final synthesis report 150811 - mellemfolkeligt samvirke · 2020. 2. 24. · july 2011 . 2 list of...

Synthesis Report

Summative evaluation of MS Country Programme Strategies and Programme Support

within the “Democracy Focus”

July 2011

2

List of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 4

2. PROGRAMME STRATEGY AND DESIGN ...................................................................................... 6

2.1 Country Programme Strategies .......................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Partnership Approach ........................................................................................................................ 9

2.3 Programme Development ................................................................................................................ 10

3. ACHIEVEMENTS .............................................................................................................................. 10

3.1 Building Local Democracy (BLD) .................................................................................................. 10

3.1.1 Overall effectiveness ............................................................................................................... 10

3.1.2 Programme development ......................................................................................................... 14

3.2 Anti Corruption (AC) ...................................................................................................................... 14



3.3 Land Rights (LR) ............................................................................................................................. 16

3.3.1 Overall Effectiveness ............................................................................................................... 16


3.4 Conflict Management and Peace Building (CMPB) ....................................................................... 17



3.5 Trade Justice (TJ) ............................................................................................................................ 19



3.6 Capacity Development .................................................................................................................... 20


3.6.2 Programme Development ........................................................................................................ 21

4. GOOD PRACTICE AND LESSONS LEARNT ..................................................................................... 21

5. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 23

3

List of Acronyms:

AAI Action Aid International AAI/IGT Action Aid International, International Governance Team AADK ActionAid Denmark ACCU Anti-Corruption Coalition Uganda BLD Building Local Democracy CBO Community-based Organisation CDF Constituency Development Fund CMPB Conflict Management and Peace Building CSO Civil Society Organisation CSP Country Strategy Paper CPS Country Programme Strategy DANIDA Danish International Development Assistance DDC District Development Committee DT District Team DW Development Worker ET Evaluation Team IEC Information, Education and Communication KACC Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission LFA Logical Framework Analysis LG Local Government LGA Local Government Authority LR Land Rights MACCO MAYANK Anti-corruption Coalition MIRAC Mid-Western Regional Anti-Corruption Coalition MS Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke (MS in Danish) MS-TCDC MS Training Centre for Development Cooperation NGO Non-Governmental Organisation OD Organisational Development PAC Policy Advisory Committee PETS Public Expenditure Tracking System P4C People for Change PMWY Poor and Marginalised Women and Youth RAC Rwenzori Anti-Corruption Coalition RDP Recreation for Development and Peace SC School Committee SEATINI Southern and Eastern African Trade, Information and Negotiation

Institute TJ Trade Justice TORs Terms of Reference TRC Teachers’ Resource Centre VADP Village Agricultural Development Plans VDP Village Development Plans VDC Village Development Committee VLC Village Land Committees VLPC Village Level Peace Committee VMG Village Mediation Group

4

1. INTRODUCTION

MS decided in 2006 to focus all its programme activities on democracy as an important strategic means for poverty reduction. The ‘Democracy Focus’ was developed within the framework of ‘Partnership against Poverty’ as the guiding strategy for all MS’ programme work in the South and comprised five themes: Building Local Democracy (BLD), Land Rights (LR); Anti-Corruption (AC); Conflict Management & Peace Building (CMPB), and Trade Justice (TJ).

In turn, 2008-2012 Country Programme Strategies (CPS) were developed for the nine country programmes in Guatemala1, Kenya, Mozambique, Nepal, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Each country programme must allocate 50% of its resources to the Building Local Democracy theme, while 30% could be allocated to a maximum of two other themes. The remaining 20% could be used for complementary innovative and country-specific activities. This resulted in the following selection of themes:

BLD LR AC CMPB TJ Guatemala Kenya Mozambique2 Nepal3 Sudan4 Tanzania5 Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe

In consequence of MS’ association and subsequent affiliation to ActionAid International the Country Programmes were in 2010 merged with ActionAid in all countries except in the Sudan (where the programme was phased out by the end of 2010) and in Mozambique (where the merger will only take place by mid-2011). However, the programmes were continued in accordance with the CPS and the existing Partnership Agreements and underlying Project Documents, and on the basis of Cooperation Agreements between MS/ActionAid Denmark (MS/AADK) and the pertinent national ActionAid entities.

As the Country Programme Strategies and the current Cooperation Agreements with MS’ ActionAid partners will expire by the end of 2011, it was decided to undertake a

1 The Guatemala Programme was originally part of a regional Central America programme but is dealt with here as a

country programme 2 Democracy in Primary Schools was selected in the complementary category 3 CMPB was inApril 2010 integrated into BLD 4 BLD was the only theme selected in the Sudan 5 A ’Youth for Development’ theme was selected in the complementary category

5

‘Summative evaluation of MS Country Programme Strategies and Programme Support within the Democracy Focus’ in order ‘to ensure that the lessons learned from the implementation of the MS Country Programme Strategies in Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Sudan, Nepal and Guatemala are collected and analysed. The information will serve as documentation to the back donor Danida and as strategic learning points for AAI/International Governance Team as well as for the individual ActionAid organisations in the countries of cooperation. The evaluation will also be used as an input in the appraisal of new programmes proposed for AADK funding and contribute to the overall evaluation of all AADK activities scheduled for the last quarter of 2011.’

The evaluations were carried out in all the countries between February and June 2011, guided by the same Terms of Reference and an inception note prepared by two international team leaders in response to TOR and outlining the common methodology. The methodology was tested in the first two evaluations in Nepal and Tanzania, respectively, and subsequently applied in all evaluations.

The evaluations were undertaken by three international team leaders and nine national consultants. Seven PME specialists from ActionAid Denmark acted as resource persons to the evaluation teams together with five representatives from ActionAid’s International Governance Team and three national Action Aid staff:

CORE TEAM RESOURCE PERSONS Int. consultant National

consultant PME rep IGT rep AAI rep from

another country Nepal Peter Marinus

Jensen Mohan Thapa Helene

Ellemann-Jensen Upendranadh Choragudi

Tanzania Ashanut Okille Kitakaya Loisa Vince Martino Uganda Ashanut Okille Beatrice Ngonzi Helene

Ellemann-Jensen Maria Justiniano

Kenya Rueben Lifuka Kitakaya Loisa Susanne Adelhardt Jensen

Thomas Johnny

Sudan Ashanut Okille Aggrey Cyrus Kanyikwa

Mozambique Elias Ainadine Anders Lundt Hansen

Joyce Laker Rebecca Kukundakwe (AAI Uganda)

Guatemala Patricia Ardón Helle Løvstø Severinsen

Iván Salinas

Zambia Rueben Lifuka Stuart Nsana Karen Jørgensen Joyce Laker Madhu Pokhrel (AAI Nepal)

Zimbabwe Ashanut Okille Ephraim Moyo Dhlembeu

Karen Ansbæk Thomas Johnny Carol Mukosa (AAI Zambia)

The nine draft evaluation reports were scrutinized by the resource persons and comments and corrections were then reflected in the final evaluation reports. This report synthesizes the nine final evaluation reports.

6

2. PROGRAMME STRATEGY AND DESIGN

2.1 Country Programme Strategies

The Country Programme Strategies (CPS) were developed in 2007 and introduced in 2008. They will expire by the end of 2011. The strategy process was thorough and characterised by participation of the major stakeholders; and the draft strategies were subject to external appraisals. Subsequently they were amended to accommodate the appraisal recommendations. Some strategic adjustments have been made during the implementation process, amongst others as a result of thematic programme reviews (BLD, LR and TJ) in 2008 and 2009.

The Country Programme Strategies (CPS) have been moulded to the same template and shape. The relatively sharp thematic limits and strict requirements to programmatic accuracy have resulted in a strategic planning with characteristics of programme documents rather than strategies. On the one hand, this ensures coherence in the overall programme, while, on the other hand, the manoeuvring space for programming at country and local levels is reduced. Still, with the option to combine BLD with one or two complementary themes and bearing in mind that BLD includes two sub-themes, i.e. ‘Holding local government accountable’ and ‘Political empowerment’, there have been adequate opportunities to customize the country programmes so as to ensure relevance vis-a-vis the pertinent context.

Six country programmes (Kenya, Mozambique, Nepal, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe) embraced three themes6 and, interestingly, none of the programmes had the same composition. Two country programmes (Guatemala and Zambia) comprised two themes each (with only BLD in common), while BLD was the only theme in the Sudan programme – primarily because it was a new, experimental programme (that was eventually phased out).

There is a very even distribution of the non-BLD themes chosen as each theme (LR, AC, CMPB and TJ) was chosen by three countries.

All in all, the diversity within the overall strategic umbrella is significant and may be seen as an indicator of country programmes designed to match and tone in with different contexts. The relevance of the programs was confirmed in all evaluations but it was also found, in some cases, that the internal linkages between themes could be improved. For instance, linkages to TJ Uganda were weak – in contrast to the situation in the Zimbabwe program. Correspondingly, CMPB in Nepal and in Zimbabwe were, using the wording from the Zimbabwe evaluation report, left “hanging” without a clear thematic profile interacting with other themes. Finally, in Mozambique there is ‘no clear line between the Building Local Democracy and Anti-Corruption themes’.

6 The third theme in Mozambique and Tanzania, respectively, belongs to the complementary category.

7

The transformation from the strategy and programme levels into implementation involves the selection of partners and the prioritisation of the activities (projects) to be supported and carried out by these partners.

The partnership portfolio has averaged plus/minus twenty partners in all countries with the exception of Guatemala with only 9 partnerships. The number has, of course, changed during the strategy phase as some partners were phased out according to plans or as a result of inadequate performance, while others have been identified and included. A distinction has been made between strategic partners and implementing partners. Strategic partners are usually – but not necessarily – based in the capital with a national coverage, sometimes umbrella organisations, and generally working with policy advocacy as a key activity. Implementing partners are in most cases sub-national (local) NGOs or CSO networks.

The Tanzania evaluation found that ‘all the programme partners are relevant in relation to the themes’ and this statement could, by and large, be applied in relation to all country programmes – albeit with some modifications. The Zimbabwe evaluation, for instance, notes that ‘All the partners selected seemed to have a logical fit except the partners under CMPB where the fit is not easily evident…’ The Nepal evaluation report points out that although some partners may be relevant in theory the relevance in practice is more uncertain because of insufficient documentation on efficiency and effectiveness.

Many partners have been selected from the previous strategy phase and although they were not necessarily well equipped from the outset to work within the Democracy Focus they have generally been able to adapt without deviating from or changing their raison d’être. As previous activities, irrespective of sector flavour, were often based on a Rights Based Approach and the main principles included in the Democracy Focus, the adjustments and adaptation have therefore not presented major difficulties. The Nepal evaluation report, amongst others, deals with these issues: ‘All partners but one were selected from the partnership portfolio existing prior to 2008, which means that partners did not necessarily have experience with and qualifications related to the new CPS themes. Any fear that this selection might undermine the partners’ integrity by giving offers they could not well refuse appears to have been groundless, and the partners have been able to adapt and to develop the knowledge and skills required to develop and implement the projects. Capacity development support for this has been instrumental but many approaches and activities are in reality not that different from earlier interventions, and there is generally coherence between MS/AAIN supported projects and partners’ other activities’.

At the same time, new partners have been identified as compatible with the new strategy and included in the partnership portfolios. However, the opportunity to select relevant partners has been limited in some countries. The Sudan evaluation notes ‘that the number of reputable and credible Sudanese NGOs with democratic governance objectives is limited; MS Sudan had to work with the best set of alternative partners that it could find’.

8

The Mozambique report also highlights the limitations: ‘There are however challenges and constraints which are not exclusive for MS partners but rather the origin and nature of CS in Mozambique. Most CSOs operate as “service providers” or “consultancy CSOs”, rather than real CS movements that represent the interests of their constituencies.’

The relatively well defined themes within the strategies and the involvement of partners in the planning processes have greatly facilitated the relevance of the activities (projects) supported. Even so, the internal relevance in the sense of coherence between themes is not always optimal; cf. the examples given above from Guatemala, Mozambique, Nepal, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

The strategies pay in general due attention to the need to create linkages between local activities and national policy issues and this is to a large extent reflected in the composition of the partnership portfolios. In Tanzania it was observed that the ‘selection of strategic partners has been done carefully, with the former MS Tanzania programme not only looking for expertise and national linkages for its district-based partners, but also looking for strategic partners to whom they could add value.’ There are, nevertheless, also observations to the opposite effect. Local-national links appeared to be relatively weak in Guatemala and in Nepal, and in Mozambique there was a need to ‘give particular emphasis to promotion and strengthening of horizontal and vertical linkages and networking, starting from district to national level, to allow flow of information and use of evidences collected at community level to advocate for policy change in the national forums’. A corresponding observation was made in Zambia: ‘…there is still a weak linkage between district CSOs and national partners in terms of advocacy on national issues. While the district partners have been able to identify a number of challenges affecting Building Local Democracy, these issues have not fully been raised at the national level.’

The issue of gender is addressed in all strategies, albeit to different extent, and generally reflected in the work with partners. It is positive that distinct gender objectives and related indicators are included in many cases and linked to the pertinent thematic objectives; and, in turn, mirrored in the project designs at the partnership level. However, gender is often translated to ‘women’; and gender analysis is rarely carried out. Furthermore, there is a tendency to focus quantitatively on women in preference to qualitative assessments of gender roles and relations.

The Sudan evaluation report described a different situation in the Sudan from the rest of the country programmes: ‘MS Sudan also tried to integrate gender in all its events, and whilst none of the partners objected to the ideas, neither did the partners actively try to incorporate gender sensitive approaches to their work. This was apparent from discussions at a workshop, with partners where the ET realised that the partners did not understand gender nor its implications on their work.’ It must be recalled, however, that the Sudan program was given little time to develop and operated in an environment where the

9

prioritization of development issues have been heavily influenced by the protracted conflicts.

2.2 Partnership Approach

ActionAid International’s Partnership Policy and Practice Framework of 2009 builds to a large extent on MS’ partnership policies and approaches. Therefore, although the Country Programme Strategies were developed before the Partnership Policy and Practice Framework the same principles apply.

‘A partnership is the relationship of equality between entities based on mutual respect, complementarity and accountability where the shared values, purpose, goals and objectives are clear and which recognises autonomy of the entities.(...) ActionAid recognises a partnership as both a dynamic process and a relationship (...) It is often a longer-term relationship (...) allowing time to develop and deepen the relationship for shared goals, objectives, programmes and projects. A partnership involves the transfer or exchange not just of funds but also of solidarity, staff, ideas, learning and extended relationship (e.g. to partner’s partners) etc. A partnership is grounded in a documented agreement, which spells out the contractual obligations, irrespective of whether ActionAid provides funding or not.’7

The partnership approach has been developed by MS over more than two decades, and the existing approximately 170 partnerships have been established on these principles, which are referred to in all Country Programme Strategies. However, Capacity Development is implicitly part and parcel of the partnership concept and this aspect could well deserve to be highlighted in all strategies and underlying Partnership Agreements. The Nepal report states that ‘MS-AADK attaches importance to the concepts of partnership and capacity development but the scarce attention given to them in the CPS is remarkable. The omission to adequately address the substance of the partnership approach and related capacity development objectives in the CPS is generally repeated in partnership and project agreements.’

Notwithstanding, partner selection has been thorough, based on a CSO mapping and a screening against set criteria. The fact that many partners were ‘inherited’ from the previous strategy phase obviously facilitated this process and the realignment to the Democracy Focus themes. For new partners, and possibly some of the old ones, ‘sufficient time was needed for partners to understand and appreciate the ”Triangular relationship” involving (...) Programme staff, national and local and partners’ as it was observed in the Kenya evaluation.

It is an overall conclusion that the partnership approach applied by MS is relevant, efficient, effective – and highly appreciated by partners. In Guatemala ‘... partners

7 Quote from ActionAid International’s Partnership Policy and Practice Framework

10

repeatedly stressed the importance of the respectful (and) flexible relationships with MS. Its substantive contributions to advance the issues of local organizations were relevant to the organizations’ strengthening as was the openness to dialogue and incorporate suggestions coming from the partners when relevant’. The Uganda report observed that ‘MS Uganda partners considered their partnership with MS as positive and supportive, characterised by mutual respect, regular communication and attention, as well as direct support from key staff. In interviews with stakeholders, some of the positive aspects of MS partnership were said to be: genuine interest in developing both institutional and technical capacity of their CSO partners, fostering a culture of open and transparent dialogue with partners based on mutual respect and trust, a commitment to standing by its partners in both good and challenging times, and offering a high degree of autonomy in its partnership agreements.’

2.3 Programme Development

Issues to consider in the further programme development:

� How to strengthen the linkages between themes in a given programme � How to ensure adequate linkages between local activities and national/international

policy issues; i.e. also how to strengthen linkages and cooperation between implementing partners and strategic partners

� To promote the inclusion and proper use of gender analysis in planning and design � To promote an understanding of the gender concept � To further develop the partnership approach based on lessons learnt from previous

and current practice

3. ACHIEVEMENTS

3.1 Building Local Democracy (BLD)

3.1.1 Overall effectiveness

The BLD objectives in the country programmes all rotated around similar objectives that sought to create greater awareness amongst rights holders, promoting accountability of duty bearers and encouraging citizen participation. All the evaluation reports point to progress under the BLD theme, with examples of real changes in the lives of rights holders. The following constitute key achievements under the BLD theme.

Increased awareness and citizen participation in democratization and governance processes: All the former MS programmes aimed to increase awareness amongst

11

communities about democratic rights and governance processes using methods that promoted discussion and dialogue. For example, the Sudan programme distributed accessible, simplified information in posters and booklets, and used information-sharing methods that were interactive and ensured community participation like board and card games. The ETs found that booklets and posters that used cartoon characters in Uganda, Tanzania and Sudan were considered particularly effective because their portrayals were fun, catchy and delivered a clear message. Other country programmes also sought to use interactive methods that targeted different groups like community dialogues, radio talk shows and forum theatre. Some of the programmes also trained civic educators. In Uganda, they were called civic mwalimus and the ET found that civic mwalimus (informal for Mwaalimu – Swahili word for teachers) played an instrumental role in raising awareness amongst communities about their rights and responsibilities regarding community development programmes. Increased citizen participation and representation in governance structures: In all the country programmes, the increased awareness amongst citizens about their rights also resulted in increased citizen participation in various governance processes and structures. For example, the Nepal report pointed out that local democratic representation increased significantly in structures such as VDC planning, monitoring and evaluation committees; VDC Annual Assembly, political parties and ‘all parties mechanism’, school management committees, user groups, cooperatives, health committees etc. The Uganda report points out that one of the achievements of the programme was a significant increase in citizen awareness and participation, with specific emphasis on youth participation. In Tanzania, the former MS Tanzania programme supported the Teachers Resource Centre (TRC) to facilitate the formation of school committees (SCs) for primary schools with active involvement of community representatives. The Tanzania programme also created awareness amongst communities about the need for them to actively participate in the development of District and Village Agriculture Development Plans (DADPs and VADPs respectively). In Zambia, the MS programme largely focused on promoting citizen’s participation in tracking the utilisation of the constituency development fund (CDF) to foster development at local level.

Engagement between rights holders and duty bearers: All the programmes also had a component that sought to increase engagement between rights holders and duty bearers, with the main strategy being to empower rights holders with information and skills to enable them engage effectively. It is only in Uganda where there was some deliberate targeting of duty bearers through support to training manuals for Local Government officials. One of the challenges faced in Sudan was that whilst programme partners were able to create opportunities for rights holders to engage directly with duty bearers - the emphasis on rights holders per se proved to be a challenge because the rights holders were empowered and ready to engage, but duty bearers were not aware of their duty and responsibilities which made it difficult for the rights holders to get positive responses from

12

them. In Mozambique, this challenge was addressed by lobbying local councils to include representatives of CSOs and CBOs in council meetings, especially when planning and budgeting was taking place. In all the country programmes, another challenge to getting required responses from duty bearers, especially local government officials, was the limited resources (financial and material) available to them. In Zimbabwe, the challenge was made more difficult because of the politicisation of resources. The Guatemala report highlights the weakness of the Guatemala state, lack of political will and corruption as factors that affect the ability of duty bearers to be responsive. Ensuring accountability through monitoring planning and budget expenditure: A key strategy for some partners in Tanzania, Uganda and Sudan included the use of public expenditure tracking (PET). The Uganda report mentions that a number of the partners applied PET and were able to influence change by monitoring and demanding accountability for expenditure on specific services. According to the Nepal report, Local government (VDC and DDCs) and District Line Agencies’ accountability clearly improved due to the BLD instruments and approaches. The partners trained members of the communities in which they worked. These community members were then able to engage in planning and budgeting meetings. As a result of their participation, community members were able to influence the formulation of some district and municipal plans and budgets. Creating citizen platforms: In addition to encouraging citizen participation in government structures, all the programmes also supported the set up and operation of citizen platforms like the youth forums in Zimbabwe and civil society forums in Uganda. The members of these platforms were provided with training in key areas of leadership, accountability and empowerment, local government (LG) planning, and budgeting processes. Additional training was provided in advocacy, lobbying, gender mainstreaming and human rights. In all the countries, these civil society platforms provided a forum for discussion for community members, and at times also involved duty bearers. The Mozambique report noted the increasing influence of district platforms because they have better access to district policy documents directly from local government offices, as well as from public spaces like notice boards and community radio. The report also mentions that some of the district platforms have successfully engaged with district technical teams in the consultations and development of district plans.

Women’s participation: All the country programmes had objectives and interventions that sought to increase women’s participation in democratisation and governance processes. These objectives were attained to a large extent, with the main challenge being the emphasis on numbers i.e. more women in the structures, and not enough emphasis on addressing causes of inequality and vulnerability. The Zimbabwe report pointed out that in addition to providing training and creating platforms for women, women in poor rural and urban areas were trained in leadership skills and empowerment and were encouraged to take up leadership positions. The Uganda report stated that activities to promote women’s

13

participation implemented by the partners resulted in a marked change in the number of women participating in local government planning and budgeting processes and consequently a reflection of their priorities like improved health and education facilities, in community development plans (CDPs) and district development plans. In the Guatemala report, it was noted that as a result of the BLD programme, there has been the design and introduction of proposals at the municipal level, to incorporate issues of women´s and youth rights, as well as new initiatives on tourism and access to markets in municipal development plans. A country that did not register as much impact was Zambia where the report mentioned that in the programme design, there was very little focus on the structural factors that promote gender inequality and inequity in decision- making.

Youth for Development-, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe had specific objectives and interventions promoting youth participation. The programmes all registered some success. In Tanzania, youth organisations were supported to establish structures at the village (youth embassies and parliaments), ward (ward youth committees) and district (district forums) levels, that create space for youth to mobilize and discuss issues that affect them. The programmes in Zambia and Uganda also created youth platforms that were specifically meant to ensure youth engagement in local governance, including youth budget advocacy groups (YBAGs). In Kenya, there was a particular focus on youth in the Anti-corruption theme. In Guatemala, municipal offices addressing youth issues have been set up with representation at the departmental level, and local youth organizations are capable of generating and administering proposals, alliances and coordinated initiatives. Uganda, Sudan and Mozambique also had programmes that targeted schools and aimed to inculcate a culture of democratic process and leadership. These initiatives were largely seen as successful. The Mozambique report states that as a result of the programme on democratization in schools, a number of schools in the focus districts started the process of developing strategic annual plans with participation of school council members. It was also pointed out that school councils in the targeted schools are now engaged in the elaboration of School Development Plans and Internal School Regulations.

Influencing national policies: Working with strategic partners has played a key role in advocacy and lobbying for policies at national level. This lobbying and advocacy was informed by research, as well as training in leadership, advocacy and lobbying. Partners were encouraged to work together for this advocacy and lobbying for example in Zambia, the collaboration of CSOs’ efforts on analysis the draft national constitution enabled the CSOs collate their issues and concerns for consideration by the National Constitutional Conference. In Uganda, partners worked together to lobby for the implementation of the Access to Information Act. It should however be noted that collaboration between the partners did not always work out smoothly.

Improvement in CSO internal democracy: In all the country programmes, the need for CSOs to have internal good governance and democratic processes was considered to be important and a prerequisite for the CSOs to hold other stakeholders accountable. In all the

14

countries, CSO democratic structures, systems and performance have been enhanced through capacity building and OD interventions. Nonetheless, most of the country offices pointed out that strengthening internal democracy of the CSO partners is a long term process, and will have to continue.

3.1.2 Programme development

Issues to consider in future programme development:

� Continued support to strengthening CSO internal democracy � Shift beyond getting more numbers per se to a focus on qualitative representation

and meaningful participation of Rights Holders (especially dalits, women, youths and other marginalized groups) if they are to benefit further in ways that will significantly improve the quality of their lives. This calls for (i) formulation of a well crafted gender equality and social inclusion strategy based on ground realities by all implementing partners; (ii) improvement of programme officers’ and partners’ analytical skills on gender and social inclusion; (iii) focus on development of advocacy, communication, leadership skills of potential activists and leaders at the community level; and (iv) development of separate strategies and innovative approaches focusing on particularly marginalised and vulnerable women.

� The role of media projects (including radio talk shows) should be clarified based on sound audience research and the BLD implementing partners’ need for development communication.

� The school committees appear to be a good model of accountability with proven success i.e. a way of getting citizens at the grassroots involved in aspects of governance and service delivery. Future programmes should therefore explore possibilities of working with school committees.

3.2 Anti Corruption (AC)


Anti-corruption was considered a major theme in Uganda, Kenya and Mozambique. However, other countries like Sudan, Zimbabwe and Tanzania considered anti-corruption to be a cross cutting theme. The country programmes sought to increase public consciousness about corruption and encourage them to report and follow up cases. The programmes also sought to encourage and strengthen the capacity of CSOs that were engaged in anti-corruption work at local and national level. The following constitute key achievements:

Increased public awareness and attention to corruption: The evaluation reports all pointed to an increase in public awareness and attention to corruption, with an increase in cases

15

reported as well as discussion by members of the public during public meetings and radio talk shows. The Uganda report points to the fact that corruption was a key issue during the 2011 elections and attributes this to the consistent work on corruption by CSOs and other stakeholders in the country. Activities to increase awareness and discussion have included public meetings, forum theatre as well as radio and other media activities. From discussions held in all the countries, the radio programmes seem to have a broader reach and the ability to relay information faster.

Increased reporting and exposure of corruption cases by members of the public: In addition to creating awareness about corruption, the country programmes also supported their partners to establish channels through which the public could report cases of corruption. In the Kenya programme, the main activity was the development and use of the SMS back-end solution to report instances of petty corruption in social service provision in health, water and education services among citizens. Some of the partners of the Mozambique programme and the district platforms they worked with, reported corruption cases related to deviation of funds from a road project and mismanagement of district development funds, payment of bribes for hospital treatment, etc., to the local councils. In Uganda, CSO partners had phone lines and focal points at community and national level where people could report cases. In Uganda, the CSO partners also developed working relationships with government agencies at district and national level that were responsible for anti-corruption work. This relationship then enabled the CSOs to follow up with reported cases. A challenge pointed out in the Kenya report was the lack of specific and formal linkage with the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission to take up some of the cases reported, which caused a sense of frustration by those who were reporting the cases.

Establishment of coalitions to fight corruption: In Uganda, the country programme supported the establishment of the Anti-corruption coalition (ACCU), a national network of CSOs and other stakeholders engaged in anti-corruption work. The programme also supported the establishment of four regional anti-corruption coalitions i.e. RAC, TAC, MIRAC and MACCO. These coalitions have played a key role in developing and implementing anti-corruption initiatives in Uganda. In Kenya, the programme focused on working with youth groups whose members were trained and supported to play the role of change agents in the fight against corruption. In Uganda, some of the regional anti-corruption coalitions have been able to cause investigations into corruption by district authorities which resulted in the arrest of local government officials. In Mozambique, the attempts to form a national anti-corruption coalition failed, mainly because it is still a novel idea, but a smaller coalition was established around a particular campaign issue. One key lesson from the operation of the coalitions is that their effectiveness depends to a large extent on the commitment of the members and their capacity to engage in anti-corruption work.

The Uganda and Kenya reports highlight that a key challenge to anti-corruption work is the threat to personal security. The partners also face the challenge of ensuring that their own

16

institutions are accountable, and practice transparency and principles of good governance in their own operations. Other challenges that were raised in the Mozambique report are, limited understanding of corruption issues by partners; lack of skills (policy analysis, budget tracking and monitoring) of the partners and district platforms; lack of courage of both partners and district platforms to address corruption issues; the political context in which there is still strong control from state and government institutions leaving limited space for CS critique which is often perceived as ‘opposition’ positions.



� Programme partners should consider developing collaborative relationships with State agencies involved in anti-corruption work, and seek to build a reputation of consistency and commitment to anti-corruption work.

3.3 Land Rights (LR)

3.3.1 Overall Effectiveness

The country programmes that had land rights as a key theme i.e. Tanzania, Zambia and Nepal, sought to increase awareness about land rights, especially amongst PMWY. The programmes also sought to influence national policies to ensure that they adequately protect the rights of the PMWY. The programme partners also aimed to ensure that PMWY actually obtained ownership of the land. The following key specific achievements were registered:

Increased awareness amongst women, the poor and marginalised about land rights: The Tanzania report pointed out that the impact of the awareness raising has been increased participation by women in discussions to deal with land. In Zambia, the main activities that resulted in increased awareness involved evidence gathering through baseline studies, training of stakeholders including duty bearers, production of IEC and other knowledge building materials and advocacy for changes in the policy and laws related to land administration at national and local levels, and also prepared customary land guidelines for land acquisition.

Security of tenure for poor and marginalised women and men: The country programmes also all aimed to ensure acquisition of legal ownership for PMWY. The Nepal programme was able to attain some degree of success in enabling PMWY, especially the ex-Kamaiyas, acquire land ownership. There was however limited progress in obtaining land for the Ukhada farmers and some other landless farmers and tenants. In Tanzania, the partners were able to make progress towards land ownership by supporting communities to obtain land use plans. They supported community members make border agreements, survey and demarcate some villages, as well as ensure that land use plans and certificates were

17

submitted for approval - all necessary steps in ensuring legal ownership of land. According to the Zambia report, by the time of the evaluation, over 250 people had acquired Traditional Land Holding Certificates (THC) with the support of MS partners, which is an important step towards ensuring documentation of ownership. All the three evaluation reports highlighted increased ownership of land by women.

Increased involvement of community members in land management committees; In order to ensure that communities kept abreast of land rights and developments in this regard, programme partners supported community members to play an active role on land management committees at different levels. The Nepal report highlights that it is a notable achievement that ex-Kamaiyas have obtained representation in the High Level Commission for Problem Resolution of ex-Kamaiyas. In Zambia, one of the objectives was about citizens holding land administrators accountable in the manner that they handle both customary and state land, however, the ET found little evidence that this had been accomplished.

National advocacy for the enactment and implementation of pro-poor land policies: The Zambia and Nepal reports highlight that the programme partners were actively engaged in research and providing technical support to Government agencies, including constitutional drafting processes. However, land issues tend to be very sensitive and political; therefore obtaining the desired change in policy and implementation can take a long time.



� Implementation delays of Government decisions are major impediments in providing tangible benefits to Rights Holders. These need to be analyzed and action plans need to be formulated by partner organisations in collaboration with other stakeholders.

� Linkages and work relations between the strategic and implementing partners should be strengthened continuously in order to ensure better coordination in addressing local issues and contributing to policy advocacy.

� Land rights, especially the rights of women to access and own land is still considered a key strategy to ensure respect for women’s rights, participation and ultimately as a way of ensuring that more women are lifted out of poverty. Future programmes should therefore consider continuing with work in this regard.

3.4 Conflict Management and Peace Building (CMPB)


Kenya, Nepal, Zimbabwe and Sudan had CMPB in their themes. In Nepal and Sudan, CMPB was mainstreamed into the BLD programme. In Zimbabwe, the CPS provided for

18

CMPB as a separate theme, however, in practice, CMPB activities were mainstreamed under the BLD theme.

Establishment of conflict resolution committees: In all the country programmes, establishment of peace committees or providing training to other CSO committees was carried out. For example in Nepal, local peace committees have been set up at village and district level and these committees have been active in resolving disputes in their areas of operation. In Zimbabwe, partners have set up about 60 conflict resolution committees in different communities. In all these committees, the partners have deliberately sought to increase women’s representation and participation. The Kenya report mentions that a book called ’Women’s Voices’ has been written by one of the partners, PeaceNet. This book highlights the role that Kenyan women at the grassroots level play in peace and security. The book, which is meant to act as a reference, has already been used in different forums including a women’s forum in Sudan.

Increased capacity of community members to address conflicts on their own: The country programmes expected that the capacity building and establishment of peace committees would result in enhanced capacity of communities to prevent and resolve conflicts on their own. In all the countries, there were examples of conflicts that had been resolved. However, a key challenge as pointed out in the Kenya report, is that a number of activities and interventions aimed at forestalling violent conflict but not necessarily at eliminating the root causes of social tensions among or within communities. Future programmes should therefore emphasise the importance of conflict analysis and the need to address the root causes.

An increase in the timely reporting and response to conflicts: The establishment and training of members of peace committees in different parts of the communities has ensured that the people have easy access to a place to report any incidents of violent conflict. In all the country programmes, members of the peace committees were carefully selected together with community members in order to ensure that the committees would be comprised to highly trusted and respected people. Furthermore, where the local peace committees worked together with the local authorities, they were also able to attain positive results.



� There is a need to clarify relations between the different committees that are supported by the country programmes in order to avoid parallel structures and duplication.

� A strategy of mainstreaming CMPB in a BLD partnerships and projects should be considered, and if followed through, this strategy must be followed up by tangible plans to promote the mainstreaming.

19

� Future programmes should emphasise the importance of conducting a thorough conflict analysis and the need to address the root causes of conflict.

3.5 Trade Justice (TJ)


The countries that had Trade Justice as a key theme were Uganda, Zimbabwe and Guatemala. The country programmes sought to create awareness about issues relating to trade and to provide support that enabled PMWY access markets and get fair prices for their products.

Increased capacity of farmers to organize and lobby for better prices for their produce: In Zimbabwe, the programme specifically focused on supporting farmers’ groups to organize and develop the capacity to lobby and advocate for fair prices for their produce. The partners collectively reached out to about 25,000 farmers, 65% of who are women, with their support, and mobilised farmers to form associations and influence. The ET in Zimbabwe found that there were high levels of participation, a combination of strengthening voice and governance, as well as putting money in people’s pockets. In Uganda, one of the programme partners was a cooperative that sought to provide access to markets for small holder farmers, mainly poor women and youth. These groups also worked with other partners at national level, and in Uganda, at regional level, to advocate for pro-poor trade policies. In the case of Guatemala, the MS partners have improved their access to markets and their understanding of the market system. A marketing database has been created with information about 40 organizations of small producers and there is a commercial relationship with El Salvador.

Increased capacity for leadership: The TJ partners in Zimbabwe were able to successfully negotiate for better prices and improved market access for their products. The ET was informed that a key contributory factor to the negotiation and lobbying skills was the training provided by MS Zimbabwe to staff, and then passed on by the staff to the farmer and commodity groups. As a result, these groups are active and their members have been affiliated to other national organisations, with their members oftentimes taking on leadership positions in these national organisations.



� If the trade justice theme is maintained, there should be clearer links to the rest of the programme for instance by supporting the small holder farmers to participate in planning and budgeting processes and hold duty bearers accountable.

20

3.6 Capacity Development


The Democracy Focus Program is in essence about the development of the Rights Holders’ capacity to claim and access their rights. All activities implemented by the partners are intended to develop the Rights Holders’ capacities in terms of knowledge, tools, skills, approaches and social capital formation. These issues have explicitly and implicitly been addressed in the assessments of the thematic achievements above.

Rights, however, unfold in the interface between Rights Holders and Duty Bearers and realization of rights demands that Duty Bearers have the legitimacy and capacity to respect, protect and fulfill the rights. Capacity Building of Duty Bearers is not directly included in the program but the interaction between Rights Holders, civil society organisations and Duty Bearers entails indirect capacity development of local government entities and line ministries at the local level and other Duty Bearers.

A prerequisite for this work is, obviously, that the partners have adequate capacity to manage their organisations and projects and play a role in CSO networking and policy advocacy. This also entails a development of the partners’ democratic structures.

The early phasing out in the Sudan had an unavoidably negative impact on the partners’ capacity development. Still, it was found that ‘MS partners have made significant progress towards being defenders and guardians of local democracy’. The evaluations provide many other examples of significant progress and achievements. The Zimbabwe evaluation concludes that ‘capacity building resulted in stronger partners’; and correspondingly ‘all organizations (in Guatemala) have strengthened their administrative and planning systems and procedures’. In Mozambique it was found that ‘Capacity Building of partner organizations is a fundamental part of the MS Mozambique CPS. This has been effectively translated from the CPS to concrete activities …’

It is, however, not all praise: ‘Most partner organisations (in Nepal) have initiated processes to democratize their own democratic structures and systems, notably in terms of transparency and accountability, and new technical skills and approaches are adapted. (…) However, partners’ capacity development has not been addressed on the basis of systematic organizational capacity assessments; and endeavours are ad hoc rather than the result of a connected development process.’

Multiple approaches have been used in the capacity development activities, including counseling and coaching (notably by Programme Officers and Development Workers/advisers); training courses and workshops; and peer mechanisms. Particular capacity development units were set up in some countries, e.g. Core Competence Teams in Kenya and District Teams in Nepal.

The role of the Programme Officers differed from one country to the next. In Tanzania, for

21

instance, partner organisations ‘highlighted the coaching and mentoring support provided by former MS staff. The partners were of the view that the coaching and mentoring provides more individual-or-organization-focused support, and allows them to have more practical and hands-on support. It also supplements the training workshops very well.’ In contrast, Programme Officers in Nepal were found to ‘facilitate general support but do not have an active role in capacity development except, possibly, through their participation in the District Teams’. Despite such differences, however, it is safe to conclude that Programme Officers in all countries have been instrumental in supporting and contributing to the partners’ capacity development.

Findings on the value of People for Change contributions (Development Workers, Advisers, and Inspirators) were mixed. Partners in Zambia appeared not to be clear of the Development Workers’ and Advisors’ roles and were not always convinced that they had ‘the necessary competencies and interpersonal skills and ability to adjust and understand the local context…’ In Mozambique, ‘the overall perception of the P4C component by most of the people interviewed is that the programme has yet to reach its full potential. Partners and other stakeholders mentioned the great value external advisors can contribute to programme development and capacity building, but it is necessary that both advisors and partner organizations are very clear on roles and responsibilities.’ The Uganda evaluation noted ‘mixed responses to the quality and impact of DWs. Some partners noted that DWs added value to their work, while others stated that the DWs did not provide any additional skills and/or support.

3.6.2 Programme Development

Issues to consider in the further programme development:

� Partners’ capacity development should be addressed on the basis of systematic organizational capacity assessments; and support should be provided as an integral part of the development process in preference to ad hoc activities.

� The purpose of the People For Change programme, including opportunities and limitations, should be carefully communicated to partners; and it should be ensured that roles and responsibilities are fully understood and agreed upon prior to any People for Change arrangements are made.

4. GOOD PRACTICE AND LESSONS LEARNT

i. The use of IEC materials that are simple, easy to understand and communicate clearly, in particular the materials used in Sudan and Uganda was highly rated. The other training and learning materials have also been useful, and whilst they mainly target rights holders, they are also a resource for partners and duty bearers.

22

ii. The use of interactive processes and activities to foster dialogue on democratization and governance issues. For instance the posters, board and card games, forum theatre as well as puppetry.

iii. Community radio and development communication, however, the actual value must

be determined through adequate audience research.

iv. Development Workers have contributed greatly to introducing new approaches and tools for especially BLD. Settlement planning, social audits, score cards, and citizen charters have been effective to promote participation, transparency and accountability.

v. There must be a balance between a clear strategic framework for partnerships and

projects on the one hand and maneuvering space to allow for experimental and innovative interventions on the other.

vi. Development communication is indispensible but media must be selected on the

basis of efficiency and effectiveness.

vii. Gender is often translated to ‘women’ and gender analysis is generally not carried out. There is a tendency to focus quantitatively on women in preference to qualitative assessments of gender roles and relations.

viii. Working on democratic governance in post-conflict fragile States requires greater

investment in resources, time, patience, flexibility, and the willingness to try and fail at different approaches, as well as a balance between long and short term planning. Any decision to work in such a context should therefore be deliberate, strategic, and aimed at long-term engagement.

ix. Support to strengthening the capacity of rights holders (the demand side), needs to

be counter balanced with some support (either directly or through other agencies) that will encourage duty bearers to be responsive to the demands of rights holders.

x. The approach of working through sectors that are of great interest and of direct

importance to communities like education and agriculture is key to ensuring mobilization, ownership, and participation of communities. Furthermore, working with existing structures in these sectors is likely to yield quicker and more immediate results.

xi. Whilst the partnership approach yields dividends in terms of relationships, as well

as capacity building, it requires a significant investment in time and resources. The

23

regular reviews, coaching sessions, availability to follow-up on specific issues, and the patience required to work and support the partners requires a lot of time.

xii. As efforts are being made to incorporate citizens in the various legally established

governance structures, there is need for caution to ensure that the citizens are not absorbed into the way of doing things and get compromised. The idea of having active citizens’ groups outside of the structures who monitor and support their representatives is therefore paramount.

xiii. It is important that CSOs invest in ensuring that their internal governance adheres

to key principles of accountability and transparency. This will contribute to their credibility.

5. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

i. All the country programmes were considered to be still relevant. The significant building blocks are in place, and heavy investment has been made with the partners, which is why the AAI offices should consider continuing with partners that fit in their new strategy.

ii. The partnership and capacity-building approaches are useful, and intense capacity-building is required with regard to the community-based partners. In particular, the partners favor capacity support that is demand-driven and adopts more of coaching than formal training approach. AAI should consider the use of similar approaches in its future programmes.

iii. There should be greater effort to take advantage of the overlaps between themes.

This could be through more meetings with partners who should also be encouraged to plan for joint activities.

iv. Any future programmes to promote accountability should focus on both the supply

and demand side i.e. working with rights holders but also engaging duty bearers (at local level) for higher level duty bearers lobbying and advocacy.

v. A new approach implementing BLD, TJ and Land Rights interventions should be

adopted and the emphasis should shift from knowledge building or empowerment to active engagement. Support should be provided for activities which seek to promote citizens engagement at national and local levels. Innovation by partners in addressing BLD, TJ and LR issues should be promoted as this will move partners away from trying to implement generic or typical solutions which may not necessarily address local characteristics and peculiarities.