Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
of the Katine
Community Partnerships Project
August 2009
Hazel Slavin
Table of Contents
Acronyms .............................................................................................................................ii
Executive summary...............................................................................................................iii
List of recommendations.......................................................................................................vi
Introduction...........................................................................................................................1
The relationship between the Guardian and AMREF............................................................3
The Conceptual Basis of the Project.....................................................................................6
Project Activities....................................................................................................................8
Views from the District level..................................................................................................10
Views from Sub–County ......................................................................................................15
Views from three Parishes....................................................................................................16
Views from the Community...................................................................................................20
Gender and equity issues.....................................................................................................22
Questioning the Community..................................................................................................23
Achievement rating (see Annex 10)......................................................................................24
AMREF Management ..........................................................................................................25
The Project Time Frame.......................................................................................................26
Planning for Year Three........................................................................................................27
Planning workshop, 15–17 September 2009........................................................................28
2010 and beyond..................................................................................................................29
1. T
he Mid–Term Review (MTR) of the KCPP took place in July 2009, led by Hazel Slavin, an independent
consultant contracted by AMREF, with support from Rick Davies, the Guardian’s independent evaluator.
2. T
he KCPP is a unique development project funded by donations from readers of the Guardian with
matching funds from Barclays Bank. It is an integrated Project of five components, Health, Education,
Water and sanitation (WATSAN), Livelihoods (including VSLA, a sob–component separately funded by
Barclays)and Community Empowerment. The KCPP works with partners from government structures
from District to village. There is considerable integration between components, particularly between
health, education and WATSAN.
3. A
fter the MTR was completed and a planning session held in September 2009, the Project will have
one full year to run. The purpose of the MTR was to assess progress against objectives in all five com-
ponents and to consider to what extent the project is on track.
4. In the absence of a LogFrame an achievement rating at the end of the MTR used the ‘specific ob-
jectives’ and ‘expected outcomes’ listed in the ToRs. The overall score for the Project at MTR is 2.9
(I highest—5 lowest).
5. T
he MTR was designed to be both inclusive and participative and used a mix of methods and constant
checks. The MTR interviewed District staff across the components as well as trainers from UWESO and
the veterinarian from FARM–Africa. Sub–County, Parish and Village committees were visited and villag-
ers discussed their concerns during informal conversations.
6. T
here is no MoU between AMREF and the Guardian and no ‘rules of engagement’ between the Guard-
ian and AMREF in London or Uganda. This has led to misunderstandings and conflict.
7. T
he many visitors to the Project has put the Team under some strain by taking up 10 per cent (lowest
estimate) of its working time.
8. In terms of the activities planned for Year 2, there has been considerable achievement and success:
this is not, however, an indication of impact which takes considerably longer to assess.
9. S
elf assessments by the Project team assessments show that the rate of implementation is uneven.
Looking across all the components, two–thirds were behind schedule at the end of June although it is
expected that at least two of the components will achieve near completion by the end of September.
10. The Project Steering committee felt that the capacity building, the setting up and training of Parish De-
velopment Committees, work with VHTs, schools and health centres, together with training, classroom
building, the VHTs and boreholes are the most successful aspects. Some members expressed doubts
about the level of capacity building in relation to the amount of infrastructure; many of the committee
would like to see more ‘hardware’ as evidence of change; there is a perception that a lot of money has
been spent on little that can be seen in terms of infrastructure. Some members of the committee had
expected more of the budget to be spent in Katine.
11. The Project Management Committee, concerned with day to day implementation of the project,
listed many achievements and was united in condemning the short time frame of the Project.
Members are disappointed that the Project had not planned for a health centre in Merok Parish nor
sunk more bore holes and there was a plea to consider irrigation to counter the lack of rain. Some
members feel that there has been too much emphasis on training but did see that the committees
were part of the recognised GoU structure that embodies the notion of planning at grassroots level
facilitating both topic–based and process training and there are reported improvements in coordina-
tion and community ownership.
13. Procurement has been slow and, on some occasions, prevented work from taking place. Agreements to
purchasing locally (as long as goods are of acceptable quality) will have the additional effect of bringing
business to Soroti and creating more wealth.
14. At the time of the MTR the UWESO team had set up 140 VSLA groups with at least one in each of
the 66 villages in Katine. There are also VSLA in each of the Farmers’ groups set up as part of the
Livelihoods component.. UWESO has an overambitious target of setting up 200 groups and this has
led to an anomalous situation. The grant for VSLA ends in September 2009 and each group needs
eight months of training and supervision before it likely to be established as a self–governing concern.
Groups were being formed at the time of the MTR which means, in effect, that some groups will have
less than a month of supervision.
15. The VSL groups have been highly successful and for a modest investment they really make a difference
to people’s lives. One group has completed a cycle and has started again. High value items, such as
heifers, bulls, ploughs, cement and bricks, were bought. Loans were used for school books, drugs and
small items to help income generation.
16. At Parish level there is conviction that the training received in planning, recording and making represen-
tation upwards will bring change. They have been equipped them with both knowledge and sustainable
skills. The number of latrines built has jumped dramatically. Ojama Parish recorded an increase from
118 in 2008 to 565 in mid–2009. But there is much concern about lack of good quality water.
17. Two Heath Centres recorded higher levels of attendance for treatment, very high rates of immunisation
and more women delivering in the Health Centre lV where, at the time of the MTR there were drugs
(including Fansidar for malaria, Nivirapine for paediatric ARV and ARVs for adults) but ‘stockouts’ are
normal. A laboratory has been built and equipped at the health Centre ll but there is no full time member
of staff. Both health Centres have active HUMC.
18. VHTs are highly active and instrumental in helping to raise rates of ante–natal attendees, deliveries at
the heath centre, improving sanitation and hygiene levels in the villages by promoting pit latrines and
‘ideal’ homesteads.
19. Two schools have been built, 10 classrooms renovated and 14 are in the process of renovation. Desks
and text books have been provided to schools. Latrines have been built at all schools and three have
rain water harvesting tanks. Schools report higher rates of enrollment. AMREF–facilitated training has
been very successful; school sanitation has been improved through PHASE training, teachers and par-
ents have learned how to make teaching and learning aids. There is improved performance and attend-
ance among teachers. School Management Committee training has been very successful and will be
rolled across the District.
20. The football tournament was a success and has inspired both girls and boys to take an active part in
sport. Women’s football has been well received. Nets, balls and kit have been distributed by the Project
and skills have improved. This is seen as emancipating for the girls involved and inspiring for the boys.
21. The Community Media Centre has a regular throughput of users and 100 have been trained to use a
computer, send emails and surf the web.
22. Water Source Committees have been set up across the sub–county, those visited were clean and well
maintained. The success rate for collecting money has varied. Drought has caused crops to fail and
there is less income; collecting water fees may be increasingly difficult and without money a failed
pump will not be repaired.
24. There is concern about the lack of gender equality in all committees and amongst teachers and VHTs.
There is a predominance of women in the VSLA groups. The emphasis on rolling out training on ‘rights
based approaches’ should address this to some extent.
25. Ninety per cent of 53 persons interviewed said that they had experienced some change in their and/or
their family’s life since the start of 2008. Those interviewed were able to describe the changes and what
they would like to see KCPP provide in the next year. This is a mix of infrastructure, school desks and
books, clean water and farm animals at the top of the list.
26. There is a need for AMREF in Kampala to provide more management support to the Katine office. Deci-
sions are seen to be made too slowly because most of them have to be referred to Kampala.
27. AMREF staff in Katine haven’t had any opportunity for staff development; they should be facilitated to
go to conferences to learn from others as well as disseminate the KCPP.
28. Three years is short time for a development project, a further year would allow the KCPP to achieve its
objectives and hand over to its government partners. This requires further funding from the Guardian
and Barclays.
29. Year Three should focus on some key critical interventions, including what has been committed in terms
of infrastructure. Critical interventions should ensure maximum impact, sustainability and reflect what
the community wants.
30. A workshop in September 2009 must agree key decisions about KCPP’s future; Will there be a fourth
year funded by the Guardian and Barclays? If so there must be an agreement of the partnerships roles
to the end of 2010 and beyond. Agree ‘rules of engagement’ and produce an outline plan for what criti-
cal interventions can take place before then end of 2010.
31. AMREF is testing a model that can be replicated by government, AMREF is not a replacement for gov-
ernment and must not be considered as such. KCPP cannot provide the answer to the many problems
in Katine sub–county, it can only model ways of working based on best practice. Any work that takes
place in Year Four should be in total partnership with local government—and not seen as an AMREF
water source, or AMREF classroom or AMREF training. Some co–funding from the government is desir-
able. By the end of the KCCP AMREF will hand over the Project completely to the government.
1. T
o clarify roles and responsibilities of the two partners, The Guardian/AMREF and CARE/AMREF(in
KAMPALA) should agree appropriate MoUs as soon as possible.
2. T
he Guardian and AMREF London and Uganda should discuss and agree collaborative ‘rules of en-
gagement’ as soon as possible, preferably at the planning meeting in September 2009.
3. It would be useful if Guardian staff arranged a short workshop for AMREF staff in Uganda, to help them
learn how best to respond to the blogs.
4. A
MREF should devise more creative ways of presenting the Project in a more purposeful way and be-
gin by changing its reporting format.
5. A
MREF must engage in a team building and public relations exercise with the Steering Committee to
counter misconceptions on both sides about what can, and cannot, be achieved.
6. T
he Terms of Reference for the Steering and Management Committees should be reviewed to ensure
relevance and effectiveness. Each member must be made aware of the Management committee’s re-
sponsibilities in tracking the Project.
7. A
n urgent review must be made of the committees at Sub–County level to determine whether they are
necessary, combined or reconstituted to take account of all Project components, Sub–county and Par-
ish committees must be assisted to make regular reports to the Management Committee, reports from
AMREF are not appropriate.
8. It is recommended that the procurement department in AMREF Kampala puts a strategy in place to deal
more quickly with requests from the KCPP and makes every attempt to source items locally in the District.
9. It is recommended that Barclays continue to fund the VSLA groups in Katine for at least a further year.
During this time, the existing groups should be supported and new groups set up no later than eight
months before the end date of the funding.
10. Discussions between CARE and UWESO need to take place about the merits of their collaboration to
try and reduce the levels of bureaucracy and transaction costs.
11. AMREF Kampala must provide more day–to–day management support at field level at the earliest opportunity.
12. All staff should be offered appropriate staff development opportunities to attend conferences or study tours.
13. It is recommended that he Guardian and Barclays continue funding a further year of the Project (until
2011) to ensure that objectives are fully achieved.
14. If no further funding is obtained from other sources, AMREF must develop an exit plan for how it will
respond if a number of project staff seek to leave KCPP for other employment before the project ends in
late 2010. Failure to do so could jeopardise the Project’s progress in the last months of 2010.
15. AMREF and its partners must redesign the third year budget to put the maximum funds into agreed
activities and interventions.
16. KCPP cannot provide the answer to the many problems in Katine sub–county, it can only model ways of
working based on best practice. Any work that takes place in Year Four should be in total partnership with
local government and by the end of the Project KCPP must become the responsibility of government.
The KCPP is a unique development project funded by donations from readers of the Guardian with match-
ing funds from Barclays Bank. It is an integrated Project of five components:
● Health
● Education
● Water and sanitation (WATSAN)
● Livelihoods (including VSLA)
● Community Empowerment
The Guardian runs a dedicated website to track the progress, successes and difficulties of the project
which is implemented by AMREF together with specific inputs providing technical support from CARE/
UWESO and FARM–Africa. Barclays separately funds a sub–element of the Livelihoods component, to
encourage the setting up and running of voluntary savings and loans associations (VSLA).
The MTR was guided by Terms of Reference (ToR) written by AMREF and agreed by all partners. The ToR
are Annex 1. The review took place over three weeks and a complete itinerary is Annex 2. The MTR pro-
vides a snapshot of the Project after 18 months of work from January 2008–June 2009. Initial organisation,
planning and recruiting staff began in October 2007. Some initial work began in November and implementa-
tion started properly in January 2008. In effect that means that after the MTR was completed, and a plan-
ning session held in September 2009, the Project has one full year to run.
The purpose of the MTR was to assess progress against objectives in all five components and to con-
sider to what extent the project is on track. The scope of the MTR was on interim results at outcome
level that contribute to achieving the longer term goal of improving the quality of lives for the people of
Katine, what has helped and what has hindered (in terms of expected and unexpected outcomes) and
provide recommendations on how to strengthen outcomes for sustainability for the remainder of the
project. This MTR report does not reiterate all the facts and figures that are easily found in the AMREF
six–monthly reports.
Report Structure
Because the KCPP is integrated in terms of its components and with government and the community,
this MTR report is structured to highlight the perspectives of the beneficiaries, as seen from District,
Sub–county, Parish and Community levels.
Two major issues are discussed; the Project and its donors and the duration of the Project. The manage-
ment of the Project is considered and recommendations are made for the remaining life of the Project to
maximise impact, ensure sustainability and meet the wishes of the community and Project partners.
Constraints
A major constraint in attempting to review and give an achievement rating to the Project is the lack of a
succinct LogFrame. There are lists of activities and ‘outcomes’ in different places and the nearest that the
Project has to a framework that sets out what it intends to do, and how it will be measured, is the 20 page
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Framework listing every sub–component. The achievement rating at the
Because of a family crisis his involvement in the MTR ended unexpectedly on 9th July.
The summary of achievements annex (6) is based on the reports.
LogFrames (logical frameworks) are universally used by all donors. It is summary of the work to be done, what the expected results (impact)
will be, and it will be measured and what risks and assumptions exist that may jeopardise the project.
MTR methods
The MTR was designed to be both inclusive and participative. The methods used during this MTR included:
Interview and discussion questions were based on guidance developed by the OECD Development As-
sistance Committee (DAC), performance measures associated with the Paris Declaration and two others
proposed by the External Evaluator.
● DAC
efficiency
effectiveness
relevance
impact
sustainability
● Paris Declaration
harmonisation
alignment
● External Evaluator
equity
transparency
Two types of checks were put in place. A de–briefing meeting was held with team members after the review
of each component. The MTR process was reviewed regularly and again after the draft report was written.
Along with the knowns in development there are the unknowns and often these make for progress which
can be two steps forward and one back—or at worst—two or three back. The MTR team saw this, starkly,
in Katine. Despite the new strains of cassava and ground nuts carefully planted in a new way, weeded and
tended, the crop is failing because there is inadequate rainfall. The Project Team could not have predicted
that the hard work they have done with farmers would end in crop failure. Then come the ramifications; less
or, at worst, no food means children are less likely to go to school, surplus crops which might have been
sold aren’t available so income decreases and there is severe undernourishment.
Development, by its nature, is slow, sometimes excruciatingly so. Infrastructure can take time, perhaps
waiting for deliveries of cement and bricks and, if building is taking place using community members, lo-
cal people may have to tend their fields and leave the building site. It is generally accepted that behaviour
change in health and education may take from three to five years and only then with constant reinforcement
that has to take into account the nuances of cultural pressure such as local beliefs about women, the place
of children, taboos about dirt, beliefs about fate and individual self determination.
Contrast this with Guardian reporters who want stories and understandably want them fast and often. On
the ground there may be few stories that make the Project look effective and efficient. Stories of woe may
reinforce negative stereotypes of the country, its people and of the failure of development. Added to this
mix is the openness of the website with its ‘bloggers’ and respondents. This is the first experience that the
Team has had with the media and a website. There was no understanding of what blogging and respond-
ing is about. It would have been hard to predict the effect of both constant scrutiny, and what is sometimes
perceived as negative comment, on the Project team who go to work anticipating what they might see on
the website to make them feel upset, sometimes confused and angry. Understanding the conventions of the
website and blogging is new in Katine and the Guardian could help in the learning process.
Recommendation…
It would be useful if Guardian staff arranged a short workshop for AMREF staff in Uganda, to help
them learn how best to respond to the blogs.
This is not to say that real difficulties and mistakes haven’t been reported well. The Project continues
to learn from errors of judgment and has made changes accordingly, for example, using local building
contractors. Working together has been a steep learning curve; for the Guardian to learn the complex-
ity, frustrations, disappointments, problems and pace of development and for AMREF to be in the media
spotlight. AMREF certainly didn’t realise what being part of a media project would entail or, perhaps, even
the purpose of it and should have been more assertive about what it could or could not do to accommo-
date the needs of the Guardian.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the aftermath of the football tournament. Arrangements for the tourna-
ment cut across all other, planned, activities for several months and there appears to have been a break-
down in effective communication. Although Team members see the tournament as a useful, groundbreaking
activity with high quality educational effects, it is now evident that they were overwhelmed by the task but
did not admit this to the Guardian. The locally employed football consultant was not properly briefed about
the processes that needed to be in place by either the Guardian or AMREF which made matters worse. The
“ As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.” Donald
Rumsfeld, former US Defence Secretary, 2002
The KCPP has received far more visitors than any development project would expect and coping with the
almost constant stream of visitors—not only from the Guardian—has put some strain on the Project team.
An estimation of days spent hosting visitors and therefore lost to work has been difficult to obtain as no
accurate records have been kept but the best lowest ‘guesstimate’ from September 2007 until July 2009 is
2110 person hours; 264 working days. How this figure has been calculated can be seen in Annex 4. There
have been many visits not included on the table and this figure does not include any time spent on the foot-
ball tournament.
There are two underlying problems here; there is no agreed ‘memorandum of understanding’ (MoU) be-
tween the Guardian and AMREF about who does what and who makes decisions when new activities or
events take place. Who is in charge? Is it AMREF staff or the Guardian? There should be a clear set of
rules that satisfy all parties about the role of each of them. It is noted that no MoU exists between AMREF
and CARE in Uganda and this too must be rectified.
Secondly, there is a need to set some ‘rules of engagement’ for working together in the third year as the
Guardian and AMREF would both benefit from working together creatively rather than by responding de-
fensively after the event. At the end of 2007 a so–called Team Day took place in London to “establish clarity
around governance and planning for the success of the partnership” but any agreements made at that
meeting appear not to have held and the relationship has become guarded and, occasionally, adversarial. It
would be worth revisiting the agreements made at the Team Day and agree a set of ‘rules’ based on some
key principles such as:
Furthermore, and critically, there are no ‘rules of engagement’ between the Guardian and AMREF in Uganda.
Agreements made for working together are between the parties in London but the action is in Uganda.
Recommendation…
The Guardian/AMREF and CARE/AMREF should agree appropriate MoUs as soon as possible.
It is fair to say that AMREF’s response to the blogs often appears defensive and the way the Project presents
itself is not always clear to the Guardian or its readers. New ways must be found to report both success and
problems in a more forthright and balanced manner that strikes a balance between the on–the–ground reality
of community–based development and the need for interesting stories.
Recommendation…
The Guardian and AMREF London and Uganda should discuss and agree collaborative ‘rules of
engagement’ as soon as possible, preferably at the planning meeting in September 2009.
Output notes, Partnership Workshop, 27th November 2007, Manny Amadi, Cause & Effect Ltd
Recommendation…
AMREF should devise more creative ways of presenting the Project in a more purposeful way and
begin by changing its reporting format.
Uganda’s Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) is the framework for both national development and for
striving to achieve the (MDGs). The Project is structured around the PEAP’s 5th pillar which recognises
that a healthy, well–educated, productive population is a necessary condition for development and pri-
oritises health outcomes through the involvement of other sectors including WATSAN, education, liveli-
hoods and community empowerment, in order to address the underlying socio–economic determinants of
ill–health in Uganda.
The five components have an agreed set of objectives and sub–objectives summarised here.
Health
The Health component of the project works closely with the Director of Health and training implemented
by the Project is supported by input from District trainers. Aligned closely to the Government of Uganda’s
Health Sector Support Programme 11 (HSSP 11) the health component recognises that poor health is the
leading cause and consequence of poverty in Uganda so it:
● focuses on promoting health
● preventing disease
● the provision of basic curative services
● prioritises immunisation, sanitation and hygiene, reproductive health, malaria and HIV/AIDS
● emphasises the role of communities, households and the individual’s ownership of health and
health services
● builds capacity of health sub district and Village Health Teams (VHT) for more effective and equitable
service delivery
Education
The education component has close liaison with the District Inspector of Schools in Katine and the Centre
Coordinating Tutor (attached to the Soroti Primary Teaching College) and seeks to:
● focus on child–centered methodologies to improve academic performance
● promote adolescent–friendly reproductive health counseling
The WATSAN component works closely with the District Water office and other water–related agencies in
Soroti District. It seeks to:
● increase access to safe water
● Increase access to basic sanitation
● increase personal hygiene amongst community members
● facilitate community empowerment to manage water sources effectively
Livelihoods
There are two distinct but related activities in the livelihoods component. One is concerned with improving
farming methods to improve crop yield, encourage planting of new varieties of seeds, raise nursery beds
and improve capacity. The other is to form VSLA groups—some of which are farmers associations while
others are groups of villagers. The VSLA activities are technically supported by UWESO and Barclays fund
this sub–component separately.
Community Empowerment
● This component is instrumental in supporting the Project Steering Committee and works across all the
components. It seeks to:
● strengthen local governance
● enhance community planning to meet community needs
● enable people to mobilise, organise, communicate and participate within the formal sector to demand
and receive basic services
Each component links both conceptually and in daily working practice. Health, Education and WATSAN
are closely allied with each other; effort has been made to ensure that schools have adequate latrines and
there is emphasis on health and hygiene education. The Livelihoods component underpins the need to im-
prove the socio–economic situation of the community in Katine. Community Empowerment is a “cross–cut-
ting” component, setting up, training and empowering committees at school, health centre, water source,
village, parish and sub–county level.
In terms of the activities planned for Year 2, there has been considerable achievement and success: this
is not, however, an indication of impact which takes considerably longer to assess. For example, raising
the school enrollment of girls is certainly happening but the impact from doing this will not be measurable
for some years until after girls leave school and seek further study or employment. Similarly, the increased
immunisation rates now will only begin to show in the epidemiological figures three to five years after the
event. Some simpler, observable, measures do exist to track impact more quickly; rates of diarrhoea and
malaria are said to be going down but in general these are anecdotal measures and more difficult to attri-
bute to any one activity within the space of one and a half years. For example, malaria rates may be going
down because more people are using ITNs but if there is drought, there is less standing water and fewer
mosquitoes. Changes in day–to–day school attendance and completion rates at the end of the year have
been reported and are more likely to be directly attributable to Project input.
There is considerable integration between components, particularly between health, education and WAT-
SAN (for example in the building of latrines in schools with lessons and activities on hygiene and health)
and this is to be both expected and applauded. To some extent there has been work with schoolchildren on
empowerment (using the media centre) and with all components in the formulation, running and training of
77 community committees. The Livelihoods component is less integrated at the moment, although the set-
ting up of school gardens is one way to bring new agricultural methods into school work, for example.
A major activity completed by the Project Team during the MTR was a self–assessment of the implementa-
tion of each component and these are shown in detail, with the sub–objectives, in Annex 7 and in summary
below. The tables show implementation of activities during the first 18 months of the Project with a mix of
infrastructure and training across the components. The assessments show that the rate of implementation
is uneven. Looking across all the components, two–thirds were behind schedule at the end of June. It could
be expected that 75 per cent would be completed by the end of September but this looks unlikely to happen
except in the Health and WATSAN components.
Summary of Annex 7, each objective has sub–objectives and these are in turn linked to outcomes.
Health
NO of % completed Expected %
Objectives
activities by June 09 by Sept 09
Improve community–based treatment and care for HIV/AIDS,
8 93.2% 100%
malaria, TB, RH and childhood illnesses
Improve quality health services for HIV.AIDS, malaria, TB,
9 75% 88%
RH and childhood illnesses
Strengthen rural health systems 7 60.7% 68%
Education
NO of % completed Expected %
Objectives
activities by June 09 by Sept 09
Improve teaching and learning environment 13 73.1% 92.3%
Promote inclusive education of girls, disabled children,
4 50% 50%
orphans and vulnerable children (OVC)
Katine Community Partnerships Project 6 month narrative report October 2008—March 2009, prepared by Oscar Okech
Reviewing Katine, to mark the mid–way point of the Project and focusing on the five project components health, education, water and
sanitation and livelihoods
WATSAN
NO of % completed Expected %
Objectives
activities by June 09 by Sept 09
Improve access to safe water 5 34.5% 34.5%
Increase rates of personal hygiene and access to basic
3 83% 100%
sanitation
Facilitate community empowerment to mange water
5 55% 60%
sources effectively
Livelihoods
NO of % completed Expected %
Objectives
activities by June 09 by Sept 09
Community Empowerment
NO of % completed Expected %
Objectives
activities by June 09 by Sept 09
Strengthen local governance 9 33.3% 90%
Enhance Community planning to meet community needs
12 32.3% 83.7%
better
The following section of the MTR attempts to provide an overview of the KCPP from the perspectives of
stakeholders at different levels of local government organisation.
The committee mentioned that the capacity building, the setting up and training of Parish Development
Committees, work with VHTs, schools and health centres, together with training, classroom building, the
VHTs and boreholes are the most successful aspects. There are those on the committee who expressed
doubts about the level of capacity building in relation to the amount of infrastructure; many of the committee
would like to see more ‘hardware’ as evidence of change.
Members acknowledged that school attendance has increased but suggested that the Project is only part of
District attempts to raise enrollment rates. One member of the committee described the training for School
Management Committees (SMCs) as ‘wonderful’ and said the model will be rolled out across the entire dis-
trict. This is a major success. The committee applauded the football tournament as it was focused solely on
youth and raised the profile of sport for girls as well as boys.
There is, nevertheless, a perception that a lot of money has been spent on little that can be seen in terms of
infrastructure. Just how much money is available is a figure that can be misrepresented but the entire sum
when broken into management, transport and staff costs leaves a reasonable—but not excessive—amount
for activities and work on the ground. The figure is at least 70 per cent of the total budget and this is re-
garded as an acceptable amount in development projects worldwide. Some members of the committee had
expected the entire budget to be spent in Katine and are disappointed and angry. This anger goes beyond
financial issues; a vociferous group questions elements of AMREF’s approach, particularly on the issue of
hardware/software, and this has had an effect on how some members view AMREF management.
Recommendation…
AMREF must engage in a team building and public relations exercise with the Steering Committee
to counter misconceptions on both sides about what can, and cannot, be achieved.
The Project Management Committee, concerned with day to day implementation of the project, is co–
chaired by the Sub–county Chief.
This comment was mentioned several times during the MTR, apparently by visitor from the Guardian, but no–one was able, or willing, to
say who made it.
The committee was united in condemning the short time frame of the Project and was disappointed that the
Project had not planned for a health centre in Merok Parish nor sunk more bore holes and there was a plea
to consider irrigation to counter the lack of rain. Some members feel that there has been too much empha-
sis on training but did see that the committees were part of the recognised GoU structure that embodies the
notion of planning at grassroots level, from Village Development Committee (VDC) to Parish Development
Committee (PDC) to the District. It was reported that the system hadn’t functioned well before the AMREF
training, it is now working better and is much more likely to be sustainable because the structure is embed-
ded in the system.
The Management Committee is charged with reading and responding to reports from the district and Sub–
Counties, yet the Sub–County Health Committee has not met since October 2008 and the Management
Committee has not appeared to have noted this anomaly. AMREF appears to be the main source of infor-
mation about the Project, whereas it should be the various committees that report on the Project.
Recommendation…
The Terms of Reference for the Steering and Management Committees should be reviewed to ensure
relevance and effectiveness. Each member must be made aware of the Management committee’s
responsibilities in tracking the Project.
Sub–county and Parish committees must be assisted to make regular reports to the Management
Committee.
The Acting District Health Officer has responsibility for the performance of Heath Centres. He applauded
the training for VHTs and explained that AMREF coordinated and facilitated but much of the training was
done by District government staff who also identified the appropriate participants. In outlining the problems
in the sub–county he explained that staff norms were well below GoU targets. The lack of human resources
for health is a critical issue in Uganda and particularly in Katine. AMREF is adding value to the health ser-
vice by facilitating both topic–based and process training and there are reported improvements in coordina-
tion and community ownership.
The Area School Inspector works closely with the Project team members. He referred to better running of
schools through the training of School Management Committees (SMCs) with Parent/Teacher Associa-
tions (PTAs) together other parents growing engagement with schools. AMREF has facilitated training on
the GoU’s new ‘thematic” curriculum10 for primary schools and worked with teachers on lesson plans that
include evaluation techniques. Personal hygiene, gender issues, music, dance and drama (MDD) and sport
are highlighted as successful ventures. Schools are taking action to prevent absenteeism. More children
attend school in the morning than the afternoon. Many children arrive at school having had no food and
although some run home at lunchtime, most do not eat until four o’clock in the afternoon. Currently there is
no school feeding programme.
The Inspector thought the impact from the AMREF facilitated training was “great”. Parents now see schools
as part of their community and part of their responsibility. He believed that the mood in Katine had changed;
teachers know what to do and are more motivated; parents feel involved and pupils know what is expected
of them. Schools were cleaner, tidier and more hygienic.
10 The curriculum is taught in local language and focuses on local issues for all curriculum subjects until Primary Year 5.
Plans to be made for year three of the Project must take into account the infrastructure and material
needs of schools.
The Centre Coordinating Tutor is attached to the teacher training college in Soroti. He provides all newly
trained teachers with support and guidance for one year. His particular concerns are the lack of houses for
teachers and the lack of food in schools. He is working with AMREF as part of the training team. He sees
the training as an important step in bringing equity to the education sector.
The District Water Officer (DWO), together with the Water Officer in charge of hygiene and sanitation
promotion and Water Officer in charge of community mobilisation spoke of improved water provision in
Katine; the eight bore holes provided through the Project brought the total number to 57. The District staff
work closely with the AMREF team and undertake joint work on planning and water quality testing as well
as community sensitisation and training. Geological differences in Katine result in some water tasting
salty whilst other water has an iron flavour. The DWO recognised that Operation and Maintenance pres-
ents a problem of sustainability but believed that the water source committees (WSCs), equipped with
new skills from the training, could overcome this problem. He contrasted AMREF’s approach to that of
the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF) that set up WSCs before construction, provided little
support afterwards and saw enthusiasm and numbers dwindle within two years. Having a paid caretaker
is less likely to see the committee fade. He recognised poor financial management by some committees
but models exist for sustainability and financial probity. In time it may be possible for WSO to elect to be-
come a VSLA. Monitoring is undertaken
on a quarterly basis by a sub–county
committee who charge the Parish Chief
with responsibility to ensure functionality
of water sources.
11 The highest ratio of pupils to latrine is 115:1 and the lowest 15:1
12 Largest class = 108 pupils, smallest = 45
The Project has been successful in providing new varieties of ground nuts and cassava and the promotion
of nursery beds to grow seedlings13 to plant or sell. Farmers have been taught new skills, such as the visu-
ally evident row planting, rather than scattering seeds in all directions. Nevertheless, drought has rendered
much of the healthy crop useless. Farmers want more input and a variety of implements such as fertiliser,
wheelbarrows and hand tools. The District team point to success in the following areas:
However it is known that, in general, training without the necessary start–up kits for farmers is not
helpful and AMREF must acknowledge this has been a mistake and ensure that kits are provided for
newly formed groups.
Learning good animal husbandry is a necessity. The farming system, with open, unfenced farms, leads to
animal ill–health because the “sick meet the healthy.” The training of seven para–vets by the FARM–Africa
veterinarian has been a successful venture and four of them were interviewed by the MTR team. The para–
vets were trained in simple veterinary procedures and business skills in February 2009 but, to date, they
have been prevented from working by the lack of an agreed kit of gumboots, raincoat, bag, instruments14
and drugs. The para–vets, who will make money from selling their services and drugs then re–stock their
drug kit from local drug shops are frustrated by having to wait.
The issue of local purchasing has been a difficult one for AMREF and hasn’t yet been solved. Buying in
bulk from Kampala may, in some cases, be cost–effective and checks on quality easier but it is reported
that on many occasions this has caused lengthy delays. In an interview with the FARM–Africa veterinarian
it was evident that this has caused friction. She is clear that the simple equipment and drugs are easily ob-
tainable in Soroti and could be sourced and delivered in a matter of days. There is no reason why AMREF
cannot speed up the purchase process and discussions in Kampala, after the MTR field work, suggest that
it will. It is acknowledged by AMREF that procurement has taken too long and action has been agreed to
ensure faster local procurement as long as the quality of goods is acceptable. Faster purchasing and buy-
ing locally have the additional effect of bringing business to Soroti and creating more wealth.
Recommendation…
It is recommended that the procurement department in AMREF Kampala puts a strategy in place to
deal more quickly with requests from the KCPP and makes every attempt to source items locally in
the District.
UWESO is implementing the VSLA programme under the guidance of CARE who pioneered the work and
devised and tested the methodology. Groups must have 15 or more members but never more than 30 and
there are six sessions of training on group formation, VSLA concepts and leadership, elections, by–laws
and constitution, record keeping, meeting procedures and conflict resolution and practicing saving and
loaning. Members are expected to attend all meetings and be smartly dressed. Those who are late pay a
small fine. The procedures for the meeting are ritualised and undertaken in reverent silence.
UWESO has an overambitious target of setting up 200 groups and this has led to an anomalous situation.
The grant for VSLA ends in September 2009 and each group needs eight months of training and supervi-
sion before it likely to be established as a self–governing concern. Groups were being formed at the time of
the MTR which means, in effect, that some groups will have less than a month of supervision. It was agreed
that no further groups would be formed and in the last two months, effort would be made to train the new
groups up to a point where it might be possible for them to continue.
The VSL groups have been highly successful and for a modest investment they really make a difference.
Recommendation…
It is recommended that Barclays continue to fund the VSLA groups in Katine for at least one further
year. During this time, the existing groups should be supported and new groups set up no later than
six months before the end date of the funding.
UWESO has mastered the training and support of VSLA groups and it is debatable now whether
both the UK and Kampala CARE offices can add value to this component other than as a conduit
for receiving funding.
Recommendation…
Discussions between CARE and UWESO need to take place about the merits of their collaboration to
try and reduce the levels of bureaucracy and transaction costs.
VSLA could be introduced on a trial basis for other community committees where money changes hands. A
trial of two or three committees should start if the committee has running successfully for at least one year
and has proved it can manage its finances.
The outcome of the training includes better planning and sensitisation of the community about sanitation
and hygiene. One member of the committee described changes in one village as an example. AMREF
provided tool kits for Abata Village and 30 model homesteads now exist when a year ago there were
less than 10 and the school now has one latrine. The committee members collect information from VHTs
monthly reports.
The Sub–County Health Committee has three sub–sections; sanitation, operation and management (O&M)
and hygiene. Lack of funds have prevented the committee meeting regularly and the previous full meeting
was in October 2008.
Recommendation…
An urgent review must be made of the committees at Sub–County level to determine whether they are:
● necessary—and if not they should be disbanded
● combined
● reconstituted to take account of all Project components
Committee members felt that the Project has brought many benefits; boreholes, permanent class-
rooms, bicycles for the VHTs, sanitation kits and latrines in schools. Having trial ECOSANs16 was seen
as a good outcome.
Again the issues of lack of adequate safe water and health facilities were raised in Ojama. However
the committee is convinced that the training they have received in planning, recording and making
representation upwards will bring change. The PDC was proud of its inclusive membership consist-
ing of youth, elders, the disabled, a good gender balance and people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA).
Although the committee had received earlier training, from the District in 1997 with refresher training in
2004, members feel that the training received from the Project has equipped them with both knowledge
and sustainable skills.
The members of the PHC reported that they had plans to build more latrines, keep records of meetings and
have ‘smart’ work plans.
15 The GoU provides treatment for malaria but there are constant ‘stockouts’ in the Health Centres. It is outside of the mandate of an NGO
such as AMREF as it cannot be seen to be replacing or interfering in the role of government. AMREF does collaborate with NGOs that do
have a mandate for supplying drugs and it also advocates at National and local level.
16 The ECOSAN is sustainable and has the added value of providing dry compost and wet fertiliser. The pit for the latrine is constructed above
ground with steps leading to the concrete cubicle. Each cubicle has two sets of footplates and holes, one in use and one covered, set over
two concrete storage pits. Each hole separates urine from faeces. Urine drains directly into a tank which has a tap. Faeces are stored in a
concrete pit with a metal lockable shutter. When the pit is full the second hole is used which feeds the second pit. After six months, the first
pit is opened and the dry compost can be removed and the pit is then used again. There is doubt about the cultural acceptability of using
human waste as fertiliser in Uganda.
Members of the committee meet once a month and have received training on mobilising the community,
sanitation and health. The committee noted that women find it difficult to talk in meetings. Being healthy
on the farm is important, malaria, safe water and eradication of worms are top priorities. The committee
monitors the work of the VHTs. Members recognise that change is difficult and see the difference be-
tween teaching and the promotion of new behaviours as “saying it over and over until it’s done” and they
use new by–laws to reinforce messages. AMREF has trained masons to produce sanitation slabs (col-
loquially called sanplats19) in each parish. They cost 7,000UGX (£2.03)20 compared to 15,000UGX in the
market. Only 20 have been sold; this is seen as in indication of increasing poverty caused by changing
economic circumstances.
The Ojama Parish Sanitation Committee reported their key tasks as collecting data (population and the
number of households, pit latrines and ideal homesteads) and sensitising people at village level. The data
helps with planning at sub–county level and allows feedback to the community. At the start of 2008 there
were 118 pit latrines in the parish, now there 565. Nineteen sanplats were made but only five have been
bought. Of seven boreholes (one provided by the project) only four are providing constant water and water
levels are low. Of 623 households only 154 can draw safe water.
At Ojom interviews and discussions were held with the 14 member of the VHT, four members of the
Health Unit Management Committee (HUMC) and toured the facilities. The VHT reported their work as
focusing on:
17 A common belief is that women who use a latrine will be unable to get pregnant. The committee is trying to change this by discussion and
education.
18 The Tippy Tap is a simple device for hand washing with running water. A plastic container with a small hole near the cap is filled with water
and tipped by standing on a stick attached to a rope tied trough a hole in the cap. The plastic container then tilts and water runs onto the
hands.
19 Sanplats are locally–made concrete platforms for latrines, they are easier to clean than logs or planks.
20 Exchange rate during July 2009: 1000UGX = 29p.
21 Women are discouraged from attending for the recommended four visits because of distance from the health facility, staff shortages and
poor, unacceptable, staff attitudes.
At Tiriri Health Centre lV, the VHT coordinator spoke of a reduction in many diseases and attributed this to
the work and training of the VHTs. The distribution of ITNs for children >5 and for pregnant women, ‘friendly
relationships’ with households that encourage use of nets together with a cleaner environment and less
standing water has led to a reduction in rates of malaria (no figures available). The Parish has 256 ideal
latrines out of a total 626 households. The rate of women delivering in the health centre has increased to
55% from 33% and since VHTs have had special psycho–social training, increased numbers of PLWHA are
attending for support. VHTs are now active and recognised as front line health promotion workers, helping
to identify problems and assisting the community with planning. The Health Centre IV had a selection of
drugs, including anti–retroviral drugs and Nivirapine, a paediatric ARV to prevent mother–to–child transmis-
sion of HIV (PMTCT).
The MTR team did not visit the third Health Centre in the sub–county financed by a Catholic church. The
centre had suffered a fire and AMREF has financed the building of a new roof for the centre.
The savings had helped farmers to set up small businesses, for example, buying cassava, taking it to mar-
ket and selling it. One person talked about the business skills he has developed. It was important to adver-
tise your business he said and he had made a sign for his store at the trading centre stating “I am buying
scrap”. Record keeping was noted as being important as was group sharing and problem solving which
also helped dissipate rumour–mongering.
The women, in particular, enjoyed having visitors, especially when mzungu came to the village. Visits from
VHTs were welcomed and they were seen as instrumental in helping to ensure homestead hygiene. A show
The comments were similar at Obalanga Alamakis Farmers’ Group. Although they kept individual gardens
the group had expanded to communal farming using improved strains. They summed up:
The training facilitated by AMREF had resulted in better knowledge about planting, using less seed and
saving money. The group had saved 1million UGX (£290.00) from, for example, trading fish or a local brew
made from millet. Money had been spend on items such as school fees, drugs and clinic treatment.
26 The welfare fund is for emergencies and can be accessed day, or night, by members who pay a flat rate of 200UGX at each meeting. The
welfare fund has been used for buying food and drugs.
The table below shows the number of men and women at interviews and meetings27 during the MTR as well
as the gender balance of the KCPP team in Katine.
Women Men
District level (all committees and meetings) 8 48
Sub–county committees 3 14
Parish level 25 56
Schools (teachers, SMC and PTA) 8 33
Health (Health Centres, VHTs, HUMC) 12 20
Farmers’ Groups 32 19
VSLA groups 20 12
Village (water source committees) 5 7
AMREF team in Katine (excluding administrative staff) 3 9
There are few women in positions of authority at District level, only one was present during an interview
and she is responsible for nursing in the district; a profession traditionally associated with women. Both the
Steering Committee (2 women: 12 men) and the Management Committee (4 women:21 men) are domi-
nated by men and no woman spoke during these meetings. The only woman at the Sub–county Sanitation
Committee meeting is also the sole woman member of a Parish Sanitation committee. There is more gen-
der balance in the Parish and Village–level committees such as WSCs, presumably because it is women
who are responsible for collecting water and the cleanliness of the surroundings. Only one committee,
Ojama PDC, mentioned its attempts at equity and inclusivity.
There were considerably more men in the management of both the schools visited; the current ratio of men
to women teachers is 3:1. School enrollment has increased and many parents now know that the bride
price for young women may be higher if they are educated and this has had the unexpected effect of in-
creasing the enrollment of girls.
The District has made an effort to recruit women teachers, wanting to promote the education of girls and
provide role models. The recent AMREF facilitated training across the sub–county has resulted in women
councilors speaking about the important of female education. One particular effort to improve the atten-
dance of girls has been to train teachers in how to make sanitary pads from local materials so that girls can
stay at school when they are menstruating.
AMREF must make the issue of women’s leadership an important element when rolling out the ‘rights
based’ approach in year three. If a rights based approach is about knowing your rights, knowing your worth
and claiming your rights then women need special attention. If vacancies occur in the AMREF team in Ka-
tine every effort should be made to engage women.
Recommendation…
AMREF must make the issue of women’s leadership an important element when rolling out the ‘rights based’
approach in year three.
27 These are the numbers of those who attended the meetings not the total membership but the balance is unlikely to be any different
YES NO
Have their been any changes in your and your family’s life in EDUCATION since the start of 2008? 51 2
Have their been any changes in your and your family’s life in HEALTH since the start of 2008? 52 1
Have their been any changes in your and your family’s life in WATER AND SANITATION since the
52 1
start of 2008?
Have their been any changes in your and your family’s life in your FARMING since the start of 2008? 38 15
Ninety per cent of respondents reported a change to their and their family’s life since January 2008.
These figures are consistent with data collected by the Team. Tables show activities plotted against each
village in the four parishes. Every village has received at least one intervention and some have had two or
three. Tables are in Annex 9.
To judge engagement with community issues the question was asked about involvement:
YES NO
Are you or any of your family a member of any COMMUNITY COMMITTEES 27 9
At least one person is member of a community committee in 66 per cent of families surveyed.
The next questions related to what changes had been noted and which were the most important. Communi-
ty members were then asked what they had expected to see and what they would like to see (see Annex 8).
The results of the quick survey were instrumental to the Team’s thinking about the third year of the Project.
28 The Team were split into five groups of three and each group took responsibility for entering data onto a flip chart sheet and calling the
results to a group of tellers. The figures and words were entered into a copy of the original questionnaire by the Consultant and checked.
The following table sums up the DFID measures for outputs (quality, sufficiency and efficiency)
Quality ostly good but variable (bore holes/school building problems29) Training quality
M
appears good; it has engendered enthusiasm.
Sufficiency (quantity) ot enough infrastructure (water sources, classrooms, desks). Appropriate training
N
in health, education, WATSAN, livelihoods and in committee training at all levels. No
rights–based training.
29 The use of local builders or builders contracted from Kampala has been an much–debated issue. Unfortunately school building has been
held up by poor workmanship by contractors from outside the District. This has been a costly exercise in terms of time and money.. Further
building work will be contracted locally.
30 1 = fully achieved, very few or no shortcomings
2 = largely achieved, despite a few shortcomings
3 = only partial achievement, benefits and shortcomings finely balanced
4 = very limited achievement, extensive shortcomings
5 = not achieved
Questions have been raised about such issues such as where procurement should be done, who replies
to Guardian bloggers or defends decisions about how the Project is managed. The layers haven’t been
helpful in trying to understand how decisions are made except that they are seen, by the outside world, to
be made slowly.
Managing a project in Katine from Kampala is fraught with difficulties, particularly with intermittent email
service. The Project Manager doesn’t make any but the most simple decisions. Discussions in Kampala af-
ter the field work led to plans to change the way the field office may be managed through a team manage-
ment approach by giving each Project Officer more decision–making power. This would release the current
Project Manager to spend time assisting with rights–based approaches training, about which he has spe-
cialist knowledge, in year three.
The Deputy Country Director has day–to–day responsibility for the Project but more frequent and regular
visits to the Project site are necessary. Two possibilities are proposed; either that she spend two days in
Katine every 2–3 weeks or AMREF assigns another person to provide regular management support to
the team.
Recommendation…
AMREF Kampala must provide more day–to–day management support at field level at the
earliest opportunity.
Despite accepted good practice in most organisations, staff contracted to the Katine project have not had
opportunities for staff development. In order both to share experience and learn from others, at the very
least all staff should be encouraged to attend national, and where affordable and relevant, international
conferences or a study tour at least once during their contract. There is of course, a cost implication to this
but the opportunity to learn as well as disseminate the Project are worth it.
Recommendation…
All staff should be offered appropriate staff development opportunities to attend conferences or
study tours.
The implication for the Katine project is that, although most activities are on track, real change is unlikely to
be seen across the whole sub–county with its 66 villages by October 2010. This means either that the Proj-
ect must continue, with adequate funding to complete the job or the Project ends and is seen, possibly, as a
failure because it won’t have achieved everything that it set out to do.
The workshop in September must agree a set of specific targets that it believes AMREF and its partners
can achieve by the end of 2010.
Now is the time to make decisions about further funding and to plan for, at the very least, one further year.
This decision must be based on an agreement to review project outcomes and the range of activities and
targets revised accordingly. Every attempt must be made to ensure sustainability by continued and further
alliance with GoU and other district actors.
If funding isn’t found for a fourth year, the third year must create as much sustainable impact as possible
with the remaining funds.
In addition, in the absence of a ‘future’, staff will leave the Project and this will deplete both its pool of ex-
pertise and enthusiasm.
Recommendation…
The Guardian, Barclays and AMREF must immediately negotiate whether or not funds will be avail-
able for a further year until 2011.
If no further funding is obtained from other sources, AMREF must develop an exit plan for how it will
respond if a number of project staff seek to leave KCPP for other employment before the project ends
in late 2010. Failure to do so could jeopardise the Project’s progress in the last months of 2010.
● impact
● sustainability
● what the community wants
Recommendation…
AMREF and its partners must redesign the third year budget to put the maximum funds into agreed
activities and interventions.
At the Team workshop at the end of the MTR, taking into account the issues of impact and sustainability
and using the quick survey to determine what the community wants it was agreed that these were the most
suitable outputs:
These activities and interventions represent the ‘bottom line’ of what should be done and concrete plans for
what, where, and how many must be determined at the September workshop in Soroti. Basic information
on costs will be crucial to determining the plans.
1. A time–bound course of action from AMREF and the Project partners about which recommendations to
take on, which to ignore, what should be done differently and how it will be funded and resourced.
2. A decision of what Barclays and the Guardian will continue to do in
3. Katine until the end of 2010 and beyond.
4. An agreement on the partnership, roles and responsibilities until the end of year 3 (end 2010) and a ten-
tative one up to the end of 2011 (with possible scenarios for ensuring sustainability).
5. A separate agreement between AMREF and the Guardian for ‘rules of engagement’ with both London
and Uganda.
6. An outline plan of what is to be achieved by the end of 2010—agreeing which critical interventions are to
take place
AMREF is testing a model that can be replicated by government, AMREF is not a replacement for govern-
ment and must not be considered as such.
Recommendation…
KCPP cannot provide the answer to the many problems in Katine sub–county, it can only model ways
of working based on best practice. Any work that takes place in Year Four should be in total partner-
ship with local government—and not seen as an AMREF water source, or AMREF classroom or AM-
REF training. Some co–funding from the government is desirable. By the end of the KCCP AMREF
will hand over the Project completely to the government.
Whenever the Project comes to an end it will be important to have a celebratory and ‘winding–down’ event,
showcasing change and success; perhaps including a cultural show involving schools.