DOCSLIB.ORG

Strategic Mid-Term Evaluation of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey 2016-2019/2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Strategic Mid-Term Evaluation of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey 2016-2019/2020 Strategic Mid-term Evaluation of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey 2016-2019/2020 Prepared by Final Report Volume I: Main Report June 2021 Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations STRATEGIC MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE 2 FACILITY FOR REFUGEES IN TURKEY, 2016–2019/2020 Evaluation implemented by Landell Mills Ltd with support from IOD PARC and Development Analytics Consortium composed of Landell Mills Ltd, Adam Smith International Ltd, Le Groupe-conseil Baastel, CEval GmbH, ICON-INSTITUTE GmbH & Co. KG Consulting Gruppe, Integrity Research and Consultancy Ltd, IOD PARC, Linpico Sarl and PROMAN S.A. The evaluation was conducted by Lewis Sida – Team Leader Core Experts – Julian Murray, Meltem Aran, Christopher Talbot, Elizabeth Dyke, Nur Abdelkhaliq Zamora and Francis Watkins National and Fieldwork Team – Gökçe Baykal, Safir Sumer, Nazli Aktakke, Hazal Colak, Yali Hajhassan. Project Management and Technical Support – Hannah Isaac and Tom Barton The evaluation was managed by DG NEAR Evaluation Managers – Lena Zimmer, Martina Stuka, and Didem Ergin Ulaç Cover Image: The project has major activities; namely Turkish language education, Arabic language education, FRAMEWORK CONTRACT COM 2015 catch-up and back-up classes, transportation Europe Aid/137211/DH/SER/MuIti/2018/401148/1 services, assistance in stationery items, course Specific Contract: N° 2018/401 148 books and clothing, awareness activities, procurement of education materials, development of a Turkish language testing system, guidance Strategic Mid-term Evaluation of the Facility for Refugees in and counselling services, provision of security and Turkey, 2016-2019/2020 cleaning staff to schools and TECs, provision of education instruments, training of teachers, training This document has been prepared for the European Commission of administrative and other personnel, monitoring however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the and evaluation. Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which © 2018 European Union may be made of the information contained therein. (photographer: Berna Cetin) STRATEGIC MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE 3 FACILITY FOR REFUGEES IN TURKEY, 2016–2019/2020 Contents Figures 5 Acronyms 6 Executive Summary 10 1 Introduction 15 2 Context 18 2.1. The Syrian crisis, refugee flows and the political/migration context 19 2.1.1. The EU-Turkey Statement 20 2.2. The Facility for Refugees in Turkey 22 2.2.1. Key characteristics 22 2.2.2. Financial resources and instruments 23 2.2.3. Facility governance, management and implementation 24 2.2.4. Facility objectives 26 2.2.5. Summary of Facility interventions 27 2.3. The political and socio-economic situation in Turkey 30 2.3.1. Attempted coup d’état and aftermath (2016 – present) 30 2.3.2. Economic instability (2018 – present) 31 2.3.3. COVID-19 pandemic 32 2.3.4. Refugee policy changes 32 2.3.5. EU-Turkey relations 32 2.4. Regulatory frameworks for refugee hosting in Turkey and the EU 33 2.4.1. EU asylum and migration framework 33 2.4.2. Turkish asylum and migration framework 35 3 Methodology 38 4 Key findings of the evaluation 42 4.1. Strategic evaluation questions 43 4.1.1. EQ1: To what extent are the Facility strategy and interventions responding to the real needs of the target population and of the hosting country? 43 4.1.2. EQ2: To what extent has the Facility contributed, and is at present contributing, to creating an environment of equal opportunities for all, in particular for the most vulnerable groups of population as per the ‘no-one left behind’ and protection principles? 47 4.1.3. EQ3: To what extent, and how, have the institutional set-up, programming approach and implementation procedures of the Facility influenced its capacity to generate the expected outputs and contribute to the achievement of outcomes and impacts? What other factors – political, organisational, human, technical or financial – have influenced the performance of the Facility? 54 4.1.4. EQ4: To what extent did the Facility Results Framework and monitoring/reporting approach contribute to a coordinated and coherent Facility response and to adapted management and learning? 62 4.1.5. EQ5: To what extent is the Facility’s strategy and programming in line with the tenets of the Global Compact for Refugees and Lives in Dignity? 66 STRATEGIC MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE 4 FACILITY FOR REFUGEES IN TURKEY, 2016–2019/2020 4.1.6. EQ6: To what extent is the Facility-strategy relevant to and coherent with the EU’s overall policy and normative framework, relevant policy orientations and sectoral frameworks, and with relevant international standards? 72 4.1.7. EQ7: To what extent has the Facility been, and is at present, maximising the EU cooperation potential and the EU added value? 76 4.2. Evaluation questions on sectors supported by the Facility 81 4.2.1. EQ8: To what extent have the Facility interventions contributed to an increased participation (enrolment, retention, transition, completion) in inclusive, equitable, quality education of refugee children and youth? 81 4.2.2. EQ9: To what extent has the Facility contributed in an inclusive and equitable way to the availability, accessibility and demand for healthcare services – and as a consequence contributed to an improved health status of the refugee population? 87 4.2.3. EQ10: To what extent has the Facility contributed in an inclusive and equitable way to basic needs, employment prospects, livelihood opportunities and social cohesion – and as a result contributed to an improved socio-economic situation of refugees? 98 4.2.4. EQ11: To what extent has the Facility contributed to the registration and referral of refugees to appropriate protection services? 106 5 The Facility’s response to the COVID-19 crisis 114 5.1. National response to COVID-19 in Turkey 115 5.2. Impact of COVID-19 on refugees 116 5.3. Facility response 117 5.4. Impact of COVID-19 on Facility results 119 6 Environment as a cross-cutting issue 121 7 Conclusions 126 8 Recommendations (strategic) 132 STRATEGIC MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE 5 FACILITY FOR REFUGEES IN TURKEY, 2016–2019/2020 Figures Figure 1 Total number of Syrian refugees registered by Turkey, 2011 – 2020 (millions) 19 Figure 2 Immigrants from outside the EU-27 and emigrants to outside the EU-27, 2013 – 2018 (millions) 19 Figure 3 Number of asylum applicants in the EU-27, 2008-2019 (millions) 20 Figure 4 Arrivals by sea and resettlements under the Statement, 2015 – 2020 21 Figure 5 Resources mobilised through the Facility by external financing instrument (Tranche I) 23 Figure 6 Facility organisational structure 25 Figure 7 Breakdown of Facility support across sectors 30 Figure 8 Evaluation phases, activities and outputs 40 Figure 9 Differences between DGMM data and IOM migration study data 45 Figure 10 % ESSN benefit distributed across PAB quintiles 49 Figure 11 Humanitarian and development funding allocations between the first and second tranche of the Facility 68 Figure 12 Alignment of the Facility with SDGs 72 Figure 13 Key policy frameworks of the EU and how the Facility aligns with them 74 Figure 14 International humanitarian funding to Turkey, 2013 – 2019 79 Figure 15 Reasons for dissatisfaction from healthcare organisations expressed by SuTP respondents to SIHHAT 94 pre and post surveys (2018 and 2020) Figure 16 Barriers to healthcare access across different groups 95 Figure 17 Satisfaction from the healthcare organisations applied in the recent year (%) for 2018 and 2020 97 Figure 18 System map of the awareness-raising and information ecosystem 108 Figure 19 Measures to increase the sustainability of EU trust funds 127 STRATEGIC MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE 6 FACILITY FOR REFUGEES IN TURKEY, 2016–2019/2020 Acronyms 3RP Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan AFAD Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome ALMP Active Labour Market Programme ANC Ante-Natal Care ASAM Association for Solidarity with Asylum Seekers and Migrants ASDEP Family Social Support Programme (MoFLSS) CCTE Conditional Cash Transfer for Education CEAS Common European Asylum System CEFM Child, Early and Forced Marriage CHCs Community Health Centres CID Commission Implementing Decision CM Case Management CMHC Community Mental Health Centre COHAFA Council on Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid CSO Civil Society Organisation CVME Comprehensive Vulnerability Monitoring Exercise DG Directorate General DG ECHO Directorate General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations DG NEAR Directorate General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations DGMM Directorate General for Migration Management (Turkey) DRC Danish Refugee Council EAMR External Assistance Management Report EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EC European Commission ECE Early Childhood Education ECA European Court of Auditors ECHR European Convention on Human Rights EEAS European External Action Service EMHC Extended Migrant Health Centre EQ Evaluation Question ESSN Emergency Social Safety Net EU European Union EUD Delegation of the European Union (to Turkey) EUNA European Union’s Needs Assessment EUR Euro EUTF European Union Regional Trust Fund in Response to The Syrian Crisis (‘EUTF Madad Fund’) FAFA Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement STRATEGIC MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE 7 FACILITY FOR REFUGEES IN TURKEY, 2016–2019/2020 FGD Focus Group Discussion FHCs Family Health Centres FMR Facility Monitoring Report FPA Framework Partnership Agreement FPI Foreign Policy Instrument FR Facility for Refugees FS Facility Secretariat FSNA First Stage
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Info Booklet
    INFORMATION BOOKLET THIRTY FIFTH SESSION OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC AND COMMERCIAL COOPERATION OF THE ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC COOPERATION (COMCEC) 25-28 November 2019 İSTANBUL TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. About COMCEC………………………………………………………………… 4 2. About 35th Session of the COMCEC……………………………………………. 5 3 Draft Agenda of the 35th Session of the COMCEC................................................ 6 4. Draft Programme of the 35th Session of the COMCEC......................................... 7 5. Draft Work Programme of the Senior Officials Meeting of the 35th Session of the COMCEC……………………………………………………………………. 8 6. Draft Programme of the Opening Ceremony of the 35th Session of the COMCEC………………………………………………………………………... 9 7. Draft Programme of the Ministerial Working Session of the 35th Session of the COMCEC …………………….............................................................................. 10 8. Draft Programme of the Closing Ceremony of the 35th Session of the COMCEC 11 9. Draft Program of the Side Events of the 35th Session of the COMCEC…............ 12 10. Information about the Arrangements for the Meeting ........................................... 13 - Date and Venue of the Meeting - Registration - Identification Badges - Working Languages and Interpretation - Bilateral Talks - Information Desk - Secretarial Offices - Press and Internet Center - Press Accreditation & Badges - Hall for Press Conferences - Documentation Center - Airport Welcoming Services - Transportation and Shuttle Services - Accommodation for Delegates of Member
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Development- Displacement Nexus in Turkey
    Assessing the Development- Displacement Nexus in Turkey Working Paper Fulya Memişoğlu November 2018 Assessing the Development- Displacement Nexus in Turkey Working Paper Acknowledgements This report is an output of the project Study on Refugee Protection and Development: Assessing the Development-Displacement Nexus in Regional Protection Policies, funded by the OPEC Fund for Inter- national Development (OFID) and the International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD). The author and ICMPD gratefully acknowledge OFID’s support. While no fieldwork was conducted for this report, the author thanks the Turkey Directorate General of Migration Management (DGMM) of the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Development, ICMPD Tur- key and the Refugee Studies Centre of Oxford University for their valuable inputs to previous research, which contributed to the author’s work. The author also thanks Maegan Hendow for her valuable feedback on this report. International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD) Gonzagagasse 1 A-1010 Vienna www.icmpd.com International Centre for Migration Policy Development Vienna, Austria All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission of the copyright owners. The content of this study does not reflect the official opinion of OFID or ICMPD. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in the study lies entirely with the author. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS \ 3 Contents Acknowledgements 3 Acronyms 6 1. Introduction 7 1.1 The Syrian crisis and Turkey 7 2. Refugee populations in Turkey 9 2.1 Country overview 9 2.2 Evolution and dynamics of the Syrian influx in Turkey 11 2.3 Characteristics of the Syrian refugee population 15 2.4 Legal status issues 17 2.5 Other relevant refugee flows 19 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Border Security: the Role of the U.S. Border Patrol
    Border Security: The Role of the U.S. Border Patrol Chad C. Haddal Specialist in Immigration Policy August 11, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL32562 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Border Security: The Role of the U.S. Border Patrol Summary The United States Border Patrol (USBP) has a long and storied history as our nation’s first line of defense against unauthorized migration. Today, the USBP’s primary mission is to detect and prevent the entry of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, and illegal aliens into the country, and to interdict drug smugglers and other criminals along the border. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 dissolved the Immigration and Naturalization Service and placed the USBP within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Within DHS, the USBP forms a part of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection under the Directorate of Border and Transportation Security. During the last decade, the USBP has seen its budget and manpower more than triple. This expansion was the direct result of congressional concerns about illegal immigration and the agency’s adoption of “Prevention Through Deterrence” as its chief operational strategy in 1994. The strategy called for placing USBP resources and manpower directly at the areas of greatest illegal immigration in order to detect, deter, and apprehend aliens attempting to cross the border between official points of entry. Post 9/11, the USBP refocused its strategy on preventing the entry of terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, as laid out in its recently released National Strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Khachatrian. Economic Impacts of Re-Opening the Armenian-Turkish
    Economic Impacts of Re-Opening the Armenian-Turkish Border By Haroutiun Khachatrian 1 The economic consequences of the possible re-opening of the Armenian-Turkish border will appear quickly and will mean a rapid improvement for both countries, but especially for Armenia. The current economic relationships between Armenia and Turkey can be characterized in short as follows: Turkey exports goods to Armenia worth some 260 million dollars a year, whereas imports of Armenian goods to Turkey are worth a mere 1.9 million dollars (data of 2008). In other words, the Armenian market is open for Turkish goods, while the opposite is not true, as Turkey applies a de-facto embargo (not declared officially) to imports from Armenia. All of this cargo transfer is chanelled through third countries, mainly Georgia. This shows the first possible benefit for Armenia once the de-facto embargo is lifted. The huge Turkish market, a country of 70 million, would become available for Armenian exporters. Meanwhile, today the immediate markets available for Armenian goods are only the market of Armenia itself (3.2 million people) and Georgia (4.5 million), both being poor countries which restricts the volume of the market. Two other neighbors of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Iran are practically inaccessible for Armenian exports, the former for political reasons and the latter because of high trade barriers. Along these lines, opening the Turkish market to Armenia would greatly improve the investment rating of Armenia as the limited volumes of markets nearby make it a risky site for investments, today. 1 The author is an analyst and editor with the Yerevan based news agency Noyan Tapan.
    [Show full text]
  • Al-Jedda-Preliminary-Issue-Judgment
    Appeal No: SC/66/2008 Hearing Dates: 2nd – 4th and 7th July 2014 Date of Judgment: 18th July 2014 SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION Before: THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE FLAUX UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WARR SIR STEWART ELDON Hilal Abdul Razzaq Ali AL-JEDDA APPELLANT and SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT RESPONDENT For the Appellant: Mr Tom Hickman and Ms Samantha Knights Instructed by: Public Interest Lawyers For the Respondent: Mr Jonathan Swift QC, Ms Karen Steyn QC and Mr Rupert Jones Instructed by: The Treasury Solicitor JUDGMENT Page 1 The Honourable Mr Justice Flaux: Introduction 1. On 1 November 2013, the Respondent (referred to hereafter as “the Secretary of State” made an order in exercise of the power under section 40(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981 as amended (“the 1981 Act”) depriving the appellant (referred to hereafter as “Mr Al-Jedda”) of his British citizenship. Mr Al-Jedda appeals against that order to the Commission pursuant to section 2B of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997 (“the 1997 Act”). 2. By Order of Irwin J dated 13 February 2014, the Commission ordered the determination of the following preliminary issues: (1) Did the deprivation order made by the Secretary of State on 1 November 2013 render Mr Al-Jedda stateless contrary to section 40(4) of the 1981 Act (including the sub-issues of issue estoppel and abuse of process which are referred to in the Scott Schedule and the Grounds of Appeal)? (2) Is the Secretary of State required to provide a minimum level of disclosure and information about the case against Mr Al-Jedda pursuant to the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights and/or European Union law? (3) Was the deprivation of citizenship unfair by failing to provide Mr Al- Jedda with an adequate opportunity to make representations to the Secretary of State before it was made? 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Or Closed: Balancing Border Policy with Human Rights Elizabeth M
    Kentucky Law Journal Volume 96 | Issue 2 Article 3 2007 Open or Closed: Balancing Border Policy with Human Rights Elizabeth M. Bruch Valparaiso University Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Human Rights Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Bruch, Elizabeth M. (2007) "Open or Closed: Balancing Border Policy with Human Rights," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 96 : Iss. 2 , Article 3. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol96/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Open or Closed: Balancing Border Policy with Human Rights Elizabeth M. Bruch' "We are living in a time when civil rights, meaning basic human rights, are being reformulated, redefined, and extended to new categories of people." Roger Nett (1971) "We should not be afraid of open borders." 3 Bill Ong Hing (2006) INTRODUCTION O PEN borders have not been a popular idea in the United States for at least a century.4 Since the federal government became involved in immigration regulation in the late 1800s, the history of immigration policy has generally been one of increasing restrictions and limitations.5 I Associate Professor of Law, Valparaiso University School of Law; Visiting Scholar, Centre for Feminist Legal Studies, Law Faculty, University of British Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989
    FORUM The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989 ✣ Commentaries by Michael Kraus, Anna M. Cienciala, Margaret K. Gnoinska, Douglas Selvage, Molly Pucci, Erik Kulavig, Constantine Pleshakov, and A. Ross Johnson Reply by Mark Kramer and V´ıt Smetana Mark Kramer and V´ıt Smetana, eds. Imposing, Maintaining, and Tearing Open the Iron Curtain: The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2014. 563 pp. $133.00 hardcover, $54.99 softcover, $54.99 e-book. EDITOR’S NOTE: In late 2013 the publisher Lexington Books, a division of Rowman & Littlefield, put out the book Imposing, Maintaining, and Tearing Open the Iron Curtain: The Cold War and East-Central Europe, 1945–1989, edited by Mark Kramer and V´ıt Smetana. The book consists of twenty-four essays by leading scholars who survey the Cold War in East-Central Europe from beginning to end. East-Central Europe was where the Cold War began in the mid-1940s, and it was also where the Cold War ended in 1989–1990. Hence, even though research on the Cold War and its effects in other parts of the world—East Asia, South Asia, Latin America, Africa—has been extremely interesting and valuable, a better understanding of events in Europe is essential to understand why the Cold War began, why it lasted so long, and how it came to an end. A good deal of high-quality scholarship on the Cold War in East-Central Europe has existed for many years, and the literature on this topic has bur- geoned in the post-Cold War period.
    [Show full text]
  • Passports Into Credit Cards: on the Borders and Spaces of Neoliberal Citizenship
    Passports into credit cards: On the borders and spaces of neoliberal citizenship Matthew Sparke University of Washington Forthcoming in Joel Migdal ed. Boundaries and Belonging (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Copyright protected under Matthew Sparke. Permission to cite may be directed to the Author. "We have included in our design the necessary technological platforms to ensure that the card will have a useful life of approximately five years. Most importantly for commercial users today, it will sport the ubiquitous magnetic strip which the government will not use, making it completely available to the commercial sector. We have also included a microchip in the design as we will require some of the available storage space for automated inspections. We will make the remainder of the chip’s storage available to our commercial partners. We think this is especially significant because of the recent announcement by Visa, MasterCard and Europay of their joint specification for chip- based credit cards. To further the appeal of this idea to the commercial sector, we will also allow cards prepared by our partners to display the logo of the partner. This would create in the mind of the card holder an instant link between our high technology application and the sponsoring corporation. Just think of the possibilities for a frequent traveler pulling out a card bearing the IBM or United Airlines logo, for example. Now potentiate that image by seeing the card as a charge card, an airline ticket, a medium by which you access telecommunications systems, an electronic bank, and/or any other card- based application you can conceive." Ronald Hays1 1 These plans for a new kind of passport using credit card and biometric technology are not the plans of a banker, a commercial web systems designer, or some other corporate planner.
    [Show full text]
  • Bordering Two Unions: Northern Ireland and Brexit
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics de Mars, Sylvia; Murray, Colin; O'Donoghue, Aiofe; Warwick, Ben Book — Published Version Bordering two unions: Northern Ireland and Brexit Policy Press Shorts: Policy & Practice Provided in Cooperation with: Bristol University Press Suggested Citation: de Mars, Sylvia; Murray, Colin; O'Donoghue, Aiofe; Warwick, Ben (2018) : Bordering two unions: Northern Ireland and Brexit, Policy Press Shorts: Policy & Practice, ISBN 978-1-4473-4622-7, Policy Press, Bristol, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv56fh0b This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/190846 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Background Check Procedures
    Shaping the future of international education New Edition Criminal Background Check Procedures CIS in collaboration with other agencies has formed an International Task Force on Child Protection chaired by CIS Executive Director, Jane Larsson, in order to apply our collective resources, expertise, and partnerships to help international school communities address child protection challenges. Member Organisations of the Task Force: • Council of International Schools • Council of British International Schools • Academy of International School Heads • U.S. Department of State, Office of Overseas Schools • Association for the Advancement of International Education • International Schools Services • ECIS CIS is the leader in requiring police background check documentation for Educator and Leadership Candidates as part of the overall effort to ensure effective screening. Please obtain a current police background check from your current country of employment/residence as well as appropriate documentation from any previous country/countries in which you have worked. It is ultimately a school’s responsibility to ensure that they have appropriate police background documentation for their Educators and CIS is committed to supporting them in this endeavour. It is important to demonstrate a willingness and effort to meet the requirement and obtain all of the paperwork that is realistically possible. This document is the result of extensive research into governmental, law enforcement and embassy websites. We have tried to ensure where possible that the information has been obtained from official channels and to provide links to these sources. CIS requests your help in maintaining an accurate and useful resource; if you find any information to be incorrect or out of date, please contact us at: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Binding the Almancı to the “Homeland” – Notes from Turkey
    Binding the Almancı to the “Homeland” – Notes from Turkey Barbara PUSCH* and Julia SPLITT* Abstract The Turkish- German migration movement particular, the last group- the young and highly did not start with the recruitment agreement educated- cannot be called returnees as such in 1961. However, with this agreement, as they were born in the country where their migration from Turkey became a new dynamic. forebears settled. However, this group of young As migration is usually accompanied by return and educated migrants is often lucky in the migration, we may also say that the Turkish- sense that their professional skills correspond to German migration movements have not been the needs of the Turkish labour market. While only characterised by the migration of Turkish previous returnees often drove taxis or delivery citizens to Germany, but also by their return. trucks, built rental houses or set up small Consequently, we can observe different types businesses and became part of the service sector, of return migration parallel to the changing they now work in many different sectors ranging nature of migration movements to Germany from arts and culture to telecommunications, in the last 50 years. Today, more than 50 years engineering, banking and are often involved in after the recruitment agreement, the population the global economy. In this article, we will first with Turkish migration background has give an overview of the return migration from significantly changed. For immigrants with the 1960s onwards. Then we will refer to the Turkish background in Germany, we can return and reintegration policies of the Turkish identify several aspects, such as rising age, state.
    [Show full text]
  • Thousands Mark Genocide Anniversary at Times Square Program NEWS INBRIEF
    MAY 4, 2019 Mirror-SpeTHE ARMENIAN ctator Volume LXXXIX, NO. 41, Issue 4585 $ 2.00 NEWS The First English Language Armenian Weekly in the United States Since 1932 INBRIEF TALEEN BABAYAN PHOTO Erdogan Says Thousands Deporting Armenians Mark Genocide Was ‘Appropriate’ ISTANBUL (Bloomberg) — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the deportation of Anniversary at Armenians by the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century was “reasonable” at the time. Times Square Erdogan made the comment on April 24 at a symposium where he slammed France for marking the Ottoman campaign against the Armenians as a Program genocide. “The relocation of the Armenian gangs and their supporters, who massacred the Muslim people, By Taleen Babayan including women and children, in eastern Anatolia, was the most reasonable action that could be taken in such a period,” Erdogan said in a Twitter post in NEW YORK — Thousands gathered for English. the Armenian Genocide Commemoration “The relocation of the Armenian gangs and their in Times Square on Sunday, April 28, as the supporters, who massacred the Muslim people, 104th anniversary of the massacres was including women and children, in eastern Anatolia, memorialized in a monumental event spon- Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) was the most reasonable action that could be taken sored by the Knights and Daughters of in such a period. The doors of our archives are wide Vartan. open to all seeking the truth.” Calls for recognition were made through- ness for the “wonderful and compassionate stepped up to officially acknowledge the Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan out the afternoon as speakers, guests and Armenian people” and appreciated their Armenian Genocide.
    [Show full text]