Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Best Practices and Lessons Learned on Community Driven Development and Gender Mainstreaming from the APMAS training/workshops, Hanoi and Delhi, November/December 2010
Contents
Background Summary of lessons learned Community Participation versus CDD Women in Development versus Gender and Development Intervention Logic and Responsibility See-Do-Get Self-fulfilling management attitudes Why and Challenges of Community Meetings Adult Learning Cycle Stakkeholder Analysis Key issues and lessons concerning PRA tools Methods used in WB Watsan film Nepal Comparison of some tools Working with Cards Notes on Wealth Ranking Options Prioritisation Matrix (OPM) Lessons on Visual Aids Monitoring (versus supervision) Examples of indicators in community self-monitoring Monitoring the effectiveness of your project community facilitators Annex A: Participants Evaluations Annex B: Participants Recommendations Annex C: Trainers Recommendations 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 5 6 7 7 9 9 10 11 11 11 12 13 18 20
Page 1 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Background
The Asian Project Management Support Programme (APMAS) aims to enhance capacity of project managers in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and India to implement and effectively manage gender sensitive, pro-poor rural development interventions, through training, information access and innovation. Late 2010 MDF Indochina has implemented two 4-day training programmes in Vietnam and India on Community Driven Development (CDD) and Gender Mainstreaming, from which the below lessons were drawn. The report below is a only a summary of highlights, as APMAS documented the events in full through pictures, and also captured facts tools at its website http://apmasnetwork.org (particularly at the community driven development tab) Further note that IFAD has published a kit with CDD decision tools which is available at http://www.ifad.org/english/cdd/pub/decisiontools.pdf Besides the summary of lessons, this report also contains: The participants evaluations of the two trainings (Annex A) The participants recommendations for further capacity development (Annex B) MDFs recommendations regarding further capacity development efforts (Annex C)
Project Manager
MDF Indochina copyright 2011
Project Participation
Community
Page 2 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Page 3 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Get
Changes in Doing (Skills), yields small gains. Changes in Seeing (Paradigm) allows for quantum leaps. Project managers and community facilitators have to able and motivated to get the best out of the projects. Managers moreovver need genuine convincing and excellent lsitening skills if they are to lead their staff to different convictions and behavior.
Why and Challenges of Community Meetings Why have Community Meetings? Get agreement with communities Democracy Community Consultation Seeking experiences and ideas from communities Planning with communities, need assessment, fund using Voting for the households, who can be beneficiries of project. Priority Conflict settelement Problem Analysis Information Dissemination Implementing activities Raising awareness Challenges of Community Meetings Not fully participatory, not all communities give inputs It is difficult to gather all people, levels of knowledge are different Participatory is not as the same levels Women are often shy and quiet Incline to be a small group discussions Diffirent in languages, diffirent interlecture and cultures Illustration tools are poor and out of date Old people are often dominated Not understanding local languages and customs Difficult to get agreement of every people.
Page 4 (21)
www.mdf.nl
1.EXPERIENCING
4.APPLYING
2.PROCESSING
Reflecting / Analysing
3.GENERALISING
Abstracting from experience to life
Stakeholder Analysis
This tool is to prevent that participation in participatory events is random, unbalanced and unrepresentative. 1. 2. 3. Establish the objective of your stakeholder workshop/meeting Identify stakeholders: All who have an interest (think broadly) Categorise the stakeholders and decide whom to involve how (and how many representatives to invite), considering the below matrix Protect Empower Involve Ignore Work together Advocate and Collaborate and/or Oppose Influence High
Influence Low
In which importance is judged from the point of view of the programme or project: Whether this group is the target group (poor, disadvantaged, women), while influence stands for power from the stakeholder to the others. Note that in the last box, stakeholders of low importance but high influence (often commercial companies), development thinking has evolved. Whether in the past such stakeholders were often looked at as a threat to be excommunicated, nowadays they are
Page 5 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Page 6 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Page 7 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Before you meet: Objective Before you meet: Who to involve Success factor at the start: Overall objective Success factor at the start: Specific objective Process pitfall
It is useless to make maps (out of habit) if it is unrelated to decision-making Be aware of interest if you use it to plan Include (and agree) purpose of the exercise Tell the purposes before drawing else it seems only entertainment Guidance should be short and crisp What is the mapping activity for?
Works best with three cicles only Decide on which sub-groups and keep them unless genuienly convinced otherwise Can use cards to assess the needs of each area
Cannot define exactly the needs in areas in general (heterogeneous) groups Some people think that the area of shared activity is by default the most important
Takes long time and may therefore be hard to keep participants meaningfully awake and aware Theoretically high validity, but if math are ill understood transparency is lost
Community must to get agreement on voting majority Quicker but less meaningful than pro-poor prioritising
Page 8 (21)
Good Card RMCs not convinced of ICIMODs relevance to poverty reduction Political instability Increase in infectious diseases Staff does not know the company strategy Most vegetables not timely transported to market Rural poor mistrust politicians Politicians accepted 1,000,000 $ in bribes Leaking roof destroys stored produce Some development organizations not quick enough
Reason (for Good and Bad) KISS (Keep It Short and Simple) and KILL (Keep It Large and Legible) One problem per card
Political instability and increase in infectious diseases Communication problems Not enough trucks Bad politicians
No balloons (be specific) Fight absent solutions Accept views as views . or find facts Fight absent solutions (again, because this happens so often) Those abbreviations! For info: PDQ = Pretty Damn Quick
Not enough money Sme dev. org. sld lrn to bcome PDQ
3. 4.
Page 9 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Notes: Distinguish between nice to know and need to know information. Wonder who needs to know. If it is you rrather than the community, take care not to unddermine CDD.
Between B&C
In C
Central+Bridge
3 Schools
Strength of OPM Can alllocate scarce resources optimally Enables to reach a wise and supported community decision, shaping the process Better way to come to concensus Facilitates to bring out in-depth issues, turning Yes, but or No, because fights into OK, and mutual enrichment Completely participatory and transparent Best example of By the the people, of the people and for the people
Page 10 (21)
Page 11 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Page 12 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Course Evaluation No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Aspects Achievement of training course objectives Effectiveness of course delivery methodology Facilitation skills for adult group Quality of training course materials Trainers Knowledge of development project management Relevance of case studies/examples used to development context Applicability to my work Overall outcome of the training course Duration of the training course Training facilities (classroom, equipments) Administrative and Logistics Arrangement 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Participants 3 4 5 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 7 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total Average Score 25 27 27 25 28 26 26 27 27 28 27 3.57 3.86 3.86 3.57 4.00 3.71 3.71 3.86 3.86 4.00 3.86
Page 13 (21)
Daily Evaluation (SMILEY) No 1 2 3 4 5 Facilitation Training Material Time Management Group Dynamics Logistics Aspects 0 0 0 0 0 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
1 1 6 2 0 7 7 2 6 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5
7 6 7 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
7 5 7 7 7
Page 14 (21)
Page 15 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Course Evaluation No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Aspects Achievement of training course objectives Effectiveness of course delivery methodology Facilitation skills for adult group Quality of training course materials Trainers Knowledge of development project management Relevance of case studies/examples used to development context Applicability to my work Overall outcome of the training course Duration of the training course Training facilities (classroom, equipments) Administrative and Logistics Arrangement Trainer: Mr. Diederik Prakke Trainer: Mr. Sathasivam Thilakan Participants 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 6 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 10 4 4 11 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 12 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 13 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 14 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 15 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 16 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 17 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 Total Score 67 66 62 66 67 64 65 67 58 56 52 68 62 Average 3.94 3.88 3.88 3.88 3.94 3.76 3.82 3.94 3.41 3.29 3.25 4.00 3.65
Page 16 (21)
0 1 0 7 1 17 16 17 10 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
17 17 17 17 16 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 9 2 5
15 15 8 15 12
Page 17 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Page 18 (21)
www.mdf.nl
India
Page 19 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Page 20 (21)
www.mdf.nl
Mentoring modules could be: Personal coaching (4 persons per day) Assistance to training module development and mentoring (through a reflection day after joint training implementation) of local training providers Recomendations concerning the CCD/Gender training module We agree with the APMAS recommendation to integrate gender more throughout, rather than only in some exercises duriung the first two days We also agree with the APMAS recommendation to refer more to the extensive training file given to the participants during the training, so that they know more what they have and where to find it Translation of this training material into Lao. Khmer and Vietnamese may be considered As in many trainings, some participants asked for more background information, whereas experiences shows that the more material is provided, the smaller the percentage that is being studied. In this context participants from India seemed more genuinely eager to read more, whereas their English was also good. Therefore, in future courses in India, more background materials may be provided, whereas in the other countries this may not be advisable Repeat this module for Laos and/or Cambodia If the above iis done, invite Vietamese partners who missed out, but then require good English language proficiency from the Vietnamese Through timely invitation and massaging that this information is communicated through, future trainings may be more fully participated in. In this message, female participation in the events may be specially encouraged The groups were fairly heterogeneous in level, which posed a challenge but also opportunities (in terms of facilitating communication between them which is key to management effectiveness). Even so, if in future more heterogeneous groups can be constituted, this may be an advantage
Page 21 (21)
www.mdf.nl