents, 8% were 20 years of age or younger, 38% were between 20 and 30 years of age, 38% were between 30 and 40, and 17% were over 40. The distribution of ages in 5- year increments is shown in Figure 8.
15
Figure 8: Age distribution of current migrants Among current migrant endline survey respondents, 39% identified as the head of household and 61% did not. The locations of the current migrants surveyed are shown in Table 4. Table 4: Locations of current migrants. Province Kampong Cham 31.9% Kampong Thom 18.1% Koh Kong 1.4% Oddar Meanchey 2.8% Phnom Penh 4.2% Prey Veng 11.1% Siem Rep 14.6% Svay Rieng 16.0%
Among current migrants, 37% of respondents had poor ID certificates (16% Poor 1 and 21% Poor 2), 16% identified as poor but did not have a certificate, and 47% did not have a certificate. Only 7% of current migrants surveyed cross the border alone, while 93% traveled with other people. Of those that did not migrate alone, 69% of them migrated with other migrants, 55% migrated with their family and relatives, 28% migrated with a broker or recruiting agency, and 18% migrated with their friends.
16
Reasons for migration and migration channels There are five main factors that pushed current migrants to migrate abroad: 56% of current migrants migrated because they needed money to support their family, 37% were unemployed, 26% wanted to pay back debts, 17% had a difficult situation with their family, and 17% experienced a natural disaster. An additional 10% migrated because of a reduction in the price of agricultural products, 10% to join friends, family, or relatives abroad, 4% because of low income (see Figure 9). Only one person said they migrated because of discrimination and one because of domestic violence.
Figure 9: Reasons for migration among current migrants. There were three main channels through which migrants were recruited or arranged to migrate outside Cambodia: 24% went through a middle man or broker, 33% went through their family or relatives, 28% went through a recruitment agency, while 8% went through friends and 7% went by other means (see Figure 10).
17
Figure 10: Migration channels for current migrants. Behavior towards safe migration The study found that 19.4% of current migrants demonstrated protective behavior connected with safe migration.2 Further, 73% reported that they sought advice from someone on their job opportunity before migrating. Of those that sought advice, 42% consulted with their family or relatives, 31% consulted their parents, 19% consulted their husband or wife, and 5% consulted other migrants (see Figure 11).
2 Indicator 1.1.2: Percentage of behavioral change to prevent TIP in the migration process in target population. This indicator was measured based on the two following questions: “Did you seek advice from anyone else about the job opportunity?” (Q58) and “Before leaving, did you leave any copy of ID Card or passport with your family at home or with a trusted person?” (Q113). If the respondent said “Yes” to Q58 and Q113, then the respondent was counted under this indicator.
18
Figure 11: Sources of advice on job opportunities before migrating for current migrants. In addition, only 28% of current migrants left a copy of their documents/information with their family or trusted persons, while 72% of them did not leave a copy. Additionally, 34% left the contact information of their broker or recruiting agency with their family or trusted person, 12% left the contact information of the police, 4% left the contact information of the Cambodian embassy/consulate, and 4% left other documents or information.
Documents used for cross-border migration The endline study found that 62% of current migrants used their passport for cross-border migration, 48% used their ID card, 33% used their border pass, and 10% used their work permit. However, 13% of existing migrants reported that they used no documents for migration to work outside Cambodia. The study found that 30% of current migrants handed over their ID card and/or passport to their broker or employer during their migration outside Cambodia, while 70% did not.
Received jobs as promised According to the baseline study, 85% of current migrants received their job/work as promised by their broker/recruitment agency/employer, while the other 15% did not. Among the actions taken by current migrants who did not receive the job as promised, 48% continued to work at the available job, 29% tried to find another job in their destination country, 19% stopped working for the employer, and 10% began work with another employer.
19
Destination country employment There were three primary types of work that current migrants were doing in their destination country: 17% were working in the construction sector, 36% in manufacturing (industry), 21% in agriculture. These and other types of work are shown in Table 5.
Table 5: Employment type in the destination country among current migrants. Type of work in the destination country Manufacturing 36.1% Agriculture 20.8% Construction 16.7% Restaurant 6.9% Daily sales of labor 6.2% Domestic work 5.6% Other 3.5% Fishing vessel 2.8% Cleaning 0.7% Security 0.7%
Costs of cross-border migration The study showed that 57% of current migrants paid for their passport to migrate outside Cambodia, 44% paid for the migration travel costs, 39% paid a fee to their broker and/or recruiting agency, 22% paid for their border pass, 14% paid for a travel document, and 13% paid to cross the border. Additional costs incurred include ID card (7%), work permit (6%), stay permit (5%), visa (1%), health insurance (1%), while 3% incurred other costs and 3% didn’t know.
The median cost for migration was 250 USD for men and 350 USD for women, and the average cost was 373 USD for men and 535 USD for women. Two women and one man were charged a maximum price of 3000 USD. Costs of less than or equal to 200 USD were reported by 38% of respondents. The distribution of costs associated with migration are shown in Figure 12.
20
Figure 12: Distribution of migration costs for current migrants. Regarding the financial sources used for migration, 58% of current migrants used their own money, 33% took out a loan, 13% used wage deduction, 15% received money from their family/relatives, 4% sold assets, and 5.1% mentioned other sources (see Figure 13).
Figure 13: Financial sources for migration among current migrants.
21
Impacts of migration Regarding the impacts of migration on their family, 80% of current migrants reported their family had more money than before their migration, 88% reported their family had more food available, 86% of families with healthcare expenditures reported being able to pay for those expenditures more easily, 69% of those who had debt before migrated reported being able to pay off that debt, and 76% of families with school-aged children reported being able to send their children to school more regularly. Additionally, 18% used the money from migration to start a business, 24% bought land, 31% bought or built a new house, 33% bought a motorbike, and 15% bought a water pump (see Figure 14).
Figure 14: Impacts of migration on the families of current migrants. Problems experienced by current migrants Problems were experienced by 36% of current migrants surveyed, of whom 60% were female and 40% were male. Of those that experienced problems, 42% reported being locked in the workplace when off duty (14 women, 8 men), 33% reported that they were forced to work because they owed a debt (8 women, 9 men), 23% were threatened by the employer (4 women, 8 men), 15% were sometimes not paid (4 women, 4 men), 8% were physically beaten (4 women, 1 man), 8% had their employer call the police and seize their money (1 woman, 3 men), 6% were not paid (2 women, 1 man), and 2% were forced to use drugs (1 woman) (see Figure 15).
22
Figure 15: Problems experienced by current migrants, by gender. Frequency of migration Among the current migrants surveyed, 63% said it was their first time migrating to a different country. Of those who said it was not their first time, 44% reported they had migrated once a year, 30% migrated once every two years, 9% migrated twice a year, and 17% mentioned other options.
Remittances The endline study found that 65% of existing migrants transferred money to their home monthly, 9% yearly, 3% daily, 3% weekly, and 10% with some other frequency. However, 10% had never transferred money home during their work outside Cambodia. It was found that 44% of current migrants used Wing to send money, 33% used banks, 16% used a middleman or broker, 10% through their friends, 7% through their relatives, and 4% through money exchange counters. 10% of current migrants opened a bank account in Cambodia for the purpose of sending remittances.
Regarding the use of remittances, 63% of current migrants reported that they used their remittances for household food expenditures, 40% for children’s education, 34% to pay debt, 26% for health care, 22% for care of the family’s elderly sick members. Other reasons reported by 10-20% of respondents included buying agricultural inputs, savings, supporting relatives, and buying a motorcycle. Other reasons reported by less than 10% included build/buy a new house, repair house, buy land, and start a new business, while an additional 9% reported other uses.
23
Communication with families and other migrants The study found that 97% of the current migrant population communicated with their family while abroad. Of those, 92% contacted their families through telephone and 52% used Facebook, while only 1% contacted their family through other family, friends, or relatives, and 1% used other means of communication. 38% of current migrants who contacted their families did so every day, 36% did so every week, 16% did so every two weeks, and 10% did so with some other frequency.
While working outside Cambodia, 92% of the current migrant population mentioned that they reached out to other Cambodian migrants at their workplace or another workplace in the same destination country. 79% of respondents said that they had a good relationship with one or more Cambodian migrant workers.
RETURNED MIGRANTS Returned migrants refer to those who have returned from their cross-border migration for at least one year. In total, there were 218 returned migrants interviewed during the endline study, 66% of which were females and 34% were males. Among returned migrant endline survey respondents, 5% were 20 years of age or younger, 35% were between 20 and 30 years of age, 37% were between 30 and 40, and 22% were over 40. The distribution of ages in 5-year increments is shown in Figure 16.
Figure 16: Age distribution of returned migrants. Among returned migrant endline survey respondents, 44% identified as the head of household and 56% did not. The locations of the current migrants surveyed are shown in Table 6.
24
Table 6: Locations of returned migrants. Province Kampong Cham 31.2 Kampong Thom 24.3 Koh Kong 1.4 Oddar Meanchey 5.0 Phnom Penh 5.0 Prey Veng 8.7 Siem Rep 17.4 Svay Rieng 6.9
At the time of the study, 34% of returned migrants were unemployed, 28% were working as local day- labor workers, 20% were running their own small business, 11% were working in agriculture, while the other 8% had a salaried position in the private sector. Among returned migrants, 38% of respondents had poor ID certificates (16% Poor 1 and 22% Poor 2), 16% identified as poor but did not have a certificate, and 46% did not have a certificate. It was found that 81% of the returned migrants were supporting the expenses/needs of their family, while 19% did not support their family.
Destination countries of returned migrants Most of the returned migrants reported that they had migrated to Thailand (80%), and 18% had migrated to Malaysia while the rest migrated to work in Vietnam (1%) and South Korea (1%). The median time abroad for returned migrants was 19 months, with 68% migrating for a year or longer and 32% migrating for less than a year.
Reasons for migration The main factors that pushed returned migrants to migrate abroad are as follows: 51% of them had migrated because they needed money to support their family, 26% migrated because they were unemployed, 24% migrated to pay back debts, 20% migrated because of the difficult condition of their family, and 17% migrated because of a natural disaster, among other reasons (see Figure 17).
25
Figure 17: Reasons for migration among returned migrants. Consultation before migration The endline study found that 89% of returned migrants consulted with someone before they migrated to work abroad. The majority consulted with their family members or friends (78%) before they made the final decision to migrate, while 55% consulted with other migrants, 11% consulted with local authorities, and very few consulted with other sources (see Figure 18).
Figure 18: Sources returned migrants consulted before migration.
26
Migration channels The study revealed that 35% of returned migrants migrated through brokers, 28% through their family members and relatives, 24% through recruitment agencies, and 6% migrated through friends or others (see Figure 19).
Figure 19: Migration channels for returned migrants. Destination country employment The endline study showed that 26% of returned migrants had an employment contract in place before migrating. Among the returned migrants, 33% worked in manufacturing, 21% worked in construction, 18% worked in agriculture, and 10% worked in the domestic sector, among other occupations (see Table 7).
Table 7: Employment type in the destination country among returned migrants. Type of work in the destination country Manufacturing (industry) 33.0 Construction 21.1 Agriculture 17.9 Domestic work 9.6 Other 5.0 Restaurant 4.6 Daily sales of labor 3.7 Fishing vessel at sea 2.3 Cleaning 1.4
27
Seafood processing 0.9 Hospitality 0.5
Problems experienced in destination countries Problems were experienced by 38% of returned migrants surveyed, of whom 70% were female and 30% were male. Of those 83 respondents that experienced problems, 39% reported being locked in the workplace when off duty (25 women, 7 men), 35% reported that they were forced to work because they owed a debt (22 women, 7 men), 24% were threatened by the employer (13 women, 7 men), 10% were not paid (5 women, 3 men), 10% had their employer call the police and seize their money (8 women), 7% were physically beaten (6 women), 7% were sometimes not paid (5 women, 1 man), 5% were arrested/jailed, 2% were forced to use drugs (2 women), and 1% were raped (1 woman) (see Figure 20).
Figure 20: Problems returned migrants experienced in the destination country, by gender. In order to deal with the problems that they faced in their destination country, 62% of returned migrants dealt with problems themselves, 7% changed employers, 6% stopped working and returned home, 3% reported the problem to their recruiting agency, and 29% took other actions or did nothing. Less than 1% reported their problems to the local authorities or to the embassy/consulate, and none reported the case to an NGO.
28
Received jobs as promised The endline showed that 85% of returned migrants reported getting their job as promised (by their broker/recruitment agency/employer) when working in their destination country, while the other 15% did not get the job as promised. Among the actions taken by returned migrants who did not receive the job as promised, 55% continued to work at the available job, 15% began work with another employer 12% stopped working for the employer, 6% tried to find another job in their destination country, 3% sued the recruiting agency, 3% returned home, and 15% took another action. The endline survey also revealed that 89% of respondents received the salary that they had been promised, while 11% did not.
Outreach to other Cambodian migrants The study found that most of the returned migrants (89%) had communicated with other Cambodian migrants at their workplace, while 59% reached out to other Cambodian migrants outside their workplace. 80% of returned migrants surveyed said they had a good relationship with other Cambodian migrants in the destination country.
Reasons for return There were a variety of reasons that migrants returned home, such as the 30% of respondents that mentioned their family’s desire to live together, 20% that said their contract ended, 17% said they needed to take care of their children, 7% said they were sick, 7% said a family member at home was sick, 7% said they had a business in Cambodia they had to run, 7% said they were afraid of getting arrested, 5% said it was difficult to work there as an undocumented worker, 4% said they were forced to work long hours, and 4% said that they had too much deducted from their wages. Less common reasons included not being paid (2%), being arrested (2%), no holidays (2%), no overtime pay (2%), didn’t provide enough food (2%), not allowed sick leave (1%), being beaten (1%), being locked in (1%), being jailed (1%), being deported (1%), forced to use drugs (1%), not provided room to sleep (1%), sexual harassment (1%), and being threatened (1%). Other reasons were cited by 31%, which included pregnancy, growing old, lack of work in destination country, and a general desire to return home.
Future plans Regarding their future plans, 48% of returned migrants reported that they would start a small business at home, 20% planned to find a job within Cambodia, 17% planned to stay home to take care of their family, 7% planned to cross the border to migrate again, 6% planned to join their family business, and 14% cited other plans (see Figure 21).
29
Figure 21: Future plans of returned migrants. Challenges after returning home Only 20% of returned migrants reported facing problems or difficulties after returning home. Of those facing problems, 56% reported being jobless 44% said they have no money, 18% have debt, 18% have health issues, and 18% cited other problems.
Support needed upon return Returned migrants identified modes of assistance that should be provided for migrants after returning home; 26% said that there should be local job opportunities offered, 19% said they should have access to grants and capital to start a business, 17% said vocational skills training should be provided, 17% said information about local jobs should be provided, 12% said they should have access to loans, 10% said training in vegetable growing, 10% said training in animal raising, and 8% said they should be provided counseling (see Figure 22). Less commonly identified assistance included soft skills training (5%), agricultural materials/equipment (5%), healthcare (4%), basic needs (2%), legal aid (1%), and temporary accommodation (1%). The majority of the 34% of returned migrants who responded other, said that they didn’t know or that they didn’t need support upon return.
30
Figure 22: Desired assistance upon return among returned migrants. Impacts of migration Retuned migrants cited a number of impacts that their migration had on their family: 60% reported having more money, 68% reported having more food, 65% of families with school-aged children reported being able to send their children to school more regularly, 70% of families with healthcare expenditures reported being able to pay for those expenditures more easily, and 70% of those who had debt before migrated reported being able to pay off that debt. Additionally, 12% used the money from migration to start a business, 24% bought land, 32% bought or built a new house, 28% bought a motorbike, and 10% bought a water pump (see Figure 23).
31
Figure 23: Impacts on the families of retuned migrants. Assistance received to return The endline study found that 23% of returned migrants needed assistance to return to Cambodia. Of those that required assistance, 33% received help from friends, family or relatives in Cambodia, 31% received help from friends, family or relatives in the destination country, 18% got help from their broker, 10% got help from their recruiting agency, 8% got help from other Cambodian migrant workers, and 2% got help from the Cambodian government or embassy, while 16% cited other sources of help.
Willingness to migrate again Regarding their interest in migrating again in the future, 42% of returned migrants reported they would potentially migrate again to work outside Cambodia, while 58% of them said they would not. Among those that said they would be interested in migrating again, 54% said that they would like to migrate again because they need the money to support their family, 18% said they are currently jobless, and 9% said they would do it to pay back a debt.
Additionally, among those that said they would be interested in migrating again, 75% said they would do things differently to change their next migration experience. Of those, 62% said they would migrate with a legal recruiting agency, 40% said they would choose to do different work, 20% said they would choose a new employer, 18% would learn about the working conditions of their destination, 9% would go to a different country, and 4% would learn the language of their destination country.
32
DISCUSSION The endline survey gives insights into the KAP of potential, current, and returned Cambodian migrants. The endline survey is not directly comparable to the baseline survey since the baseline survey did not have a representative sample and because some of the questions and response options changed between the baseline and endline. These changes were made in response to some concerns whether the baseline questions were truly accessing variables of interest; all changes in baseline values reported are related to provide the greatest possible level of comparability between baseline and endline measurements.
POTENTIAL MIGRANTS There was a greater proportion of women respondents on the endline survey (75.8% female, 24.2% male) compared to the baseline (51.8% female, 48.2% male). That is not to say that the gender makeup of the potential migrant population changed between the baseline and endline; this is an example of how the baseline survey was not representative, and that caution should be exercised when comparing baseline and endline results.
Knowledge of safe migration (Indicator 1.1.1) The endline survey found that 44.4% of potential migrants expressed knowledge on protective behaviors to prevent trafficking in persons, Indicator 1.1.1. The result of this indicator is based on the following, “If you were in the destination country, what would you do if having any problems?” If the respondent made more than one response, other than “I don’t know,” then the respondent was counted under the indicator. This is an apparent increase from the 23.1% of potential migrants who expressed knowledge of safe migration on the baseline survey, when measured using the same question and criteria.
Note that the original baseline report stated that 35.5% of potential migrants expressed knowledge of safe migration. This assessment was based on two baseline questions, one of which was not on the endline survey, so the baseline was recalculated to be comparable with the endline result.
Choice of migrant channel There was a decrease in the proportion of potential migrants that said they would like to arrange their migration using a recruitment agency from the baseline to the endline (64% to 53%), while there was a slight increase in those that would like their family or relatives to arrange their migration (24% to 28%). This shows a small shift in attitudes of potential migrants towards sources they find more trustworthy. More current or returned migrants have been open about their negative experience with recruitment agencies which may have contributed to this shift in attitudes. While the CTIP project did not promote any specific channel for migration, messaging encouraged potential migrants obtain as much information as possible from sources that are reliable.
Consult before migration Many of the results are similar between the baseline and endline; however, there was a notable decrease in the proportion of potential migrants that reported they would consult with other migrants before migration from the baseline to the endline (45% to 19%). This is one of the few areas where CTIP
33 messaging does not appear to have been effective. Despite CTIP messaging encouraging potential migrants to speak with returned migrants to better understand the process, destination country and generally learn from their experience, it appears many potential migrants would not seek their advice. A lesson learned from this outcome may be for future CTIP efforts to take this messaging a step further that not only encourages this communication but facilitates it. In the future project in Cambodia could work with local NGOs in destination countries to forge these connections and provide a venue for prospective migrants to learn from current migrants. Other responses to this question were similar between the baseline and endline, such as those that would consult their friends and family (62% to 59%) and those that would consult local authorities (17% to 18%).
Documents for migration There was a significant decrease in the proportion of potential migrants that said they would give their travel document to their employer to hold from the baseline to the endline (36% to 17%). Confiscation of travel documentation is a common method employers may use to perpetuate TIP. The CTIP project had messaging specifically aimed at ensuring potential migrants would maintain ownership of their documentation in order to protect themselves. Based on this difference between the baseline and endline, this was one area of CTIP messaging that was particularly effective. There was also a marked increase in the proportion of potential migrants who said they would need a border pass (9% to 68%), a work permit (7% to 31%), and/or a passport (44% to 66%), while there was a marked decrease in the number who said they would need an ID card (83% to 31%) from the baseline to the endline. Overall, this shows a better understanding of the required documentation required for migration, especially of individual documentation they should be obtaining before migration. Although, the number that said they didn’t know also increased on the endline, from 7% to 14%.
Opinions/observations about Migration
When asked about what happened to most people who migrated to another country, there were seemingly lower opinions among the endline respondents. There was a higher proportion on the endline that said migrants didn’t get paid for their work (9% to 24%), had their wages garnished (5% to 27%), were forced to work (4% to 17%), were arrested (5% to 12%), or went missing (4% to 9%). There was a similar reduction in positive opinions from the baseline to endline, with fewer thinking that migrants have more money than before (81% to 19%) or were able to build a new house (50% to 24%). These increases demonstrate a significant increase in the number of people within CTIP communes that understood the potential risks migrants face. While overall there is not a need to discourage migration, it is important that ARPs understand the risks of migration, especially irregular migration.
Loan to emigrate There was a slight reduction in the proportion of potential migrants that said they would take out a loan in order to migrate, from 75% to 61%. When migrants take on debt in order to migrate, they increase their own vulnerability.
34
Attended awareness activities There was a slight reduction in the proportion of potential migrants who said they attended awareness activities or were otherwise provided information related to safe migration, from 51% on the baseline to 41% on the endline. This overall decrease is attributable to a reduction in overall mass media outreach, despite an increase in grassroots efforts; among those that said they were provided information on safe migration, there was a decrease in mass media exposure (83% to 71%), while there was a significant increase in social media (2% to 34%), outreach activities at the village level (16% to 32%), and meetings/workshops (4% to 9%) from the baseline to the endline.
CURRENT MIGRANTS As with the potential migrants, there was a greater proportion of women who participated in the endline survey compared to the baseline (50% women to 60% women)
Behavior to prevent TIP (Indicator 1.1.2) The endline survey found that 19.4% of potential migrants reported behavior connected to safe migration that could help prevent trafficking in persons, Indicator 1.1.2. The result of this indicator is based on the following questions, “Did you seek advice from anyone else about the job opportunity?” and “Before leaving, did you leave any copy of ID card or passport with your family at home or with a trusted person?” If the current migrant responded yes to both questions, then they were counted under the indicator. The original baseline report estimated this value at 22.6% of current migrants; however, this upon further review during the endline this was found to be a miscalculation. Using the same questions and methodology to measure this value at baseline and endline, the true baseline value was 3.4%, indicating a substantial increase in safe migration practices over the life of the project.
35
Figure 24: Indicator 1.1.2 Percentage of people with TIP prevention behavior in baseline and endline Left copy of documents There was a slight increase in the number of current migrants who left their ID card or passport with their family or another trusted person (25% to 28%). While messaging around potential migrants resulted in significant improvements in preventative behavior, the increase in current migrants was not as significant. It may be useful to look more closely at what limitations current migrants may be facing in their ability to leave copies of ID cards or passports with family. Perhaps options could be expanded to include ensuring access to digital copies of documents.
Poor ID card The current migrants who participated in the endline survey had a smaller proportion of Poor ID certificates (37%) compared to the baseline (46%) and compared to the potential migrants in the endline (54%).
Why did you decide to migrate? The stated reasons for migration were different from the baseline to endline, with fewer saying they migrated because they needed money to support their family (83% to 56%) or that they migrated because of a difficult situation with the family (60% to 17%).
Documents used for cross-border migration There was a significant increase in the proportion of migrants who used a passport for their cross- border migration (20% to 62%), as well as those who used a border pass (15% to 33%). This tripling and doubling of proper document use, shows that more migrants are traveling through regular migration pathways rather than seeking irregular migration. There was a decrease in other forms of identification such as ID card (65% to 48%), however the marked increase in use of passports may show that these are the preferred identification at this point and time and other forms of identification are not necessary. The change in use of work permits (13% to 10%), was not significant along with the proportion who carried no documents (18% to 13%).
Handed over documents to employer Despite strong TIP messaging against handing over travel documents to employers, there was an increase in the proportion of current migrants who were not allowed to keep their travel documents (24% to 30%). While this increase was not significant it shows that this continues to be an issue faced by current migrants.
Cost There was a significant increase in the cost of migration between the baseline and the endline, with 72% of current migrants reported paying less than 200 USD for migration at the baseline, while only 38% reported paying less than 200 USD at the endline. Despite the cost increasing significantly, many more people paid with their own money (24% to 58%) rather than taking out a loan (56% to 33%). This could
36 be considered a reflection of current migrants reaching higher income levels in areas with CTIP support, as well as avoiding an increase in vulnerability by taking out a loan.
RETURNED MIGRANTS Employment There was a significant increase in unemployment from baseline to endline (12% to 34%) and a significant decrease in the number of respondents employed in agriculture (52% to 11%).
Migration channel There was a difference in the recruitment channels among returned migrants, with more respondents using a recruitment agency (10% baseline to 25% endline) and fewer using a broker (48% to 35%).
Experienced problems There was a notable decrease in the number of returned migrants who reported experiencing problems on the endline survey compared to the baseline; on the baseline, 46% of returned migrants (49% female and 51% male) experienced problems during their migration, while on the endline 38% experienced problems (70% female and 30% male). Although this decrease is a positive change, the level of both returned and current migrants reporting problems related to restriction of movement, forced labor, physical abuse and other issues was considerably high, at 38% of returned migrants and 36% of current migrants. These conditions suggest elements of forced labor, which should be further explored by local government and NGOs in migrant receiving countries. Similarly, 62% of returned migrants dealt with these problems by themselves, indicating that they may not have access to resources in-country or were undocumented and unable to seek support.
IV. LIVELIHOODS
METHODS The same samples used to provide descriptive statistics of the populations of interest outline above were used to assess measures of livelihoods. The indicator assessed via a set of livelihoods questions is 1.2.1, the percentage of participating households at risk of TIP with improved livelihoods. The project operationalized this indicator using a set of questions to gauge whether households met the definition of having low risk of insufficient livelihoods. Researchers asked questions at baseline and endline related to whether households had experienced any shortage of essential foods over a 12-month period, whether they had purchased livestock over the same period, and whether they had bought any new equipment or materials over the preceding year. In order to be considered low risk, a respondent must indicate that the household had both not experienced any food shortages in the prior year and that they had been able to make purchases of both livestock and other equipment. While directly comparing household livelihood status from baseline to endline is not possible, the comparisons we can make
37 assess the relative risk of each sample in having low risk of failing to meet a threshold for livelihoods, which is part of the enabling environment for risky migration.
RESULTS Out of 761 respondents, the number who answered all of the questions required to assess the level of risk for insufficient livelihoods, a total of 71 met the criteria required to demonstrate having low risk. This represents 9.33% of the sample overall. While the proportion of respondents at low risk of insufficient livelihoods, at just under 10% is not high, this represents a substantial increase over the baseline values. At baseline, only 55 out of 1293 respondents, or 4.25%, met the criteria for low risk of insufficient livelihoods. The increase from endline to baseline represents a noteworthy increase of those exhibiting sufficient livelihoods within CTIP communes.
Figure 25: Indicator 1.2.1 Percentage of people will less risk in baseline and endline
Given the large proportion of respondents still at high risk for not meeting their basic needs, the need for programming that assists communities with raising the standard of living for all members remains strong. Future work should also consider alternative ways of operationalizing livelihoods, as purchase of both livestock and equipment may not be an appropriate investment for all at risk households. Any efforts to enhance and measure livelihoods must be framed within a comprehensive social protection paradigm for very poor households.
38
DISCUSSION Numerous methodological decisions make interpreting the livelihoods data collected by the project difficult. The endline did not target only direct beneficiaries, so individual households included may or may not have received livelihoods support from the Cambodia CTIP Project. Furthermore, rather than examining a continuum of improvement from baseline through endline, livelihoods were measured using a threshold set using the questions described above. With this measurement, households either met or did not meet the threshold for sufficient livelihoods.
Based on these measurements, the project fell short of meeting its targets for improved livelihoods. Likely a large portion of this shortfall, is due to both structural poverty across the country and the relatively short timeframe in which to see change. It is highly unlikely for poor households to see substantial, sustained shifts in their livelihoods over a period of three years. Anecdotally, project staff and partners have reported substantial evidence that direct beneficiaries perceive their livelihoods as improved. It is possible and even likely that a large share of households are experiencing improved livelihoods even while not fully reaching the threshold for an acceptable livelihood level as defined in the baseline and endline surveys. Future projects should ensure that livelihoods measures are carefully operationalized in order to accurately reflect shifts in livelihoods status associated with interventions. At the same time, this provides evidence that incremental improvements may not be sufficient to lift households out of poverty and reduce their risk of unsafe migration.
V. CHILDREN’S ALTERNATIVE CARE
METHODS As household members migrate, parents often must leave their children behind. Migrant parents must make alternative care arrangements for children during migration. In order to understand the decision- making processes that migrants and their communies make around alternative care for children, Winrock asked questions of 250 household respondents around Children and Alternative Care (CAC) as well as holding focus group discussions (FGDs). While not directly comparable to similar data collected on CAC during the baseline period, these results provide us with important insights into the role of the care of minor children on household and community life as well as migrant decision making.
A survey was administered to 250 households. These households were purposively selected to include children of migrants being provided with care while one or both parents worked abroad. Descriptive statistics from these households are included in the results below. In addition, researchers conducted three focus groups with a total of 27 participants. These FGDs took place in Siem Reap, Battam Bang, and Oddar Meanchey. Two respondents were men and 25 women, reflecting the fact that women are most likely to be responsible for caring for the children of migrants in this setting. All respondents were farmers. Insights from FGDs have been used to provide more detail around the findings from the
39 household questionnaire. FGD facilitators used the discussions as opportunities to probe into the access of migrants’ children to food, education, and healthcare.
RESULTS 250 households completed questionnaires related to children of migrants and CAC. These households included a total of 391 children, aged from birth through 17 years of age. The minimum number of children per household answering CAC questions was 1, while the maximum of any included in our sample was 4. On average, households include slightly over 1.5 children, and the majority of included households (57.2%) included only one child.
All households included in this study include current or returned migrants. The caregivers of migrants’ children are overwhelmingly female with an average age of approximately 53. Over three-fourths (75.6%, n = 189) of caregivers in our sample are grandmothers. Other relationships of caregivers to children included mothers (8%, n=20), grandfathers, (7.6%, n=19), and aunts (7.2%, n=18). Fathers (0.8%, n=2) and sisters (0.8%), n=2) also provided care to some children.
The majority of households’ children were left with alternative caregivers due to the migration of both parents (76.8%, n=192). Only one parent migrated in the remaining households sampled; in 12.8% (n=32) of these households’ fathers migrated and in 10.4% (n=26) mothers migrated. The vast majority of migrants in these households migrated to Thailand (98%, n=245). The other destination countries within this sample were Malaysia, South Korea, China, and Japan. There was wide variation in the length of migration of parents, ranging from one month to two decades at the extremes. The median duration was two years, with a mean of nearly 4 years.
Most households (87.6%, n=219) reported that children of migrants within that household had not experienced any shortage of rice over the past 30 days, while the remainder did report rice shortages. The most commonly reported reasons for rice shortages were drought and insufficient labor for farming (respondents could provide more than one reason). In addition to asking about rice, the staple food of Cambodia, researchers asked if any households with children of migrants residing had experienced any shortages of non-rice food in the past 30 days. The numbers were slightly higher for food other than rice, with 17.6% (n=44) of households reporting shortages. The major reasons cited for food shortages were lack of labor for farming and unemployment.
Similar patterns emerged around food shortages in FGDs. More respondents indicated that children had experienced food shortages other than rice shortages. Eight respondents told facilitators that they had enough rice only because of remittances sent by migrants, which households can use to buy and cultivate rice. Two had experienced shortages of rice ranging from periods of a few days to multiple months. Shortages were blamed on small farms and insufficient labor to cultivate rice. One respondent mentioned that old age prevented efficient growing of rice; this point is particularly relevant given that the majority of alternative caregivers are grandparents over the age of 50. While only a few FGD
40 respondents indicated that they did not have enough rice, most told facilitators that they subsist mainly on rice with salt and rarely have meat or other food aside from rice available.
Most surveyed households, 90.4% (n=226) receive some level of remittances from migrants. Of these, nearly half (46%, n=104) reported receiving money monthly. Of those receiving remittances, 89.8% (203) had received money within the past 6 months; for the full 250 households surveyed, this proportion was 81.2% (n=203). The median amount of remittances reported was 1500 USD. FGD participants confirmed that most, but not all, receive remittances. Despite this, they also expressed that remittances don’t cover expenses and the schedule of receiving them can be irregular.
Over half of those households receiving remittances, 61.5% (n=226), used the money to pay off debts, while nearly four-fifths (78.8%, n=178) used the remittances for feeding children. While the remittances contributed to food for children, only slightly more than one-fourth of remittance-receiving households (26.4%, n=47) reported that the amount of money they received from abroad was enough to provide a sufficient amount of food. 57.1% (n=129) of households receiving remittances spent all or part of the money received on education for children; of these, 42.6% (n=55) reported that they money received was enough to cover educational costs. Nearly 90% (87.6%, n=198) of remittance-receiving households used the money to cover health care needs for children, but fewer than 1/3 of these households (30.8%, n=61) reported that the money was sufficient fully cover the health care needs of children. Data from FGDs backed up these observations. Participants who received remittances used them for expenses including food, education, and healthcare for migrants’ children, but in most cases the money received was neither a large enough amount nor a regular enough income to fully cover costs. Partly for these reasons, remittances are then used to cover debts incurred by the cost of living.
In addition to the topics covered in the household questionnaire, FGDs asked specifically about the challenges caregivers faced. Most of these caregivers are grandparents, and their answers reflected the difficulties of having multiple grandchildren to care for and not enough time to take care of their own needs. Respondents discussed facing problems around disciplining children, indicating that children could be noisy and argumentative. Discipline came up as it related to trying to keep children in school and studying, and some caregivers expressed frustration that the children in their care do not listen to their advice and guidance. The recurrent themes that predominated were insufficient time and insufficient money to provide all they wished to the children in their care.
DISCUSSION The inclusion of the CAC is a new addition to the endline study compared to the baseline. Specifically asking households and FGD participants about their roles as alternative caregivers to the children of migrant parents provides the Cambodia CTIP and other projects with crucial information about how labor migration affects family structures.
The results of this study indicate that those most likely to be tasked with providing care to the children of migrants are women over the age of 50, usually children’s grandmothers. Those providing care
41 struggle to provide financially and emotionally for children. While remittances from labor migrants provide some income that can be used for children’s food, education, and healthcare, for most caregivers, remittances are neither large enough nor come often enough to fully cover the costs of providing care.
Furthermore, qualitative findings suggest that caregivers do not feel able to provide supportive and save environments for children while also taking care of their own needs. Additional work needs to be done to better understand how migration and TIP may affect the lives of children and caregivers in sending countries, and donors and implementers should consider projects geared toward supporting alternative caregivers and the children for whom they provide care.
VI. COMMUNITY VULNERABILITY INDEX
METHODS
CONCEPTUAL MODEL As part of the baseline study undertaken in 2016, the Cambodia CTIP Project conducted a CVI study, which aimed to measure the level of vulnerability to TIP in target communes. This study has been replicated for the endline in an effort to measure changes in areas in which the Cambodia CTIP Project worked. Researchers in 2019 used the same conceptual model and methodological approach with a slightly smaller sample. Results from the endline CVI study are reported below under Results and compared with the 2016 baseline in the Discussion section.
Vulnerability to TIP is a function of vulnerability factors, sensitivity3 to TIP and interventions of the government and NGOs to prevent and reduce trafficking-in-persons. The vulnerability factors to TIP included in this study are: (1) the practice of undocumented migration, (2) TIP cases, (3) missing migrants, (4) discrimination, (5) unemployment and (6) domestic violence. Sensitivity to TIP consists of the social and local mechanisms that exist in the community to prevent or reduce the likelihood of trafficking-in-persons. The sensitivity factors used in this study are: (1) social capital, (2) access to natural resources, (3) land ownership and (4) access to market and economic activities. The intervention variables covered by this study are: (1) access to migration information, including information on safe migration, (2) regular school attendance, (3) access to local employment, (4) access to community-based loans, (5) the practice of protective behaviors in migration, (6) the existence of commune investment plans to prevent TIP-related issues, (7) commune budget allocation to implement TIP-prevention activities, (8) services provided by commune councils relating to migration and TIP
3 While analyzing the endline data, it was determined that the baseline did not reflect that sensitivity factors as conceptualized in this study, like interventions, are protective factors. The baseline data was recoded and the current comparisons between baseline and data reflect a more accurate picture of commune vulnerability in both 2016 and 2019.
42 prevention and (9) livelihood programs to address the economic root causes of TIP. Each of these intervention components can address one or more of the risk factors that makes individuals vulnerable to TIP. FGDs were held in a total of 38 communes with 331 participants. The baseline CVI study in 2016 originally included 65 communes. It was impossible to replicate the CVI approach in all of these communes due to a variety of factors. During the life of the Cambodia CTIP Project, the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago (NORC) conducted an impact evaluation, which required treatment and control communes for specific interventions. After the original CVI study, the project allocated 16 communes to the NORC study, leaving 49 potential communes to be included in the endline study. The remaining excluded communes either contained villages covered by NORC or did not receive a complete set of livelihoods interventions thereby not allowing them to be comparable to the other communes. The reduction in the number of communes included from 65 to 38 may have implications for interpretation of results.
Participants were drawn from local leadership and included the commune chief and representatives from commune council members, village chiefs, and commune police. These FGDs were used to decide on a score for each variable included in vulnerability factors, sensitivity, and interventions. To determine scores, two different types of measurement scales were used. Some variables were measured in percentages, which was then converted to a Likert scale from 1 to 4, with 1 representing the lowest values and 4 the highest, and some were measured only using a Likert scale rating of the degree of prevalence of that variable from 1-4, 1 being the lowest and 4 the highest. The score of each variable measures respondent perceptions of the presence of that variable in each commune. Note that while scores on any individual variables were limited to a scale of 1-4, commune vulnerability scores overall could range considerably higher. The scores of each variable on for each of the factors (vulnerability, sensitive and interventions) were summed to produce a total score for each category resulting in an overall vulnerability, sensitivity and interventions score. To compute the vulnerability index score of each commune, the total score of vulnerability factors was multiplied by the total score of sensitivity and then divided by the total score of interventions.
( ) Vulnerability Index Score4 = Vulnerability Factors X Sensitivity
Interventions
4 Adapted from the vulnerability index in Deems, H, Bruggeman, A. and Kallis, G. (2010). Vulnerability of rural communities in the Mediterranean region to climate change and water scarcity: The case of Cyprus. Masters. Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona for the 2016 baseline study and replicated for the 2019 endline study.
43
Table 8 illustrates the variables scored and used to calculate the vulnerability index score of each commune included in this study,
Table 8: Scored Variables in CVI Variables Indicators for scoring on scale of 1-4
Undocumented migration Degree of illegal migration in the commune
Trafficking-in-persons Degree of TIP in the commune
Vulnerability Missing migrants Decree of missing migrants in the commune Factors Discrimination Degree of discrimination against migrants in the commune
Unemployment Degree of unemployment in the commune
Domestic violence Degree of domestic violence in the commune
Social capital Degree of social capital in the commune
Land ownership Degree of land ownership in the commune
Sensitivity Access to natural Degree of access to natural resources in the resources commune
Access to market and Degree of access to market and economic activities economic activities in the commune
Access to migration Degree of access to migration information in the information, including safe commune migration
Regular school attendance Degree of regular school attendance in the commune
Intervention Access to local Degree of access to local employment for the employment commune
Access to community- Degree of access to community-based loans (ex: based loans saving group) in the commune
Protective behaviors • Degree of practice of protective behaviors in safe migration in the commune
44
• % of population demonstrating protective behaviors (source: KAP survey5) in the commune
Commune Investment Plan Degree of existence of CIP to prevent TIP related (CIP) issues
Existence of commune Degree of commune budget allocated to prevent budget allocated to TIP related issues prevent TIP related issues
Services provided by Degree of services connected with migration and commune councils TIP prevention in the commune
Existence of livelihood Degree of access to livelihood programs in the programs commune
STUDY POPULATION The CVI Study consists of 38 FGDs, each held in a different commune across eight different provinces and 19 districts. Due to the nature of respondents, which included commune leaders and council members, village chiefs, law enforcement officers, NGO staff, teachers, and some youth representatives, the group leaned heavily male (approximately 80%). The one outlier commune, in which all respondents were women, did not include any of the leadership positions represented in other FGDs. Table 9 summarizes the composition of focus groups across communes, districts, and provinces. The communes included in this study, on average, consisted of approximately 14,400 individuals, 2440 families, and 2100 households.
Table 8: FGD Participants by Commune and Gender
Province District Commune Number # of Women (%) Mream 10 0 (0%) Romeas Hek Andoung Pou 10 3 (30%) Chambak 9 4 (44%) Svay Rieng Chantrea Chantrea 10 0 (0%) Thlok 10 3 (30%) Svay Chrum Kroal Ko 8 1 (12.5%) Kampong Ro Thnot 9 2 (22%) Sub-Total 4 7 66 12 (18%) Chey Yo 10 3 (30%) Speu 9 1(11%) Kampong Cham Chamka Leu Ta Ong 8 1 (12.5%) Ta Prok 8 0 (0%) Sub-Total 1 4 35 5 (14%)
45
Chey 9 2 (22%) Kampong Svay San Kor 7 1 (14%) Pralay 7 2 (29%) Stoung Kampong Thom Chamna Leu 10 0 (0%) Prasat 11 2 (18%) Santuk Ko Koah 9 3 (33%) Tang Krasau 8 1 (12.5%) Sub-Total 3 7 61 11 (19%) Tram Sorsor 9 2 (22%) Srey Snam Prei 11 3 (27%) Varin Svay Sa 10 3 (30%) Siem Reap Svay Chek 8 8 (100%) Angkor Thom Leang Dai 11 4 (36%) Sotnikum Chan Sor 8 2 (25%) Chi Kreng Spean Tnot 11 3 (27%) Sub-Total 5 7 68 25 (37%) Oddar Beng 10 2 (20%) Banteay Ampil Meanchey Sub-Total 1 1 10 2 (20%) Mebon 9 0 (0%) Pear Rong 9 0 (0%) Chrey 9 1 (11%) Svay Anthor Smong Khang 10 0 (0%) Preng Veyng Cheung Chea Klang 12 1 (8%) Angkor Tret 8 1 (12.5%) Prey Lanlorng 7 0 (0%) Pou Rieng Ta Kor 10 3 (30%) Sub-Total 2 8 74 6 (8%) Koh Kong Modul Seima Pak Klang 7 2 (29%) Toul Kokir 7 3 (43%) Sub-Total 3 2 14 5 (36%) Khan Russei Sangat Chrang 6 0 (0%) Keo Camres 1 Phnom Pen Sangat Prey 7 3 (43%) Khan Dangko Veng Sub-Total 2 2 13 3 (23%) Total: 8 19 38 331 66 (20%)
LIMITATIONS The approach taken in the CVI study contains some serious limitations that constrain the conclusions that can be generated. While FGDs were supplemented with commune records, in most cases these records were incomplete or did not contain information on migration and TIP specifically. Rather, this approach allows us to explore how commune leadership and other key stakeholders perceive the issues of vulnerability to trafficking within their commune.
Due to the qualitative approach taken, and results expressed quantitatively must be interpreted with caution. This CVI study is not a study on prevalence, including prevalence of vulnerability factors such as missing migrants, those who have experience TIP, and related issues such as unemployment. For this
46 reason, Winrock has chosen to report findings with a focus on the attitudes and perceptions around commune vulnerability explored in FGDs, rather than a focus on reported numbers, which are not a reliable source without source documentation and triangulation, which was beyond the scope of this study.
This study should be interpreted as an exploration of local perceptions around vulnerability. These perceptions are important to understand, as they can help USAID and implementing partners determine how the community perceives drivers of TIP; and how they may collaborate more actively in efforts to understand ways of reducing these vulnerabilities and risks to abuse and exploitation. Engagement of communities in understanding and addressing these vulnerabilities is a key element in developing more culturally-responsive and objective ways of overcoming them and reducing TIP.
This initial, exploratory approach represents an important step in understanding factors associated with vulnerability to TIP for individual communes. It is crucial, however, to understand the scope of the problem quantitatively as well as qualitatively, and for that, additional research employing complementary methods is required.
RESULTS
OVERALL RESULTS Table 9: Communes by category of vulnerability to TIP
Provinces # of Vulnerability to TIP Communes # of Communes # of Communes # of Communes by Province with High with Medium with Low Vulnerability Vulnerability Vulnerability Svay Rieng 7 5 2 0 Kampong Cham 4 1 3 0 Kampong Thom 7 2 5 0 Siam Reap 7 3 2 2 Oddar Meanchy 1 1 0 0 Preng Veyng 8 3 4 1 Koh Kong 2 0 1 1 Phnom Penh 2 1 1 0 Total 38 16 18 4
47
Table 10: Vulnerability Score by Commune
Please see Annex A and Annex B for full scoring along all vulnerability, sensitivity, and intervention factors for 2016 and 2019.
Province District Commune CVI Score Score Change 2016—2019
Svay Rieng Romeas Hek Mream 4 0 Andoung Pou 5 0 Chambak 4 -2 Chantrea Chantrea 7 3 Svay Chrum Thlok 8 1 Kroal Ko 6 2 Kampong Ro Thnot 6 1 Kampong Cham Chamka Leu Chey Yo 4 0 Speu 4 1 Ta Ong 5 1 Ta Prok 3 -8 Kampong Thom Kampong Svay Chey 4 -1 San Kor 4 0 Stoung Pralay 5 4 Chamna Leu 4 -2 Santuk Prasat 5 0 Ko Koah 4 0 Tang Krasau 4 0 Siem Reap Srey Snam Tram Sorsor 6 2 Prei 3 -2 Varin Svay Sa 1 -5 Angkor Thom Svay Chek 4 0 Leang Dai 6 1 Sotnikum Chan Sor 1 -2 Chi Kreng Spean Tnot 5 0 Oddar Meanchey Banteay Ampil Beng 7 1 Preng Veyng Svay Anthor Mebon 3 -1 Pear Rong 6 0 Chrey 2 -1
48
Smong Khang 4 -1 Cheung Chea Klang 3 0 Angkor Tret 7 3 Pou Rieng Prey Kanlorng 5 0 Ta Kor 4 -1 Koh Kong Modul Seima Pak Klang 2 -2 Toul Koki 3 0 Phnom Penh Khan Russei Keo Sangat Chrang 4 . Camres 1 Khan Dangko Sangat Prey Veng 6 .
RESULTS BY VARIABLE Due to the limitations discussed in the Methods section, above, Winrock has made the decision to limit its reporting on numbers reported by FGD respondents at the individual commune level. The completeness and accuracy of records varies by commune, and it is beyond the scope of this research to verify commune records. Instead, in this section, we report on the findings related to each variable included in the CVI score.
Over the course of 38 FGDs, common themes emerged around each of these variables, as did rich descriptions of individual circumstances connected to each of these variables. Below, we have grouped these thematic and individual insights by variable. Together, these insights provide a holistic picture of how respondents think about factors associated with TIP in their communities, families, and daily lives.
Vulnerability Factors The formula for the CVI, above, includes vulnerability factors as one important component of the score. Vulnerability factors, which for the purposes of this study include the rate of undocumented migrants, the number of TIP victims, missing migrants, discrimination, unemployment, and domestic violence, are factors that are linked with higher vulnerability to trafficking. The higher the score each commune gave itself on each vulnerability score, the higher the overall level of risk is for each commune. These scores represent how community leadership assesses their level of each of these vulnerabilities.
Undocumented Migrants While some communes reported zero undocumented migration, others indicated that a considerable number of migrants are undocumented. This is most common in communes near international borders, where undocumented cross-border migration is easier than in other regions.
Some of the reasons cited for undocumented migration including not having money to legally access documents, low levels of education, and being cheated by someone. Others mentioned that some migrants wish or need to leave the country quickly and are unwilling or unable to wait for their
49 documents, while others have relatives in their destination country, which may make them more willing to migrate without documents.
TIP Victims Respondents gave a wide array of responses when asked about push and pull factors that influence migration, including risky migration practices and that can make people vulnerable to labor exploitation, abuse, and TIP. The most common factors mentioned were related to employment and wages: unemployment, lack of lobal jobs, low local wages, poverty, debt, and either insufficient farmland or low yields. Other factors include lack of knowledge around safe migration and being influenced by the perceived successes of others. Some listed personal issues, including domestic violence, divorce, and escaping punishment for having committed a crime. One respondent reported the experience of a young couple whose families separated them who then migrated internationally together.
Many respondents reported that most migrants, especially those who do not migrate through family connections, pay brokers for assistance. The reasons for this vary, but some of the most commonly reported included being told that brokers are required to find a good job or one with a high salary; brokers provide money, transportation and other factors that facilitate migration; and that some brokers have good reputations. Others had negative views of brokers, claiming that they can be very good at convincing migrants to trust them and there are perceptions that migrants are easy to cheat.
When asked to list the factors that can make migrants vulnerable to labor exploitation, labor abuse, and human trafficking, respondents most commonly cited poverty, lack of information, unemployment, and lack of attention to safe migration practices because of eagerness to earn money. While none of the communes included in this study reported high numbers of trafficked persons, almost none collected and maintained data on human trafficking, abuse or labor exploitation. Some communes reported sharing data with NGOs, but many others did not know how or where to report potential TIP-related issues. Given the level of factors related to vulnerability to TIP reported, any results indicating that few to no individuals are trafficked should be treated with caution until and unless they can be verified by other means.
Missing Migrants Across the 38 communes included in this study, respondents reported a total of 56 missing migrants. Missing migrants are defined as those who migrated and haven’t returned (no standard length of time given) and from whom there has been no communication. Some of the missing have been gone for as long as a decade, and planned destination countries included Thailand, Malaysia, and China. Missing migrants planned to work in industries including fisheries, agriculture, and domestic labor.
The village chiefs who reported missing migrants had learned about them from caregivers, friends, or co-migrants. Most cases were reported to local authorities such as the provincial police or a district’s office of women’s affairs. These authorities provided support, as did local NGOs when contacted, but without success. In cases when missing migrants were not reported to authorities, reasons given included lack of a formal written report or the recency of cases.
50
Despite the 56 missing migrants, all communes included in this study rated themselves as the lowest possible score on the scale measuring missing migrants, as these numbers were considered equal to no or very few missing migrants per commune.
Discrimination Most communes reported no discrimination against migrants or victims of human trafficking, abuse, and labor exploitation. Only a single commune reported that, though families are supportive, some villagers speak badly of migrants behind their backs. In response, authorities in this commune conducted anti- discrimination education in collaboration with an NGO in the community and in schools.
While it is encouraging that almost no discrimination is reported, it is important to note that this is a very approximate measure. We have no data to report on how migrants or survivors of trafficking perceive the presence or absence of discrimination. Respondents for this study include village chiefs, council members, and other authority figures. It is not difficult to imagine that where discriminatory practices exist, they may be hidden from public officials and prominent community members.
Unemployment Few communes collected any data on unemployment, and given the lack of standard record keeping, we do not report specific numbers here. The estimates respondents provided of the number of unemployed ranged from a minimum of zero to a maximum of 50 cases, with most reporting just a few cases.
Respondents tied low unemployment rates to the availability of local jobs in industries such as agriculture, fishing, construction, and manufacturing. Respondents from Koh Kong noted that many factories have been built in the province, and village chiefs have been asked to share information about staff recruitment. Those uninterested in factory work are able to maintain work in the agricultural or fishing sectors.
While respondents claimed that unemployment was low fairly universally, they did identify seven main factors associated with unemployment across the communes of the study:
1. Lack of the appropriate education and skills for advertised jobs; 2. Biases in some industries against men or women (e.g., it is widely perceived that garment factories prefer to hire women over men); 3. Spouses of migrants may be unemployed as they have been left as the sole caregivers for their family so may be unable to perform paid labor; 4. Lack of capital to start new businesses; 5. Lack of transportation; 6. Inappropriate individual-level behaviors such as gambling, substance abuse, or laziness; and 7. Illness or other health issues.
While some respondents indicated that migrants traveled to countries such as Thailand due to local unemployment, others explained cross-border migration even in contexts with robust local labor
51 conditions as a result of higher salaries abroad. While no communes considered themselves to have high levels of unemployment, scores varied between 1 and 2 for unemployment. This highlights the subjectivity of this measure, as there were no objective metrics for what constituted high or low unemployment; this study measured only respondent perceptions.
Domestic Violence The responses on domestic violence showed some interesting variation. Domestic violence is particularly ill-suited to be studied using the methods for the CVI, as it is often considered a private behavior and hidden from view. This means that it is possible or even likely that there are many cases of domestic violence that village chiefs and other leaders may be unaware of.
Communes rated themselves as a one or a two on the vulnerability factor of domestic violence, even though very few reported zero cases of domestic violence. In communes reporting domestic violence, the number of households involved in violence ranged from one to approximately thirty. Respondents credited low levels of domestic violence to improved community understanding of domestic violence, rights, and relevant laws. Village chiefs, commune councils, commune police, and other authorities have taken actions related to prevention of domestic violence including education and awareness raising programs at the village level, warning letters to offenders, and legal actions against perpetrators. It is beyond the scope of this research to determine whether the low levels of reported domestic violence reflect a true decline or absence or whether participation in efforts to eradicate domestic violence may influence how respondents answer questions related to domestic violence.
The major drivers of domestic violence that respondents identified include low levels of education, extreme jealousy, infidelity, alcohol use, gambling, rigidly defined gender roles within families, other forms of conflict within the family, and poverty. Some participants tied domestic violence to migration in various ways. Some focused on victims of domestic violence, stating that some may lose their sense of self and dignity and, thus, choose to migrate, while others might migrate as a way to escape from a violent relationship. Other respondents mentioned that perpetrators of domestic violence may migrate to avoid being held accountable.
Sensitivity Sensitivity factors included in this study are social capital, land ownership, access to natural resources, and access to market and economic activities. Variation in these community characteristics can help explain the likelihood of out-migration, including the vulnerability to trafficking, experienced in any given commune. These factors, unlike vulnerability factors, are protective against risky migration, meaning that high scores on sensitivity factors lower commune vulnerability overall.
Social Capital For the purposes of this study, researchers assessed the role of social capital by asking questions about the types of support overseas migrants received from family, friends, and communities prior to and during their period of migration. The types of support that migrants receive that respondents identified include financial support for learning the language of destination countries, financial support for
52 migration itself, serving as guarantors of loans, providing equipment and other materials, providing emotional support, providing childcare, providing assistance with finding jobs, support for applying for required documents, and providing advice and information on safe migration practices.
Respondents indicated that this type of assistance contributes to prevention of risky migration practices in two main ways. The first is that this support helps migrant prepare properly for safe migration. Secondly, social capital can help migrants by improving their chances of knowing who to contact should they encounter problems during migration.
Most communes reported relatively high levels of social capital (scores 3 or 4). Reasons for high scores included a feeling that members of the commune were well informed about safe migration, migrants tended to follow the advice they received from their communities, migrants from a given commune did not experience exploitation or trafficking, and that relatives often facilitated the conditions for safe migration through connecting migrants to safe employment. In communes with relatively high levels of social capital related to migration, some respondents noted that those migrants with no support from their networks experienced worse outcomes than those with strong support networks. Examples were given of migrants without support who were arrested and deported back to Cambodia.
The communes that scored themselves lower on social capital tended to do so because of a perception that family, friends, and other members of support networks did not provide sufficiently detailed information on safe migration or were otherwise lacking in the level of support provided. Some respondents also indicated that communities in which migrants were encouraged to find local jobs instead of migrating exhibited low levels of migration-related social capital.
Land Ownership Data on land ownership and its relationship to migration and potential trafficking in persons was mixed across communes, though there was consensus that it was not a very large problem. In most cases, the data on land ownership was collected by village chiefs, commune police, and the researchers’ direct observation. Tracking data from people with poor ID cards also contributed information on landlessness. According to the FGDs conducted as part of this study, landlessness existed to some degree in all communes, but ranged from a minimum reported one landless household to a maximum of 160 landless households.
FGD participants identified numerous factors associated with landlessness. These can be roughly sorted into three categories: factors associated with selling land, those connected to new households, and other factors. Reasons for selling land that were mentioned including selling it to support subsistence, to pay back loans, for health care, due to financial losses connected to farming and/or business ventures, and due to gambling losses or excessive alcohol use. Reasons related to new households included donating land to children, new couples needing land to live separately from their households of origin, and new dwellers migrating into the community. Other factors mentioned were that some households live on state land or protected land, not their own, and that if individuals were absent when the
53 government allocated land, they would not receive the land grants to which they would have been entitled were they present.
FGD participants were mixed in their reactions when asked whether landlessness is a factor triggering migration. Some respondents claimed that landlessness does not lead to migration, as even those in landless households have access to local jobs such as fishing, factory work, or other business ventures. Others believed that landlessness is a factor in the decision to migrate, as without land, income generation is difficult. Given the relatively low numbers of landless households per commune, most scored themselves a 3 or 4 on land ownership.
Access to Natural Resources Only slightly more than one-fifth (8) of the 38 communes included in this study reported shortages of natural resources. The others confirmed that there are at least some natural resources to which the residents have access and from which they derive some benefit. Despite this, very few communes reported residents obtaining much benefit from access to natural resources, with most being used for household needs and not for income generation.
The major resources mentioned included fisheries, mushrooms, lotus, bamboo seeds, and forests for forestry work or logging. Very few commune FGD participants linked access to natural resources to migration, and those that did were primarily those communes in which forestry or logging were important sources of income. The majority of the commune FGD participants reported that access to natural resources, or the lack thereof, is not a driver of migration as individuals and households have access to agriculture for subsistence and income generation. In addition, for most households, natural resources are not used for income generation.
Commune-generated scores for access to natural resources varied more than those for other sensitivity factors. Scores ranged from a low of 1, indicating no access natural resources or that households did not obtain benefits from what access there was to a high of 4, when participants perceived many households using and obtaining benefits due to natural resources. Numerous communes also scored themselves as a 2 or a 3, reflecting a more middle-range sense of how important access to natural resources are for their community. The individual scores for all communes for this and all other factors are included in Annex A and B.
Access to Market and Economic Activities Communes were approximately evenly split between reporting an existing market within the commune and reporting that no market exists. Twenty of the 38 communes reported having at least one market, while the remaining 18 reported no markets. Even when a market does not exist within a given commune, however, respondents reported a range of economic activities. These included raising poultry, raising other livestock, fishing, agriculture, handicrafts, and various other trades.
Communes without their own markets are still able to sell excess production through brokers. Respondents reported, however, that selling products through brokers often results in lower prices or
54 price instability. The highest prices were reported when individuals or households can deliver their products directly to markets.
Respondents from every commune included in this study reported households owing debts to either microfinance institutions or more traditional banks. Participants linked borrowing to business activities intended to meet household needs.
Nearly three-fourths of FGD participants linked lack of access to markets or economic activities to migration. The logic most often used is that households need to borrow money to produce goods and products, but when prices are lower than anticipated, they are unable to pay off their dept, resulting in migration. The minority of respondents who disagreed with this majority view believed that there are sufficient local jobs, so individuals should not need to migrate internationally for employment.
Overall, communes scored themselves relatively high on access to markets and economic activities, as even in communes where no markets exist, traveling brokers connect households and the goods they produce to markets.
Interventions Interventions are a set of factors related to reducing the risk for unsafe migration or TIP. These are protective factors, and higher scores on interventions lower a commune’s vulnerability index score.
Access to Migration Information Respondents from nearly all communes confirmed that residents have substantial access to migration information. The most common way identified that individuals interested in migration access information is through approaching local authorities. The few communes that indicated that people do not have much access to migration information did so as they believed that individuals rarely reached out to local authorities to discuss their migration plans in advance.
The types of information local authorities share include working fees, sheltering while working in the destination country; required legal documents; types of jobs available; contact information for employers, the Cambodian Embassy in the destination country, and NGOs working on safe migration; and the benefits of legal migration and safe working conditions.
While local authorities and commune leadership were the primary source of migration information that FGD participants raised, likely due to the over-representation of such leadership in the focus groups, respondents also mentioned other sources. These include relatives, friends, former migrant workers, radio announcements, brokers, hiring companies, provincial labor department officers, NGOs, schools, and other community members.
Approximately 75% of the communes included in this study scored themselves as a 3 or a 4 on access to migration information, as the widespread perception exists that many people within the commune had tried to learn about safe migration before making migration decisions. In the remaining communes,
55 participants assigned themselves scores of 1 or 2 according to the perception that individuals do not approach local authorities for migration information.
Regular School Attendance Almost all communes reported regular school attendance among the school-age population of the commune. A majority of communes reported that more than three-fourths of students attend school regularly, while three maintained that all students do. It is, of course, impossible to verify school attendance with the methods used for this assessment, but perceptions of high rates of regular school attendance may indicate a relatively high value placed on education and regular attendance at educational institutions. A small minority of communes indicated that very few students regularly attend school.
While respondents indicated that the scale of the problem is small, they also recognized a high level of variation in the reasons for low attendance rates. Reasons cited include overall low standards of living, illness, bad weather, having migrated with their parents, living with non-parent relatives due to their parents’ migration, lack of supplies for studying, lack of transportation, and domestic violence. A major category of reasons for not attending school regularly have to do with opportunity costs. Some do not attend school so that they can engage in other income generating activities, while some who do not attend regularly miss school due to household obligations such as sibling care or agricultural responsibilities.
Most of the respondents recognize the links between regular school attendance and reducing unsafe migration, as they have observed that those with low education levels are often unable to obtain quality jobs locally. While some observed that even those without high levels of educational attainment can find jobs in the apparel sector, overall, the link between education and safe migration is clear. Simultaneously, nearly all communes rated themselves highly on this intervention factor, as few had noticed substantial issues with regular attendance among the school-age population.
Access to Local Employment Most communes identified multiple employment sectors that households and individuals have access to locally. Some of the industries identified are factories; agriculture including growing rice, cassava, and cashews; selling groceries; animal husbandry; construction; handicrafts; carpentry; and others. People tend to find jobs themselves or through formal and informal networks consisting of friends, relatives, and colleagues or supervisors. In areas where jobs are less available, many individuals or families migrate within Cambodia to urban areas such as Phnom Penh, Siam Reap, or Preah Sihanouk Ville.
Nearly three-fourths of communes rated themselves highly, a score of 3 or 4, on access to local employment. The remainder rated themselves as a 1 or a 2.
Access to Community-Based Loan Funds All communes included in this study reported access to community-based loan funds within the commune. Thirty-six of the 38 communes have a saving group within the commune, while the remaining two have associations that provide interest-free loans to the poor. The groups are formed to support individuals within the commune to raise the capital needed to start a business.
56
Many NGOs, both local and international, have worked within communes to assist with the formation of savings groups. These include Care, the Old Age Association, World Vision, Tonle Sap Project, Wathanakpheap NGO, and others.
While these savings group exist, they are not the only sources for loans prior to migration. Respondents reported that for migration-related costs such as obtaining a passport, transportation, and living funds prior to earning post-migration, some people borrow from banks or other villagers as opposed to savings groups or other micro-finance institutions. Eight of the communes reported that non-members of the savings groups are not allowed to borrow for them, while the remainder allow both members and non-members to borrow, though non-members must pay a higher interest rate. The majority of those who borrow to facilitate migration are able to repay their loans due to their post-migration employment.
Despite the widespread existence of village savings groups, communes scored themselves relatively low on this intervention factor. No communes assigned themselves a 4, and only 8 gave themselves a 3. The 30 remaining communes scored themselves as a 1 or a 2. These scores reflect the fact that no or few migrants approach savings groups for migration assistance.
Commune Investment Plan Every commune included in this study formulates a Commune Investment Plan (CIP) on an annual basis. The budgets approved for the CIP ranged from a minimum of USD 15,000 to a maximum of USD 96,000. There is no budget line specifically earmarked for TIP prevention in the CIP. Instead, all communes used budget reserved for social services to implement TIP prevention. The social services budget accounts for 25% of the overall CIP budget. A range of activities are included under the umbrella term “social services,” making it difficult to reserve a substantial amount specifically for TIP-related programming. Despite this challenge, multiple communes reported creative integration of TIP prevention activities into other social services program. For example, in one commune, the commune council members responsible for programming related to women and children integrated TIP prevention messages into visits to pregnant women, the poor, and children living in poverty. Another commune combined TIP prevention activities with the implementation of the village-commune safety policy. While communes are constrained by the budget and are often not able to plan as many activities as they would like, integrating TIP activities into other village priorities enables them to stretch their budgets.
Respondents identified several common reasons for the limited budget available for TIP prevention. Overall, budgets are limited, and often building roads and other infrastructure is prioritized over issues such as TIP prevention. Some respondents mentioned that NGOs often implement TIP prevention education and activities, which both enables communes to leave TIP prevention out of CIP budgets and leaves them dependent on NGOs. Some respondents claimed that TIP prevention activities and related resources are proposed but not approved, and some claimed that there is no need for including TIP prevention in the CIP as TIP does not occur in that commune.
57
Overall, there was broad consensus among respondents that leaving TIP prevention out of the CIP and associated budget is a weakness. Due to this, most communes scored themselves as only a 1 or 2 on this intervention factor.
Existence of Commune Budget for TIP Prevention As discussed above, no communes had a separate budget dedicated to TIP prevention. Communes spent a minimum of USD 50 to a maximum of USD 500 of the social services budget for TIP prevention activity.
Services Provided by Commune Councils All participants in this study confirmed that their commune leadership dissemination safe migration information. The variation in this indicator is only in the frequency, and a majority of the communes indicated that information is shared on a monthly basis. The most common places for information sharing are pagodas, schools, commune halls, and, somewhat less frequently, the house of the village chief.
A variety of stakeholders, including commune council members, village chiefs, commune chiefs, police officers, and NGO employees, engage in dissemination. Some of the topics most commonly discussed are:
• The benefits of legal migration and risks and drawbacks of illegal migration; • The requirements for legal documents; • The need to discuss employment prior to migration; and • The importance of keeping important contact information, such as that for commune police and the Cambodian ambassador in their destination country.
All communes speak directly with individuals and households about safe migration practices as party of their TIP prevention education activities. In addition, local authorities make home visits to households with recently returned migrants.
While all communes provide services related to TIP prevention education, due to variation in frequency of activities, there was a roughly equal proportion of scores 2, 3, and 4 across all of the communes. While the scores varied, highlighting their highly subjective nature, there was broad agreement that the level of activity is not yet sufficient.
Existence of Livelihood Programs All communes reported the existence of livelihoods programs, which are universally implemented by NGOs in communes. These programs include a host of activities related to livelihoods, including vegetable growing, animal husbandry, vocational training, mushroom and tree planting and harvesting, savings groups, rice banks, cattle banks, and capital provision for both pig farming and agricultural instrument distribution.
58
While there was acknowledgement and agreement that these programs have contributed to an increased standard of living for households involved in them, there was also consensus that these programs only benefit those households included in them, leaving out most of the households in each commune. Due to this, most communes assigned themselves a score of only a 1 or a 2 for this intervention factor.
DISCUSSION The baseline CVI study conducted in 2016, recoded for the purposes of this report to reflect the protective nature of sensitivity factors, included a high number of at-risk communes. Twenty-nine out of 65 communes, 44.6%, were highly vulnerable to unsafe migration, while the majority, 52.3% (n=34) demonstrated a medium level of vulnerability. A mere 3% (n=2) were considered to have low vulnerability to TIP.
Figure 27: Percentage of Communes by Vulnerability Figure 26: Percentage of Communes by Vulnerability Level in 2016 Level in 2019
CVI Results 2016 CVI Results 2019
3.1% 10.5%
44.6% 42.1%
52.3% 47.4%
High Vulnerability Medium Vulnerability High Vulnerability Medium Vulnerability Low Vulnerability Low Vulnerability
In 2019, the patterns seen in commune vulnerability were the same as in 2016, with the largest share, 47.4% (18 of 38 communes), categorized as medium vulnerability. As in 2016, a slightly smaller proportion, 42.1% (n=16), fell into the high vulnerability category. The number of low vulnerability communes doubled from two in 2016 to four in 2019, but the relative share increased substantially, to 10.5% of the studied communes.
59
Figure 28: CVI Baseline and Endline Maps
60
In addition to assessing the shifting share of communes falling into the low, medium, and high vulnerability categories, Winrock also examined shifts in scores at the individual commune level. These shifts are illustrated in the maps above (see Figure 28). Of the 38 communes assessed at endline, twelve saw their vulnerability scores decrease, eleven saw their scores increase, and thirteen remained the same. The two communes from Phnom Penh Province in 2019 were new to the sample, so their scores were not comparable to the communes included from that district in 2016.
The most common result of this study was no shift in the CVI score for a given commune. In Svey Rieng Province, no shift was observed in either Mream or Andoung Pou Commune. In Kampong Cham, Chey Yo remained stable. Within Kampong Thom Province, San Kor Commune in Kampong Svay District showed no shift over time and all communes in Santuk District, Prasat, Ko Koah, and Tang Krasau maintained their scores from 2016 to 2019. In Siam Reap Province, no change was observed in Svay Chek Commune in Angkor Thom District or Spean Tnot Commune in Chi Kreng District. Pear Rong and Chea Klang Communes in the Svay Anthor District remained stable as did Prey Kanlorng Commune in Pou Rieng District of Preng Veyng District. Toul Koki Commune in Modul Seima District of Koh Kong Province also showed no evidence of a shift in vulnerability. Interestingly, all of the communes for which no change was observed were in the high (five of eleven) or medium (six of eleven) vulnerability categories.
Unsurprisingly, the communes where we saw risk increase tended to be communes already experiencing a high level of vulnerability. Within Svay Rieng Province, all communes within Chantrea, Svay Chrum, and Kampong Ro Districts saw slight increases in their vulnerability score (ranging from 1 to 3 points), either moving or keeping them in the high vulnerability grouping. In the Chamka Leu District of Kampong Cham Province, Speu Commune increased its score by one point, but managed to stay in the medium vulnerability category, while Ta Ong Commune’s one point increase in risk was enough to shift it from medium to high risk. Pralay Commune in Stoung District of Kampong Thom Province saw a dramatic risk increase of four points, enough to move it from the low to high risk categories. This requires further exploration to understand whether there were specific events or shocks that shifted the underlying risk level in the commune substantially during the period of the project. This was the single largest increase in risk seen in any of the communes included in this study. Researchers observed smaller shifts in Tram Sorsor Commune of Srey Snam District, Leang Dai Commune of Angkor Thom in Siem Reap Province. The only commune included in this study from Oddar Meanchey Province, Beng Commune in Banteay Ampil District, demonstrated a small increase in vulnerability, which further cemented its status as a relatively high vulnerability commune. The only commune in Preng Veyng to demonstrate increased vulnerability was Angkor Tret Commune in Svay Anthor District.
While the number of communes that demonstrated reduced vulnerability (12) is not significantly different from the number that saw increased risk (11) or no change (13), we do see a pattern of greater overall reduction in risk. The overall shift in scores among communes that were included in the CVI study at both baseline and endline is -8 points, demonstrating a net reduced level of vulnerability.
61
Most provinces saw at least one commune with decreased risk. The exceptions to this are Oddar Meanchey Province, where only one commune was included in the study, and Phnom Penh Province, where there were no communes included at both baseline and endline. In Svay Rieng District, Chambak Commune in Romeas Hek saw reduced vulnerability. Ta Prok Commune in Chamka Leu District of Kampong Cham Province saw the single largest decrease in vulnerability, with its CVI score shifting from a high of 11 to 3, placing it in the medium vulnerability category. In Kampong Tham Province, Chey Commune in Kampong Svay District and Chamna Leu Commune in Stoung District each saw modest vulnerability decreases, which were sufficient to move both from the high vulnerability category to medium vulnerability. In Siam Reap Province, Prei Commune in Srey Snam District and Chan Sor Commune in Sotnikum District saw decreases in vulnerability, while Varin District’s Svay Sa Commune saw a large drop of 5 points in its score, enough to move it all the way into the low vulnerability group from its original position as a high vulnerability commune. In Preng Veyng Province, Mebon, Chrey, and Smong Khang Cheung Communes in Svay Anthor District as well as Ta Kor Commune in Pou Rieng District experienced score drops of one point each. Pak Klang Commune in Modul Seima District of Koh Kong Province rounds out the group of communes that demonstrated lower vulnerability at endline compared to the baseline study.
While these results seem to indicate little in the way of change, there are hopeful signs. The highest scoring commune in the 2016 was Trapok Commune in Kampong Cham Province, with a vulnerability index score of 11. The highest score in 2019, however, was 8, the vulnerability index score of Thlok Commune in Svay Rieng Province. Furthermore, looking at all 38 communes included in the 2019 study, the observed total shift was -8, indicating that, despite some reshuffling of risk levels, the overall level of risk has decreased.
Furthermore, the CVI tool is a rough guide to the perceptions of local communities, not necessarily to the actual conditions. For example, nearly all communes rated themselves as having low incidence of domestic violence. In practice, this means that a commune with zero reported cases would earn the same score as a commune with higher numbers, as 1 is the lowest score any commune can receive. These results should be interpreted with caution, and further research into both self-assessed measures of vulnerability as well as ways to more objectively operationalize vulnerability is warranted.
Quantitatively, the shifts in vulnerability from 2016 to 2019 seem small. Substantively, however, these are meaningful changes. Vulnerability to TIP is a complex phenomenon reflecting deeply entrenched norms and structural factors. These results indicate that a holistic approach such as that taken by the Cambodia CTIP Project can be successful in reducing community levels of risk over time. Future programming should build on this foundation and continue to target risk through a multi-dimensional approach to countering TIP.
VII. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Taken as a whole, the results from all four components of this endline study point to the success of the Cambodia CTIP project in meeting its objectives. The four indicators measured in this study
62 demonstrate modest but important progress across multiple dimensions of TIP. These indicators, repeated from above, are:
1.1.1 % knowledge change in target population, who are exposed to behavior change campaigns, on protective behaviors to prevent TIP 1.1.2 % behavioral change to prevent TIP in the migration process in target population who are exposed to behavior change campaigns 1.21 % participating households at risk of TIP with improved livelihoods 1.2.3 # of communes with reduced vulnerability to TIP
The Cambodia CTIP Project has demonstrated progress on each of these indicators. 44.4% of respondents in the endline demonstrated knowledge around safe migration practices, compared to just 23.1% at baseline. The proportion of migrants reporting safe migration practices jumped from 3.4% in 2016 to 19.44% in 2019. The share of respondents reporting information associated with being at low risk for failing to meet a minimum threshold for livelihoods more than doubled over the three-year period, from 4.25% to 9.33%. It is difficult to accurately assess how many communes have reduced vulnerability to TIP, as the endline CVI study included only 38 out of an original 65 communes. Even with that caveat, the proportion of communes considered low risk more than doubled from 2016 to 2019, and researchers observed an overall decrease in commune vulnerability to TIP.
What these results taken together demonstrate is two-fold. Firstly, the Cambodia CTIP Project has been successful, and future programs should build on this work and consider applying a holistic approach to decreasing risk of TIP, itself a multidimensional problem. Secondly, there remains substantial work to be done. While each of these indicators shows success, the absolute levels of knowledge, safe behaviors, and sustainable livelihoods remain low and commune vulnerability to TIP remains all too high. The following recommendations should be considered:
• Continue to build on the robust legacy of Cambodia CTIP and other counter-trafficking programs in Cambodia through interventions that promote a holistic approach to tackling the multidimensional problem of TIP. • Facilitate communication between current or former migrants and prospective migrants to ensure that potential migrants can access information from trusted, experienced sources. • Support the increased grassroots communication around safe migration. • Assess whether the successful outcomes observed in this study are interrelated. For example, both knowledge of safe migration and behaviors associated with safe migration increased from baseline to endline. Future work should determine whether that increased knowledge plays a causal role in facilitating safer behaviors. • Target support to caregivers for the children of migrants. The children of migrants may be at increased risk of unsafe migration or TIP, and support to caregivers could reduce their vulnerability.
63
• Test and refine alternative models of assessing and reducing commune vulnerability. The Cambodia CTIP Project made important progress, but the factors that lead to increased vulnerability at the commune level are many and complex. Future programs should include targeted interventions to address this vulnerability. • Conditions reported by returning migrants suggest elements of forced labor occurring in the destination countries. It is recommended other USAID CTIP projects, such as USAID Asia CTIP and USAID Thailand CTIP, liaise with local civil society groups in destination countries to improve working conditions for migrants, especially Cambodia migrants. • The majority of returned migrants also reported dealing with these issues on their own, so another focus in destination countries should be strengthening the communication channels between migrants and service providers in destination countries.
64
Annex 6: Workers' Journey
Annual Progress Report: October 2019 – September 2020 Cambodia Workers’ Journey 2020
Internal Migrant Workers in Manufacturing, Construction, Hospitality and Tourism
USAID Cambodia Countering Trafficking-in-Persons (CTIP) Program
This study is made possible by the generous support of the American People through the United State Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of Winrock International and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. Abbreviations
CTIP Cambodia Trafficking in Persons
CENTRAL Center for Alliance for Labor and Human Rights
DOLVT Department of Labor and Vocational Training
EBA Everything But Arms
EU European Union
FGD Focus Group Discussions
GAATW The Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women
HR Human Resources
KII Key Informant Interviews
KTV Karaoke Television
ILO International Labour Organization
n number
NEA National Employment Agency
NGO Non-government organizations
NSSF National Social Security Fund
OSH Occupational Safety and Health
TIP Trafficking in Persons
USAID United States Agency for International Development
1
Contents Abbreviations ...... 1 Executive Summary ...... 6 Introduction ...... 10 Objective and Scope of the Study ...... 10 Research Questions ...... 10 Methodology ...... 10 Desk Review ...... 10 Primary Data Collection ...... 11 Study Sites ...... 11 Survey ...... 11 Focus Group Discussions ...... 11 Key Informant Interviews ...... 12 Analysis and Validation ...... 14 Ethical Approach ...... 14 Limitations...... 14 Context ...... 15 Target Work Sectors ...... 16 Recruitment Practices ...... 17 Risk for Migrant Workers in the Recruitment and Employment Process ...... 18 Study Findings ...... 20 Basic demographics of migrant workers in the target industries ...... 20 Sex of Survey Respondents ...... 20 Age of Survey Respondents ...... 21 Marital Status ...... 23 Education ...... 24 Disability ...... 25 Current and Previous Work History ...... 26 Current Type of Work ...... 26 Work History ...... 28 Migration History ...... 31 Training ...... 32 Workers Experience in the Pre-Decision, Recruitment, Hiring process, and Employment Processes ...... 33 Workers Past and Current Residence ...... 33 Reasons for Migration ...... 34
2
Safe Migration Training ...... 36 Recruitment ...... 36 Hiring Processes ...... 39 Commitment for work before migration ...... 43 Migration Experience ...... 44 Contracts ...... 47 Subcontracting ...... 48 Work ...... 49 Current Events ...... 55 Summary and Conclusions ...... 55 Demographics of Migrant Workers in the Survey ...... 55 Current and Previous Work History ...... 56 Worker Experience in the Pre-Decision, Recruitment, Hiring process, and Employment Processes ...... 56 Analysis and Recommendations ...... 58 Recommended Action for Future Work ...... 61 Recruitment ...... 61 Migration...... 62 Employment ...... 63 Annex 1 References ...... 65 Annex 2 Data Collection Toolkit ...... 67 Annex 3 Validation Exercise ...... 93
3
Figure 1: Survey Respondents by Sex and Type of Work (n=296) ...... 20 Figure 2: Age of Survey Respondents ...... 21 Figure 3: Age by Type of Work: Factory (n=195) ...... 21 Figure 4: Age by Type of Work: Construction (n=50) ...... 22 Figure 5: Age by Type of Work: Hospitality and Tourism (n=51) ...... 22 Figure 6: Marital Status of Survey Respondents (n=296) ...... 23 Figure 7: Marital Status by Work Sector (n=296) ...... 23 Figure 8: Attendance at School by Sex (n=296) ...... 24 Figure 9: Highest Grade Completed for Those That Attended School (n=280) ...... 24 Figure 10: Highest Grade Completed by Work Sector (n=296) ...... 25 Figure 11: Total Survey Respondents by Type of Work (n=296) ...... 26 Figure 12: Factory by Type of Product (n=195) ...... 26 Figure 13: Occupation in Factory (n=176) ...... 27 Figure 14: Type of Job in Factory by Sex (n=176) ...... 27 Figure 15: Type of Job in Hospitality and Tourism (n=51) ...... 27 Figure 16: Occupation in Construction (n=50) ...... 28 Figure 17: Length of Time in Current Job (n=296) ...... 28 Figure 18: Previous Work (n=296) ...... 29 Figure 19: If currently working in a factory, where did you work previously? (multiple responses permitted) (n=195) ...... 30 Figure 20: If currently working in hospitality and tourism, where did you work previously? (multiple responses permitted) (n=51) ...... 30 Figure 21: If currently working in construction, where did you work previously? (multiple responses permitted) (n=50) ...... 31 Figure 22: If yes, what type of training did you receive? (n=213) ...... 32 Figure 23: Survey Respondents by Home Province (n=296) ...... 33 Figure 24: Length of Time in Current Province (n=296) ...... 33 Figure 25: Reasons for Migration (multiple responses permitted) ...... 34 Figure 26: Reasons for Migration by Sex ...... 35 Figure 27: How did you learn about this job? (n=296) ...... 36 Figure 28: Recruitment Methods by Sector (% of total respondents by sector n=296) ...... 37 Figure 29: Payment to Recruitment Agency or Broker ...... 38 Figure 30: What went well about the hiring process? ...... 39 Figure 31: Did you have all the information you needed to decide about the job? (N=296) ...... 39 Figure 32: Was there information that you wish you had been provided during the recruitment process? (N=296) ...... 40 Figure 33: If yes, what kind of information did you want? ...... 40 Figure 34: Did you face any challenges during any stage of the recruitment and hiring process? (n=296) ...... 41 Figure 35: Did you feel pressured or forced to take the job? (n=296) ...... 41 Figure 36: Legal documents required when migrated for work (n=296, multiple responses) permitted) ...... 42 Figure 37: Were your documents (ID, passport, etc.) kept by your employer at any time? ...... 42 Figure 38: Did you have a verbal or written commitment before you migrated? (n=296) ...... 43 Figure 39: Commitment for work prior to migration by type of work (% of type of worker) ...... 43 Figure 40: “Yes” to “Did you have problems migrating?” (N=296) ...... 44 Figure 41: Of those that had problems, types of problems by sex (n=132 respondents, multiple responses permitted 253 responses)...... 45
4
Figure 42: Problems migrating % of total ...... 45 Figure 43: Type of problem identified aggregated by subsector of manufacturing (n=91 Yes: Apparel 59, Bags and Luggage 17, Footwear 15, multiple responses permitted 174 total responses) ...... 46 Figure 44: Percentage of workers that had contracts by Sector (n=296) ...... 47 Figure 45: If you have a contract, did you understand the terms of the contract? (n=195) ...... 48 Figure 46: Is it common for people in this industry to subcontract and do work at home or elsewhere? (N=296) ...... 48 Figure 47: The working conditions are what I expected (n=296) ...... 49 Figure 48: I receive the pay that was promised to me by my employer on time (n=296) ...... 50 Figure 49: I am not required to work more than 40 hours a week unless I agree (n=296 ...... 50 Figure 50: If I work more than 40 hours a week, I get paid for it (n=296) ...... 51 Figure 51: I get to take days off as promised (n=296) ...... 51 Figure 52: The work facility (building, equipment, transportation) is safe (n=296) ...... 52 Figure 53: I am safe from sexual harassment at my job (n=296) ...... 52 Figure 54: I can freely come and go at my job (n=296) ...... 53 Figure 55: My employer looks out for the workers (n=296) ...... 53 Figure 56: If I have a problem at work, I can talk to my supervisor or human resources person (n=296) ...... 54 Figure 57: I can freely join a trade union (n=296) ...... 54
5
Executive Summary
The USAID Cambodia Countering Trafficking-in-Persons (CTIP) Program (2015-2020) was designed to improve systems to counter trafficking in persons in Cambodia through a holistic, multi-pronged approach that bolsters the capacity of both communities and government actors, in coordination with the private sector and key development partners. The project’s private sector engagement strategy specifically targets actions by private sector actors to improve and sustain monitoring of TIP in their supply chains. Within this framework, CTIP conducted the Cambodia Workers’ Journey study during the project’s fifth year to examine the profile of Cambodian internal labor migrants and identify risks to human trafficking in their journey from recruitment to hiring, and employment in three sectors in Cambodia- manufacturing, apparel, footwear, bags and luggage, hospitality, and construction. CTIP considers this study a tool to demonstrate how concerned stakeholders can improve internal migration and employment opportunities so that workers are less likely to pursue riskier opportunities abroad. The study involved a total of 296 workers (195 manufacturing, 50 construction and 51 hospitality and tourism sectors) in three provinces of origin (Prey Veng, Kampong Cham, Svay Rieng) and two destination areas ( Siem Reap and Phnom Penh) in the country. Through a desk review, survey, focus group discussions, and key informational interviews detailed in the report, the study surfaced findings and conclusions about the profile of internal migrants in the sectors covered; their work history; motivations for migration; recruitment and hiring processes and perceptions; and employment terms and work conditions. Based on the research conducted, vulnerabilities of internal migrants within Cambodia were identified. Findings indicate most workers found a job through their network of friends and family and had limited information on how to migrate safely and did not know how to collect basic information on salary, working conditions and job responsibilities before deciding to migrate. While most workers did not feel forced to take a job, few received a written commitment related to the job and 36% did not even receive a verbal commitment before they left their community While most workers in factories (83%) had written contracts once they were onsite and formally hired, only 6% of construction workers had contracts, making them especially vulnerable to abuse. Using the global determination of human trafficking where specific indicators within each of the three elements of act, means and purpose establish the presence of human trafficking, the study concludes that moderate risks to trafficking for forced labor were seen in the migrants’ recruitment and migration decision-making process and in some aspects of their employment. While the study found no strong evidence of forced labor, many different risk factors were identified which open workers up to the risk of forced labor and other forms of exploitation. Workers’ lack of access to information on safe migration, and basic job information such as salary (particularly true for construction and factory workers), working conditions and job responsibilities limited workers’ ability to make informed and free decisions about their job putting them at risk of forced labor. The limited information provided by friends and family opens opportunities for employers to take advantage of vulnerable workers’ lack of information about their rights as workers. Recruitment procedures and information were generally free of coercive methods done by recruiters who were known to the workers. However, the workers’ experience points to moderate risks of human trafficking since they could not access and understand complete job-related information to make an informed decision about taking a job freely. They also did not get full information about safely migrating to their place of work.
6
Formal hiring and employment showed gaps in ensuring that formal jo1b contracts were given to all workers. While 61% of factory and hospitality workers had contracts, they lacked understanding of payment terms, benefits and time off. Only 6% of construction workers had contracts, making them more vulnerable to forced labor conditions. They also experienced underpayment of wages, late payment or irregular pay. A significant percentage (30% for construction, 31% for factory and 20% of tourism workers) of workers did not reply to the question about the retention of their documents could be an indication of a problem which the study could not explore further. The mechanism for proactive monitoring of workplace conditions leaves much to be desired for workers in footwear, bags and luggage, hospitality and construction workers. While trade unions can provide support in ensuring workers’ rights at work are ensured, workers’ participation in trade unions is not always easy and can be associated with one’s political affiliation. Despite evidence of these vulnerabilities, most workers reported they generally had freedom of movement, were paid for overtime work, and had the ability to report work issues to their supervisor or human resources staff. For the three sectors covered by the Workers’ Journey study, there does not seem to be strong evidence of human trafficking for forced labor although, as mentioned above, we identified the presence of several risk factors associated with worker exploitation. In addition to the risks mentioned above, there is reason to be concerned about the bags and luggage manufacturing sub-sector and the construction sector, many of which are not registered with the proper authorities2 and would most likely not have internal regulations to implement the labor law in their workplace. Recommended Actions While the study did not find strong evidence of trafficking for forced labor, there are proactive steps that all stakeholders can take to prevent future trafficking risks, increase worker satisfaction and reduce the need for Cambodians to engage in riskier employment opportunities abroad. Recommended Action for National Government • The government and specifically the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training should enact a directive that will educate employers about human trafficking and safe migration, alerting them to the indicators of human trafficking in the recruitment process. • The same directive from government should instruct employers to provide clear information about job opportunities and conditions of employment at first point of contact with potential employees. • Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training should instruct employers to formalize and standardize job announcement content and processes as part of their internal regulations • The government should also issue policy guidelines directing employers to ensure fair, inclusive, transparent and direct recruitment through more formalized application systems • The government-issued guidelines should instruct employers to ensure more formal application processes are easily accessible.
1 Culturally in Cambodia the question may have been sensitive. The research team did not know the high rate of refusal to answer to this question until they summarized the data. They tried to follow up in FGDs but the issue was not a concern for the small group that the researchers were able to gather. COVID 19 also kept the research team from gathering groups and digging more into the data. Keeping documents may have inhibited movement, or ability to move to another job. 2 https://www.makingiteasycambodia.com/our-updates/proper-business-registrations-in-cambodia. See Step 3. 7
• Include a policy within the National Employment Agency (NEA), the government’s job- seeking platform to integrate human trafficking prevention in its employment service. The NEA should also make its service more accessible to jobseekers in remote areas through stronger outreach efforts in collaboration with local authorities, employers, schools, community service organizations (CSOs), other institutions and potential workers. • Based on prioritized recommendations to improve TIP efforts in Cambodia (2020 TIP Report for Cambodia), increase unannounced labor inspections for industries highly vulnerable to debt bondage • As part of the comprehensive review and reform of the labor law of 1997, government should provide adequate human resources, training and monitoring of labor inspectors. As a general policy, government it should conduct proactive unannounced audits of working conditions. Ideally the Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training could send two auditors at the same time to reduce the risk of bribery.
Recommended Action for the National Committee for Counter Trafficking in Persons (NCCT) and Local Authorities • The NCCT should strengthen the capacity of local authorities on safe migration practices, specifically in providing information to community members that are considering migration domestically. • The NCCT, specifically through its Prevention Committee should develop and implement guidelines for vetting prospective employers of internal migrants to increase their awareness of credible employers. Employer-related information should be disseminated to districts and communes as well. The latter should proactively make this information available to job seekers in their respective areas • Local authorities should encourage information sharing on safe migration practices for domestic migrants. • The NCCT should encourage provincial committees and local authorities to increase dissemination of reliable and clear information on the labor law. • NCCT should exert efforts at all levels of government to update its 2019-2023 National Plan of Action by integrating prioritized recommendations from the 2020 TIP report on Cambodia and making resources available for its implementation
Recommended Action for Employers • Employers should provide new employees with a statement about their legal rights as employees. • As a matter of standard practice, employers should provide written contracts that are clear and understandable and accurately describe employment terms and working conditions. • Employers can provide orientation to newly arriving employees in their new community about community resources, housing options, transportation and essential services such as police, health care and other social services • The employer should ensure that their policies include working conditions that comply with local law and the International Labor Organization’s Core Labor Standards. • To increase employee satisfaction and productivity while reducing turnover, employers should include arrangements to balance working life and the demands of family and life outside work. • The employer should make reasonable accommodation to include people with disabilities in the workforce.
8
Over the long term, government, working with employers, CSOs and stakeholders should institute reforms in the Cambodian labor law to address policy and program gaps in line with the Government’s commitment to the Decent Work Programme 3.Ultimately, employment relationships must promote core labor and human rights , aligning public and private sector interests to create a sustainable, just and peaceful society for all.
3 The Cambodia Decent Work Country Programme (DWCP) 2019-2023 provides a framework for cooperation between the ILO, the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) and the social partners to contribute to the achievement of Cambodia’s national development objectives by 2030. The DWCP is the 5th such document and builds on 50 years of Cambodian membership of the ILO. The DWCP will support implementation of the Rectangular Strategy IV, the National Strategic Development Plan 2019-2023 and the Cambodian Sustainable Development Goals (CSDGs). Priority will be placed in this context on implementation of SDG 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all. 9
Introduction Winrock International is a nonprofit organization that works with people in the United States and around the world to empower the disadvantaged, increase economic opportunity, and sustain natural resources. Winrock has been implementing the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Countering Trafficking-in-Persons (CTIP) project in Cambodia since 2011. The current CTIP project has expanded its focus on awareness-raising efforts to include more complex prevention, protection and prosecution interventions that address economic disparities and other factors that contribute to trafficking in persons (TIP) vulnerability. As part of CTIP’s private sector engagement strategy, CTIP sought to better understand the recruitment process in the apparel and footwear, construction, bags and luggage, and hospitality sectors in Cambodia. This research documented the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment. The researchers considered that the workers’ journey could potentially include risks for human trafficking, labor exploitation and other types of violence or abuse. Objective and Scope of the Study The objective of the study was to conduct an evidence-based study on the Cambodian workers’ journey, documenting processes from recruitment, to hiring, to their employment in the selected industry sectors. This initiative aimed to uncover potential risks to human trafficking for internal migrant workers and recommend actions to improve internal migration and employment opportunities domestically so that workers are less likely to pursue riskier opportunities abroad.
Research Questions The research questions were as follows: 1. What are the basic demographics of the migrant workers in the target industries? 2. What is the current work and history of work of the migrant worker? 3. What is the worker’s experience and processes in the worker’s journey from pre-decision, recruitment, hiring process, and employment? 4. How do Cambodian workers perceive the recruitment, and hiring process? 5. What are key areas of risk for trafficking and exploitation in the migrant worker’s journey? 6. What information would be helpful for employers to improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? Methodology The technical approach to the research included a desk review of relevant research and primary data collection through a quantitative survey, qualitative interviews with key informants, and focus group discussions. The sampling strategy for the survey is described in quantitative survey section. The sampling for the key informant interviews was purposive, identifying relevant stakeholders to answer the research questions listed above. Desk Review The desk review was conducted to better understand the current situation of internal migration for work in Cambodia, recruitment practices in the targeted industries and sectors, risks for TIP or exploitation, and good practices in recruitment. In addition to understanding current practices in recruitment, the desk review will also build further understanding of current source communities for labor migrants in the target industries within Cambodia. The desk review was conducted using Google Scholar, Google Search, and The Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW) Journal of Human Trafficking. An estimated 51 documents were reviewed. The findings are summarized in the context section of this report.
10
Primary Data Collection Study Sites The quantitative research was conducted with workers in the target industries around Phnom Penh for construction and factory workers. For the hospitality and tourism sectors, workers were interviewed in Phnom Penh and Siem Reap. The qualitative interviews were conducted in the source communities in the provinces of Prey Veng, Kampong Cham, Svay Rieng and Siem Reap. Survey A survey was conducted to collect data on demographics of workers, their current and past work history, and their experiences and perceptions in the recruitment process. The following characteristics of workers were used as selection criteria: ● Low-skilled workers who are or have worked in the selected industries ● Workers in the footwear, apparel, construction, hospitality, bags and luggage sectors ● Workers between the ages of 15 and 45 years of age (primarily between 18 and 45) The survey tool was designed and reviewed by Winrock technical advisors, approved and translated into Khmer, and entered in KoBo Collect, a platform to collect the survey data. The survey tools were piloted, then adjusted to address errors found. The sample size was based on the estimate that there are 614,242 (ILO, 2018) active workers in the Cambodian manufacturing sector, 358,734 in construction, and 132,612 in hospitality (World Bank, 2018). Hence, the total population for the survey is estimated at 1,105,588. Based on this estimate and considering the budget and time available for the study, the sample size agreed upon with Winrock was 250 workers. The proposed sample was to include an estimated 175 workers in manufacturing (footwear, apparel, bags and luggage), and an estimated 35 to 40 each of workers in construction and hospitality sectors. The survey was conducted with 296 workers total (exceeding the proposed sample size). This total includes 195 manufacturing (factory), 50 construction and 51 hospitality and tourism. Workers were identified without going through their employer to reduce risks to workers and protect their confidentiality. For the manufacturing sector factory workers involved in the production of garments, footwear, and bags and luggage, were interviewed in the areas around Phnom Penh municipality which has a high concentration of factories. The workers were identified around different factories that produce the target goods (i.e. not all from one factory), with a focus on factories that are producing for international brands. International brands were a focus as CTIP as a USAID implementor may be better positioned to engage with these factories. The data collectors approached workers to conduct interviews as they left work (outside the workplace), or in the area where they lived. Workers were asked if they would be willing to participate in a brief survey and asked qualifying questions (sector of work, age, and migrated within five years). If the prospective participant met the basic criteria and agreed to the interview, the informed consent process was administered, and the interview conducted. The interviewers tried to achieve five or six interviews per day. The researchers worked in a group – six interviewers and one team leader for the safety of the workers and the data collectors. For construction workers and hospitality and tourism, a similar approach was applied. Construction sites and housing for workers were identified, and workers were approached in these settings. Focus Group Discussions Focus group discussions (FGDs) were held in provinces or districts of origin for migrant workers and in destination work areas. Twelve FGDs were conducted with families of migrant workers during the 11 same time the survey was being conducted in Phnom Penh. These FGDs were labeled as community members, however, to participate they had to have a family member (spouse, partner, child, parent) that had migrated (See Table 1 below). The FGD participants were recruited by Winrock Cambodia’s partner organizations in the community. The participants ranged in age from 25 to 70. There were more women than men that participated, even though both men and women were invited. Men were reported to not be available due to work, had migrated themselves, or had a lack of interest in participating. Men and women were interviewed together in FGDs. After the survey was completed, three FGDs were held with workers: one each with factory, construction and hospitality and tourism workers (see Table 1 below). The FGD participants were recruited from the same work sites that the survey was conducted. The same criteria were followed for recruitment of FGDs as study respondents (age, work sector, and years since migrated). These FGDs were difficult to convene because the COVID 19 pandemic had begun, and it impacted the ability to gather in groups. Key Informant Interviews Key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with local authorities in a community of origin for migrant workers, a Human Resource (HR) Manager at a factory, officials from the Department of Labor and Vocational Training (DOLVT) and NEA, and members of CARE International, the Center for Alliance for Labour and Human Rights, and trade unions in manufacturing and construction (See Table 1 below). The researchers were not able to interview the Better Factories Programme of the International Labor Organization (ILO) due to time limitations, pressing challenges related to the Everything But Arms (EBA) agreement with the European Union, and the beginning of the COVID 19 pandemic.4 Later in the study, the COVID 19 pandemic was reported to be another challenge. Factories feared closure, breaks in the supply chain from China for raw goods, and concerns for reduced orders and factory closures. Additionally, it was not possible to interview but one HR Manager due to the same challenges. HR managers that were approached declined to be interviewed citing the same time constraints caused by EBA and COVID 19. Table 1: Key Informants and Focus Group Discussion Summary Prey Veng Focus Group Discussions Male Female Total Community Members 1 10 11 Community Members 1 4 5 Community Members 7 5 12 Total Participants 9 19 28 Key Informant Interviews Male Female Total Local Authorities 2 1 3 NEA 1 1 Local Authorities 2 2
4 On February 11, 2020 the European Commission has decided to withdraw part of the tariff preferences granted to Cambodia under the European Union’s Everything But Arms (EBA) trade scheme due to systematic violations of human rights principles. The withdrawal of tariff preferences will affect selected garment and footwear products, and all travel goods and sugar. The withdrawal as serious consequences as it amounts to around one-fifth or Euro 1 billion of Cambodia’s yearly exports to the EU.
12
Local Authorities 1 1 DOLVT 2 2 Total Participants 8 1 9 Svay Rieng Focus Group Discussions Male Female Total Community Members 1 7 8 Community Members 1 10 11 Community Members 2 7 9 Total Participants 4 24 28 Siem Reap Male Female Total Focus Group Discussions Male Female Total Community Members 3 3 6 Community Members 2 4 6 Community Members 6 5 11 Total Participants 11 12 23
Key Informant Interviews Male Female Total NEA 1 1 DOLVT 1 1 2 Total Participants 2 1 3 Kampong Cham Focus Group Discussions Male Female Total Community Members 3 8 11 Community Members 1 10 11 Community Members 1 4 5 Total Participants 5 22 27
Key Informant Interviews Male Female Total DoLVT 1 1 Total Participants 1 1 Phnom Penh Key Informant Interviews Male Female Total Care 1 1 Central 1 1 NEA 1 1 Trade Union Construction 1 1 Trade Union Manufacturing 1 1 Total Participants 5 5 Focus Group Discussion Male Female Total Construction Workers 6 6 Hospitality and Tourism 5 5 Factory Workers 8 8 Total Participants 14 5 19
13
Analysis and Validation The data from the survey, KIIs and FGDs was analyzed, triangulating findings from multiple sources when possible. Only descriptive statistics were presented from the survey due to the lack of representative sampling. The descriptive statistics were provided through KoBo Collect and transferred to Excel for further cleaning, analysis and presentation. The KIIs and FGDs were summarized by type of individual or group interviewed and by question category. The data was analyzed for common themes. The findings were summarized and presented to Winrock staff. Based on initial findings, a FGD guide was developed for follow-up FGDS with workers in each of the three sectors. Once these FGDs were completed, a draft report was completed and circulated within Winrock for comments, then the draft report updated. Originally, a validation workshop was intended to be held, but due to COVID 19 limiting the ability for groups to meet, a validation activity was agreed upon. The draft report, along with a set of validation questions, were disseminated to a cohort of stakeholders agreed upon by Winrock. Once this feedback was received, the report was finalized. A total of six stakeholders responded including CARE International, the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association, two trade unions, and Legal Service for Women and Children. The validation questions are in Annex 3.
Ethical Approach The ethical approach to the research was to protect the identity, privacy and confidentiality of the respondents. Interviewing workers about their journey from recruitment to employment can be sensitive, particularly if the worker has experienced any exploitation or been a part of risky or informal practices. To provide protections for the employee against any retaliation or negative consequences from the employer for their participation in the study, the research was conducted “outside” of workplaces. This means that employers were not engaged to identify workers for interviewing. Employees were approached (with appropriate explanation and protections) outside the workplace (See Survey Section above) and interviewed with their informed consent. To ensure quality interviewing, World Health Organization guidelines for interviewing survivors of violence were applied. This means that all participants were explained the purpose and objectives of the research and were asked to give verbal informed consent to participate before any interviews are conducted. Participants were informed that they could choose not to answer a question or opt out from the discussion or interview at any moment. They were ensured that their identity would remain confidential and anonymous, and the information they provided would be used solely for this assignment. For any person that revealed their experience of violence or exploitation, the team was prepared to make a referral to available services. To ensure quality interviewing, the research team interviewers were provided training to conduct the survey. This included interviewing women that had experienced violence, ensuring privacy and confidentiality, and identifying referral sources. Limitations The survey was limited by the inability to conduct a random representative sample. In Cambodia, conducting a survey or collecting data in the manufacturing sector and the construction sectors is sensitive due to the politicization of the manufacturing sector. For example, alleged human rights violations by the Royal Government of Cambodia have impacted the sector. During the time of the survey, the EBA status of Cambodia was being reconsidered as a result of these alleged rights violations. The EBA is an initiative of the European Union (EU) under which all imports to the EU are duty-free and quota-free, with the exception of armaments. The loss of this special status 14 was expected to negatively impact the economy in Cambodia through a reduction in manufacturing. Any types of interviews were considered of concern by workers and by manufacturers. HR Managers were not willing to be interviewed and factories would not cooperate to provide data on workers for a representative sample. Better Factories of ILO was fully engaged in preparing for and managing any fallout from an unfavorable decision for Cambodia on the EBA and was not willing to be interviewed based on a reported lack of time. The study also focused on interviewing workers that were in companies manufacturing for international brands. This may have limited access to some workers more likely to be at risk for exploitation and abuse. The workers at factories that contract for producing goods for international brands have tighter scrutiny and these factories often follow labor laws and adequate working conditions; therefore, it is suspected that working conditions are generally better than in non-brand factories. Construction workers were only interviewed at small sites. The interviewers were denied entry by the larger companies into group on-site housing for larger construction sites. This provided no opportunity (as workers did not leave the site) for interviews. The research was also conducted at the beginning of the COVID 19 pandemic. This did not impact data collection for the survey as it was completed before the pandemic began. However, at the time of the follow-up FGDs, it limited the ability for gathering larger groups of workers for their safety.
Context Internal migrants in Cambodia constitute a significant population and are the focus of this research. In 2013, the National Institute of Statistics estimated that nearly one quarter of the Cambodian population (approximately 4.1 million individuals) had changed their location of residence. This internal movement is significantly greater in scale than international migration: as of 2017, total international migrant stocks (those migrating to and from Cambodia) numbered approximately 1.1 million, less than a tenth of the population (Kimchoeun, 2018). Of the total internal migration, rural-rural accounts for 58.4%, rural-urban for 24.5% (mostly to Phnom Penh), and urban-urban for 12%. Men were found to dominate rural-rural migration (60%) and women dominated rural-urban migration (World Food Programme, 2019). A recent 2016 survey showed that migration in Cambodia, especially rural-urban and cross border migration, has increased since 2013. Migration happens in all regions, although the rate is the lowest in the Plateau area.5 The study also showed that the most popular migration destination is Phnom Penh followed by Thailand and other provincial towns (World Food Programme, 2019). Provinces for the highest out migration are Kandal, Kampong Cham, Prey Veng and Takeo (Ministry of Planning, 2012). The most common migrants are young people aged 17 to 35, divided equally between men and women. Young adults and adolescents aged 13 to 18 also migrate (World Food Programme, 2019). Migrants are better educated than non-migrants with 41% having completed secondary school compared with 32% for non-migrants. Migrants are nearly three times more likely than non-migrants to be single (Ministry of Planning, 2012).
5 The Plateau area is made up of provinces – Pailin, Kampong Speu, Oddar Meanchey, Preah Vihear, Strung Treng, Rattanakiri, Mondulkiri, and Kratie. These provinces are not contiguous and are in the northeast bordering Phnom Penh and near the border of Thailand in the western part of the country. 15
Almost half of the migrants to Phnom Penh have a contact in the capital at the time of migration. Most of the time the contact is a relative or friend from the migrant’s village of origin. Over 86% of migrants are moving for employment-related purposes (Ministry of Planning, 2012). Target Work Sectors In Cambodia, as in many parts of the world, one pathway to livelihoods for young women (and men) from poor families is to migrate to urban areas to earn a better wage and send money to families (Brody, et al., 2019). Female migrant workers work primarily as garment workers, small business owners, domestic workers, and entertainment and service workers. Male migrants work as construction or non-construction workers such as drivers, business owners, and white-collar professionals (Ministry of Planning, 2012). The construction sector provided the best average salary for low-skilled entry-level jobs followed by manufacturing, security, and hospitality (Open Institute, 2016). Garment and footwear sectors have been the backbone of Cambodia’s economy over the past two decades. In 2015, the garment and footwear sectors value-added 11% to the economy, and the sector contributed nearly two percentage points to the country’s 7% GDP growth. The sector’s development has been driven by exports with heavy dependence on the EU and U.S. markets. In the previous year, 80% of Cambodia’s total merchandise exports were garment and footwear (ILO, 2017). The garment industry is the largest manufacturing sector, providing about 700,000 jobs. In recent years, the manufacturing sector has shown a significant growth in new footwear, and travel goods factories reportedly opened with 30 factories in the first half of 2019 alone. During the same period, it was reported that 10 garment factories were closed, showing that the footwear and travel goods sectors are growing while the garment sector is retracting (Vireak, 2019). A recent study by Better Factories Cambodia found that an estimated 85% of factory workers are women. This is down from 92% in 2006, showing that the sector is increasingly offering employment to men. Female workers are reported to be under-represented in leadership roles with between 75- 95% of women in lower-ranked positions. Although formal reports of sexual harassment are low, surveys of workers’ experiences show high rates. The study reports that a baseline survey by Better Factories Cambodia found that 38% of workers surveyed felt uncomfortable often or sometimes because of joking or flirtatious behavior in the factory. More than 27% of those behaviors came from their supervisor or manager (Better Factories Cambodia, 2018). Women are under-represented in leadership positions. When women are in leadership positions among other benefits and rewards, it helps to reduce sexual harassment and discrimination at work (Better Factories Cambodia, 2018). Care International conducted a study to understand the prevalence and financial impact of sexual harassment to the Cambodian garment industry. In the workplace, 28.6% or nearly one in three female garment factory workers reported experiencing sexually harassment behavior over the last 12 months. With limited institutionalized means of empowering women and ensuring a workplace free of violence, women experience shaming and blaming and employ coping strategies such as avoiding the perpetrator, missing work, or changing jobs. The study estimated that the productivity cost of sexual harassment in the garment industry in Cambodia is 89 million USD per annum (CARE International, 2017). Increasingly more attention is being focused on the construction industry in Cambodia. The country, and in particular Phnom Penh, is experiencing a construction boom (Sothear, et al., 2014) (Consiglio, et al., 2014). The construction sector in Cambodia is the fastest growing industry in the country, making up an estimated 30.1% of the GDP. Recently, the investment in the sector has dropped by
16
15.3%, specifically in the real estate sector. The construction industry is largely in the informal sector, making the workers ineligible for participation in the National Social Security Fund (Seila, 2019). Labor market experts estimate that there are between 175,000 and 200,000 workers in the sector, many of whom are unskilled and work informally as day laborers. An estimated 20-40% of the construction workers are female and are reported to be in the lowest skilled positions and do not receive equal pay even for equal work (Janssens, 2013). No exact numbers are available because there is no system for registration or monitoring of workers. According to an analysis in 2013 by the Asia Development Bank, overall employment of females in the construction sector is .62% compared to 3.54% male; the industry is still male dominated, but anecdotal reports show that women are increasingly working in the sector (Asia Development Bank, 2013). The hospitality and tourism sector is also an important driver of Cambodia’s economy. The sector’s contribution to Cambodia’s GDP was estimated to be 32.4% in 2017 (OECD, 2019). The hospitality and tourism businesses are extremely labor intensive and a significant source of employment. This sector is among the world’s top creators of jobs requiring varying degrees of skills and allows for quick entry into the workforce for youth, women and migrant workers (ILO, 2010). The tourism industry and particularly the hotel and restaurant subsector is highly diversified in the types of businesses that operate under its auspices. Internationally, about 20% of the industry's workforce is located within multinational enterprises compared to about 80% in small and medium enterprises (ILO, 2010). This results in a range of jobs, many in the informal sector where workers are less protected. In Cambodia these jobs – particularly the lower skilled – attract young female migrant workers seeking better pay. Young women seek employment at entertainment venues such as beer gardens, massage parlors and karaoke bars (Brody, et al., 2019). These young women are often at risk of abuse due to their social isolation, lack of negotiating power, their low status in the community, and the stigma associated with their occupation (CARE International, 2015). Recruitment Practices Very few studies are available that have documented the recruitment practices in different industries in Cambodia. Overall, the findings are similar, most recruitment is through informal mechanisms such as word of mouth from family, friends and relatives. Even formal methods of job recruitment are often linked to informal contacts. Open Institute interviewed human resource managers in manufacturing, hospitality, construction, and security. The study focused on low-skilled and unskilled workers. The recruitment practices to find these workers followed a common pattern. The human resource managers reported that they asked existing workers in person to call their relatives or friends in the village or city who might be looking for jobs. They are then contacted and offered a job via phone or in person. This was reported in the study to be considered, convenient, low cost and reliable (Open Institute, 2016). The second more formal method was using advertising materials to announce vacancies. Examples were banners or boards displayed in front of companies, microphones or speakers announcing openings in front of companies, flyers or leaflets stuck on walls on the way to the work site or disseminated to people nearby in the community (Open Institute, 2016). The third way to find workers is to hire an intermediary (used mainly by construction and security sectors). This intermediary can be a village chief or villager aware of who might be looking for a job. Brokers are generally hired if there is a need for more experienced workers. Human Resources managers reported they found brokers to be trustworthy (Open Institute, 2016).
17
Another study explored the current recruitment practices in the garment industry. It also found that recruitment practices remain highly informal with the majority of factories surveyed finding their workers by selecting them from in front of the factory and using verbal referrals from currently employed workers. In the survey 98% of factories responding recruited workers from in front of the factory gate (Kaing, 2017). Hiring of employees by garment factories was also considered seasonal, depending heavily on the volume of orders from brands, and to a lesser extent, holiday and farming seasons in Cambodia. Hiring of workers was reported to be a relatively quick process with most factories spending an average of two to three days to recruit one worker to fill a position (Kaing, 2017). Factories reportedly spent very little on the recruitment of workers. The informal method of hiring from the factory gate resulted in no cost to the employer. Of those that used referrals from employees there were some costs as they paid for referrals – somewhere in the range of $5 to $10 to recruit one worker – a few paid higher up to $20 for one worker. In this study only 15% of workers used formal agencies such as the National Employment Agency (Kaing, 2017). The same survey reported that the challenge to recruiting workers in the garment industry in Cambodia was finding workers with the right skills. The skills they preferred were sewing first, followed by supervision and leadership. Risk for Migrant Workers in the Recruitment and Employment Process Workers face many risks for abuse, exploitation and trafficking in the migration process. These risks are present at all stages of the migration process. Migrants are the most vulnerable to trafficking and exploitation in situations and places where the authority of the State and society are unable to protect them, either due to lack of capacity, applicable laws, or simple negligence. Migrants are highly vulnerable when fleeing situations of violence and conflict, dislocated from family and community support, and working through irregular channels where their status puts them at the mercy of those who may seek to take advantage of them. Migrant workers are vulnerable in labor situations where they are not visible (domestic workers, at sea, confined to worksites, controlled living conditions). Migrants can be exploited because they have limited access to networks, information or resources, and frequently need to look to a third party for help (David, et al., 2019). During the recruitment process, individual factors such as poverty can drive a migrant to take increased risks to seek a job. Lack of education or literacy may result in a lack of job opportunities and a lack of understanding of labor rights or proposed contracts and working conditions. Factors such as an abusive background or unstable family support can drive risky migration when young women or men do not have access to opportunities. Cultural norms and family obligations are other factors driving risky migration decisions (David, et al., 2019). Men, women, adolescents, and children all face risks and are vulnerable to exploitation, abuse and trafficking. Gender is a key factor in the employment opportunities that are open to migrants. Low education and a lack of skills and opportunities result in women being more likely to migrate to informal work that is unregulated, which increases risk for violence, abuse, exploitation and trafficking (UN Women, 2019). Women experience higher rates of exploitation, abuse and trafficking in domestic work, the sex industry and forced marriage, while men are more likely to be exploited in forced labor in construction and manufacturing sectors (David, et al., 2019). Migrant workers that are undocumented are also more vulnerable. Factories report workers use false documents in order to become employed because they are not of legal age. Factories cite difficulties 18 in verifying identification documents to prove an applicant is of a legal working age (Kaing, 2017). At the same time, not having documents can result in workers being less likely to report abuse for fear of losing their employment (UN Women, 2019). Other risks for abuse, exploitation and trafficking are linked to the corruption of officials in the recruitment, migration and criminal justice processes, including recruitment agencies, employers, and police and military officials. Lack of legal documentation or status can increase risk for abuse by state actors (police officers, local authorities) since filing a complaint or criminal charge could result in their loss of work, leaving them with little power and no recourse (UN Women, 2019). Reliance on third party recruiters and agents, particularly those that are unregulated, pose risks as well, especially when coupled with drivers of poverty. Gaps in protective mechanisms provided by the government, due either to deficiencies in political will or coverage also puts workers at risk (David, et al., 2019). The skill level of migrant workers can also be a concern. The majority of workers end up in non-skilled jobs and there is little correlation between what they did before and after migration. Most of the workers in the garment factories have not built nor upgraded their skills through the work they have been doing, creating a low paid, low skill trap for migrants. Many do not finish their education due to migration for work or because they have migrated with their family. The data shows that a high percentage of youth (aged 13 to 18 years) who were at school before migrating, no longer go to school after they migrate (World Food Programme, 2019)
19
Study Findings This is a summary of the findings from the worker surveys, qualitative interviews from focus group discussions with source community members, key informant interviews with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), trade unions, HR managers, local authorities, and others. Basic demographics of migrant workers in the target industries Sex of Survey Respondents
Table 2: Sex of Survey Respondents (n=296) Female 212 Male 83 Third Gender 1 Grand Total 296
In this study of the 296 respondents surveyed 212 were female, 83 were male, and one was third gender (See Table 2). 6 As the majority of survey respondents (195 out of 296) were factory workers the high percentage of females fits with the data demonstrating that the majority of factory workers are female (Better Factories Cambodia, 2018).
Figure 1: Survey Respondents by Sex and Type of Work (n=296)
200 173 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 40 21 29 22 10 20 1 0 Female Male Female Male Third Gender Female Male Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
When disaggregated by type of work of the 50 construction workers interviewed 10 were female and 40 were male; of the 195 factory workers interviewed 173 were female, 21 male and 1 third gender; and of the 51 hospitality and tourism workers 29 were female and 22 were male (See Figure 1).
6 Third gender is a person that does not identify as male or female. 20
Age of Survey Respondents
Figure 2: Age of Survey Respondents
30% 28%
25% 23% 20% 20%
15% 11% 9% 10% 6% 5% 3%
0% a.15-18 b. 19-20 c. 21-25 d.26-30 e. 31-35 f. 36-40 g. 41-45
The target group surveyed were between 18 and 45. If an approached worker was under 18, they were interviewed but not if they were over 45.7 As a result, the age range for the respondents was between age 15 and 45. Age was asked in age range categories, so no mean age was calculated. Within these parameters, the majority of survey respondents were between the ages of 21 and 35. Only 12% were 20 or under (9% 19-20 and 3% 15-18) and 17% were over 36 (11% 36 to 40 and 6% 41 to 45) (See Figure 2). This profile changes by work sector as is described below.
Figure 3: Age by Type of Work: Factory (n=195)
40% 34% 35% 30% 25% 23% 19% 20%
15% 11% 10% 8% 3% 5% 2% 0% a.15-18 b. 19-20 c. 21-25 d.26-30 e. 31-35 f. 36-40 g. 41-45
For factory workers surveyed the majority were in the age category 26-30 (34%). The second highest percent were between 21-25 (23%), followed by age 31-35 (19%). There were 2% of workers that were 15-18, 8% that were 19-20, and 3% were 41-45 (See Figure 3). The survey parameters were to sample workers between the ages of 18-45 so workers older than 45 were not interviewed. However, as noted earlier, it was agreed that workers 18 and under would be interviewed, if identified, so those respondents are included. In KIIs, participants reported that factory workers have said they are not permitted to work in a factory past age 40. However, in this study 3% of factory workers were over 40. This shows that in some cases factory workers are working past the age of 40. Of those that were over 40 (six workers), five worked
7 Winrock asked the researchers to prioritize age 18-45 but not to exclude under 18 if they were identified. 21 in garment factories in production and one worked in bags and footwear in quality control. Data from ILO shows that over 80% of garment, textile and footwear workers in Cambodia are under 35 (ILO, Dec 2018). Figure 4: Age by Type of Work: Construction (n=50)
30% 28%
25% 20% 20% 14% 14% 14% 15%
10% 6% 4% 5%
0% a.15-18 b. 19-20 c. 21-25 d.26-30 e. 31-35 f. 36-40 g. 41-45
For construction workers, 28% of workers were in the 31-35 age category. The next highest age group of construction workers were the 21-25-year age category (20%). However, in age categories 26-30, 36-40 and 41-45, there were 14% in each. In total, 70% of construction workers were over age 26, with 56% over the age of 31 (See Figure 4). The age of construction workers is higher than the age of factory workers and hospitality and tourism workers.
Figure 5: Age by Type of Work: Hospitality and Tourism (n=51)
35% 29% 30%
25%
20% 18% 16% 14% 15% 10% 10% 8% 6% 5%
0% a.15-18 b. 19-20 c. 21-25 d.26-30 e. 31-35 f. 36-40 g. 41-45
For the hospitaltiy and tourism sector the majority of workers (29%) were between 21-25 with 16% in between 19-20, and 6% between 15-18 years of age. Hospitalty and tourism workers were younger overall than both factory and construction workers (See Figure 5). Overall in this sample, hospitality and tourism workers were the youngest, followed by factory workers, then construction workers. Generally, there is limited data available on the age of construction workers and hospitality and tourism workers, but as noted above, the age range of factory workers is similar to what is found in other studies.
22
Marital Status
Figure 6: Marital Status of Survey Respondents (n=296)
70% 57% 60% 50% 40% 35% 30% 20% 6% 10% 1% 1% 0% a. Single b. Married c. Living with partner d. Windowed e. Divorced / Separated
Overall, the majority of survey respondents were married (57%). Thirty-five percent were single. Small percentages were living with a partner (1%), widowed (6%), and divorced or separated (1%). When examined by sector, the data shows a different picture (See Figure 6).
Figure 7: Marital Status by Work Sector (n=296)
100% 78% 80% 59% 60% 51% 35% 40% 31% 16% 16% 20% 4% 1% 0% 2% 4% 0% 1% 2% 0% a. Single b. Married c. Living with partner d. Windowed e. Divorced / Separated
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Overall, 78% of construction workers surveyed are married compared to 59% of factory workers and 31% of hospitality and tourism workers. Sixteen percent of construction workers are single compared to 35% of factory workers and 51% of hospitality and tourism workers (See Figure 7). In summary, hospitality and tourism workers are more likely to be single compared to workers in the other sectors, followed by factory workers, then construction workers. When exploring the ages of those married in each sector, between 75-80% of those married were over 26. As construction workers, then factory workers responding to the survey were older than hospitality and tourism workers, this likely accounts for the higher marriage rates in these occupations. It is also worth noting that migration patterns in Cambodia show young unmarried women migrate from rural areas (primarily) to Phnom Penh or surrounding areas to work in factories. Hospitality and tourism workers also migrate to work when they are young and unmarried (Ministry of Planning, 2012). This is a factor that should be considered in identifying and reducing the risks for abuse, trafficking and exploitation to ensure that safe migration programs are targeting all age groups with appropriate information and resources.
23
Education Figure 8: Attendance at School by Sex (n=296)
100% 95% 94% 80% 60% 40%
20% 5% 6% 0% Female Male
a. yes b. no
Overall, 95% of females and 94% of males in this survey had attended school (See Figure 8). Of those that had not attended school (16 individuals total), five were construction workers, eight were factory workers and three were hospitality and tourism workers. Attendance was evenly split between males and females. Data from other research shows that the majority of factory workers (94.3%) are literate. The literacy rate for factory workers is slightly higher for males than females, and overall higher than the national average (ILO, Dec 2018). There is not similar data available for the construction and hospitality and tourism sectors.
Figure 9: Highest Grade Completed for Those That Attended School (n=280)
35% 30% 30% 28% 25% 20% 18% 15% 12% 10% 10% 4% 5% 0% 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11-12
This total was summarized with 4% of survey respondents completing grade 1-2, 12% completing grade 3-4, 30% completing grade 5-6, and 28% completing grade 7-8. Only 28% had completed grade 8 or higher (18% grade 9-10 and 10% grade 11-12). Based on this survey data the majority of respondents had completed between grades 5 and 10 (58%) (See Figure 9). The data is further analyzed by sector.
24
Figure 10: Highest Grade Completed by Work Sector (n=296)
35% 38% 40% 32% 30% 24% 22% 24% 19% 20% 15% 15% 16% 13%11%13% 9% 7% 10% 3% 2% 4% 0% 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11-12
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Overall, in this survey the hospitality and tourism workers had higher rates of educational attainment with nearly 38% having completed 11-12, 19% completing grade 9-10, and 15% completing both grades 7 and 8 and grades 5 and 6. Only 2% of hospitality and tourism had completed only grade 1 and 2 (See Figure 10). This is likely due to the sample selected and the requirement for English language skills (particularly in Siem Reap). For factory workers responding to the survey, the majority had completed grade 5 or 6 and grade 7 or 8 (35% and 32% respectively). Only 4% had completed grades 11 or 12, and 11% had completed grade 3 or 4, and only 3% had completed grade 1 and 2 (See Figure 10). For construction workers responding to the survey, 9% had completed grade one or two, 13% completed grade 3 or 4, and 24% completed grade 5 and 6, 22% completed grade 7 and 8, and 24% grade 9 and 10 (See Figure 10). Overall, in this survey sample construction workers were the least educated, followed by factory workers, then hospitality and tourism workers. Education and literacy of workers in the sectors are important. For low skilled workers, training can provide a pathway to improved employment opportunities. Having basic literacy and numeracy is necessary for these advancements. Additionally, to prevent exploitation, abuse and trafficking, building understanding of workers’ rights and access to information and resources is imperative. That most workers have attended school and have some level of literacy can provide guidance on the best mediums for providing information or areas for improvement. For example, if a worker has limited literacy, understanding a complex contract would present a challenge possibly opening the door for confusion and labor exploitation or abuse. It will be important to ensure that information sharing on safe migration to prevent exploitation, abuse, or trafficking, and language levels in contracts fit with the literacy levels of the workers. Also, when workers have lower literacy levels, it could inform the need for promoting improved literacy. Disability The survey respondents were asked to provide answers to the six Washington Group Questions (See Survey in Data Collection Toolkit) related to difficulty in seeing, hearing, mobility, memory, self-care and communication. Overall, there were very few study respondents that reported having a lot of difficulty in these areas: seeing, 1%; hearing, 0%, walking and climbing stairs, 1%; remembering, 2%; self-care, 0%; and communication, 0%. The number of people with disabilities in this study does not match the number of people with disabilities in the Cambodian population. Estimates vary, but the most recent Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey estimated that about 10% of the population over 5 years of age had some form of
25 disability. This likely means that people with disabilities are not able to access employment opportunities in the sectors explored in this study (National Institute of Statistics, 2014). Current and Previous Work History Current Type of Work
Figure 11: Total Survey Respondents by Type of Work (n=296)
250 195 200
150
100 50 51 50
0 Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Of the 296 respondents to the survey, 50 were construction workers, 195 were factory workers, and 51 were hospitality and tourism workers (See Figure 11). As described earlier in the methodology section of this report, a larger number of factory workers were interviewed due to the size of that sector.
Figure 12: Factory by Type of Product (n=195)
140 119 120 100 80 60 46 40 30 20 0 Apparel Bags and Luggage Footwear
Of the 195 survey respondents working in factories 119 were working in apparel, 30 in bags and luggage, and 46 in footwear (See Figure 12). The study sought to identify respondents that represented the different sub-sectors to ensure that the different experiences were documented. When relevant, data is reported by sub-sector. However, the sample is small and when analyzed there are few differences related to sub-sector.
26
Figure 13: Occupation in Factory (n=176)
160 148 140 120 100 80 60 40 17 20 6 5 0 Production in a Line Manager Quality Conrol Productivity factory
A total of 176 workers described the type of work they do in a factory (19 replied other, with no description). The majority (148) worked doing production work. Six were line managers, 17 in quality control and five in productivity (See Figure 13).
Figure 14: Type of Job in Factory by Sex (n=176)
100% 87% 76% 80% 60% 40% 14% 9% 20% 2% 5% 2% 5% 0% a. Production in a b. Line manager c. Quality control d. Productivity factory (Sewing, etc.)
Female Male
To explore the gender dimensions of employment roles in factories the data was disaggregated by sex. Overall, the majority of men and women worked in production. However, of those that are line managers are majority men. It would be important to understand this factor and how it has changed over time, however, this survey only collected current information. Women were more likely than men to be in quality control (9% and 5%) and men were more likely than women to be in productivity (5% and 2% respectively) (See Figure 14).
Figure 15: Type of Job in Hospitality and Tourism (n=51)
45 39 40 35 30 25 20 15 8 10 4 5 0 Hotel Restaurant Other
27
Of the 51 workers in hospitality and tourism 39 were in restaurants, eight in hotels and four were in other businesses (See Figure 15). The others were in Karaoke Television (KTV) or ticket sellers. Figure 16: Occupation in Construction (n=50)
45 40 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 10 5 0 a. Laborer in construction b. Supervisor
Of the 50 construction workers 40 were laborers (ten of them women) and 10 were supervisors (See Figure 16). All of the supervisors were male. For all three sectors, women were less likely to be in supervisory roles or in management positions. When asked about this issue in FGDs, participants reported that women were not usually managers, citing social norms that men were usually in that role. Work History
Figure 17: Length of Time in Current Job (n=296)
80% 68% 70% 60% 50% 43% 43% 39% 40% 29% 30% 18% 20% 14% 12% 10% 4% 6% 0% 2% 0% Under 1 Year 2-4 Years 5-8 Years 9-10 Years
Construction Factory Hospitality and Tourism
For construction workers, the majority had worked in their current job for less than one year (68%). Another 18% had worked at their job for 2-4 years. Only 4% had been in the job between 5-8 years (See Figure 17). For factory workers the majority had worked in their current job for 2-4 years (39%). Another 29% had worked less than one year, and 15% had worked 5-8 years. Another 6% had worked for 9-10 years in their job (See Figure 17).
28
For hosptialty and tourism workers, equal numbers had worked under 1 year and between 2-4 years (43% respectively). Another 12% had worked between 5-8 years and 2% over 10 years (See figure 18). Table 3: Is your work seasonal? (n=296)
Yes 9% No 91%
Survey respondents were asked if their work was seasonal. Of the 9% of respondents that replied yes to seasonal work, all were construction workers. No hospitaltiy and tourism or factory workers reported being seasonal workers (Table 3). Overall, factory workers had the most longevity in their jobs. Construction workers had the shortest timeframes and were the only that were considered seasonal. While this survey did not address this, it is of note, that factory workers have the most formalized work settings with contracts, minimum wage and working conditions that are monitored. This likely leads to longer employment in their jobs. Table 4: Have you worked at a different job in the same industry? (n=296)
Yes 13% No 87%
The majority of respondents had not worked at another job in the same industry – 87% reported no (See Table 4). The next question explores where they had worked before (and if they had no other work before). With many workers new to the different sectors, it likely means there is an opportunity to provide information on their rights in that job, orientation to the job and job sector, and link the employee with peers and trade unions that can help support their successful entry into the sector.
Figure 18: Previous Work (n=296)
40% 34% 35% 28% 30% 26% 25% 20% 15% 11% 8% 10% 5% 5% 0% No other work Agriculture Factory Hospitality and Construction Other before tourism In the survey respondents were asked about their previous work experience. 8 The majority of respondents had previously worked in agriculture (34%), followed by no work before (28%), factory work (26%), construction (11%), hospitality and tourism (5%) and other (8%) (See Figure 18). For the 8% that reported other types of work this included furniture worker, hairdresser, chef, seller (small shop), painter, security guard, moto taxi driver, electrician, ironworker, and housekeeper. Later in this report, the survey data will show that 77% of survey respondents had migrated for the first time, mostly from a rural province. This fits with the profile of the young person (mostly women),
8 This includes the 13% in Table 4 that have worked in a different industry. 29 migrating from home to work, who had previously worked at home and/or did agriculture work in their family. As the majority have migrated for the first time, it is imperative that the migrants are provided information that will ensure they are not exploited, abused or trafficked as they begin their journey. To better understand the situation of previous work, the survey data was disaggregated by sector. . Figure 19: If currently working in a factory, where did you work previously? (multiple responses permitted) (n=195)
40% 34% 35% 35% 33% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 4% 5% 1% 2% 0% No other work Agriculture Factory Hospitality and Construction Other before tourism
For workers in factories, the majority had worked in agriculture (35%), followed closely by those that had done no other work before (34%) or had worked in another factory (33%). Only 1% had worked in hospitality and tourism, 2% in construction, and 4% in another sector (See Figure 19). Other sectors included selling goods, housekeeper and ironworker. This survey data shows that the majority of workers 69% (34% no other work, 35% agriculture), are entering the formal work sector for the first time, likely with limited information about their rights, how to comprehend and negotiate contracts, and other issues such as work conditions.
Figure 20: If currently working in hospitality and tourism, where did you work
previously? (multiple responses permitted) (n=51) 27% 27% 30% 25% 25% 20% 15% 10% 8% 5% 0% 0% No other work Agriculture Factory Hospitality and Construction before tourism
For workers in hospitality and tourism the majority had not worked before or had worked in agriculture (27% each), followed closely by other hospitality and tourism work (25%). A few had worked in construction (8%) (See Figure 20). Again, this demonstrates a young worker coming into the hospitality and tourism sector that is not highly regulated, with opportunity risks for exploitation, abuse and trafficking.
30
Figure 21: If currently working in construction, where did you work previously? (multiple responses permitted) (n=50)
60% 48% 50% 40% 40% 30% 18% 20% 14% 10% 4% 0% 0% No other Agriculture Factory Hospitality Construction Other work before and tourism For those working in construction the majority had worked in other construction (48%) or in agriculture (40%). Only a few had worked in a factory (18%), and even less never worked (4%). Fourteen percent reported other which include the jobs listed above (See Figure 21). Of note is also that construction workers were older and more likely to be married. Construction was also a seasonal sector, so it is not surprising that workers had worked in the sector before. However, this sector also lacks adequate regulation and as will be demonstrated later in this report, construction workers have a less safe work environment. Migration History Table 5: “Yes” to “Is this the first time you have migrated for work?” (n=296)
Male 23% Female 77%
Overall 65% of respondents had migrated for work the first time (not graphed). When disaggregated by sex more females than males were first time migrants (77% compared to 23% respectively) (See Table 5). Of those that had not migrated for the first time (101 people) 68% had migrated five times or less. To better understand the issue the data was disaggregated by job sector. Table 6: “Yes” to “Is this the first time you have migrated for work?” by job sector (n=296)
Construction 34% Manufacturing 71% Hospitality 76% and Tourism
Of survey respondents, factory workers and hospitality workers were more likely to have migrated the first time (71% and 76% respectively of workers in that sector), followed by construction workers (34%) (See Table 6). Earlier it was identified that for factory and hospitality and tourism workers prior experience was most commonly agriculture or nonexistent. This data fits with the earlier identified trend for young women to migrate for work in the manufacturing and hospitality and tourism sectors (both dominated by females in this survey). Since many of the migrants are first time migrants in the factory and hospitality and tourism sector, and the majority are female, it is important to ensure appropriate ways to convey information on rights and precautions to females in the community before they migrate. This does not mean other sectors are not important, but repeat migrants may need a different type of information.
31
Training Table 7: “Yes” to “Have you received any technical training or induction orientation for this job?” (construction n=50, Factory n=195, Hospitality and Tourism n=51)
Construction 44% Factory 85% Hospitality 51% and Tourism
Survey respondents were asked if they had received any type of technical training or induction orientation for the job. The responses were disaggregated by type of work. Forty-four percent of construction workers, 85% of factory workers and 51% of hospitality and tourism workers reported yes to receiving some type of technical training or induction orientation (See Table 7).
Figure 22: If yes, what type of training did you receive? (n=213)
120% 100% 91% 100% 81% 80% 60% 40% 19% 20% 5% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% Short course Technical and vocational On the job training training (certificate or degree)
Hospitality and Tourism Construction Factory
Survey respondents that said yes to technical training or induction orientation were asked what type of training they received. The most common type of training reported was on the job training. In total, 81% of hospitality and tourism workers, 91% of construction, and 100% of factory workers reported on the job training (See Figure 22). For technical and vocational training 5% of construction workers reported this type of training. For a short course, 19% of hospitality and “At this factory, tourism and 5% of construction workers reported this type of training when we could not (See Figure 22). 9 get workers with the required skill, we HR Managers at factories reported that they provide a practical test for provide them workers during the hiring process – for example a sewing test before training.” getting employed in the factory. If the worker did not have the skills then required training is provided at the factory. Due to the high HR Manager demand for workers HR Managers are willing to provide sewing training for workers. When asked how to get the right people for a job, the HR Manager reported the need to consider what is needed for the current position but also reported a need to look at the applicants’ personality, behaviors, and the way they communicated during the initial interview.
9 A short course was a formal training that does not result in a degree or certification 32
Workers Experience in the Pre-Decision, Recruitment, Hiring process, and Employment Processes
Workers Past and Current Residence
Figure 23: Survey Respondents by Home Province (n=296)
90 80 80 70
60 51 50 40 28 30 30 18 17 20 12 11 9 8 5 8 8 10 2 1 2 1 4 1 0
As described in the context section, provinces for the highest outmigration are Kandal, Kampong Cham, Prey Veng and Takeo (Ministry of Planning, 2012). As a result, the community groups were interviewed in provinces with high out migration where Winrock International is working – Prey Veng and Kampong Cham. Two other provinces were selected because of their location Svay Rieng – near the border of Viet Nam and Siem Reap as a tourist destination (hospitality and tourism workers). The majority of survey respondents’ home province were the provinces with high out-migration. These are Prey Veng (60), Kampong Cham (51), Takeo, (30) Svay Rieng (28), Siem Reap (18), and Kandal (17). Other provinces had less than 15 people in the survey that had migrated from them (See Figure 23).
Figure 24: Length of Time in Current Province (n=296)
70% 61% 60% 50% 40% 30% 21% 17% 20% 10% 1% 0% Seasonal a. Less than 1 b. 1-2 years c. 3-5 years year
The survey sought to interview respondents that had migrated to Phnom Penh and surrounding areas within the last five years. This was to ensure the migration experience of the survey respondents was currently relevant and had not occurred too far in the past. 33
The survey was conducted in Phnom Penh and surrounding areas and in Siem Reap (20 hospitality and tourism workers). Therefore, all participants had been living in their current province less than 5 years. The majority had been in their current province for 3-5 years (61%). Seventeen percent had been in the province for 1-2 years and 21% for less than one year. For those that were seasonal (1%) all were construction workers (See Figure 24). Reasons for Migration Figure 25: Reasons for Migration (multiple responses permitted) (n= 296 respondents with 373 responses)
Other reason: 10%
A crisis such as lost land, lost home, natural disaster 0%
Conflict in Household 1%
Follow family 17%
Marriage 8%
Education 5%
Job 95%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Study respondents reported their reason for migration in the survey. Multiple responses were permitted therefore the total does not equal 100%. A total of 296 persons were asked the question providing 373 responses. Not surprisingly, 95% of respondents reported they had migrated for a job. Fewer report other reasons: 17% reported they followed family; 8% reported they had migrated for marriage. Five percent reported they had migrated for education. When respondents provided multiple answers, they were most commonly for a job and to follow a family member, suggesting that the family had migrated together. The next most common multiple response was marriage and job – once again implying that the person was moving for marriage and to find a job in the location where their partner lived. For the few that reported they migrated for education, most did not have multiple responses. In FGDs with community members and migrant workers, participants reported repeatedly the reason for migration was to get a job. Reasons cited for moving to a new location for a job was the lack of available jobs in their home community and that jobs available in their home province are low paid. This was confirmed by local authorities interviewed in the community. Clearly the need for a well-paid job is a driver for migration.
34
Figure 26: Reasons for Migration by Sex (multiple responses permitted) (n=212 females and 83 males)
120% 120% 96% 100% 93% 100% 80% 80% 60% 60% 40% 40% 17%17% 20% 13% 10% 12% 20% 1% 5% 0% 1% 0% 0 5% 0% 0% Job Education Marriage Follow family Conflict in A crisis such as Other reason: Household lost land, lost home, natural disaster
Female Male
To understand if there are any differences by sex, the survey results were disaggregated. Slightly more females than males (96% compared to 93%) migrated for work; more males than females migrated for education (13% compared to 1% respectively); more females than males migrated for marriage (10% compared to 5% respectively). There is no information on why more women migrated for marriage than men. In FGDs community members repeatedly noted that the “We felt worried about them, and lack of regular jobs in the local community is the main how hard their life would be, but push factor that motivates people (men and women) to we saw no better option. And they migrate outside their community for work – either don’t have any jobs in the domestic or international migration. Participants community, so migrating was acknowledged there are some risks to the migrant worker, best. However, we can talk to but they do not have a better choice for income them on the telephone.” generation for themselves or their family. One factor FGD Community Members mentioned by the groups as a motivator for migration that Svay Rieng is not otherwise mentioned and is sometimes hidden is debt. It was also reported that to migrate sometimes workers go into more debt to be able to migrate. In KIIs with the NEA and the DOLVT, participants reported that workers migrated out of their province to other destinations where they think they will get a job. Popular destinations include Phnom Penh Capital, Sihanoukville, Rattanakiri, and Kandal. Some reported that workers migrated to all 25 provinces. The area they migrated is based on available job opportunities. In KIIs trade union representatives echoed that people migrate out of their home provinces in search of better employment opportunities. One reason cited is that agriculture is no longer the main source of income for families so they must migrate to locations with salaried positions.
35
Safe Migration Training Table 8: Did you receive training on Safe Migration? n=296
Yes 4% No 96%
Of the participants surveyed 96% had not received any training on safe migration prior to migrating (See Table 8). The few that did receive training on safe migration had received it either from an NGO or the local authorities. In FGDs, participants in communities with high migration reported that it was not common to have pre-migration training “We never inform the local for domestic migration. Most reported they also did not inform authorities when someone is the local authorities of their intention to migrate. Informing the migrating for work. We only local authorities that they were migrating could provide an go to them when we have a opportunity for the local authorities to provide information on problem.” safe migration and link the migrant to support resources in the FGD of Community destination province. Members in Svay Rieng In KIIs the DOLVT reported they disseminate safe migration training based on the relevant government Prakas (regulation). The activities conducted by DOLVT includes leaflet distribution, advising job seekers to use registered recruitment agencies, and referring job seekers to training institutions. Training is provided to focal points in the community and they are expected to disseminate the information to the community. It was again pointed out that most of the participants in safe migration training were migrating internationally. Recruitment
Figure 27: How did you learn about this job? (n=296)
40% 36% 35% 32% 30% 25% 22% 20% 15% 10% 7% 5% 2% 1% 0% c. Friend told me a. Advertisement b. Family member d. Went to the job e. A community f. A recruitment about the job about the job told me about the site and asked member told me agency told me job about the job about the job
Overall, most survey respondents learned about the jobs they currently had in informal ways – the most common was from a family member (36%), followed by a friend (32%). Other informal ways people learned about jobs was from a community member (7%). More formal ways people learned about jobs were through advertisements (22%). Only 1% learned about a job through a recruitment agency (See Figure 28).
36
Figure 28: Recruitment Methods by Sector (% of total respondents by sector n=296)
50% 47% 45% 40% 42% 40% 36% 35% 31% 30% 25% 27% 25% 22% 20% 15% 8% 9% 10% 3% 4% 5% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% A community Friend told me Family member Advertisement Went to the job A recruitment Other member told about the job told me about about the job site and asked agency told me me about the the job about the job job
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
To better understand any differences in recruitment processes the data was disaggregated by sector. This data is analyzed by formal and informal recruitment methods. Informal Recruitment Methods As noted above the most common ways that study respondents learned about jobs were from family and friends. This was true for all job sectors. The three ways that respondents learned about jobs or were recruited informally were from a community member, from a friend or family member. Learning about jobs from a community member was the least common informal recruitment method used by each sector. For construction workers 8% learned about the job through a community member, 9% of factory workers and none of the hospitality and tourism workers (See Figure 28). Learning about jobs from a friend, however, was a very common informal recruitment method. For construction workers 40% learned about the job through a friend, compared with 25% of factory workers, and 47% of hospitality and tourism workers (See Figure 28). Learning about jobs from a family member is also very common. For construction workers 42% learned about the job “Workers with limited from a family member, compared to 36% for factory workers knowledge normally seek help and 31% of hospitality and tourism workers (See Figure 28). from their networks or relatives to assist them during In FGDs, community members reported that most commonly the recruitment process.” the first job that a person gets is often through word of mouth – this was through family, friends, or community members. DOLVT Representative An official of DOLVT acknowledges that workers most commonly seek help from their own families and networks to find out information about jobs and how to apply for them. Formal Recruitment Methods There were three means of recruitment or learning about the job that were classified as formal. These are through a recruitment agency, went to job site to apply, and saw an advertisement for the job. Going to the job site and asking if there are available jobs, was used by both factory workers and construction workers, but again both percentages were low – with 3% of factory workers and 2% of construction workers were successful using this method.
37
Learning about jobs through advertisement was more ” If we need new workers, we tell commonly used by both hospitality and tourism (22%) and our current workers and they by factory workers (27%), compared with only 2% of spread the word.” construction workers (See Figure 28). HR Manager Factory The only respondents of the survey that had used a recruitment agency were construction workers, and only 4% of construction workers used one. In FGDs, community members reported that the manufacturing sector has a more formal recruitment process than other sectors. As part of the recruitment and hiring process often potential employees are required to take a sewing test. Community members reported that when hospitality and tourism sectors used more formal recruitment processes, it was when the business was large. In FGDs, it was reported that employers commonly use their current staff to pass information about job vacancies to job seekers. To better understand the use (or lack of use) of these more formal mechanisms study participants were asked in KIIs and FGDs about formal recruitment methods. These more informal methods of recruitment were acknowledged as being available by local government authorities. They reported that even through there is radio, TV, Facebook, and the NEA that migrant workers most commonly still use their networks, family and friends to learn about jobs. In FGDs when migrant workers were asked if they used recruitment services such as Bong Thom, Bong Pheak or the NEA. No one had used these services, and some study participants had not even heard of these mechanisms for job recruitment or advertising. It was acknowledged in KIIs that the NEA plays a crucial role in disseminating job information and provides job orientation at high schools and in the communities in collaboration with local authorities. In addition to the job information, NEA also provides training on negotiation and interview skills, preparing job application and resumes, and on other soft skills. However, it appears that it is not common for unskilled and low skilled workers to use these services provided by NEA. One trade union representative interviewed suggested that to make the NEA effective for low skilled and unskilled workers classes should be set at times that workers can attend such as the weekend.
Figure 29: Payment to Recruitment Agency or Broker
120% 98% 97% 100% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 2% 3% 0% 0% a. yes b. no
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Overall 2% of construction workers and 3% of factory workers paid a fee to a recruitment agency or broker for the job they had (See Figure 29). Two of them paid $50 USD and six people paid less than $15 USD.
38
In FGDs community members reported that in some cases “There are no formal fees, but workers do need to pay to get a job during the recruitment sometimes a worker will give a tip process and that the employer might not know that money to the broker for helping to find the is taken from the applicants. The money is given to the job.” person providing information about the job opportunity. The money was described as a ‘tip’ to the broker for Community Member in Prey Veng information about the job. This tip was expected by the receiver. Hiring Processes Figure 30: What went well about the hiring process? N=296 multiple answers permitted - % of total of each sector 100% 94% 91% 92% 80% 60% 40% 25% 27% 18% 18% 8% 20% 6% 2% 1% 2% 0% Clear information provided Information was timely Help provided in preparing Other, about the job opportunity documents needed by employer
Construction Factory Hospitality & Tourism
When asked what went well about the hiring process, most workers responded that getting clear information about the job opportunity was what went well. In all sectors the positive response was above 90%: construction 94%, factory 91%, and hospitality and tourism 92% (See Figure 30). About a quarter of factory workers found that timely information and help in preparing documents was useful as well (25% and 27% respectively) (See Figure 30).
Figure 31: Did you have all the information you needed to decide about the job? (N=296)
100% 94% 88% 92% 80% 60% 40% 20% 11% 2% 4% 4% 1% 4% 0% a.yes b. no c. no answer
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
When asked if they have all the information needed to decide about the potential job, the majority reported yes: construction 94%; factory 88%; and 92% of hospitality and tourism workers. Reporting no were 2% of construction workers, 11% of factory workers and 4% of hospitality and tourism workers (See Figure 31).
39
Figure 32: Was there information that you wish you had been provided during the recruitment process? (N=296)
70% 59% 60% 54% 48% 50% 36% 40% 29% 30% 23% 24% 16% 20% 12% 10% 0% a. yes b. no c. no answer
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Study respondents were asked if there was information, they wished had been provided during the recruitment process. Nearly two thirds of hospitality and tourism workers (59%) replied yes, followed by 54% of factory workers and 36% of construction workers (See Figure 32).
Figure 33: If yes, what kind of information did you want? (n=153 yes, multiple response permitted, total responses 351)
60% 49% 50% 43% 40% 34% 30% 29% 30% 29% 30% 24% 20% 20% 13% 10% 10% 10% 10% 0% 2% 0% Salary Working Conditions Overtime Job Responsibilities No Response
Construction Workers Factory Hospitality and Tourism
The 153 survey respondents that said yes to the previous question were asked to describe the information they wanted. Multiple responses were permitted. A total of 351 responses were provided by the 153 respondents that said yes to the previous question. The chart above provides a summary of the responses showing a percent of workers in each sector that provided that response. All the answers were within four categories, salary, working conditions, overtime, and job responsibilities. For construction workers, they wanted more information most often on salary (34%), followed by working conditions (24%), and overtime (10%). Factory workers wanted more information most often on salary (43%), followed by working conditions and job responsibilities (both 30%), and overtime (13%). While hospitality and tourism workers wanted more information on salary (49%), followed next by working conditions and job responsibilities (both 29%) and overtime (20%). Overall, this demonstrates that workers that want more information want it on salary and working conditions and overtime. Except for construction workers, information on job responsibilities was also desired. In the previous question, when asked if they had the information, they needed to make a decision about the job the majority reported yes. However, here many report they wish they had more information about salary, working conditions and overtime. This shows that even though workers had
40 enough information to make a decision, they still lacked some key information them to better understand the conditions of their employment.
Figure 34: Did you face any challenges during any stage of the recruitment and hiring process? (n=296)
100% 94% 86% 82% 80%
60%
40%
20% 14% 12% 2% 2% 4% 4% 0% a. yes b. no c. no answer
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
When survey respondents were asked if they faced any challenges during the recruitment and hiring process, the majority responded they experienced no challenges: 86% of construction workers, 94% of factory workers, and 82% of hospitality and tourism workers reported no challenges. The group that answered yes mostly commonly were hospitality and tourism workers (14%). The group that did not respond most often were construction workers (12%) (See Figure 34). In the FGDs, the participants only noted personal challenges in the recruitment and hiring process such as financial concerns or fears of moving to a new place for example. While the percent is small that faced a challenge, it is not insignificant. It would be worth re-examining this issue for the sectors concerned as this is a key entry point for reducing exploitation, trafficking and abuse. Figure 35: Did you feel pressured or forced to take the job? (n=296)
100% 88% 92% 82% 80% 60% 40% 16% 20% 8% 8% 4% 0% 2% 0% a. yes b. no c. no answer
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
When asked, the majority of survey respondents stated they did not feel pressured or forced to take their job: 88% of construction workers, 92% of garment factory workers; and 82% of hospitality and tourism workers responded no to feeling pressured or forced to take the job (See Figure 35). While this is quite high rates of workers that did not experience pressure, there are still a significant numbers that reported yes– 8% of construction workers, 8% of factory workers and 16% of hospitality and tourism workers. It is also worth noting that 4% of construction workers and 2% of hospitality and tourism workers did not respond (See Figure 35). In FGDs, the pressure to take a job came from family members because of the need for family income and support. Experiencing this pressure to have a job 41 to support the family can result in workers taking jobs in risky situations. This is a key point which could indicate vulnerability to labor exploitation, abuse and trafficking.
Figure 36: Legal documents required when migrated for work (n=296, multiple responses) d) 120% 99% 100% 86% 88% 80% 64% 61% 60% 40% 26% 20% 0% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 2% 2% 1% 0% ID Card Birth Certificate Passport Cambodian Working Visa Work Permit Migrant Worker Card
H&T Construction Factory
In KIIs, it was reported by HR Managers that because of poverty and the families need for income, some parents tended to modify legal documents, such as their children’s date of birth and other necessary documents required to be qualified for the job application in the manufacturing sector. Parents pressuring their adolescent children to take a job was identified as one type of possible exploitation. Survey respondents were asked about which legal documents they were required to have. The most common required documents were identity cards and birth certificates. These were most commonly required for factory workers (99% and 88% respectively), and hospitality and tourism workers (86% and 61% respectively). Construction workers had fewer requirements for documentation with identity cards at 64% and birth certificates at 26%. Few other documents were required. For construction workers 8% were required to have passports. There is no clear answer as to why passports were required (See Figure 36).
Figure 37: Were your documents (ID, passport, etc.) kept by your employer at any time?
90% 76% 80% 66% 70% 61% 60% 50% 40% 30% 31% 30% 20% 20% 8% 10% 4% 4% 0% a. yes b. no c. no answer
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Survey respondents were asked if their documents were kept by the employer at any time. Overall 4% of construction workers, 8% of factory workers and 4% of hospitality and tourism workers said yes. It is important to note that many respondents chose not to answer this question (See Figure 37).
42
In the FGDs, none of the workers had their documents taken “They took my documents when I except temporarily. The purpose for taking the documents first arrived. But they gave back to was for verification and copying according to FGD me after they reviewed them.” participants. It is difficult to know if there are issues in this area. Because only a small group participated in the FGDs, Factory Worker, (due to COVID 19), it is possible that issues within this area Phnom Penh were not identified as the larger number of respondents no answering may imply some challenges. Holding of documents is a key element in trafficking and labor exploitation, so this requires further exploration. Commitment for work before migration
Figure 38: Did you have a verbal or written commitment before you migrated? (n=296)
70% 59% 60% 50% 40% 36% 30% 20% 10% 6% 0% Verbal Commitment Written Commitment No Commitment
Prior to migration 59% of survey respondents had a verbal commitment for work. Only 6% had a written comment and 36% had no commitment for work (See Figure 38). When the topic was disussed in FGDs, it was found that the verbal commitments were common – often even second hand from a relative or friend. The worker was “recruited” by the friend or relative and told if they came they would have a job. However, generally they still had to pass a basic interview and skills test to obtain the job. The FGD participants in worker groups reported that they did not know of incidents where a verbal commitment was not kept, unless the person recruited could not do the job. Figure 39: Commitment for work prior to migration by type of work (% of type of worker)
53% No commitment 34% 22%
8% Written Commitment 6% 2%
39% Verbal Commitment 60% 76%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Hospitality and Tourism Factory Construction
43
To better understand the types of commitment by sector, the data was disaggregated by sector and type of commitment for those workers that recieved a commmitment. Prior to migration, for hospitality and tourism workers, 53% had no commtiment for a job, 8% had a written commitment and 39% had a verbal commitment. Prior to migration, for factory workers, 34% had no commitment for a job, 6% had a written commitment and 60% had a verbal commitment. Prior to migration, for construction workers 22% had no commitment, 2% had a written commitment, and 76% had a verbal commitment (See Figure 39). Overall very few workers in any sector had a written commitment for a job before they migrated. As described earlier the most common recruitment methods were through family and friends, so high rates of verbal commitemts are to be expected. It is worth noting that hospitality and tourism workers were the most common groups to migrate without any kind of commitment. A written commitment is the safest guarantee for a worker, particularly if the written commitment provides clear information on the terms of employment. Written commitments for work were low in all sectors. The highest rate of written commitments was for hospitaltiy and tourism workers and the lowest was for construction workers. However, construction workers had a very high rate of verbal commitment. Since construction work is often seasonal and informal, it is not surprising that the “word of mouth” process is strong for this sector. Increasing the level of written commitments through a more formal application and hiring process can be an avenue for providing clear information for workers on the expectations and an opportunity to explore the offer to ensure it is not in violation of their rights as workers. Migration Experience
Figure 40: “Yes” to “Did you have problems migrating?” (N=296)
50% 47% 43% 38% 40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Construction Factory Hospitality and Tourism
Study respondents were asked about their migration experience. The first question was “did you have any problems migrating?” Overall 45% of all workers reported yes (not graphed). When disaggregated by sector, construction workers experienced the fewest problems (38% reported yes), hospitality and tourism (43% reported yes) and factory workers (47% reported yes) (See Figure 40).
44
Figure 41: Of those that had problems, types of problems by sex (n=132 respondents, multiple responses permitted 253 responses) 40% 36% 38%
30%
20% 11% 9% 10% 6% 6% 6% 2% 3% 4% 0% Financial Lack of Info Care of Children/Elder Transportation Other Famiy
Male Female
To understand if the problems were different for men and women, the survey data was disaggregated by sex. Overwhelming the largest problem was financial with 36% of males and 38% of females reporting financial problems when migrating. This was followed by lack of information (11% females and 6% for males), and transportation (9% for females and 4% for males). The respondents that had problems with transportation were factory workers and hospitality and tourism workers. Only 3% of females and 2% of males reported problems with childcare or care of the elderly. Of the 6% that were named “other” problems this included problems with safety, worries about being single, and problems with selfcare and homesickness (See Figure 41). The financial problems were generally about the cost of migration and the cost to become established in their new environment. In the FGDs study participants also described high cost of housing when they first migrated. Others reported the high cost of living in general and were surprised that they had very little if any money left over at the end of the month. Other challenges reported by community members and by migrant workers themselves was missing their family back home. Families in the communities reported they worried about their family members health and well-being and migrant workers reported being lonely or missing family. Figure 42: Problems migrating % of total (n=119 Apparel, 30 Bags and Luggage, 46 Footwear)
60% 57% 50% 50%
40% 33% 30%
20%
10%
0% Apparrel Bags and Luggage Footwear
To better understand the challenges by subsector of manufacturing, the responses of factory workers were disaggregated by apparel, bags and luggage, and footwear. Between the subsectors, bags and luggage reported the most challenges (57%), followed by apparel (50%), and footwear (33%) (See Figure 42).
45
Figure 43: Type of problem identified aggregated by subsector of manufacturing (n=91 Yes: Apparel 59, Bags and Luggage 17, Footwear 15, multiple responses permitted 174 total responses)
60% 48% 50% 43% 40% 40% 30% 22% 20% 17% 16% 13% 20% 13% 9% 10% 4% 5% 3% 2% 2% 0% Financial Lack of Info Housing Care of Children/Elder Transportation Famiy
Apparel Bags and Luggage Footwear
To further understand the challenges by subsector, the survey responses were disaggregated by type of problem. Financial problems were most common for apparel and bags and luggage workers (48% and 43% respectively). Housing was also a significant problem for bags and luggage workers (40%), apparel (16%), and footwear (13%) (See Figure 43). Except for financial problems– bags and luggage workers consistently reported more problems in all areas reported. In FGDs with workers the issue of financial problems was explored. Some of the participants reported no challenges because they went to stay with friends or family. Others reported migration costs for transportation and housing and other costs for settling into the new location. A few mentioned the costs of childcare as a challenge. In FGDs with factory workers, they reported the financial problems were related to the costs of migration. However, this was often helped by having relatives or friends where they were migrating to work. For example, if a family member had recruited them to come to work in the factory that family member was also able to provide support to them when they moved. In KIIs with NGOs, participants reported that workers migrating for jobs face risks when they migrate alone, “I did not face many challenges particularly while looking for a job. This was because they when I migrated because I came were away from the supportive care of family. to stay with my cousins and In KIIs with HR Manager at factories, two main risks were aunty that worked in the same identified for female migrant workers moving to the city – place.” economic and emotional exploitation. According to the HR Garment Factory Worker Managers, some female workers are tricked by men with false promises of marriage, resulting in emotional suffering that disrupts work when they are abandoned by the man. The woman may be emotionally distraught or return home. Clearly the time of migration is fraught with risks for exploitation, abuse and trafficking. As workers are driven to work by the need for money for themselves and their families, they are likely to engage in risky practices to obtain a job. Financial problems can lead to risky travel experiences, or housing upon arrival. Both result in a risky time for the worker to experience exploitation, forced labor, or abuse. Their vulnerability is forced by the need for a job and can result in the potential worker taking
46 risks for the job. Ensuring a clear and supported transition during migration can easily reduce the risk for workers during this time. Contracts Figure 44: Percentage of workers that had contracts by Sector (n=296)
90% 83% 80% 70% 61% 60% 50% 40% 33% 30% 20% 6% 10% 0% Total Construction Factory Hospitality and Tourism
Overall, 61% of workers responding to the survey, reported they have contracts for the job they have obtained. The majority of workers surveyed that had contracts were in the manufacturing sector (83%). This was followed by hospitality and tourism workers with 33% having contracts. Only 6% of construction workers had contracts (See Figure 44). According to the desk review, construction work is often considered informal work or daily labor so contracts are not common. In FGDs with community members it was also reported that factory workers most commonly had contracts followed by hospitality and “Contracts would help tourism workers. Hospitality and tourism workers contracts workers to know what the reportedly depend on the size of the business. Larger businesses work conditions are so we are more likely to provide contracts to their workers and smaller can follow them along sized businesses did not issue contracts for their workers. with the employers. But Importantly, community members reported that workers wished we have to take what is they had contracts so they could understand and follow the there because we need conditions of the contract. jobs” The community members reported there are challenges faced by FGD Family Member of construction workers related to contracts. In the construction Migrant Worker sector it is common to have sub-contracts. The site manager will contract with a team leader to hire workers. The workers at the end of the line do not get the allocated budget for their salaries. There were no reported complaint mechanisms for construction workers. In KIIs an HR Manager at a factory reported that workers are initially hired with a contract on a two- month probation period and sign a long-term contract after passing this probation period. He reported that before signing the long-term contract, the factory explains the internal regulations, working conditions, and gives the worker a copy of contract to read through at home before they signed it. This is in line with the probation period in the Cambodian Labor Law. Clearly having a written contract for work, is a protection for the workers. It provides an opportunity for providing information on all working conditions and expectations. The promotion of contracts in all sectors is important to protect workers’ rights.
47
Figure 45: If you have a contract, did you understand the terms of the contract? (n=195)
100% 91% 80% 60% 40% 20% 3% 6% 0% a. yes b. no c. I don't know
When asked if they understand the terms of their contract 91% of survey respondents reported yes. Three percent said no, and 6% reported they did not know (See Figure 45). When this was explored in FGDs with workers, and in KIIs, there was reported to be some lack of understanding of contracts. This was reported to be related to pay, benefits and time off. There was often confusion about when payments would be made, lack of understanding of health or other benefits and time off such as holidays. Table 9: Have the terms of the contract been kept? (n=195)
Yes 94% No 6%
Survey respondents were asked if the terms of their contracts had been kept. An overwhelming 94% reported yes (See Table 9). This was also explored in FGDs and workers reported that their contracts were kept, but sometimes they were forced to work overtime. While only a small percent of workers (6%) had contracts that were not kept, this is not a small number of workers. In fact, this group is one of the priority groups to reach, to ensure that they have contracts, the terms are understood, and the conditions are kept. Subcontracting
Figure 46: Is it common for people in this industry to subcontract and do work at home or elsewhere? (N=296)
60% 53% 49% 49% 50% 44% 40% 38% 40%
30% 22% 20%
10% 3% 2% 0% a. yes b. no c. Don't know
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
48
Survey respondents were asked if subcontracting is common in their work sector. The only sector where respondents reported this is common is in the construction sector where 22% reported yes (See Figure 47). There is reported to be subcontracting for specialty work such as electrical work. In FGDs it was also reported the site manager would subcontract with team leaders for workers. In some cases, the worker did not receive pay that the site manager thought they were being paid, as the team leader would keep a cut of the money. This is a significant risk area for labor exploitation for construction workers. Generally, most respondents did not know about subcontracting or said no. However, this should not be taken that subcontracting in other sectors does not happen. It likely requires further exploration as the workers interviewed might be unaware of these practices. When participants did report subcontracting of manufacturing work, the work was done at someone’s home or in a small factory or shop. The reports of subcontracting were so small that an adequate analysis cannot be made. Most commonly the pay arrangements were by the piece. Benefits to subcontracting were the ability to work at home, flexible hours, and ability to care for children. Challenges were low pay and irregular work. Work Conditions Figure 47: The working conditions are what I expected (n=296)
70% 63% 63% 56% 60% 50% 38% 40% 33% 26% 30% 20% 6% 10% 4% 2% 2% 5% 2% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Study respondents were asked if the working conditions were what they expected. The majority agreed or strongly agreed (See Figure 48). However, in each working sector, there were some that were undecided or disagreed. For construction workers 4% were undecided and 2% disagreed. For Factory workers 6% were undecided and 5% disagreed. For hospitality and tourism 2% were undecided and 2% disagreed (See Figure 48). While these percentages are small this does indicate problem areas for each sector. When disaggregated by sex, “Construction is good for the top the factory workers were females and construction workers level, but the workers at the were male that were undecided and disagreed. This fits with bottom have it difficult, the gender segregated work conditions. especially the women.” In an earlier survey question, respondents had noted the Key Informant Interview with an desire for more information on working conditions. In FGDs, NGO participants reported that sometimes working conditions were harder than they expected or more dangerous. In FGDs community members reported that working conditions for construction workers were the most difficult in terms of pay, housing, and working environment. The nature of the work is moving from one location to another – even one province to another after a job is completed.
49
NGOs report there is a risk of danger for workers in the work sites – especially construction, that workers lack understanding of the Cambodian Labor Law, and they only have verbal contracts so there is no enforcement possible. Recently it has been forbidden by government authorities for workers to live at the construction site, but the practice continues. Some employers also treat foreign and national workers differently. For example, foreign workers are permitted to stay in air-conditioned containers as this was a more comfortable living arrangement. Another challenge that was reported for construction workers were challenges for their children that accompany them. The children often missed school as the workers moved from one location to another. Pay and Working Hours Figure 48: I receive the pay that was promised to me by my employer on time (n=296)
80% 75%
60% 50% 53% 45% 40% 34%
14% 12% 20% 8% 1% 4% 4% 1% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
Survey respondents were asked if they received the pay, they were promised on time. For this statement, the majority agreed or strongly agreed in all sectors. However, the construction sector had the higher responses of “undecided” and “disagree” (12% and 4% respectively). This was followed by hospitality and tourism with 4% undecided and 8% disagreed (See Figure 49). In an earlier question, participants reported they wished they had more information on pay. In FGDs, the information they desired on pay was how they would receive the pay, when they would receive it, and even the amount. This was not true overall, however, just in some cases. Workers report they do not have the confidence to ask their employer for information on this and sometimes they do not know what to expect especially when they do not have a contract. In KIIs with DOLVT, they reported an emerging challenge is underpayment and late payment in the construction sector. In FGDs with construction workers they reported that their pay was not always regular. Figure 49: I am not required to work more than 40 hours a week unless I agree (n=296
90% 80% 80% 70% 58% 60% 51% 50% 42% 40% 30% 30% 20% 12% 8% 4% 4% 4% 4% 10% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
50
Study respondents were asked if they are required to work more than 40 hours without their agreement. Again, the majority agreed or strongly agreed that they are not required to work more than they agreed to do. For construction workers 88% agreed or strongly agreed, for factory workers 93% agreed or strongly agreed, and for hospitality and tourism 92% agreed or strongly agreed. Overall, in each group 4% of workers disagreed (See Figure 4). However, again there were respondents that were undecided, disagreed or strongly disagreed. Construction workers had 8% undecided and 4% disagreed. Factory workers had 3% undecided, 4% disagreed, and 1% strongly disagreed. Hospitality and tourism workers had 4% undecided and 4% disagreed. Construction workers had the highest rates of responding “undecided” and “disagree,” however factory workers had 5% disagreed and strongly disagreed. This shows that while most workers are not asked to do overtime they do not agree to, others are forced to work overtime.
Figure 50: If I work more than 40 hours a week, I get paid for it (n=296)
80% 70% 71% 70% 62% 60% 50% 40% 29% 30% 26% 18% 20% 10% 6% 6% 6% 6% 1% 0% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
The survey respondents were asked if they got paid if they work more than 40 hours. Again, most respondents strongly agreed or agreed. For construction workers 88% strongly agreed or agreed, for factory workers 99% strongly agreed or agreed, and for hospitality and tourism 88% strongly agreed or agreed. Importantly while these percentages are positive there are still 6% of construction workers and 6% of hospitality and tourism workers that disagreed. Also, 6% of construction workers are undecided, and 6% of hospitality and tourism are undecided (See Figure 51). Figure 51: I get to take days off as promised (n=296)
70% 60% 61% 61% 60% 50% 38% 40% 32% 31% 30% 20%
10% 4% 4% 6% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
51
The survey respondents were also asked if they get to take days off as promised. Again, the majority agreed or strongly agreed. For construction workers 92% strongly agreed or agreed, for factory workers 99% strongly agreed or agreed, and for hospitality and tourism workers 92% strongly agreed and agreed. Even with the strong agreement that workers receive days off, there were some that disagreed. For hospitality and tourism 8% disagreed or strongly disagreed, and 4% of construction workers also disagreed (See Figure 52). Figure 52: The work facility (building, equipment, transportation) is safe (n=296)
90% 76% 80% 70% 64% 60% 53% 50% 43% 40% 24% 30% 20% 20% 10% 6% 10% 2% 0% 3% 0% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
The survey respondents were asked if their workplace and facilities (building, equipment, transportation) are safe. The majority did agree with this statement, but some were undecided and disagreed. For construction, 84% strongly agreed or agreed. For construction workers responded with the highest percentage of workers that disagreed, 10%, and 6% were undecided. When compared to the positive responses of other statements this likely demonstrates that construction workers have a less safe working environment. For factory workers 96% strongly agreed or agreed. Two percent of factory workers were undecided, and 3% disagreed. For hospitality and tourism, 100% strongly agreed or agreed (See Figure 53).
Figure 53: I am safe from sexual harassment at my job (n=296)
90% 80% 80% 72% 70% 61% 60% 50% 38% 40% 28% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
52
Survey respondents were asked if they feel safe from sexual harassment. Most participants strongly agreed or agreed. Almost all workers across all sectors either strongly agreed or agreed. Only 1% disagreed, and 1% were undecided. Both were factory workers (See Figure 54). The research does show that factory workers face risks for sexual harassment (CARE International, 2017). Figure 54: I can freely come and go at my job (n=296)
80% 70% 70% 56% 60% 51% 50% 40%
30% 24% 23% 24% 22% 20% 15% 6% 10% 2% 4% 4% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
The survey respondents were asked if they could freely come and go at their job. There was less overall agreement with this statement. For construction workers 94% strongly agreed or agreed, for factory workers 79% strongly agreed or agreed, for hospitality and tourism 75% strongly agreed or agreed. Importantly, there were study respondents that disagreed or were undecided. This ability to move freely was discussed in FGDs with workers. FGD participants reported that the nature of their work – for example sewing did not permit them to leave their work except during break times.
Figure 55: My employer looks out for the workers (n=296)
70% 64% 65% 60% 56% 50%
40% 33% 30% 30% 25% 20% 9% 8% 10% 4% 2% 2% 2% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
The study respondents were asked if their employer looks out for the workers. For construction workers, 94% strongly agreed or agreed, and 4% were undecided, and 2% disagreed. For factory workers 89% strongly agreed or agreed, and 9% were undecided, and 2% disagreed. For hospitality and tourism workers 90% strongly agree or agree, 9% are undecided, and 2% disagree (See Figure 56)
53
Figure 56: If I have a problem at work, I can talk to my supervisor or human resources person (n=296)
70% 60% 59% 60% 54% 50% 38% 38% 37% 40% 30% 20% 10% 7% 2% 2% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
The study respondents were asked if they had a problem at work if they can talk to their supervisor or HR Manager. For construction workers 98% strongly agreed or agreed, and 2% were undecided. For factory workers 92% strongly agreed or agreed, 7% were undecided, and 2% disagreed. For hospitality and tourism workers 96% agreed or strongly agreed, 2% were undecided, and 2% strongly disagreed (See Figure57). In FGD and KIIs it was reported that the only real mechanisms for monitoring the workplace conditions are through labor inspections. This practice is not practiced widely in all three sectors. Trade unions were also seen as an important mechanism for monitoring workplaces as workers can voice up challenges through these mechanisms. However, participation is not always easy for workers. Overall, the majority of workers and their families report that pay and working conditions are what is expected. However, in each category there are some that disagree or report challenges. The most challenges are in the construction sector. This group is often not receiving payment on time, or as expected, and working conditions are not what is expected. Thus, it is recommended to focus future efforts to improve working conditions in the construction sector specifically. Figure 57: I can freely join a trade union (n=296)
90% 80% 80% 70% 58% 60% 51% 50% 42% 40% 30% 30% 20% 12% 8% 4% 4% 4% 4% 10% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Disagree
Construction Factory Hospitality and/or tourism
54
The survey respondents were asked if they could freely participate in a trade union. For construction workers 88% strongly agreed or agreed, 8% were undecided, and 4% disagreed. For factory workers, 93% strongly agreed and agreed, 3% were undecided, 4% disagree, and 1% strongly disagreed. For hospitality and tourism workers, 92% strongly agreed or agreed 4% were undecided, and 4% disagreed (See Figure 57). In KIIs and FGDs, the importance of trade unions was highlighted. Trade Union were reported to be a source of information about worker rights, the labor law, and safe migration. Trade Unions were reported to gather workers and to provide counseling about the law and worker safety. Participants in trade unions reported that they had faced some challenges from employers such as lack of contract extension or suspected job dismissal. They also receive pressure from family and local authorities, referencing that participation in a trade union is politically sensitive. However, the KII and FGD participants also report that with membership in a trade union they receive some benefits such as knowledge about their rights, basic pay, safety and health, and the national social security fund. Moreover, workers are more protective, more collaborative, and can seek advice when they have issues in the workplace. Current Events In late January and early February 2020, the world rapidly became aware of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was conducted prior to the wide awareness of the pandemic. However, focus group discussions were held after (in March 2020). As a result, a question was added to the FGD asking if COVID-19 had impacted their work, and if they had concerns. In all of the FGDs the workers were aware of COVID-19, but reported at the time of the FGD, that it had not impacted their work. Some workers did report that if they lost their work because of COVID-19, they would return to their home province to be with family.
Summary and Conclusions Demographics of Migrant Workers in the Survey Sex • Factory workers were more likely to be female: 88% of factory workers responding to the survey were female. • Construction workers were more likely to be male: 80% of construction workers responding to the survey were male. • Hospitality and tourism workers were slightly more likely to be female: 56% of hospitality and tourism workers responding to the survey were female. These findings are consistent with the gendered sectors of work in each of these occupations. Age • Overall, hospitality and tourism workers were the youngest, followed by factory workers, then construction workers. Marital Status • Hospitality and tourism workers are more likely than workers in other sectors to be unmarried, followed by factory workers then construction workers. Education • The majority of study respondents had attended school for both males and females.
55
• Overall, in this study respondents that were construction workers were the least educated, followed by factory workers, then hospitality and tourism workers. Ethnicity • 99% of survey respondents were Khmer and 1% were Cham. Disability • Less than 2% of survey respondents had a disability in the six categories of the Washington Group Questions: seeing, hearing, mobility, memory, self-care and communication. Current and Previous Work History Type of Work • Of the 176 factory workers interviewed the majority were in production. • Line managers in factories were far more likely to be male than female. • Of the 50 construction workers interviewed the majority were laborers. • Supervisors in construction were all male. • Of the 51 hospitality and tourism workers surveyed the majority worked in hotels and restaurants Length of time in job • The majority of construction workers had been in their job for less than one year • The majority of factory workers had been in their job for two to five years • The majority of hospitality and tourism workers had either been at their job for under one year or for two to four years • All seasonal workers were construction workers Previous work • For one third of factory workers and hosptiality and tourism workers this job was their first job • The most common previous work for all factory workers and hospitality and tourism workers was agriculture • For construction workers the most common previous work was construction followed by agriculture. This likely represents the seasonal nature of construction work Worker Experience in the Pre-Decision, Recruitment, Hiring process, and Employment Processes Pre-Migration • The most common home provinces were Prey Veng, Kampong Cham, Takeo, Svay Rieng. Overall, 65% respondents indicated this was the first time they had migrated for work. • When disaggregated by sex more females than males were first time migrants. • For garment factory workers 71% were first time migrants, 20% of hospitality and tourism were first time migrants and 9% of construction workers were first time migrants. • Of those that had not migrated for the first-time 68% had migrated five times or less. • Very few migrants had any type of safe migration training. Safe migration training was not provided to internal migrant workers. Reasons for Migration • The majority of respondents (95%) migrated for work.
56
• When disaggregated by sex, slightly more females than males migrated for work. • More males than females migrated for education. • More females migrated for marriage. Recruitment • The work sectors were highly gendered, and this was reflected in the recruitment practices for each sector. For example, young women are recruited into the manufacturing sector, both young women and men into hospitality and tourism, and men into construction- although about one out of five were women. • The majority of respondents in the study learned about the jobs they had in informal ways through a family member, friend or community member. • Few people used formal methods for job seeking even though these are available. Some key informants reported that these methods were not commonly used by low-skilled workers. • A few people reported that payment was required to a recruiter or broker. These fees were small, and some defined them as a tip. • Workers appreciated clear, timely information about the job opportunity and help preparing documents. • While most respondents reported that they had the information needed during the recruitment process, participants would have appreciated more information on pay, overtime and working conditions. • The majority of respondents did not face challenges in the recruitment processes; however, it is important to note that a percent did face challenges. The challenges mentioned in the survey create opportunities to improve recruitment processes and reduce risk to potential employees. • The majority of participants had a verbal commitment for a job before they migrated, but nearly a third had no commitment. Only 6% had a written commitment for work. Migration Experience • Forty-five percent of migrants reported they had problems when they were migrating. Those who did not experience problems were not significantly more (55%). • The most common problems were financial, followed by lack of information, transportation, child and elder care. Financial problems were most commonly related to the high cost of migration and becoming established in their new location including housing. In FGDs participants talked about emotional issues such as missing family. • Some problems were mitigated because workers migrated to a location where they had family and friends that could serve as their support network. • Workers were required to provide legal documentation such as ID cards and/or birth certificates. This was most common for factory workers. Construction workers were not required as often to submit documentation. When documents were kept by the employer it was for recording or copying the documents only. Work Experience • Study participants were asked if they had received any type of induction or orientation training for their job. For construction workers, 44% of construction workers received technical training or induction orientation for the job, 85% of factory workers received technical training or induction orientation for the job, and for hospitality and tourism 51% of workers received technical training or induction orientation. When training was provided it was most commonly on the job training.
57
• Overall, only 61% of workers had contracts. The majority that did have contracts are factory workers (female), followed by hospitality and tourism workers. Only 6% of construction workers had contracts. Other research has shown that the construction workers that do have contracts are male. • Most workers reported that the terms of their contract had been kept. • Few workers knew about the issue of subcontracting, although this emerged as a potential area of abuse for construction workers as site managers had team leaders recruit workers – this was considered sub-contracting, because workers were not paid the full amount since the team leaders took a cut of the pay. • The majority of respondents reported that working conditions were as they expected. For construction workers they reported challenges in terms of pay, housing and working environment. Construction workers also face challenges as the work is seasonal, and they must bring their children who are then kept out of school. • The majority of workers reported they are paid on time and paid for overtime. An emerging challenge reported by authorities, is underpayment and late payment in the construction sector. • Again except for construction workers, the majority of respondents reported the work facility is safe. Construction workers have a less safe working environment. • Only factory workers reported risk for sexual harassment and the rate was 1%. • Workers could not always come and go freely at work, but this was related to work tasks. • Workers reported they can freely participate in trade unions, although there are challenges to join due to the political sensitive nature of unions in the local context. Reported benefits to joining a trade union included learning about worker rights, pay, and benefits.
Analysis and Recommendations The study examined the profile of internal labor migrants in Cambodia and their work journey from recruitment, to hiring, and employment in three sectors in Cambodia to identify risks to human trafficking and propose ways to improve internal migration and employment opportunities so that workers are less likely to pursue riskier opportunities abroad.
The identification of risks used the global determination of human trafficking where three elements are present. These are referred to as the “act”, the “means” and the “purpose”. In the Cambodian Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation, human trafficking is determined by establishing the same three elements of “act,” “means,” and “purpose” below: 10 Activity: the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons Means (method): Threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or a position of vulnerability or the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person Purpose: The exploitation or prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude, or the removal of organs Risks to Human Trafficking for Forced Labor The findings showed some indication of moderate risks in the following aspects of the workers’ journey.
10 Guidelines on Forms and Procedures for Identification of Victims of Human Trafficking for Appropriate Service Provision, National Committee for Counter Trafficking in Persons (NCCT), 2015. 58
1. Recruitment and migration decision-making. Although informal direct recruitment through family members, friends and to a certain extent job advertisements was widely observed in the three sectors, the risk seen for forced labor was the general lack of information on safe internal migration and basic information to guide free decision-making on key aspects of the job pertaining to salary (for construction and factory workers), working conditions, and job responsibilities. It could be assumed that employers generally capitalized on recruiting their staff by depending on prospective migrants’ network of relationships to disseminate job information. It seemed that the migrants’ friends and kin did not have access to safe migration information nor were they fully knowledgeable about basic information on salary, job responsibilities, and working conditions that a job-seeker needs to make a free and informed decision about a job. From the profile of the internal migrants and the main motivation for migrating, one could assume that the main driver for moving was to obtain a paid job, and they generally did not have the mindset to consider all job information for more informed decision-making. They trusted that their friends and family had their best interest in mind, and they knew that this job would be a good opportunity for them. Most migrant workers reported that they were not forced to take the job. However, it is worth further examination of the nature of the force or pressure reported by some 8% of construction and factory workers and 16% of hospitality workers who answered in the affirmative. Verbal commitment about job availability was common for many migrants, although 36% of those who did not even receive a verbal commitment opens the migrant workers to risks of deception. A written commitment about the job was generally low for all migrant workers. The information obtained through this study indicates there was no involuntary work, however moderate risks were identified related to access to information necessary for workers to migrate safely and take jobs which promote their rights. 2. Work and life at work. While 61% of the migrants had contracts for their job, with majority being in the factory sector and hospitality workers, only 6% of the construction workers had contracts making them vulnerable to abuse. A number of workers cited that they lacked understanding of their contracts especially with regard to pay, benefits and time off. It was not explored whether they had an avenue to clarify or address these issues satisfactorily. While the majority of the workers said that their documents were not kept by their employers at any time, it is worth examining in more depth the experience of those who did not respond to this question (30% of construction workers; 31% of factory workers and 20% of tourism workers). The non-response rate could be indicative of problem areas related to document retention by the employer. Even if the workers reported that working conditions were what they expected, it is still doubtful that this is the reality, since they also reported incomplete information about what working conditions to expect. It seems that construction workers were the most vulnerable in terms of employers meeting conditions of pay, housing and working environment. Frequent movement from one location to another expose's construction workers to risk. Even though government authorities have forbidden construction workers to live at the construction site the practice continues. Some employers reportedly give foreign workers preferential treatment at work, further
59
marginalizing Cambodian workers. Children who accompany construction workers miss out on schooling due to the mobile nature of construction work. Payment of wages was not a problem for many but was challenging for the construction workers who often experienced underpayment, late payment or irregular pay. Responses regarding payment of overtime and availability of time off were generally positive. This could be an indication that generally for factory workers in the garment sector and for selected footwear factories covered by Better Factories Cambodia, compliance in meeting labor law requirements is high. 11These two manufacturing sub-sectors are the only ones currently covered by the Cambodian labor law as far as wages is concerned.12 Considering the sensitive nature of the question about safety from sexual harassment in the workplace, it is worth further examining how migrant workers in general, and especially those in factory settings are at risk of sexual harassment and other forms of harassment in the workplace. Studies in factories and initiatives to address gender-based violence in factories seem to suggest the incidence of sexual harassment is particularly high for women. Freedom of movement was generally observed, except for factory workers who noted that they did not have permission to leave their work except during break times. Free participation in trade unions was reported but one’s participation can be considered politically sensitive. This raises questions about the extent of independence and objectivity one can exercise within the trade unions in their workplaces. The workers noted that generally, they can talk to their supervisor or HR Manager to seek help. However, it is doubtful whether more serious workplace issues regarding the violation of workers’ rights are properly resolved since a mechanism for workplace monitoring, except for those covered by Better Factories Cambodia, does not exist. For the three sectors covered by the Workers’ Journey study, there does not seem to be strong evidence of human trafficking or forced labor although there is reason to be concerned particularly the bags and luggage manufacturing sub-sector and the construction sector, which is highly unregulated by formal labor provisions. They are also not covered by independent mechanisms such as Better Factories Cambodia which collaborates with workers, government and employers to institutionalize compliance mechanisms to monitor for forced labor indicators. Using the Activity-Means-Purpose paradigm to determine the existence of human trafficking, the study findings generally did not point to strong indicators that one of the conditions in each of the three elements was evident. However, as discussed above, for the ‘act’ element, there could be moderate risks in recruitment and migration decision-making. For the internal migrants, information about how they can protect themselves and how they can better decide about the job opportunity is not fully accessible, making them easy prey to abuse.
11 Better Factories Cambodia was created in 2001 as a unique partnership between the UN’s International Labour Organization (ILO) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank Group. The programme engages with workers, employers and governments to improve working conditions and boost competitiveness of the garment industry. Its public reporting initiative discloses factory compliance on key legal requirements. 12 The Cambodian labor law requires all employers who have eight or more employees to have internal regulations covering working conditions and occupational health and safety as a prerequisite for registration. However, not all employers in the hospitality sector and even fewer in the construction sector, and luggages and bags sub-sector register with the Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training. 60
The ‘means’ element did not uncover threat or coercion in any aspect of the workers’ journey, although it is worth looking more closely into the responses of some workers from the three sectors who noted some form of pressure in securing their jobs. In terms of ‘purpose’, indicators of risk for forced labor could be more real for the construction sector when looking at their working conditions and job security. The situation of factory workers in the apparel and footwear sectors, mainly because of the protective provisions of the labor law and the existence of Better Factories Cambodia is assumed to be better and regularly monitored in terms of compliance with the fundamental rights at work and prohibitions against forced labor. Recommended Action Based on the findings that emerged through the study, recommendations for each area of work are presented, all of which aim to foster productive collaboration among various actors toward affirmative action to prevent trafficking or forced labor among internal labor migrants in Cambodia. Recruitment The period of recruitment for a job is a time of increased risk for trafficking. During this period there are key opportunities to provide information to potential employees, to formalize employee recruitment systems, and provide potential workers with standardized and adequate information and systems that prevent trafficking. Recommended Action for Government • Government and specifically the Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training should enact a directive that will educate employers about human trafficking and safe migration, alerting them about indicators of human trafficking in the recruitment process. Employers lack an understanding of safe migration and potential signs of exploitation and trafficking in the recruitment process. Providing this information would help them to include a clear policy about human trafficking prevention in recruitment and all aspects of their business operations. • The same directive from government should instruct employers to provide clear information at first point of contact with potential employees. Recognizing that currently, the majority of recruitment for low-skilled workers into the three sectors examined occurs in informal ways through family, friends, or personal contacts, it is recommended that potential employers use their first point of contact with potential employees to provide clear information about application procedures, skills required, pay, work hours, benefits, and any other job requirements. Most of the information that workers are receiving is often second hand (from family and friends) and this is an opportunity to ensure the workers have clear and correct information. • Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training should instruct employers to formalize and standardize job announcement content and processes as part of their internal regulations. Employers should prepare job descriptions or terms of reference on all positions that state the basic information about the job such as location, duties, skill requirements, and application procedures. These job announcements can be disseminated through other employees, postings at work sites, posting on recruitment sites such as Bong Pheak or the National Employment Agency (NEA), advertisements in the newspaper, social media or other mechanisms. • Government should also issue policy guidelines directing employers to ensure fair, inclusive, transparent and direct recruitment through more formalized application systems. Requiring employees to apply through formalized systems either at the place of employment or through 61
mechanisms such as the NEA can improve access to information and reduce opportunities for exploitation, abuse, and trafficking. Employers should develop and implement standardized application and hiring processes. The process should enable workers to understand that they can freely accept or reject employment and that they do not have to pay any recruitment fees. The use of organizations/systems such as the NEA and Bong Pheak can be used in tandem with informal mechanisms. For example, if workers learn about the job through a friend or family, employers can require them to apply through the more formal mechanism to ensure they have adequate information and risks are reduced. • The Government-issued guidelines should instruct employers to ensure more formal application processes are easily accessible. Barriers to use of more formal systems to learn about jobs and apply for them include access to technology, freedom to travel to provincial capitals for applying for jobs, and others. These are likely different for men and women or people with disabilities. Improving access for both men and women to more formal recruitment and application mechanisms and procedures provides an opportunity to promote clear information and safe processes and reduces the potential opportunities for human trafficking. • Include a policy within the NEA’s job-seeking platform to integrate human trafficking prevention in its employment service. The NEA should also make its service more accessible to jobseekers in remote areas through stronger outreach efforts in collaboration with local authorities, employers, schools, CSOs, other institutions and potential workers. The NEA should address barriers for men and women in accessing the platform and assess people’s capacity to use all forms of communication for effective engagement. The NEA should also strengthen its current activities for potential jobseekers to increase their opportunities for securing jobs. They should train jobseekers for job interviews, in preparing job applications, and developing appropriate resumes. The NEA can be a good medium for educating both employers and workers about fundamental principles and rights at work. • Based on prioritized recommendations to improve TIP efforts in Cambodia (2020 TIP Report for Cambodia), increase unannounced labor inspections for industries highly vulnerable to debt bondage • As part of the comprehensive review and reform of the labor law of 1997, government should provide adequate human resources, training and monitoring of labor inspectors. As a general policy, government it should conduct proactive unannounced audits of working conditions.
Migration Recommended Action for the NCCT and Local Authorities • The NCCT should strengthen the capacity of local authorities on safe migration practices, specifically in providing information to community members that are considering migration domestically. Trained local authorities should make sure information is available in settings that reach both men and women. The study revealed that fewer females than males had safe migration training, and that safe migration training was focused on international migration, so ensuring it reaches both men and women is important to prevent domestic trafficking. • Local authorities should encourage information sharing on safe migration practices for domestic migrants. In preventing trafficking in the three sectors, well-informed safe migration practices must be made a priority in the community. It is recommended for workers to receive
62
reliable information before migrating. This could be provided by local authorities or NGOs. Identifying relevant messages is important, as well as critical contacts, such as hotlines, police, health, and social services. Safe migration procedures should be expounded and the best ways to reach males and females with relevant information (if different) identified. Existing commune structures, such as the local committee for children and women, could be an appropriate structure for disseminating safe migration messages. Safe migration training should be incorporated in local plans of action to prevent TIP. • The NCCT should encourage Provincial Committees and local authorities to increase dissemination of reliable and clear information on labor law. Capacity building is needed for local authorities to be equipped with a fundamental understanding of relevant components of the labor law. This will help to ensure that information disseminated includes enhanced knowledge of labor law and reaches local migrant workers, so they better understand their rights. This dissemination could occur through commune councils or other community mechanisms. • The NCCT, specifically through its Prevention Committee should develop and implement guidelines for vetting prospective employers of internal migrants to increase their awareness of credible employers. Employer-related information should be disseminated to districts and communes as well. The latter should proactively make this information available to job seekers in their respective areas • NCCT should exert efforts at all levels of government to update its 2019-2023 National Plan of Action by integrating prioritized recommendations from the 2020 TIP report on Cambodia and making resources available for its implementation.
Employment Recommended Action for Employers Job Induction and Orientation • Employers should provide new employees with a statement about their rights as employees. This statement, to be included in their internal rules should include worker’s rights, entitlements, complaint mechanisms and any other relevant information for workers. Ideally, the statement could be approved by the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training and distributed to all new employees in any setting. The employee should sign they have read and understood this statement, be provided a copy, and another copy kept on file. • As a matter of standard practice, employers should provide written contracts that are clear and understandable and accurately describe working conditions. Employers should provide a draft contract to the employee, provide them time to review it and discuss with a trusted person prior to signing. Employers should provide an explanation about contract terms during the orientation or job induction process. Job induction is significant for workers and helps to establish job expectations and can be an opportunity for skills training. • Employers can provide orientation to new employees on the community. Employers can provide information to newly arriving workers on community resources, housing options, transportation, and information about essential services such as police, health care and other social services. This is an important opportunity to ensure employees are aware of hotlines for gender-based violence, sexual and reproductive health services, trafficking hotlines or resources, and support linkages to the new community to build workers’ support networks.
63
Working Conditions • The employer should ensure that their internal rules include working conditions that are humane and include arrangements to balance working life and the demands of family and life outside work. There should be adequate provisions for just wages, working time and work organization. Working conditions should be non-discriminatory; ensure workers’ safety and health and freedom of movement; guarantee that workers can freely join trade unions or employee associations; and provide protection from all forms of harassment and violence at work. The employer should also provide a clear complaint mechanism that is fair, transparent and responsive to workers’ issues and free of any adverse actions from authorities who may be party to the complaints raised by employees. • The employer should make reasonable accommodation to include people with disabilities in the workforce. The data shows a lack of diversity in the workforce particularly for people with disabilities. Employers should provide reasonable accommodations such as modified work schedules or physical adjustments to the work environment to ensure people with disabilities have access to employment opportunities. Over the long term, the government should, working with employers, CSOs and all stakeholders, institute reforms in the Cambodian labor law to address policy and program gaps for the informal sector in general and specifically the construction sector where work arrangements put workers at greater risk of abuse. Immediate reforms should include minimum wage provisions for the hospitality and tourism sector, construction sector and other sectors; access to the National Social Security Fund; compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health laws; and strengthening of the trade union law. Ultimately, at the heart of employment relationships is the promotion of human rights as a global standard where public and private sector interests can be aligned to create sustainable solutions toward a just and peaceful society for all.
64
Annex 1 References Asia Development Bank. 2013. Gender Equality in the Labor Market in Cambodia. Mandaluyong City, Philippines : s.n., 2013. Better Factories Cambodia. 2018. Towards Gender Equality: Lessons from Factory Compliance Assessments. Geneva : International Labour Organization, 2018. Brody, Carinne, et al. 2019. Childhood conditions and pathways to entertainment work and current practices of female entertainment workers in Cambodia; Baseline findings from the Mobile Link trial. [Online] October 15, 2019. [Cited: February 12, 2020.] https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216578. CARE International. 2015. Situation Analysis Hospitality and Tourism Workers. Phnom Penh : CARE International, 2015. CARE International. 2017. "I know I cannot quit" The Prevalence and Productivity Cost of Sexual Harassment to the Cambodian Garment Industry. s.l. : CARE International, 2017. Consiglio, Alex and Pisey, Hay. 2014. Construction Workers' Lives Hang in the Balance. The Cambodia Daily. November 20, 2014. David, Fiona, Bryant, Katharine and Larsen, Jacqueline Joudo. 2019. Migrants and their Vulnerability to Human Trafficking, Modern Slavery and Forced Labour. Geneva : International Organization for Migration, 2019. ILO. 2017. Cambodia Garment and Footwear Sector Bulletins. Phnom Penh : ILO, 2017. —. 2018. Cambodian Garment Sector and Footwear Bulletin. Phnom Penh : ILO, 2018. —. Dec 2018. Living conditions of garment and footwear sector workers in Cambodia. Phnom Penh : ILO, Dec 2018. International Labour Office. 2010. Developments and Challenges in the hospitality and tourism sector. Geneva : International Labour Organisation , 2010. Janssens, Frederic. 2013. A Man's World. Southeast Asia Globe. September 2, 2013, pp. http://sea- globe.com/female -construction-workers-cambodia. Kaing, Menghun. 2017. Survey on Recruitment Practices in the Garment Industry in Cambodia. Phnom Penh : The Asia Foundation, 2017. Kimchoeun, Pak. 2018. Rural Vulnerability and Migration in Cambodia: Trends, Drivers and Impacts. Phnom Penh : World Food Programme Cambodia Country Office, 2018. Ministry of Planning. 2012. Migration in Cambodia: Report of the Cambodian Rural Urban Migration Project (CRUMP). Cambodia : Ministry of Planning, 2012. National Institute of Statistics. 2014. Cambodia Demographic and Health Survey. Phnom Penh : Ministry of Planning, 2014. —. 2017. Cambodia Socio-Economic Survey. Phnom Penh : Ministry of Planning, 2017. OECD. 2019. Cambodia: Structural Policy Country Notes. Phnom Penh : OECD, 2019. Open Institute. 2016. Internal Migration for Low-skilled or Unskilled Work in Cambodia: Preliminary. Phnom Penh : Open Institute, 2016. —. 2016. USAID Counter Trafficking in Persons Program Research Report - Internal Migration for Low Skilled or Unskilled Work in Cambodia; Preliminaary Qualitive Results. [Online] 2016. http://www.open.org.kh/.
65
Sothear, Kang and Styllis, George. 2014. Lack of Construction Regulation a Concern. The Cambodia Daily. October 2, 2014. Teung Seila. 2019. Ensuring NSSF for Cambodia's Construction Workers. Phnom Penh : Phnom Penh Post, 2019. UN Women. 2019. Safe and Fair: Realizing women migrant workers' rights and opportunities in the ASEAN region. Policy Brief: Coordinated Quality Services for Ending Violence Against Women Migrant Workers. 2019. Vireak, Thou. 2019. More than 30 footwear, travel goods factories open in first half. Phnom Penh Post. July 24, 2019. World Bank. 2018. Cambodia Economic Update: Recent Economic Development and Outlook. Phnom Penh : World Bank, 2018. World Food Programme. 2019. Vulnerability and Migration in Cambodia. Phnom Penh : World Food Programme, 2019.
66
Annex 2 Data Collection Toolkit Survey for Workers Instructions: Purpose of Survey: the survey is to understand worker’s experiences in recruitment and migrating to work. Parameters to participate: Time: It should take about 30 minutes to complete. The data will be Male or Female used to help us understand how to improve the recruitment and Age 18-45 migration processes for people going to work. Your answers will be Migrated from another part of Cambodia kept confidential – we will only summarize the answers – not give to work here in the last 5 years anyone’s name. Your participation is voluntary and if at any time you don’t want to answer a question, it is ok. You can also stop at any time. Work in factory, construction, hospitality/tourism industries Is it ok to start?
□ Yes □ No if no stop the survey Interviewer: DEMOGRAPHICS The next questions are a little bit about you and your background 1. Sex □ Female □ Male □ Third Gender 2. What is your age? □ below 18 □ 19-20 □ 21-25 □ 26-30 □ 31-35 □ 35-40 □ 41-45
3. What is your marital status? □ Single □ Married □ Living with partner □ Widowed □ Divorced/separated 4. What is your ethnic group? □ Khmer □ Cham write in the name of the ethnic group such □ Phunong as Khmer, Cham, Jarai, Pnong etc.) □ Jarai □ Vietnamese □ Kouy □ Other, specify
67
5. Did you attend school? □ Yes □ No If yes, what is the highest grade you completed? Enter year _____
DISABILITY The next questions ask about difficulties you may have doing certain activities 6. Do you have difficulty seeing, □ No – no difficulty even if wearing glasses? □ Yes- some difficulty □ Yes – a lot of difficulty □ Cannot do at all 7. Do you have difficulty hearing, □ No – no difficulty even if using a hearing aid? □ Yes- some difficulty □ Yes – a lot of difficulty □ Cannot do at all 8. Do you have difficulty walking □ No – no difficulty or climbing steps? □ Yes- some difficulty □ Yes – a lot of difficulty □ Cannot do at all 9. Do you have difficulty □ No – no difficulty remembering or concentrating? □ Yes- some difficulty □ Yes – a lot of difficulty □ Cannot do at all 10. Do you have difficulty with self- □ No – no difficulty care such as washing all over or □ Yes- some difficulty dressing? □ Yes – a lot of difficulty □ Cannot do at all 11. Using your usual language, do □ No – no difficulty you have difficulty □ Yes- some difficulty communicating or being understood? □ Yes – a lot of difficulty □ Cannot do at all RESIDENCE AND MIGRATION The first questions are about where you live or have lived
12. What province are you living in now? 13. How long have you lived in this □ Less than 1 year province? □ 1-2 years □ 3-5 years
68
□ My work is seasonal, I go back to another province when I am not working here 14. What is your home province? Enter name of province 15. What was your motivation for □ For a job migrating from your home □ For education province? □ For marriage
□ Following a family member
□ Conflict within the household Multiple response permitted □ A crisis such as lost land, lost home, natural disaster □ Other: Please list other: ______16. Is this the first time you have □ Yes migrated for work? □ No If no, how many times have you migrated before this time? ____ Enter number of times 17. Did you receive any training on □ Yes □ No safe migration prior to taking on If yes, who did you receive the training from? your current job?
□ Local authorities □ Migration Resource Center □ An NGO □ Other, please describe:
If yes, what did you learn from the training? 18. Did you face any challenges □ Yes □ No when you were migrating? Do not read list but check all that apply (multiple answers permitted) □ Financial □ Lack of information □ Housing □ Care of children/elderly members of the household □ Transportation □ Other, please describe:
WORK HISTORY The next questions we will ask about your work that you have now 19. What type of job are you doing □ Factory now? If checked what type of factory?
69
□ Footwear □ Apparel □ Bags and Luggage (CAN SELECT ONLY ONE CATEGORY) □ Hospitality and/or tourism If checked, what type of hospitality or tourism? □ Hotel □ Restaurant □ Other______
□ Construction
20. How long have you been ______Years ______Months working at this job? 21. Did you have a verbal or written □ No Commitment commitment for this job before □ Verbal Commitment you migrated? □ Written Commitment
22. What type of work tasks do you If Manufacturing do at this job? □ Production in a factory (Sewing, etc.) □ Line manager □ Other (describe) □ Quality control, □ Productivity If construction □ Laborer in construction □ Supervisor □ Other (describe)
If Hospitality and Tourism □ Serving food or alcohol □ office work in hotel □ Tour guide □ Other (describe) ______23. Have you received any technical □ Yes □ No training or induction orientation for this job? If yes, what type of training did you receive? □ Short course □ Technical and vocational training (certificate or degree) □ On the job training □ Other, please describe: ______
70
24. Is this job seasonal? □ Yes □ No
If yes, what other type of work do you do when you are not doing this work? Do you only do this job for part of the year? □ None □ Agriculture □ Small business □ Manufacturing □ Hospitality and Tourism □ Construction □ Other 25. Have you worked other jobs in □ Yes □ No this same industry? If yes, how long have you worked in this industry total (all jobs combined in this industry) ______(Enter number of years) 26. Is it common in this industry for □ Yes □ No people to subcontract and do work at home or elsewhere? If yes, please describe who does the subcontracting, where subcontracting is done; payment arrangements. Name at least one good experience that you know about sub-contracting and one challenge that you see with sub-contracting. - ______
27. Before you did this type of work a. □ No other work before what type of work did you do? b. □ Agriculture c. □ Factory d. □ Hospitality and tourism e. □ Construction f. □ Other, please describe: RECRUITMENT These questions are about how you were recruited or learned about this job opportunity. 28. How did you learn about this job □ Advertisement about the job opportunity? □ Family member told me about the job □ Friend told me about the job □ Went to the job site and asked □ A community member told me about the job □ A recruitment agency told me about the job □ Other please describe:
71
29. Did you have to pay any fees to □ Yes □ No a recruitment agency or broker If yes, how much and what were the fees for? for this job?
30. Was a written contract □ Yes □ No provided to you? If no skip to 34 31. Did you understand all the □ Yes □ No terms of the contract? If no, please describe what you didn’t understand: 32. Has the terms of the contract □ Yes □ No been kept by the employer? (If no skip to 34) 33. If the terms of the contract □ Pay were not kept, which terms □ Hours were not kept? □ Leave (vacation) □ Holidays □ Maternity Leave □ Insurance □ Other Benefits 34. Did you receive a promise of a □ Yes □ No salary (pay) amount? If yes, was this salary amount paid to you as expected? □ Yes □ No
35. Did you receive a promise about □ Yes □ No expenses the employer would cover such as moving, training, housing or other to take the If yes, were the expenses promised paid for by the employer? job? □ Yes □ No 36. What kind of legal documents □ ID Card did you have when you □ Birth Certificate migrated? □ Passport
□ Cambodian Migrant Worker Card Multiple answers permitted □ Working Visa □ Work Permit □ Other
72
WORKER’S PERCEPTION ABOUT These next questions are a bit sensitive. If any question makes you RECRUITMENT AND HIRING PROCESS, feel uncomfortable, it is ok not to answer. We want to ask so we AND AREAS OF RISK for trafficking or understand better the situation including any challenges during your exploitation migration and recruitment experience. These questions are about how you felt about the recruitment and hiring process. 37. Did you have all the information □ Yes □ No □ No answer you needed for making a decision about the job? If no, please describe: 38. What went well about the hiring □ Clear information provided about the job opportunity process? □ Information was timely □ Help provided in preparing documents needed by employer □ Other, please describe: ______
39. Did you feel pressured or □ Yes □ No □ No answer forced to take the job? If yes, please describe: 40. Were your documents (id card, □ Yes □ No □ No answer passport, etc.) kept by your employer at any time and you could not access them? If yes, please describe: 41. Did you face any challenges □ Yes □ No □ No answer during any stage of the recruitment and hiring process? If yes, please describe: 42. Was there information that you □ Yes □ No □ No answer wish you had been provided during the recruitment process? If yes, please describe: 43. Did you receive social support □ Yes □ No □ No answer to assist with any of your challenges? If yes, please describe: 44. Did you receive any legal □ Yes □ No □ No answer support for any of your challenges? If yes, please describe:
WORKING CONDITIONS These questions are about the working conditions at your current job. We want to ask a group of questions and you can respond with 1-4 below – 1 is strongly agree, 2 is agree, 3 undecided, 4 disagree, 5 strongly disagree, 1 2 3 4 5
73
Strongly Agree Undecided DisAgree Strongly Disagree Agree 1. The working conditions are what I expected 2. I receive the pay that was promised to me by my employer on time 3. I am not required to work more than 40 hours a week unless I agree 4. I am allowed to join a trade union freely. 5. If I work more than 40 hours a week, I get paid for it 6. I get to take days off as promised 7. The work facility (building, equipment, transportation) is safe 8. I am safe from sexual harassment at my job 9. I can freely come and go at my job My employer looks out for the workers 10. If I have a problem at work, I can talk to my supervisor or Human Resources person for help 11. Comments
That is all of the questions I have. Do you have any questions for me? Thank you for your time
Note: Remember if the person discloses abuse, or exploitation, make sure you provide them information for referral or make a referral (as discussed in training)
74
Cambodia Workers’ Journey FGD for Community and Family Members of Migrant Workers
Guidance – The FGD should ideally between 4 and 8 participants. Participants can be community members or family members in communities with high rates of outmigration. We will be talking about recruitment of workers and migration of people in their community to work in the hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction sectors.
Be sure to find a quiet and private place to meet. Note: If a person reports an experience of violence or exploitation please share referral resources with them (as discussed in training)
Introduction: My name is ______. Thank you for joining our group today. I am here on behalf of Winrock International to talk with you about workers experience in migrating for work. We will ask about how they found out about jobs, how they made the decision to migrate to work and any risks or challenges they faced. We will use the responses to help Winrock to provide guidance to employers, recruitment agencies, and other relevant stakeholders on good practices in recruitment and hiring of workers.
Your participation in this group is voluntary and at any time if you do not want to answer a question or you want to stop participating it is ok to leave. We will not record your names or share them with anyone. Any information you provide will be aggregated, and no comments will be tied to a person.
Our discussion should take about 1 hour. I have some specific topics to discuss. I will bring up the topic and I would like for everyone to share their ideas. It does not need to be formal or in any particular order. But we would like for everyone to be able to talk, so sometimes I might have to share with you it is time to move to the next person or topic. My job is to make sure we can talk about all topics in the time!
If it is ok, we would like to quote some of the things you tell us in our report. However, even though we might quote some of your comments, we will not use your names. Is this ok? Do you have any questions? If no questions, start the discussions
75
1. INTRODUCTION: Ask the group to introduce themselves – tell if they have a family member or friend(s) that have migrated to work in the hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction sectors
2. MIGRATION EXPERIENCE I want to ask now about people that migrate to work in Phnom Penh or other areas in Cambodia – we want to know about their experiences migrating to work in the hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction sectors
Deciding to migrate for work a. What are the common reasons that people in your community migrate to work? Where do they commonly go to work? b. Do people discuss with family members about job they want to get or that they want to migrate? c. Do people inform the local authorities when they migrate for work in another province? d. Are there different types of work people commonly go to do? (hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction)? What kinds of jobs do they get in those sectors? e. Do people in the community do subcontracting – for example are there any people that work at home in the community for a factory doing work such as trimming, sewing or cutting? (off site from the factory). What are the benefits and challenges associated with sub-contracting work in hospitality/tourism, manufacturing and construction? How do people learn about opportunities for work? Do they pay anything to any of these groups to help them get the jobs outside of your community? (family, friends, posters, internet, recruiter, broker)? f. Any differences for men and women, or other groups (people with disabilities, LGBT)? g. How do you feel about people migrating to work outside of your community? Do think this should be encouraged? Why or why not?
3. HIRING EXPERIENCE Now I want to ask a bit about how people get the jobs – what do they have to do to get them. a. What was the process they went through to get the job? (prepare cv, apply, interview, training,) What type of services do people seeking jobs have to pay for? b. Do the employers provide any help or support to help the workers get ready for the job or move (training, moving expenses)? c. What works well and what doesn’t work well for the hiring of workers? Is it different for different sectors? (hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction)? d. Any differences for men and women, or other groups (people with disabilities, LGBT)?
76
e. If you had to change anything (improve) in the present hiring experience of members of your family/community, what would that be and why?
How well does it work? – recruitment and migrating for jobs? f. What works well in the recruitment process? g. What are the challenges that people in the community face during the process for getting the job? (recruitment, moving (traveling to the job, starting the job)? h. How do people manage these challenges from stage of recruitment to another? i. Who provides help and support?
4. WORK EXPERIENCE Now we want to ask about the work experience of your friends, community members and family – we know you might not know everything but just if you know or have heard. a. Do they commonly get employment contracts for the jobs they get? Is this different for different sectors? (hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction) b. Do you hear if the conditions of the contract are kept? Do people have challenges understanding the contracts? c. Are there any challenges with working conditions? (pay, hours, benefits, days off, keeping documents, leave, public holidays, working conditions safe)? Are your family members/community members able to get help to solve their work-related challenges? Please explain your answer/s. d. Are jobs commonly seasonal? If so, what do people do in the off-season? Do they move back and forth between locations (for example home province, and where the work is such as Phnom Penh). e. Any differences for men and women, or other groups (people with disabilities, LGBT)? 5. What information would be helpful to tell employers and government to improve the practice of recruitment and hiring of workers? How do you think can employers help ensure a more productive and safe work environment for workers in the sectors we talked about? a. Any recommendations or suggestion?
Thank the participants. Remember also to make referrals if needed or appropriate
77
Cambodia Workers’ Journey Interview Guide for Key Informants Local authorities: commune chiefs)
Explain the research: Purpose is to understand the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment to be able to provide recommendations to employers about good practices to prevent risks for trafficking and exploitation. Our focus is on migrant workers – migrating internally in Cambodia mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors.
1. Migration Experience a) What are the reasons that people migrate for work in your community (village, commune, district)? a. Let them say and if they don’t mention ask about some factors such as poverty, escape violence, look for work, get a job, no land, etc. b) Where are people commonly migrating to? (location, type of job) c) When people are migrating are there risks or challenges, they face during migration? Is it different for different groups of people - such men or women, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities, LGBT etc.? d) Do people in the community commonly have pre-migration training? (by who, is it helpful?) e) How would you describe safe migration? Do you see local migration growing within Cambodia? What factors are promoting or hindering this phenomenon? f) What is the role of your (NGO, government office) in safe migration? 2. Recruitment Process for Work in Sectors I want to ask about people migrating for work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors and how they find out about get those jobs. a) How do people in the community learn about these jobs? b) Is it common for recruiters or brokers to recruit people in the community for work? How does that happen? Do the recruiters work closely with govt? What are benefits and challenges for recruiters or brokers? c) When workers learn about the job, are there any steps they have to take to get it? For example, do they have to take training, pay fees, etc.? d) Did they often get any help for the employer to move for the job? e) What are the differences you see in recruitment process for manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? f) What are the risks for exploitation or trafficking for people being recruited for work? How can these risks be reduced? g) What is your role in preventing exploitation and trafficking? (in your job, if any) 3. Work and experiences once they are working I want to ask about people people’s experiences once they have the work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – what are their good and difficult experiences. a) For people (in your community or that you work with/you know), do they get contracts for work? Are these available only in some sectors? b) Is the work seasonal or long term? How does that work?
78
c) Do people in the community work as subcontractors – say for a factory? Where does sub- contracting usually take place and how does this work? What risks do subcontract arrangements pose for workers? d) Are work contract conditions usually met once they have the job? For example, do people get the pay promised, work hours promised, public holiday promised, nighttime shift promised, overtime work promised, benefits, etc.? e) Do you think that the workers that get contracts understand well about the contract? Do they get any technical training or job induction training? f) Are they allowed to be member of any trade union? Do you about any workers getting dismissed because they are member of trade union? g) Do you hear about people’s experience of exploitation? For example, long work hours, can’t leave the workplace, etc.? h) What is hard about the jobs? Are you aware of any grievance mechanisms for workers in the workplace? What are support networks for workers who experience difficult work conditions in their workplaces? Are there any legal remedies available to workers and how effective are these? i) What do you think the most common risks for exploitation or trafficking for the different types of work? Is it different for men or women (or other groups, LGBT, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities etc.) j) What solutions do you propose to reduce these risks? 4. What information would improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? a) Do you have any advice for employers and government on better (safer) ways to recruit workers for migrant labor? b) Any policy priorities to address this? c) Any information workers and their communities should have that would help them prevent problems (exploitation, trafficking, etc.)? d) Other
Anything else you think is important for us to know?
Thank the interviewee.
79
Cambodia Workers’ Journey Interview Guide for Key Informants (Better Factories)
Explain the research: Purpose is to understand the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment to be able to provide recommendations to employers about good practices to prevent risks for trafficking and exploitation. Our focus is on migrant workers – migrating internally in Cambodia in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors.
1. Migration Experience g) What are the reasons that people migrate for work in factories? a. Let them say and if they don’t mention ask about some factors such as poverty, escape violence, look for work, get a job, no land, etc. h) Where are people commonly migrating to? (location, type of job, etc.) i) Do you see migration growing within Cambodia? Have the migration patterns changed? Why? Are there new areas of concentration of factories for example, or new types of work available? j) When people are migrating are there risks or challenges, they face during migration? Is it different for different groups of people - such men or women, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities, LGBT etc.? k) Are you aware if people usually have pre-migration training? (by who, is it helpful?) l) What is the role of Better Factories in safe migration? 2. Recruitment Process for Work in Sectors I want to ask about people migrating for work – mostly and how they find out about get those jobs. h) How do people in the community learn about jobs in manufacturing (factories)? i) Is it common for recruiters or brokers to recruit people in the community for work? How does that happen? Do the recruiters work closely with govt? What are benefits and challenges for recruiters or brokers? j) When workers learn about the job, are there any steps they have to take to get it? For example, do they have to take training, pay fees, etc.? k) Did they often get any help for the employer to move for the job? l) What are the differences you are aware of in recruitment process for manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? m) What are the risks for exploitation or trafficking for people being recruited for work? How can these risks be reduced? n) What is the role of Better Factories in preventing exploitation and trafficking? What are your priorities? 3. Work and experiences once they are working I want to ask about people people’s experiences once they have the work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – what are their good and difficult experiences. k) For people in manufacturing do they get contracts for work? Are these available only in some jobs? l) Is the work seasonal or long term? How does that work?
80
m) Do people in the community work as sub-contractors – say for a factory? Where does sub- contracting usually take place? How does this work? What risks do sub-contracting arrangements pose for workers? n) Are contract conditions usually met once the worker has the job? For example, do people get the pay promised, work hours promised, public holiday promised, nighttime shift promised, overtime work promised, benefits, etc.? o) Do you think people that get contracts for their work understand well about the contract conditions? p) Do they get any technical training or job induction training? q) Are workers allowed to be member of a trade union? Do you know of any workers have been dismissed because they are member of trade union? r) Do you hear about people’s experience of exploitation? For example, long work hours, can’t leave the workplace, etc.? What is hard about the jobs in factories? s) Are you aware of any grievance mechanisms for workers in the workplace? What are support networks for workers who experience difficult work conditions in their workplaces? Are there any legal remedies available to workers and how effective are these? t) From your current assessment of factories involved with the export market, what stand out as the most common risks for exploitation or trafficking for the different types of work? u) What solutions do you propose to reduce these risks? What best practices have you seen among the garment, footwear and travel goods factories in terms of compliance with international labor regulations and the Cambodian labor law? 4. What information would improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? e) What is your advice for employers and government on better ways to recruit workers for migrant labor? f) Any policy priorities to address this? g) Any information workers and their communities should have that would help them prevent problems (exploitation, trafficking, etc.)? h) Other
Anything else you think is important for us to know?
Thank the interviewee.
81
Cambodia Workers’ Journey Interview Guide for Key Informants (HR Managers - Factories)
Explain the research: Purpose is to understand the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment to be able to provide recommendations to employers about good practices to prevent risks for trafficking and exploitation. Our focus is on migrant workers – migrating internally in Cambodia in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors.
1. Migration Experience m) What are the reasons that people migrate for work in factories? a. Let them say and if they don’t mention ask about some factors such as poverty, escape violence, look for work, get a job, no land, etc. n) Where are people commonly migrating to? (location, type of job) – o) Do you see migration growing within Cambodia? Have the migration patterns changed? Why? Are people staying long term? Do they migrate seasonally? p) When people are migrating are there risks or challenges, they face during migration? Is it different for different groups of people - such men or women, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities, LGBT etc.? q) Are you aware if people usually have pre-migration training? (by who, is it helpful?) r) What is the role of HR Managers (factories) in safe migration? 2. Recruitment Process for Work in Sectors I want to ask about people migrating for work – mostly and how they find out about get those jobs. o) How do people in the community learn about jobs in manufacturing (factories)? p) When you want new workers how do you find them? Do you use job-seeking platforms or the NEA? What are the processes at your factory? q) Is it common for recruiters or brokers to recruit people in the community for work? How does that happen? Do the recruiters work closely with govt? What are benefits and challenges for recruiters or brokers? r) When workers learn about the job, are there any steps they have to take to get it? For example, do they have to take training, pay fees, etc.? s) Did they often get any help for the employer to move for the job? t) What are the differences you are aware of in recruitment process for manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? u) What are the risks for exploitation or trafficking for people being recruited for work? How can these risks be reduced? v) What is the role of your factory/institution in ensuring that you get the right people for jobs you need and that the job seekers are protected from any form of abuse during the hiring process? 3. Work and experiences once they are working I want to ask about people people’s experiences once they have the work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – what are their good and difficult experiences.
82
v) For people in manufacturing do they get contracts for work? Are these available only in some jobs? w) Is the work seasonal or long term? How does that work? x) Do people in the community work as subcontractors – for factories? Where does sub- contracting usually take place? How does this work? What risks do sub-contracting arrangements pose for workers? Do you have any role in any sub-contracting arrangement? Please desribe this role, if any. y) Do the workers that have contracts understand well about the contract conditions? Do they get any technical training or job induction training? z) Are the workers members of a trade union? aa) What are the challenges that workers bring up about working conditions or that you hear about? What is hard about the jobs for the workers? bb) What are the grievance mechanisms for workers in the workplace? What are support networks for workers who experience difficult work conditions in their workplaces? Are there any legal remedies available to workers and how effective are these? cc) What do you think the most common risks for exploitation or trafficking for the people coming to work in factories? Other sectors? What solutions do you propose to reduce these risks? 4. What information would improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? i) What is your advice for employers and government on better ways to recruit workers that are migrating? j) Any policy priorities to address this? k) Any information workers and their communities should have that would help them prevent problems (exploitation, trafficking, etc.)? l) Other
Anything else you think is important for us to know?
Thank the interviewee.
83
Cambodia Workers’ Journey Interview Guide for Key Informants NEA
Explain the research: Purpose is to understand the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment to be able to provide recommendations to employers about good practices to prevent risks for trafficking and exploitation. Our focus is on migrant workers – migrating internally in Cambodia mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors.
1. Migration – we want to ask about migration within Cambodia – into the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors.
I know that NEA does not work specifically on migration, but you must know a lot about it because of your work. We know that many people migrate to work in these sectors manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors. s) Where are common migration patterns you know about for different types of work? a. manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – similarities and differences? t) Do people in the community commonly have pre-migration training before they migrate? (by who? is it helpful?) dd) When people are migrating what are the risks or challenges for exploitation or trafficking, that they face for the different types of work (manufacturing, hospitality tourism, and construction? u) Is it different for different groups of people - such men or women, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities, LGBT etc.? v) Does the NEA do any work around migration? Do you normally get information on local migration in your province? What is the source of this information? w) Of the job-seekers who ask for job assistance from NEA, what types of work are usually applying for? x) In the job fairs that you have organized in the past two years, what jobs had high demand for low-skilled and unskilled work? 2. Recruitment Process for Work in Sectors in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors and how they find out about get those jobs. w) How do people in the community learn about these jobs in these sectors (manufacturing, hospitality and tourism and construction)? x) On an average month, how many requests for job information in the three sectors did you receive in your job centers or through your Website/Facebook account? y) Is it common for recruiters or brokers to recruit people in the community for work? How does that happen? (strengths and weaknesses). Do you have any observation about recruitment done for these three sectors through private recruitment agencies? Please explain your answer. z) How does the NEA support or engage in recruitment processes? Any policy and program priorities related to recruitment? What challenges do you face in promoting your work related to recruitment in the five sectors? aa) When they learn about a job, what do they have to do get it? What % of job seekers normally follow up with you to complete the steps to get a job through NEA? 84
bb) Did they often get any help for the employer to move for the job? How do you facilitate job-seeker and employer interaction to get the job applied for? cc) What are the differences you see in recruitment process for manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? 3. Experiences once they are working I want to ask about people people’s experiences once they have the work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – what are their good and difficult experiences. ee) Is it common for people to have employment contracts for the jobs? Do they understand well the contract conditions when they have a contract? Are contract conditions usually met by the employer? ff) Do you hear about people’s experience of exploitation at work? For example, long work hours, can’t leave the workplace, etc.? Does NEA – get involved in complaints? If, so how are these experiences reported to you? Is there a grievance mechanism in place in your province for workers to report problems related to workplace abuse? 4. What information would be helpful for employers to improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? m) Do you have any advice for employers on better ways to recruit workers? n) Any information workers should have that would help them prevent problems (exploitation, trafficking, etc.)? How should this information be communicated to job- seekers who are interested to migrate? o) Do you have specific policy and program recommendations to the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training to address worker recruitment, hiring, promotion of safe, productive and secure work environment in the five sectors? Please elaborate. p) Other
Anything else you think is important for us to know?
Thank the interviewee.
85
Cambodia Workers’ Journey Interview Guide for Key Informants (DOLVT) Explain the research: Purpose is to understand the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment to be able to provide recommendations to employers about good practices to prevent risks for trafficking and exploitation. Our focus is on migrant workers – migrating internally in Cambodia mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors.
1. Migration – we want to ask about migration within Cambodia – into the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors. Where are people commonly migrating to from this province? What kind of work? (location, type of job)? y) Do people in the community commonly have pre-migration training? (by who? is it helpful?) gg) When people are migrating what are the risks or challenges for exploitation or trafficking, that they face for the different types of work (manufacturing, hospitality tourism, and construction? z) Is it different for different groups of people - such men or women, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities, LGBT etc.? aa) What are the DOLVT priorities or actions around migration? Do you normally get information on local migration in your province? What is the source of this information? 2. Recruitment Process for Work in Sectors in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors and how they find out about get those jobs. dd) How do people in the community learn about these jobs in these sectors? ee) Is it common for recruiters or brokers to recruit people in the community for work? How does that happen? (strengths and weaknesses) ff) When they learn about a job, what do they have to do get it? gg) Did they often get any help for the employer to move for the job? hh) What are the differences you see in recruitment process for manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? ii) How does the DOLVT support or engage in recruitment processes? Any policy and program priorities related to recruitment. 3. Experiences once they are working I want to ask about people people’s experiences once they have the work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – what are their good and difficult experiences. hh) Is it common for people to have employment contracts for their jobs? Do they understand well the contracts when they do have them? Are contract conditions usually met by the employers? ii) Do you hear about people’s experience of exploitation at work? For example, long work hours, can’t leave the workplace, etc.? How are these experiences reported to you? Is there a grievance mechanism in place in your province for workers to report problems related to workplace abuse? jj) How does the DOLVT support workers that face these kinds of challenges such as labor dispute, being dismissed because they are member of trade union, etc. Please describe the process from receipt of complaint to action to resolve the workers’ complaints. kk) Please describe how your inspectorate system helps address workplace abuse of workers in manufacturing, construction, and hospitality sectors. Do you have sufficient legal and
86
administrative sanctions to ensure a safe, productive and protective environment for workers in the five sectors? Please explain your answer. 4. What information would be helpful for employers to improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? q) Do you have any advice for employers on better ways to recruit? r) Any information workers should have that would help them prevent problems (exploitation, trafficking, etc.)? How should this information be communicated to job- seekers who are interested to migrate? s) Do you have specific policy and program recommendations to the Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training to address worker recruitment, hiring, promotion of safe, productive and secure work environment in the five sectors? Please elaborate. t) Other
Anything else you think is important for us to know? Thank the interviewee.
87
Cambodia Workers’ Journey Interview Guide for Key Informants (Trade Unions)
Explain the research: Purpose is to understand the workers’ journey from recruitment to employment to be able to provide recommendations to employers about good practices to prevent risks for trafficking and exploitation. Our focus is on migrant workers – migrating internally in Cambodia mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors. We want to ask about workers in your sector (manufacturing, or construction).
1. Migration Experience bb) What are the reasons that people migrate for work in manufacturing, hospitality and construction sectors? a. Let them say and if they don’t mention ask about some factors such as poverty, escape violence, look for work, get a job, no land, etc. cc) Where are people commonly migrating to? (location, type of job within the sector) dd) When people are migrating are there risks or challenges, they face during migration? Is it different for different groups of people - such men or women, people with disabilities, ethnic minorities, LGBT etc.? ee) Do people in the community commonly have pre-migration training? (by whom, is it helpful?) ff) How would you describe safe migration? Do you see local migration growing within Cambodia? What factors are promoting or hindering this phenomenon? gg) What is the role of the trade union in promoting safe migration? 2. Recruitment Process for Work in Sectors I want to ask about people migrating for work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors and how they find out about get those jobs. jj) How do people in the community learn about jobs in the three sectors: manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? kk) Is it common for recruiters or brokers to recruit people in the community for work? How does that happen? Do the recruiters work closely with govt? What are benefits and challenges for recruiters or brokers? ll) Can you cite any information you have or any studies you know about pegarding people’s experiences in recruitment using private agencies, for any of the sectors: manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? mm) When workers learn about the job, are there any steps they have to take to get it? For example, do they have to take training, pay fees, etc.? nn) Did they often get any help from the employer to move for the job? oo) What are the differences you see in recruitment process for manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors? pp) What are the risks for exploitation or trafficking for people being recruited for work? How can these risks be reduced? qq) What is your role in preventing exploitation and trafficking? 3. Work and experiences once they are working
88
I want to ask about people people’s experiences once they have the work – mostly in the manufacturing, hospitality and tourism, and construction sectors – what are their good and difficult experiences. ll) Is it common for workers to contracts for work? Are these available only in some sectors? Which ones? mm) Is the work seasonal or long term? How does that work? nn) Do people in the community work as subcontractors – say for a factory? Where does sub- contracting usually take place? How does this work? What risks do sub-contracting arrangements pose for workers? oo) Are contract conditions usually met once they have the job? For example, do people get the pay promised, work hours promised, public holiday promised, nighttime shift promised, overtime work promised, benefits, etc.? pp) Do the workers that have contracts understand well about contract conditions? Do they get any technical training or job induction training? qq) Are workers allowed to be member of a trade union? Do you hear about any workers being dismissed because they are member of trade union? What good and/or challenging experiences did you have organizing a trade union for workers in construction, hospitality and/or manufacturing sectors? rr) Do you hear about people’s experience of exploitation? For example, long work hours, can’t leave the workplace, etc.? What is hard about the jobs? Are you aware of any grievance mechanisms for workers in the workplace? What are support networks for workers who experience difficult work conditions in their workplaces? Are there any legal remedies available to workers and how effective are these? ss) What do you think the most common risks for exploitation or trafficking for the different types of work? What solutions do you propose to reduce these risks? 4. What information would improve the practice of recruitment of workers and reduce risks for exploitation and trafficking? u) Do you have any advice for employers and government on better ways to recruit workers for migrant labor? v) Any policy priorities to address this? w) Any information workers and their communities should have that would help them prevent problems (exploitation, trafficking, etc.)? x) Other
Anything else you think is important for us to know?
Thank the interviewee.
89
Cambodia Workers’ Journey FGD for Workers Interview Guide for Workers
Guidance – The FGD should ideally between 4 and 8 participants. Participants should be grouped by job sector (hospitality/tourism, manufacturing, construction). Age range should be between 18 and 45 years of age and have migrated to work in province away from their home province. Be sure to find a quiet and private place to meet. Note: If a person reports an experience of violence or exploitation please share referral resources with them (as discussed in training). Separate by sex (all male, all female)
Introduction: My name is ______. Thank you for joining our group today. I am here on behalf of Winrock International to talk with you about workers experience in migrating for work. We will ask about how you found out about jobs, how you made the decision to migrate to work and any risks or challenges you faced. We will use the responses to help Winrock to provide guidance to employers and recruitment agencies on good practices in recruitment of workers. Your participation in this group is voluntary and at any time if you do not want to answer a question or you want to stop participating it is ok to leave. We will not record your names or share them with anyone. Any information you provide will be aggregated, and no comments will be tied to a person. Our discussion should take about 1 hour. I have some specific topics to discuss. I will bring up the topic and I would like for everyone to share their ideas. It does not need to be formal or in any particular order. But we would like for everyone to be able to talk, so sometimes I might have to share with you it is time to move to the next person or topic. My job is to make sure we can talk about all topics in the time! If it is ok, we would like to quote some of the things you tell us in our report. However, even though we might quote some of your comments, we will not use your names. Is this ok? Do you have any questions? If no questions, start the discussions
90
Opening Question: What kind of work do you do?
Topic 1: Recruitment
1. How did people learn about the job you have? (friends, family, posters, internet, recruiter). Why did you use this method? (strengths, weaknesses, challenges) 2. Do people ever use employment services such as Bong Thom, National Employment Agency or Bong Pheak? a. Why or why not? (try to understand the barriers to using these services) 3. Do people ever use brokers or recruitment agencies? Why or why not? 4. Once you learned about the job what did you have to do to get it? a. Did you have to fill out an application, pay any fees for services (formal or informal), interview, etc. If you paid fees who did you pay? 5. What information would have been helpful to you when you were trying to get the job? a. What would be the best way for you to receive the information? b. Did the employer help? How? What help would you have like to ha Topic 2 Migration Experience 6. Many people told us that when they migrated for work that they experienced challenges during their migration time – some were financial, others were housing, loneliness, or other challenges. Can you tell us about the challenges – a. What were the challenges during the migration time? b. What about challenges when you arrived at the location? c. How did you manage the challenges? 7. What would have been helpful to have known before you migrated? 8. What would be helpful when you arrive at the place you migrate to? 9. What kind of help would make the migration experience safer and easier to manage the challenges? 10. Did you join any pre migration training in your home province before deciding to migrate? Why or why not? Do you know any place to receive pre-migration in your home province? Topic 3 Work Experience 11. Now that you have the job, what has been your experiences? (2RQ; 4RQ) a. What do you like about the job? b. Are there any challenges with working conditions? (pay, benefits, time off, safety, other) c. Did you get a contract for the job you have? Is it common for people to have contracts? d. Have the conditions of the contract been kept? If not which ones were not kept? 12. When you need help, where do you go for help? 13. I want to ask about documents – some people told us that the employer keeps documents sometimes. We want to understand this process. a. First what kind of documents do you need to work? b. Did the employer ever keep your documents (and you could not get them)? c. Do they take them for other purposes? Registration for example. 14. How is it perceived to be a member of a trade union? 91
15. Any recommendations or suggestion for a. How to make finding a job easier? b. How to make migration easier? c. How to make work experience better? Topic 4: Current issues 16. What kind of impact has the Covid 19 coronovirus had on the factory? a. slowing down of operations, downsizing of staff, partial or full shutdown of the factory. 17. Wat are your plans in case there is slowdown of operations or total loss of their job in the manufacturing sector?
Anything else you think it is important for us to know? Thank the group
92
Annex 3 Validation Exercise Cambodia Worker’s Journey Findings Validation Questions As you are reviewing the study, please consider the following – and make comments as you have questions or additional information to add. 1. Overall, do the findings of the survey and interviews compare to your understanding of the situation of migrant workers in Cambodia? If not, please add any information. 2. Recruitment Practices: The most common recruitment practices are through word of mouth from friend and family. These are ok sources of information, but leave gaps in information and risks for exploitation for workers. a. What are ways to improve recruitment practices to ensure workers are able to get the information they need about working conditions, pay, time off, etc.? b. What are ways to encourage workers to use more formal systems such as the NEA or Bong Pheak to learn about jobs? c. What information would be helpful for employers to know to help reduce the risks for exploitation and trafficking? 3. Migration Experience: Some workers report challenges when they are migrating for work. This is commonly related to financial problems, lack of information, or challenges settling into a new location (loneliness, etc.). a. Are there other challenges you see that workers face when they migrate? b. What are ways that we can support migrant workers better to make the move easier and safer for them? c. How can we reduce their risk for exploitation and trafficking when they are migrating? 4. Working Conditions: Most workers reported their working conditions were as expected, but they still want more information. The workers with the most difficult conditions were construction workers, but all expressed some concerns. a. What are recommendations to improve workers access to information about their rights as employees? b. What kind of orientation or induction is important for workers when they start work? What kind of information do they need to have? c. What are ways to ensure employers provide good work conditions? d. What are the best ways for workers to register complaints when they experience exploitation? 5. Any comments, to help make the study findings more accurate based on your experience?
93