vso social accountability report 2014

8/12/2019 VSO Social Accountability Report 2014

1/32

Holding government to account:Social Accountability and VSO

ASSOCIATES FOR CHANGE


2/32

Holding Government to Account: Social Accountability and VSO

2

Contents

Executive Summary 3

Introduction 4

Examples of social accountability initiatives 7

Crucial insights for success 8

Why social accountability? 10

Case studies Africa 11

Zambia Area Development Committees 12

Cameroon Campo-Maan and Dja & Mpomo Model Forests 14

Rwanda National Disability Forum 16

Kenya Strengthening Citizens Participation in Governance of Education (SCGPE) 18

Uganda e-Governance in Kasese 20

Case studies Asia 22

India Citizen report cards in Jharkhand and Odisha (Orissa) 23

India Samadhan 24

Bangladesh SCORE project 26

Conclusion Social accountability and VSO 28

Sources 30

References 31

Acknowledgements

Charles Gay led this project and co-wrote, edited and liaised with country programmes.

He was the Global Adviser for Participation and Governance, VSO International.

Carrie Baptist researched and co-wrote this paper as an intern in the Policy Group at VSO

International, working on Participation and Governance, 2012.

Programme staff and partners from following: VSO Zambia (George Mwaanda), VSO India

(Praveen Kumar), VSO Rwanda Programme Staff, VSO Uganda Programme Staff and volunteers,

VSO Kenya, VSO Bangladesh and VSO Cameroon.

Cover photo: VSO/Ben LangdonPhotography: VSO/Jenny Matthews (pp11), VSO/Simon Rawles (pp 22, 26 and 27), VSO/

Jon Spaull (pp25 and 29), remaing photographs were taken by programme staff and volunteers.


3/32

3


Executive summary

Good governance and social accountabilityIn the past two decades, good governance has steadily

climbed up the development agenda as international

development agencies, practitioners and donors have

realised the strength of the linkages between governance

and development outcomes. The empirical evidence tying

governance to development is strong: for example, better

governance has been found to have a direct relationship

to increased primary education attainment and decreased

child mortality. Good governance can include many things

but it always refers to increased civil society participation,voice and increased accountability. Voice, participation and

accountability issues can be particularly problematic aspects

of governance to improve, but they are absolutely essential

factors in the good governance equation.

Over the past few years, the tools, methods and processes

which aim to strengthen civil society participation, voice

and accountability have begun to be grouped together

under the heading of social accountability initiatives. To

put it another way, social accountability goes to the heart of

inclusive development, as it includes the various methods and

approaches used to strengthen the voice, participation and

accountability dimensions of good governance. This report

defines social accountability from the perspective of VSO,

giving examples of different types of social accountability

processes VSO has conducted. Several issues that must be

considered by a successful social accountability initiative are

considered including scale, local context, institutionalisation,

incentives, power structures, inclusiveness and community.

Social accountability tools are not one size fits all, and

careful analysis of power relations and context is critical to

success. Care must also be taken to avoid a superficial level or

tokenism and to seek inclusive participation with a thoroughassessment of risks.

Social accountability as part of VSOs theory ofchange1Social accountability hits at the heart of VSOs global strategy

and theory of change. Social accountability processes are one

of the primary means whereby VSO can strengthen citizens

and civil society, giving people a voice, choices and power

over decisions that influence their lives. This improves the

quality of and access to services like health and education,

and influences governments to implement pro-poor policies

and projects (key dimensions of VSOs theory of change).

Social accountability processes also represent one of the most

effective means to achieve sustainable success in governance

work, one of VSOs key development goal areas.

VSOs experience of work on social accountability is deep

and wide-ranging. In this paper, eight new case studies

from Zambia, Cameroon, Rwanda, Kenya, Uganda, India and

Bangladesh are detailed. Some initiatives focus solely onstrengthening social accountability and governance, while

others use social accountability to enhance interventions

around gender, disability, the environment or education. In

all these cases, VSO volunteers have successfully established

or supported effective social accountability mechanisms at

the local, district and/or national level, responsive to the local

needs and context.

Looking forwardAs VSO builds on its work on active citizenship, governance

and social accountability, there are some clear areas for

expansion and growth. Some of the projects are still in their

first phases, including the work in Kenya and Cameroon

which is off to a great start and will continue to grow. Many

projects, including the two case studies from India, were only

pilots. Having achieved success, they will be scaled up and

replicated. Other programmes, such as the work in Zambia

and Bangladesh, have been made possible by the strong

relationship VSO and its local partners have forged over

long periods of time with local government; relationships

which continue to expand, allowing for stronger, broader

collaborations in future. Looking forward, VSO is well

placed in terms of its programming expertise, the qualityof its volunteers, strong local partnerships and institutional

relationships to strengthen and expand its work promoting

social accountability and good governance. This in turn will

promote greater access to quality essential services for poor

and marginalised people, and will provide space and process

for citizens and civil society to work together to improve their

lives, have access to information and effectively hold their

governments/service providers to account.


4/32


4

Introduction

Good governance and social accountabilityIn the past two decades, good governance has steadily

climbed up the development agenda as international

development agencies, practitioners, academics and

donors have reecognised both the costs of state failure

and the strength of the linkages between governance and

development outcomes. The empirical evidence tying

governance to development is strong: for example, better

governance has been found to have a direct relationship to

increased primary education attainment and decreased child

mortality2

. In contexts of poor governance, increased publicspending is seen to have little or no impact on educational

attainment or child and infant mortality3. In contexts of poor

governance, increased public spending is seen to have little

or no impact on education attainment or child and infant

mortality . This strong link between better governance

and more effective public spending and more sustainable

development outcomes depends on a number of political,

social and economic factors. But essentially good governance

is critical to the equation in the sense that it strengthens the

relationship between society and the state. The breakdown

of public services has damaging effects in terms of not

only human development and poverty, but also in terms of

eroding the credibility of government and the legitimacy of

the state itself4.

Recognising the fundamental importance of good

governance, the past decade has been marked by initiatives

that foreground good governance as a primary development

concern, including the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid-

Effectiveness and the follow-up Busan Partnership for

Effective Development Cooperation in 2011.

In practice, good governance can refer to many things.Usually it speaks to improving the quality of a countrys

economic, social and political institutions: strengthening the

rule of law and the judiciary, stabilising the government and

making it more effective, better regulating a competitive

private sector5, strengthening the voice and participation

of civil society, increasing accountability, and decreasing

public corruption and graft6. Over time, it has been

recognised that anti-corruption, civil society participation,

voice and accountability are perhaps the trickiest facets of

good governance to improve or to enable to demonstrate

positive change. However, they are absolutely essentialparts of the good governance equation and key to reliably

and sustainably improving public sector management or

increasing private sector competitiveness7. It has been

observed that increasing civil society voice, participation and

accountability has a knock-on effect of decreasing public

sector corruption, graft and capture, making increasing voice,

participation and accountability a cornerstone of any good

governance initiative8. When talking about participation

and good governance, it is useful to clarify the definition

of accountability that is being referenced. Here, it will be

defined as the obligation to be called to account... making

powerful institutions responsive to less powerful publics9.

In this view, accountability is more than an abstract policy

or law as it encompasses the practical means and processes

by which government officials are made accountable tocivil society and citizens. Over the past few years, the tools,

methods and processes which aim to strengthen civil society

participation, voice and accountability have begun to be

grouped together under the heading of social accountability

initiatives. To put it another way, social accountability goes

to the heart of inclusive development, as it includes the

various methods and approaches used to strengthen the

voice, participation and accountability dimensions of good

governance10

.

Dening social accountabilityWhat exactly does it mean to strengthen civil society voice,

participation and accountability? As noted above, these

represent particularly problematic aspects of the good

governance equation, so social accountability warrants a

more precise definition and detailed framing. Moreover,

those who want to hold others to account must have a clear

idea of that that means and entails. The relationship between

voice, participation and accountability is complex and involves

an understanding of how civil society participation and voice

can develop and then lead to greater accountability11

: social

accountability processes provide space for citizen agency, civil

society voice and participation in government, with the aim ofthereby increasing accountability.

In the narrowest sense, civil society participates in

government through elections. However, this is not

sufficient to create robust accountability, and civil society

must be able to exercise its voice and hold government to

account in a variety of ways, on issues arising at different

times, at the local, regional or national levels12

. In this

sense, social accountability initiatives seek to strengthen

the information and communication channels between

civil society and government, increasing the ability of civilsociety to participate in governance and hold the state to

account for its actions. This affirms direct accountability

relationships between citizens and the state and puts them

into operation [It] refers to the broad range of actions

The empirical evidence tying governance to

development outcomes is strong: for example,

better governance has a direct relationship to

increased primary education attainment and

decreased child mortality.


5/32

5


and mechanisms that citizens can use to hold the state to

account, as well as the actions on the part of government,

civil society, media, and other societal actors that promote

or facilitate these efforts13

. This can include engaging on

policymaking, budgeting, service delivery and performance

monitoring, to improve the quality, transparency and

effectiveness of these processes and public services.

Social accountability has a strong relationship to notions

of active citizenship. In essence it works to support active

citizens, providing and defining the mechanisms whereby

active citizens are able to make their voices heard. These

include institutions, mechanisms for engagement and

communication channels (such as access to information) that

active citizens use to participate in governance.

Social accountability processes can be initiated by civil societyor the state, termed either demand- (when initiated by civil

society) or supply (when initiated by government)-driven

accountability. The direction of the accountability relationship

can also vary: when civil society holds government to

account, this is termed vertical accountability. However,

horizontal accountability is also possible: when individuals

in power hold their peers accountable within government,

political institutions and other public service providers14

.

The common thread through all these variations is that

social accountability processes endeavour to pull back

the curtain on government decision-making and service

provision, making them more transparent and, in particular,

increasing the voice and participation of civil society. Social

accountability has many commonalities with approaches that

emphasise active citizenship as it aims to empower members

of the community to take a more active role in governance,

while also considering the institutions and methods that allow

them to make their voice heard. When this is successful,

the results can be impressive. Community supervision of

healthcare clinics has been shown to increase the quality of

care; community policing initiatives decrease crime; increased

participation of the community in school councils improves

the quality of primary education15

. However, achievingincreased community participation and strengthening the

ability of civil society to hold government to account is no

easy task. Nominal inclusion of civil society in a meeting

(without providing a mechanism for them to meaningfully

shape the proceedings), or public disclosure of a minimalist

set of data (without mechanisms to analyse and act on it16

)

are not sufficient to render government more accountable

to its constituents. Social accountability initiatives enhance

the impact of active participation by citizens, building an

active civil society and bringing government into meaningful

engagement and substantive discussion. This is a processthat is always political but can sometimes be sensitive, risky

or complicated in terms of the likely positive or negative

outcomes.

This means that in order to achieve true accountability,

social accountability processes must go beyond creating

token civil society voice and participation to create a robust,

institutionalised mechanism that engages with issues of

transparency and external oversight, power, enforcement,

corruption, performance measurement and principalagent

dilemmas (for example, the incentives for politicians or duty-

bearers to act in bad faith for their own ends or conflicts

of interest that might affect the beneficial exercise of

power) . While there may be an additional problem with the

informality of the process, the enforcement mechanisms are

an essential element: those who seek to hold government or

public services to account must be able to impose some form

of sanctions, whether material, legal or involvingnaming

and shaming or a bad press, against those agencies or

officials that have underperformed or violated their duties.

In order to have effective enforcement, transparency oranswerability is also crucial: public officials must provide

complete information about their work, performance, policies

and projects, for in the absence of reliable and timely

information there is no basis for demanding answers18

.

Legitimacy, or rights of authority, also comes into play when

it is difficult for a group seen as politically illegitimate, such as

illegal economic migrants, to hold government to account. In

parallel, power dynamics are also important to bear in mind,

as only when the observer stands above the observed can

we speak of accountability19

. Without the power and social

leverage to hold government and public services to account,

voice and accountability can easily become political spin or

cover processes that create a convenient guise of inclusivity

but which actually do little to materially impact policymaking

or programme delivery, essentially masking business as usual.

Finally, targeting is important: rather than being aimed at

generalised change or influence, accountability initiatives

work best when aimed at specific results or goals.

Accountability, although difficult to achieve in many contexts,

is an important part of good governance and can act as a

complement to creating and sustaining positive developmentoutcomes. It forms the foundation of rights-based approaches

to development and governance, emphasising and

operationalising the relationship between the rights of the

individual and the responsibilities of the state and enhancing

the impact of active citizenship. Social accountability can also

help strengthen other types of development interventions,

around issues like education, health or gender. When used

in a cross-cutting way, it has the potential to dramatically

increase the efficacy, sustainability and level of community

ownership of development initiatives. Social accountability is

increasingly being recognised for its ability to improve servicedelivery: increased input from civil society and strengthened

participation and feedback mechanisms can improve the

targeting of services, reduce waste and inefficiency and

discourage corruption.


6/32


6

Quesons of scale and levelSocial accountability processes work best at the local level,

as a part of decentralised governance20

or in the informal

sphere. Accountability, civil society voice and participation

all work to strengthen the relationship between individuals

and governments/service providers, the ties that bindcommunities together or officials to their constituencies.

These ties are most direct at the local level. This is the level at

which ordinary people are best placed to directly participate

in governance and make their voice heard by going to a

council meeting, participating in a government committee,

joining a parent/teacher association or taking part in a

community scorecard. The local level is also the level at which

the impacts of government, whether positive or negative, are

felt, providing a direct feedback loop between promises and

performance.

For women and other marginalised groups, the local level is

also the context where inequalities are most acute and most

keenly felt21

. This may also be the only level at which they can

meaningfully participate given the double or triple burden on

women and girls, especially those with disabilities and those

living in remote locations.

This isnt to say that programmes cant work simultaneously

at the local and national level. Some approaches are

particularly amenable to being used at the community levelto mobilise and strengthen civil society, in the sense of

promoting active citizenship, while simultaneously using that

momentum to build a regional or national level advocacy

campaign. Social accountability processes involving formally

recognised civil society actors can very effectively and

powerfully monitor national poverty budgets of development

policies. In this case, however, there may be issues of how

to ensure that their voices are truly representative and

inclusive. The accountability of civil society organisations

may, therefore, be an important issue to address and invest

resources in at national level.


7/32

7


Examples of social accountability

initiatives

Even after breaking down the definition of social

accountability, a certain amount of ambiguity may remain as

to what social accountability initiatives look like in practice, as

they can take many forms and shapes. Social accountability

tools can be used individually or in tandem, depending on

the scope and scale of the project. Programmatic approaches

can vary as well: some social accountability initiatives focus

solely on governance, while others use social accountability

processes to enhance the efficacy and sustainability of

other goals (eg improved education, gender equity, and

health). Here are some specific examples of types of socialaccountability initiatives:

Supply-driven (iniated by government):

user outreach meetings

publication of programme performance data

forecast surveys or baseline demand surveys

structured public consultation processes

allowing user membership on advisory boards

user voting rights on decision-making and regulatory bodies

for public services

retrospective performance or perception surveys

public complaint or grievance mechanism

public hearings

Demand-driven (iniated by civil society):

independent budget analysis (public expenditure tracking)

or public revenue monitoring

community/service mapping and data gathering or

participatory geographic information systems (GIS)

community scorecard or citizen report card

community-based performance management

participatory budgeting or alternative budgets

citizens charter

service users associations or users action groups legal recourse

use of complaint mechanisms

public opinion polls or stakeholder surveys

policy audits

public forums or appreciative inquiry summits

participatory social impact analysis

In addition, mobile technologies or ICT (Information and

Communications Technology) platforms have tremendous

potential to increase the opportunities of poor and

marginalised populations to participate in governance, and

can be used as a part of many of these initiatives to increase

their efficacy, reach and access.


8/32


8

Crucial insights for success

When planning a social accountability initiative or planning

to incorporate social accountability principles into a project,

in many ways success or failure comes down to the details

and there is no standardised formula or pattern that can be

applied. The local context, incentive structure and power

dynamics must be analysed; what it means to be inclusive,

involve the community and institutionalise the process

must also be critically evaluated. Increasing the ability of

civil society to hold government to account is a fundamental

prerequisite of good governance and sustainable positive

development outcomes in many areas, but it is a complicatedand delicate process, requiring a nuanced understanding of

the systems and communities one is engaging with.

ContextAs a first step, it is always important to understand the socio-

political and cultural context the initiative is working within

there is no foolproof process that works in every context,

every time. Rather, the best social accountability processes

are tailored to their context and should begin with a basic

political economy analysis.

For example, different social accountability processes will be

necessary in a country where the rule of law is strong versus

one where the rule of law is weak; where the civil service is

capable versus where it is ineffective; where the government

is highly centralised versus where it is decentralised; where

the government is supportive of civil society participation

versus where it is not; in fragile or post-conflict states versus

peaceful ones; where participatory mechanisms already

exist versus countries where they dont; where civil society

is strong versus where it is weak. It is also worthwhile

to consider the risks of working on social accountability,

politically, socially and institutionally in this particular localcontext.

During this process of analysis, it is vital to identify the

current actors, both formal and informal, who exert pressure

on government and the entry points and channels that they

use to do so; it may also be interesting to note whether men

and women access these channels differently. It is also useful

to identify post-conflict or fragile states, as civil society may

function very differently, and a sense of community may be

much more strained, in these contexts than in a country that

has been peaceful for a long time.

These types of questions must not only be asked at the

national level, but also of the specific institution, department

and system; they must also be considered dynamically how

do these institutions and systems function and change over

time?

Answering contextual questions like these will help determinethe best scale of intervention and method of approach.

With that understanding, it is then possible to choose the

right social accountability tools to suit the situation. For

instance, in institutions or contexts that are less open and

transparent, officials may be less willing to acknowledge

their responsibility to become accountable; in these

contexts, securing political buy-in to the change process and

conducting broad-based advocacy have been identified as key

enabling factors.

Instuonalisaon and incenvesWhile it is possible to undertake a social accountability

initiative as a one-off, social accountability processes are

more likely to be effective when they are institutionalised in

some sense: a community scorecard that is repeated each

year, a government committee that is permanently altered to

include civil society representation, a participatory budgeting

scheme whose funding is guaranteed at regular intervals, etc.

Rather than just holding a focus group or a series of hearings,

it is important to create channels or forums for long-term

dialogue between government officials and civil society, so

that issues can be addressed reliably over time.

More than this, it is important not just to institutionalise

social accountability processes, but to institutionalise

them with the right incentive structure. It matters how the

performance of public officials and programmes is evaluated

and that an incentive structure is created that allows

public officials to encourage participation, and civil society

meaningfully to participate. Often, even if a government

official is sympathetic to the idea of civil society participation,


9/32

9


the social and economic incentive structure of their position

will make it difficult for them to act in a way supportive of

increased transparency and inclusivity. Similarly, while civil

society has the capacity to be an ideal oversight agent

omnipresent, able to continuously monitor and report it

isnt always motivated or able to participate in governance;

civil society can also be apathetic, dormant, or co-opted by

particular groups or interests. Checks and incentives have to

be put in place so that members of the community feel safe

participating in governance, a variety of voices can be heard

and government officials see the benefits of responding to

the concerns of civil society and are able to act accordingly.

Power dynamics and legimacyParticipation, voice and accountability are always in

some respect political issues, as they seek to restructure

current decision-making systems and channels of power,redistributing power more equally and inclusively through

society. Consequently, working to strengthen social

accountability may sometimes be sensitive politically and

there is a very real risk of social accountability initiatives

being co-opted by those already in power. In order for a

social accountability process to be successful, it must take

into account the power dynamics and structures within and

between the groups it seeks to engage. It is also important

to raise questions around legitimacy and risk, particularly for

the civil society groups and community members involved

if these groups arent seen as legitimate political actors,

what can be done to raise their status and/or protect them

from harm? It is important to consider the political incentive

structure of the people you are trying to influence and the

mechanisms of power and influence, whether they are formal

or informal. What are the ways in which power is exerted

in practice? it is important not to conflate civil society

presence, input and real influence.

For example, a case from Oxfam in Pakistan shows how

the intentions of social accountability initiatives can be

subverted. In 1999, new laws were passed as part of a wider

decentralisation policy requiring that a minimum of 33% ofthe seats in local councils be reserved for women. However,

the elected women often ended up functionally representing

the interests of male family members and/or local elites,

cementing the traditional cultural practices and channels of

power rather than disrupting them (Clarke and Missingham,

2009).

InclusivenessGiven the sensitive and political aspects of social

accountability, it is important that attention be paid to

making these initiatives truly inclusive, of marginalised groups

as well as those who present the polite or acceptable

faces of society. It can be tempting to simply include formal,

mainstream civil society organisations that have already

achieved a modicum of political legitimacy groups that

already have some relationship with government, often

made-up of middle-class professionals or well-behaved non-

governmental organisations (NGOs).

This tendency is in many ways understandable often these

types of groups are more easily accessible to international

organisations, speaking a common language such as

English or French, or sharing a common set of values and

approaches to development. They are also safer to workwith, shielding both the civil society groups and international

organisation from risk. It is more challenging to engage with

and understand groups that are marginalised, separated

from international organisation officials by language, class or

culture; misunderstanding and misinterpretation can flourish

unless a concerted effort is made to bridge the gap and

create strong communication channels.

However, the groups that are currently marginalised and

unable to access government are those that stand to benefit

most from being involved in social accountability processes

they are the ones whose voice needs to be strengthened

and whose ability to hold government to account needs to be

increased. International organisations must critically analyse

their choice of partners, with an eye towards working on

social accountability with groups that have strong ties to the

grass roots and/or are otherwise marginalised or isolated.

This can including engaging with non-traditional civil society

organisations such as social movements, informal trade

unions or religious groups. Engagement with these types of

organisations has been shown to be effective at empowering

and strengthening the voices of poor people.


10/32


10

Hing at the core of VSOs theory of change

Social accountability hits at the heart of VSOs core strategy

and theory of change. Social accountability processes are

one of the primary means whereby VSO can strengthen

civil societies to give people a voice, choices and power

over decisions that influence their lives, improve the quality

of and access to services like health and education, and

influence the government to implement pro-poor policies

and projects key dimensions of VSOs theory of change.

Social accountability processes also represent one of the

most effective means to achieve sustainable success inparticipation and governance, one of VSOs six development

goals.

Social accountability initiatives can also be incorporated in

a cross-cutting sense into programmes and projects that

focus on non-governance aspects of development, including

health, education, gender, disability and the environment. In

this sense, they can be woven into various types of sustained

development interventions which would benefit from

becoming more sustainable and embedded into normal civil

society processes and systems once the project has finished

owned by the community, as it were. For example, a one-off

vaccination drive may not benefit from the addition of social

accountability mechanisms, but an initiative to increase the

quality of community health clinics and their responsiveness

to the needs of poor people might. This isnt to say that

social accountability can be tacked onto an ongoing health

or education initiative like an afterthought; rather, that

social accountability is an integral aspect of making sustained

development initiatives more sustainable, effective, pro-poor

and subject to greater community ownership.

Reducing aid-dependence and promong good governanceMoreover, social accountability provides a pathway towards

greater local independence and capacity, rather than

continuing aid-dependence. Not a Band-Aid solution, it

seeks to put in place the social mechanisms and systems that

will be able to ensure over the long term that government

and public services serve the needs of the community and are

pro-poor. Ideally, a strong civil society is able to correct for a

certain amount of state failure in the sense that an active civil

society, armed with rights and able to access and influence

government officials, is able to hold those officials to account.

This requires more than elections or a nominal presence in

processes of governance it requires the ability to supply

input and influence policies and projects. Robust social

accountability mechanisms must be in place so that civil

society can reliably access the information it needs about the

policies and impacts of government, is seen as a legitimate

voice and is able to make use of legal or political enforcement

in some way if government is not performing ensuring its

ability to hold government to account.

Looking at the post-2015/post-Millennium DevelopmentGoals paradigm

As we look past the expiration of the Millennium

Development Goals (MDGs), there are already arguments

being put forward that more international attention must be

given to rights, voice and participation which place everyone

on the same political map, as opposed to benchmark

development targets like the MDGs. It is likely that some kind

of benchmark targets will replace the MDGs, but it also seems

clear that the experience of the MDGs has strengthened

the realisation that rights, voice and participation cannot

be left out of international agreements and approaches to

development. There is also increased momentum around

human-rights based approaches in light of the Arab Spring,

emphasising expanded freedom, good governance and

redistributing power within society more equally. A growing

chorus of voices22

is suggesting that in order to achieve such

goals, we must strengthen our legal, advocacy and policy

responses to poor governance and inadequate development,

building effective accountability mechanisms at national and

international levels, and civil society participation in shaping

the solutions as well as defining the problem23

.

Why social accountability?


11/32

11


VSO/TimN

aynard

Case studies - Africa


12/32


12

Zambia - Area Development Committees

ContextThe national Decentralisation Policy in Zambia, aimed at

strengthening local government, was approved almost

ten years ago as a component of Zambias 2002 Poverty

Reduction Strategy Paper, but its implementation has been

slow and halting. The government has re-energised the

decentralisation programme, approving a Decentralisation

Implementation Plan, including a new Community

Development Fund, which refocused attention on local

government. However, there continues to be a lack of clear

guidance and a lack of resources from central governmentfor implementation in the provinces. As a result, the District

Councils have been very reluctant to include and engage local

people in development planning. Around the country there

are ongoing issues around a lack of community participation

in governance at the district level. As a part of the national

decentralisation drive, many Area Development Committees

(ADCs) have been founded to create a bridge between local

government and the community, but there has been a lack

of recognition and acceptance of these committees by both

the local government and the community. The Community

Development Fund was intended to act as a vehicle for

involving and engaging local citizens through the ADCs,

thereby reducing the burden on local government and giving

more opportunities to civil society to decide on and fund

local development projects. However, there are ongoing

challenges to securing real citizen participation in terms

of rolling out and sustaining the Community Development

Fund mechanism across districts, as well as challenges in

legitimising the ADCs and making them effective institutions.

IniavesSince 2008, VSO has been supporting government

decentralisation in Zambia by placing volunteerDecentralisation Advisors in several District Councils,

including Choma, Mazabuka, Mambwe, Petauke, Kazungula

and Chipata. Each volunteer works in a slightly different way,

responding to the needs of the local District Council.

There have been successes, challenges, delays and strong

progress across the various councils. Here are two examples

of the types of work and outcomes that volunteers have

achieved when working in partnership with district councils:

1. In 200910, a volunteer was placed with Mambwe DistrictCouncil with the objective of increasing the planning capacity

of local government officials and ADC members, while also

seeking to improve the capacity and functioning of the 13

ADCs in that district.

The volunteer began by conducting organisational capacity

assessments with officials and proceeded to support local

officials in drafting the next strategic plan for the district.

He also carried out extended advocacy and lobbying of the

council to establish sub-district level coordinating structures

which would improve service provision and be responsive to

local needs.

A workshop was conducted with each of the ADCs to share

knowledge on the role of ADCs in Community Development

Fund processes, as well as local resource mobilisationand sustainability, with the hope of improving their

effectiveness. His training and capacity-building activities with

representatives of the ADCs helped them to reach a level of

skills and capability where they could begin to engage with

the Mambwe District Councils procedures and processes.

This engagement has been enhanced by support to produce

physical mapping of the 13 wards in their district and this has

furnished the ADCs with the evidence and data on quality of

services, condition of infrastructure and land ownership and

use.

2. In 200911, a volunteer placed with Petauke District

Council did a great deal of work to establish and build the

capacity of the Area Development Committees. The volunteer

worked first to establish and then consolidate local ADCs,

putting the committee members through a rigorous capacity-

building training programme with the intention of providing

the basic resources and skills for the ADCs to function

properly. Training was also provided so that committee

members would gain greater awareness of their role in

implementing decentralisation policy, and of the role of the

various key stakeholders in local government. The volunteer

worked to set up local resource centres for each ADC andheld workshops on how to write effective project proposals

for fundraising. Project monitoring and evaluation was also

a focus, to help ADCs monitor the outcomes of the projects

that they have chosen to support under the Community

Development Fund.

Outcomes1. In Mambwe District, the initiatives to strengthen local

ADCs, build the capacity of local government officials and

create stronger sub-district level coordinating structures

have been recognised as very successful. The District Councilwas sufficiently excited about the results of the project that

they used it to make a submission to the Local Government

Association of Zambia Award for Excellence competition in

2010 and gained an award for innovation. Together, VSO and


13/32

13


the District Council have strengthened their partnership by

recognising the ADC representatives as national volunteers

and supporting them as such. A partnership agreement was

signed between the Mambwe Council and VSO, and a two-

year national volunteering strategic plan, focused on the ADC

representatives, is in place.

As a result of this progress, the ADC representatives are

becoming increasingly motivated and have become more

active in the district planning process, and consultations on

services and infrastructure, and increasingly have found their

voice to question and raise issues of concern to the council.

2.In Petauke District, as a result of the capacity-building

workshops and training, the functioning and effectiveness of

ADCs has greatly increased: (i) ADC representatives now have

a much clearer understanding of the other key stakeholders

in local governance; (ii) ADC representatives have begunparticipating in the District Development Coordinating

Committee (the next level up from ward level committees);

(iii) with greater training and awareness, ADCs were able to

play a central role in the recent National Rural Water Supply

and Sanitation Project, which has created new Village Water

and Sanitation Committees to enhance and improve water

and sanitation at the village level; (iv) ADCs have also begun

to take over management of the Community Development

Fund, helping local community members to complete funding

application forms; and (v) some ADCs have made their own

funding proposals to the District Council, some of which havebeen successful.

The volunteer advisor has successfully supported the

council to gain European Commission funding for the

councils participatory planning process: this has resulted

in the construction of Community Resource Centres, with

more planned, resources for further capacity building and

community training and seed funding to develop the ADCs

resources. These centres provide a meeting place, a central

community resource in the wards, and have greatly added

to the functionality and prestige of these ADCs. A network

between the ADCs has also been created, through a quarterly

ADC Secretary meeting, which has been highly effective at

disseminating information between ADCs in Petauke District

and supporting monitoring and evaluation processes between

the committees.

In effect a new sub-district democratic layer has been

developed to (a) promote citizen engagement and (b) enable

citizens to hold the council to account.

Future plansVSO continues to plan to support the roll-out of the

governments decentralisation plan, building on the firm

foundations of increased local democratic engagement and

citizen participation. Integrated Development Plans are

being developed at the Provincial Council level (one level up

from the District). They will be greatly improved by the level

of citizen participation fostered at the district level as they

legally require inclusive participation and consultation with

the local community. These plans will in turn lead to more

detailed and well-formed plans to meet community needs,

improve local infrastructure, increase the quality of servicesand impact on the lives of the poorest and most marginalised

people.


14/32


14

Cameroon - Campo-Maan and Dja &

Mpomo Model ForestsThe B-Adapt project was implemented by Cuso International, the African Model

Forest Network and VSO. This project was funded by CIDA.

ContextIn 1994 as part of a larger structural adjustment package,

Cameroon passed a law which provided local communities

with the possibility of exerting greater influence over

decision-making and stewardship of natural resources and

forests. However, the law lacked domestic support and

was blocked by Cameroons highly centralised government

bureaucracy and political conflicts over resource control,

so it resulted in few changes on the ground. After years of

pressure and advocacy from civil society and community

groups, in 2005, Campo-Maan and Dja & Mpomo wereofficially recognised by the government as pilot Model Forest

sites, test sites for decentralised natural-resource and forest

stewardship. Since 2010, VSO Cameroon has helped support

these two Model Forests, helping them become stronger and

more effective pilots of community stewardship of forests

and natural resources in Cameroon.

Model Forests are forms of community stewardship

based on a flexible framework for learning and doing that

combines the social, cultural and economic needs of local

communities with the long-term sustainability of large

landscapes in which forests are an important feature. The

key stakeholders include the African Model Forest Network

Secretariat office based in Cameroon, and the International

Model Forest Network. Campo-Maan is a 769,000 hectare

forest in a coastal area of south-west Cameroon, noted for

its exceptional biodiversity, and home to about 80 species of

large and medium-sized mammals including gorillas, African

elephants and panthers. It is about one-third national forest

and one-quarter agro-forestry zone; most of the 60,000

inhabitants of the forest area make their living through

slash-and-burn subsistence agriculture, fishing, hunting and

gathering, and logging. Dja & Mpomo is a 700,000 hectareforest in the eastern province of Cameroon. It is also home to

outstanding biological diversity including many endangered

or threatened species such as forest elephants, chimpanzees,

leopards and white-collared mangabey. There are about

25,000 inhabitants of the Dja & Mpomo forest, who mostly

make their living off the forest as hunter-gatherers or small-

scale farmers, or through handicrafts.

IniaveBy design, Model Forests are voluntary, broad-based

initiatives, linking forestry, research, agriculture, mining,recreation and other interests within a given landscape. While

each Model Forest sets its own priorities, common themes

found across the International Model Forest Network include

valuing biodiversity, forest conservation and restoration,

sustainable economic development, education and good

governance. In both the Campo-Maan and Dja & Mpomo

Model Forests, a stewardship platform has been created

that includes the local authorities, civil society organisations,

private forestry, agriculture and/or mining interests and

local communities, who work together to develop and

adopt policies, systems and processes that will ensure

greater participation of all stakeholders in the conservation,

management and sustainable use of forest resources. By

bringing these disparate stakeholders together, it is hoped

that an enabling environment will be created for collaborative

and participatory decision-making that meets the needs

and respects the interests of all groups and that particularly

serves to increase the participation of the local population

in decision-making processes. VSO works to ensure that this

goal is met by supporting the voice and needs of civil society

organisations and local communities within this network,

particularly minority groups such as indigenous hunter-

gatherers, and to support local rural women to develop

stronger income-generative activities. VSO Cameroon has

used a variety of initiatives including photovoice, community

consultation, the formation of rural womens groups, learningexchanges and workshops to achieve these goals.

OutcomesCampo-Maan

The Model Forest in Campo-Maan has successfully held

several rounds of community consultations to deliberate on

different proposals including one to change land-use rights

in the forest and another to deal with the environmental

impact of industry within the forest. In the autumn of

2011, VSO organised a series of community consultations

pushing for community members to gain access to formerlogging concessions for agriculture. In November 2011, this

right was finally granted. In January 2012, VSO facilitated

a photovoice project with youth and indigenous groups

where certain issues were identified such as lack of basic


15/32

15


infrastructure (roads and potable water) and lack of proper

waste management from local agro-industries. Photovoice is

a participatory tool used to gather and analyse information

by combining photography with community mobilisation

and action, in this case analysing and developing narratives

around the critical issues impacting the lives of the

communities living in the Campo-Maan forest and then

working to bring these issues to the attention of the Model

Forest platform as well as local government. The following

March, a community consultation was held to consider plans

to install a solid waste treatment plant as an addition to a

palm-oil plantation that is currently operating within the

limits of the model forest. At the council level, the community

of Bongahl has received support for a tree-planting activity

to protect the beach from coastal erosion. Now that it has

been completed, the community is working to develop a

second proposal to expand the initiative to other coastal

villages. In addition, after consultations with local women,

the council agreed to undertake a corn production project,

to improve the yield of local women farmers, distributing

improved seeds and providing guidance on planting.

Dja & Mpomo

The Model Forest in Dja & Mpomo has been working to

systematically strengthen local livelihoods for women and

the indigenous peoples living in the Dja & Mpomo forest.

In February 2012, VSO facilitated a photovoice project

with women and the Baka (a group of indigenous hunter-

gatherers) where key issues affecting the lives of local

people were identified such as lack of basic infrastructure

(roads and potable water) and lack of education and health

facilities. The outcomes of this exercise were then used as

the foundation for community consultations and discussions

with local government. Opportunities for local economic

development were also identified, such as transformation

of non-timber products and providing support to active

womens associations. The photovoice project also kick-

started a community mobilisation process for local women.

Two months after the photovoice exercise, the Dja & Mpomo

rural womens group came together for the first time, with

the objective of organising local womens groups around

non-timber products. The group hopes to train and inform

women with regard to agricultural techniques and project

management, to form a producers organisation to better sell

their products and to transform their non-timber products

in order to add value. In August 2012, they participated,

along with the rural womens group from Campo-Maan,

in a learning exchange visit with the goal of learning about

agricultural techniques and commercialisation of products.

As a result, the Dja & Mpomo rural womens group is now

more informed on sustainable agriculture (soil improvement

techniques) and use of marketing tools for their non-timberproducts. Alongside this work with the rural women, VSO

is also supporting the needs of local indigenous groups

(the Baka) in the Djo & Mpomo area, with the goal of

increasing the coordination between these organizations and

harmonizing their approaches.


16/32


16

Rwanda - National Disability Forum

ContextPeople living with a disability currently face formidable

challenges in Rwanda. When it comes to social protections,

social support and cultural inclusion they are often left out

and/or discriminated against. In Rwandan society, people

with disabilities are both actively and passively excluded; they

are often seen as objects of charity rather than as people

with potential and abilities, and they face discrimination at

home, socially, at work and in accessing government services.

This situation is compounded by the fact that people with

disabilities in Rwanda and other developing countries aregenerally over-represented among the poorest people. A

census carried out in 2010 by the Ministry of Health and the

Ministry of Local Government and Social Affairs estimated

that persons with a disability comprise approximately 5%

of the population, with a roughly even split between men

and women. However, given Rwandas history of conflict

and development, this may well be a gross underestimate.

Civil society organisations of people with disabilities have

existed in Rwanda for many years, the oldest being more

than 30 years old. However organisations have lacked unity,

coherence and individual and collective capacity.

In 2010, after intense lobbying by civil society in conjunction

with Rwandas status as an Ambassadorial Country for the

African Decade for People with Disabilities, the government

of Rwanda agreed to amend the constitution of Rwanda and

create a National Council for People with Disabilities (in line

with the National Councils for Youth and for Women which

already existed). Constitutionally mandated, the National

Council is a government agency with a representative

structure at all levels of government administration,

responsible for mainstreaming disability across government

services and development programmes. In response, civilsociety with the support of VSO has organised itself into an

umbrella organisation, the Disability Forum, to serve as a

coordinating and representative body for the movement

and to build the capacity of member organisations. The

Disability Forum has committees at the village, sector,

district and national levels, so it is able to coordinate civil

society initiatives around disability at multiple scales. This

has resulted in a much more effective network and clearer

structure in the disability movement in Rwanda. Government

and civil society are both represented and are able to position

themselves in relation to each other. Currently, Rwanda is

drafting a new Economic Development and Poverty Reduction

Strategy (EDPRS); the process forces government ministries

and councils to say what they are going to do to better

support people with a disability. People with a disability

have been largely overlooked in the development agenda

so far in Rwanda, but the EDPRS processes provide a unique

opportunity to rethink and rewrite that agenda.

IniaveVSO supported the formation of the Disability Forum to

better coordinate the movement and have greater impact

through a united voice. Members include many national

civil society organisations, the National Council for People

with Disabilities and international disability organisations

working in Rwanda. The forums current activities include

addressing the categorisation of people with a disability,


17/32

17


influencing the EDPRS and influencing the national census to

ensure people with a disability are accurately counted. The

forum is structured in this way: there are seven people with

a disability on each village committee, who are elected for

five years to represent the local residents with a disability at

village level. Each village committee elects a representative

to serve at the sector level, on one of the 416 sector-level

committees. At the next level, each sector committee has a

representative at the district level (there are 30 districts). A

person needs secondary school education to be elected at the

sector level and a university degree to be elected at districtlevel.

In addition to supporting the forum at national level, VSO has

been supporting councils at the local level in three districts,

having international volunteers work as District Disability

Advisors alongside the district committee members. These

volunteers are working most closely with the heads of the

district committees, but they also spend time supporting the

other committee members. More recently, the volunteers

have begun working at the sector level, training the sector

committee members within each district.

OutcomesThanks to the formation of the Disability Forum itself, about

10,000 people with a range of disabilities are now better

represented and served by stronger, more visible and more

sustainable organisations, leading to greater quality of life

and representation in decision-making processes. The forum

has had success in advocating for Rwandas new Economic

Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy to engage

more clearly and strongly with the needs of persons with a

disability. It has also improved the speed and efficiency with

which government ministries respond to issues concerningpersons with a disability. While accommodating rules and

regulations have technically been in place for some time,

implementation has been slow and variable; the forum has

been able to successfully apply pressure to government

ministries that are lagging behind, pushing for government to

act on projects regarding persons with a disability.

In the three districts where VSO volunteers are working, it

is estimated that VSO volunteers have trained or supported

about 80 committee members to date. The Forum has

successfully advocated for the government to require each

district to have a paid District Disability Officer on staff, which

all districts now have. In future, the Disability Forum wants

to set up a monitoring framework for the UN Convention on

the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to make the oversight

mechanisms for the implementation of this Convention in

Rwanda more impartial and robust. It also plans to revise

the National Programme for Mainstreaming Disability, aprogramme that Rwanda published in 2009 as part of its push

to get Ambassador Country status for the African Decade

for People with Disabilities, but which is now out of date.

The Disability Forum wants to update it to reflect the new

strength of civil society organisations working on disability

issues in Rwanda.


18/32


18

Kenya - Strengthening Citizens

Participation in Governance of

Education (SCGPE)

ContextIn 2011, VSO Jitolee conducted a rapid survey to determine

the number and type of disabilities in 13 districts/counties.

They found that about 28% of children with disabilities are

not in school and 37% of the children attending appropriate

schools have not been assessed to make sure they are

receiving the right support. There seems to be limited

awareness of the challenges of learners with special needs

by service providers, policymakers and the community at

large. Generally speaking, civil society organisations in Kenya

struggle to hold government to account. The constitutionis supportive of civic engagement, but the legislative

environment grants substantial powers to the executive over

NGOs, hindering civil society independence from government.

There is also a general distrust of NGOs within government,

and levels of corruption are high in the public sphere.

Despite this, there is currently an opportunity for civil

society groups in Kenya to address the deficits in education

for children with disabilities, as the Kenyan government is

currently drafting a new education system and curriculum,

with changes to begin to be implemented in the autumn of

2013. Unfortunately, to date, this proposal does not include

provision to specifically address the needs of children with

disabilities in schools. VSO Jitolee feels that special needs

education needs to be mainstreamed in the new education

policy and framework for implementation in Kenya, so that

more children with a disability will be able to attend school

and be adequately supported. In 2012, VSO Jitolee began

the Strengthening Citizens Participation in Governance of

Education (SCGPE) initiative, intended to increase the level of

access and quality of education for children with disabilities

and increase the capacity of civil society organisations to

hold the Ministry of Education to account over education forchildren with a disability.

IniaveThe SCGPE initiative has two central aims. The first is to

strengthen the organisational capacity of community-

level institutions to undertake advocacy and demand

accountability and responsiveness on special needs education

at school and county level. The second aim is to strengthen

the capacity of Disabled Persons Organisations to engage

in mainstreaming special needs education into the Ministry

of Educations New Education Policy and Implementation

Framework. These aims will be addressed simultaneously at

national and local levels in several districts in Kenya.

In order to achieve these goals, VSO Jitolee will first assess

the needs of various community institutions including 13

Community Based Rehabilitation Groups, seven Disabled

Persons Organisations and numerous Parent Teacher

Associations. VSO will then provide tailored organisational

capacity training to support these institutions. VSO will work

to strengthen the abilities and capabilities of such institutions

to engage effectively with the Ministry of Education and to

support civil society voices in seeking accountability from the

ministry at both the local and national levels. It will support

these organisations over time to aggregate this local leveladvocacy to the national level for appropriate action, using

media and legal mechanisms. At the national level, VSO will

work to create stronger linkages and networks between

community and national level institutions around advocacy

for special needs education and specifically lobby the Ministry

of Education to increase resources to special needs education

and accountability via various consultative forums, policy

papers and reports.


19/32

19


VSO will also work with individual schools to support the

School Management Committees to build better feedback

mechanisms to engage with the local community. Clubs will

be established in schools to sensitise parents and children, as

well as support children in becoming child-to-child educators

and in publishing a periodic newsletter or magazine for

further advocacy. In addition, the programme will help in

the setting-up and strengthening of community social audit

groups in each target district/county who will work as local

volunteers. These community social audits will monitor the

quality of local special needs education service providers

and provide feedback towards an annual scorecard for each

target district/county, culminating in a national Ministry of

Education scorecard on its performance on special needs

education.

Current statusThe SCGPE project is ongoing, with some key milestones

already passed. VSO has successfully identified the training

needs for the stakeholders and delivered trainings in

governance, advocacy, mainstreaming special needs

education and social audits. The communities have been

mobilised and are being informed on their rights to education

through public forums and door-to-door engagements with

the parents of children with disabilities. Discussions with key

service providers (the school management committees, head

teachers and district education officers) have also begun and

VSO aims to gain buy-in and support for the SCGPE initiative.

This will lay the groundwork for later projects which will

seek to increase these organisations accountability to and

engagement with their local community. At the national

level, some of VSOs partner organisations are engaging

in the revision of the national education law. A policy

brief containing recommendations in favour of learners

with disability has been developed and VSO is looking for

opportunities to further engage with policymakers on this

issue.


20/32


20

Uganda - e-Governance in Kasese

ContextCurrently, in Uganda there are significant barriers hindering

the effective exchange of information between civil society

organisations and local government. Generally speaking, civil

society organisations have difficulty effectively collaborating

with government, or building synergies between government

and civil society initiatives, particularly around health,

education and sanitation. Local government also has difficulty

involving community members (particularly the poor) in

policymaking or giving feedback about the performance of

social services, citing problems with a lack of funding, staff,and community apathy towards participating in governance.

There is also a lack of transparency on the performance of

public services, as there is very little sense of accountability

between government officials and the public, and few

channels for communication or interaction.

As a result, local government, residents and civil society

organisations are unable to effectively combat corruption

in the delivery of services or ensure that public services are

delivered effectively. In the District of Kasese, VSO along with

its partner organisation the Rwenzori Information Centre

Network (RICNET) sensed an opportunity to address some

of these issues by creating an e-governance system whereby

civil society organisations could collaborate and share

information more effectively about public service delivery

and performance, both between themselves and with local

government.

IniaveIn response to the lack of transparency, accountability and

communication between local government and civil society

in Uganda, a VSO volunteer working with RICNET has helped

to set up the first e-governance resource centre in Uganda.The e-governance initiative began in 2009 and aimed to help

civil society organisations and local residents to exert more

influence over local government by actively participating in

planning, development consultations and feedback processes,

particularly around health, water and education. The project

first conducted a general needs assessment, determining the

level of technology literacy of participating local civil society

organisations and local government. From there, a series

of training sessions were held to ensure that participating

organisations had a basic level of understanding of and

familiarity with information technology and computers,

particularly around information sharing and the generation

of useful web content. To capitalise on these new skills, a

civil society e-portal was built in 2010 to provide a reliable

information source for the civil society organisations

working in the Kasese district, particularly in the health,

water and education sector. The civil society e-portal

also serves as a communication and information-sharing

platform, allowing coordination and collaboration between

civil society organisations themselves, as well as facilitating

communication between civil society and local government.

An e-library portal was also launched, to act as a resource

for local government to share policy announcements and

information on recruitment, procurement, administrativedirectives and other memos. In early 2010, a resource centre

was set-up, with computers and an information desk, where

members of the public could access the e-portal, e-library

and the internet, and make use of cameras and other digital

equipment to create dynamic web content. It was hoped

that, in addition to formal civil society organisations, young

activists and other active community members would make

use of the e-governance resource centre.


21/32

21


OutcomesThe Kasese e-governance resource centre, civil society

e-portal and local government e-library have been highly

successful at strengthening civil society organisations in

Kasese and helping effect changes in local governance. The

initiative is currently being introduced in six other districts,

with plans to scale up to 25 districts in Uganda. In Kasese,

the initial e-portal has been improved and branched into

two new web portals and resources. A new website to help

monitor and improve primary education in Kasese has also

been introduced. The Kasese e-governance resource centre

has attracted new partners such as the Belgian Technical

Corporation and is being strongly utilised by the public in

the first six months of this year the resource centre attracted

more than 2,000 users and provided information technology

and computer training to 70 students.

The e-portal, e-library and information technology training

has had a significant impact on the use of information

technology by local government staffs and civil society

organisations, to the point that almost every head of

department now uses the internet for most of their

communications. Civil society organisations have stronger

capacities internally (management, coordination, skills,

knowledge) and externally (mobilise and facilitate citizens)

to sustain social accountability monitoring in the Rwenzori

region, and local government has become more open

to citizen participation and feedback on services. About

20 local government officials and 60 members of civil

society organisations have benefited from comprehensive

information technology and computer training, and

700 social accountability monitors from civil society

organisations are engaged in social accountability tracking.

There have already been some positive outcomes from thework of these monitors, including effective performance

monitoring of water and road construction in the town of

Bwera and increased community engagement in Bugoye

Sub County over a proposed hydropower project that would

negatively impact local livelihoods negotiation between

the community and local government resulted in a solution

where the hydropower project would be reconfigured so that

it also boosts the capacity and coverage of the local gravity

flow water system, so the community could also get better

access to water.


22/32


22

Case studies - Asia


23/32

23


India - Citizen report cards in Jharkhand

and Odisha (Orissa)

ContextThe national government in India has been making significant

efforts in the past few years to dynamically increase the

rate of social and economic development in the country,

particularly in rural areas. In 2005 a landmark piece of

national legislation was passed to improve rural livelihoods

by guaranteeing each resident of rural India 100 days of work

each year. In 2009, a second landmark scheme was passed,

to systematically improve the quality of primary education. In

Odisha and Jharkhand the implementation of these initiatives

is lagging, with widespread complaints about quality, accessand inclusion.

The first piece of legislation, the Mahatma Gandhi National

Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), was passed

in 2005 after a sustained and hard-fought campaign by

social activists. MGNREGA was intended to transform the

economies of rural areas by providing a baseline amount of

paid employment each year, each adult being eligible for

100 days of work per year, while simultaneously improving

rural infrastructure and resources. Although it began with

great promise and optimism, the results of MGNREGA in

Odisha and Jharkhand have been disappointing. There have

been numerous criticisms of the programme, mainly alleging

corruption and ineffectiveness. Additionally, complaints

have been made that not enough attention has been paid to

the issue of inclusion, with regard to the ability of women,

scheduled caste and scheduled tribe communities to access

work and subsequently be paid, under this scheme.

Inclusion, access and quality have also been concerns under

the second piece of legislation, Sarva Siksha Abhiyan, which

was meant to achieve universal coverage and access to

primary education. Although several schemes and subsidiesaccompanied Sarva Siksha Abhiyan, including mid-day meals,

school grants, free textbooks and, for teachers, training and

teaching materials, there is still a significant percentage of

school-age children in Odisha and Jharkhand not in primary

school. A survey on access, quality and inclusion seemed both

warranted and necessary in order to identify and address

whatever remaining barriers prevent children in these two

states from attending school. In response to these issues

with primary education and the MGNREGA in Odisha and

Jharkhand, VSO India decided to undertake a citizen report

card in these two states to gather information about thequality, level of access and inclusiveness of these services

which could be used as advocacy tools to improve these

programmes.

IniaveIn 2011, VSO India and its partner organisations NEEDS,

Manthan Yuva Sansthan and ADHAR undertook a pilot

citizen report card to assess the quality and inclusiveness of

primary education and of the MGNREGA, in three districts

of Odisha and Jharkhand (Ranchi, Lohardaga and Bolangir).

The citizen report card surveyed a representative segment

of the community in each district, with a particular focus on

women, persons with disabilities and members of scheduled

castes or tribes, about their experiences accessing and using

these services. In total, 921 households were surveyed, andemphasis was placed on including households that contain

a person with a disability. In primary schools, the survey

showed high levels of dissatisfaction from adults concerning

uniform stipends, study stipends and health check-ups.

Regarding the MGNREGA, dissatisfaction with the initiative

was very low in one district but very high in the other two,

where it was reported that work was regularly blocked, wages

left unpaid and a hostile environment existed for disabled

persons.

OutcomesThe citizen report card initiative in Odisha and Jharkhand

was a pilot project and, as such, has been highly successful.

VSO and its implementing partners have received positive

feedback from local government as well as civil society groups

and community participations and are looking to scale up

this initiative in the near future. The citizen report cards

were more than an information-gathering exercise they

also mobilised the local community in these districts around

the issue of greater inclusion in primary education and the

MGNREGA, increasing the amount of attention on these

concerns. The citizen report cards have also led to concrete

changes in the way primary education and the MGNREGAare administered in these districts. The findings from these

citizen report cards were publicly released in Jharkhand

in 2011. As a result of the publication of these findings,

combined with increased community mobilisation and

pressure, in Ranchi district MGNREGA was restructured so

that the local community now has the ability to monitor and

help implement the scheme. This will make the scheme more

transparent and accountable. In Lohardaga district, where

primary education was assessed, the quality of uniforms,

teaching materials and mid-day meals has improved.

Village level education committees also merged into locallevel committees for better local monitoring and results.

Encouraged by these promising results, VSO India is currently

working on scaling up citizen report cards to cover more

districts in Odisha and Jharkhand.


24/32


24

India: Samadhan

ContextCorruption and bureaucratic inefficiency are ongoing

challenges in the Indian states of Odisha and Madhya

Pradesh. The national Right to Information Act was passed in

2005, which allows Indian citizens to request any information

(except classified documents) from government bodies. It has

been taken up by activists, but usage of Right to Information

requests is not as widespread as some had hoped as they

can pose a significant risk to those who pursue them. Right

to Information activists in Odisha and Madhya Pradesh have

been subjected to threats and violence (some, includingShehla Masood in 2011, have even been killed) for attempting

to shine a light on corruption and expose irregularities in

government schemes. For the majority of the population of

Odisha, day-to-day life continues to be blighted by problems

interacting with government, whether having to pay a bribe

or not being able to access entitlements or basic social

services, particularly for those who are considered part of

scheduled tribes, scheduled castes or other backwards

castes. One thing that is having an impact on daily life in

Odisha and Madhya Pradesh is mobile phones. The level of

mobile phone penetration in these two states is high and

increasing; mobile phones are cheap and easily available,

a tool that is accessible to the poor as well as the rich.

Sensing an opportunity, VSO India, in partnership with the

United Nations Millennium Campaign (UNMC), VSO India,

South Odisha Voluntary Action (SOVA), Samarthan and the

Governments of Odisha and Madhya Pradesh launched a

platform in 2010 called Samadhan, which allows residents to

use their mobile phones to file Right to Information requests

in a transparent and secure way.

Iniave

The aim of the Samadhan platform is to create a citizensservice-monitoring hub that helps residents to hold the

government to account, using mobile phone technology.

Residents can make a complaint to Samadhan about

problems with government services, such as ration cards

or their local health clinic, using their mobile phone, a

computer or by visiting a local District Collectors office.

Samadhan will then register these demands or complaints

with the appropriate government office which must process

the complaint and respond to the issue. The platform has

been built in such a way that complaints to the system are

automatically forwarded on to the appropriate government

body or ministry. Users of the system can then track the

status of their demand or complaint through Samadhan

using an individual ID number and are further able to verify

the issue has been resolved after the government has

taken action. The Samadhan system is transparent, so if

a government office has not taken action on a particular

complaint it can be publicised and public pressure canbe applied using civil society groups and the media. The

Samadhan pilot is currently underway in Koraput district,

Odisha and Sehore district, Madhya Pradesh.

By using the latest technology to provide the service, the

projects aim is to strengthen governance systems at the

grassroots level and provide an opportunity for poor and

marginalised communities, including women and persons

with disabilities, to get answers from the government and

better access to government services. A VSO volunteer

assisted with the initial stages of building the software

platform, to create an accessible, user-friendly website and

complaint submission system, and current VSO volunteers are

supporting the project implementation in Odisha.

OutcomesSamadhan was launched at the beginning of 2012. In the first

eight months of the pilot, 1,375 complaints were lodged in

Sehore and 408 in Koraput. Of these 1,783 complaints, almost

all have been processed by the appropriate government

office and 82 have been completely resolved. Broken down

by theme, the majority of issues in Koraput concerned

government services and livelihoods, particularly MGNREGA,and in Sehore the majority concerned the police, electricity

board or the Sehore sub-district government

vso social accountability report 2014

Documents