Upload
vuongminh
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Final Report
Summative evaluation of
MS Country Programme Strategies and Programme Support
within the “Democracy Focus”
Tanzania
May 2011
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms and abbreviations .....................................................................................3-4
Executive summary ....................................................................................... 5
Introduction ....................................................................................... 6
Programme strategy and design ....................................................................................7
Achievements ......................................................................................11
Key lessons learnt ......................................................................................19
List of recommendations ..................................................................................... 20
Annexes ..................................................................................... 21
Annex 1 Terms of Reference
Annex 2 Itinerary
Annex 3 List of people met and interviewed
Annex 4 Good Practice: PCM sequence for partner selection
3
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AA/IGT ActionAid International Governance Team
AADK ActionAid Denmark
AATZ ActionAid Tanzania
AP 2000 Agenda Participation 2000
ASDP Agricultural Sector Development Programme
BA Bachelor of Arts
BLD Building Local Democracy
CCM Chama Cha Mapinduzi
CDF Constituency Development Fund
CDF Community Development Facilitators
CORDS Community Research and Development Services
CPS Country Programme Strategy
CSP Country Strategy Paper
CSO Civil Society Organisation
DADPS District Agricultural Development Plans
DANIDA Danish International Development Assistance
DW Development Worker
IADO Isangati Agriculture Development Organisation
ICSO International Civil Society Organisation
ILFS Integrated Labour Force Survey
KINNAPA A local CBO whose name is an acronym of six villages in the Kibaya
Kiteto region of Tanzania
LFA Logical Framework Analysis
LGA Local Government Authority
LHRC Land and Human Rights Centre
MKUKUTA Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza Umaskini
MoEVT Ministry of Education and Vocational Training
MPLC Morogoro Paralegal Centre
MS Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke
MS-TCDC Mellemfolkeligt Samvire Training Centre for Technical Cooperation
NEC National Electoral Commission
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
NSGPR National Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction
NYDP National Youth Development Policy
O&OD Opportunities and Obstacles for Development
OD Organisational Development
P4C People for Change
PET Public Expenditure Tracking
PMOR-RALG Prime Minister‟s Office, Regional Administration, and Local
Government
PCCB Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau
4
SC School Committee
SHIVIWAKA Shirikisho la Vikundi vya Wakulima wa Kahawa Mbeya
TACSEO Tanzania Civil Society Election Observers
TAYODEA Tanga Youth Development Association
TOR Terms Of Reference
TRC Teachers Resource Centre
TTU Tanzania Teachers Union
URT United Republic of Tanzania
USAID United Stated Agency for International Development
VADP Village Agricultural Development Plans
VDP Village Development Plans
VLC Village Land Committees
VNRC Village Natural Resources Committee
VVT Vijana Vision Tanzania
WADT Ward Agriculture Development Team
WEC Ward Executive Committee
WSDPs Whole School Development Plans
YPC Youth Partnership Countrywide
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROGRAMME STRATEGY AND DESIGN
The former MS Tanzania programme increased the capacity of Tanzanians (with a
specific emphasis on women and youth) to enable them to participate effectively in
democratic governance processes, with the aim of ensuring improved service delivery in
the education and agriculture sectors, as well as ensure increased access and ownership of
land, especially among women. The programme, which is built around the three themes
of Building Local Democracy (BLD), Youth for Development, and Land Rights, has the
following immediate objectives:
To ensure that Local Government Authorities (LGAs) provide improved primary
education and agriculture development projects.
To help LGAs and School Committees (SCs) provide services responding to the
needs identified by ordinary women and men.
To ensure that politically empowered young women and men are influencing
local government.
To ensure that more women have secure access to land.
To ensure that ordinary women and men in 10 villages have safe and sustainable
access to forest resources
The Evaluation Team(ET) found that the programme is relevant to the context because
promoting citizen participation in governance, ensuring access and ownership to land, as
well as guaranteeing space for the active participation of women and youth continue to be
issues that affect development in Tanzania.
The former MS Tanzania programme worked with two types of partners: direct
implementers and strategic partners. A key contribution of strategic partners to the
programme is that they provide a linkage between initiatives at local level to national
policy level. It follows that choice of an appropriate strategic partner is instrumental in
enabling the programme to elevate the policy agenda from local or regional to national
levels.
ACHIEVEMENTS
The MS Tanzania programme had a late start with the actual implementation only
beginning in May 2009.1 It should also be noted that the start of implementation also
coincided with the process of the merger between MS and AATZ, and the transition that
followed. These processes caused some delays in implementation. Yet the former MS
Tanzania partners mentioned that they did not feel the effects of the transition since their
1 This was a result of a number of factors that required a review and overhaul of the programme starting in
2008
6
activities continued to be supported, and former MS staff were continually available to
them. Nonetheless, the result of these delays is that whilst there have been a number of
activities initiated by the programme, the actual change, particularly with the situation of
rights holders is rather limited. It must however be pointed out that a significant number
of building blocks that should steer partners towards attaining programme objectives
have been put in place.
Building Local Democracy
The programme has created awareness amongst communities about the need for them to
actively participate in the development of District and Village Agriculture Development
Plans (DADPs and VADPs respectively). Furthermore, in order to improve access to
information about village plans, budget and expenditure records, the former MS Tanzania
programme has secured commitment and facilitated the use of public notice boards for
posting related information in a number of communities. However, most of the activities
are recent and it is too early to gauge their impact.
In the education sector, the former MS Tanzania programme supported the Teachers
Resource Centre (TRC) to facilitate the formation of school committees (SCs) for
primary schools in accordance with government guidelines. The TRC has also created
awareness amongst community members about their rights, roles, and responsibilities as
custodians of primary education in Tanzania, including the responsibility to hold SCs
accountable. As a result there is an increased level of interest amongst women and men to
participate actively in the management and governance of schools. These have in turn led
to significant improvements in the performance of the SCs. As a result of the
effectiveness of some of the committees that TRC Coalition has worked with, the
Minister of Local Government in charge of primary education has publically promoted
the formation and operationalisation of these committees in other districts.
The former MS Tanzania programme is also working with its partners to provide training
on the use of Public Expenditure Tracking (PET) within the government framework. It is
expected that the effective use of PET will empower communities, and result in increased
accountability. In this regard therefore, the key building blocks - to promote
accountability and hence improved service delivery - are in place. Youth for Development
The former MS Tanzania programme provided support to youth organisations
TAYODEA and YPC to conduct civic education, and support the formation of youth
forums. These will eventually be supported to carry out PET in relation to issues of
concern to the youth. Both organisations have also received support for internal capacity
development, information and documentation, programme and financial management.
YPC and TAYODEA with support from the former MS Tanzania programme provided
training to a total 2,325 youth in Kibaha and Kilindi districts in the period from July 2009
to October 2010, and also mobilised some of their members to work as election observers
7
who contributed to a report by Tanzania Civil Society Election Observers (TACSEO).
Whilst it was not possible to concretely determine how this voter education directly
influenced the participation of youth, a study commissioned by AATZ states that as a
result of the interventions supported by AATZ, both YPC and TAYODEA have
experienced, since commencement of the projects, a steady increase in the number of
youth requesting advice and support to engage in the political process - both as voters and
candidates.
As part of the effort to facilitate youth engagement and influence local government, both
TAYODEA and YPC have established structures that create space for youth to mobilise
and discuss issues that affect them. These structures are at the village (youth embassies
and parliaments), ward (ward youth committees) and district (district forums) levels. The
youth forums, although still in their nascent stages, represent a promising platform from
which youth - both male and female - can discuss issues affecting them and serve as a
mechanism for disseminating information.
Land Rights
Under objective one, former MS Tanzania partners have been supported to carry out a
number of awareness and sensitisation activities for women on land rights. The impact of
this awareness raising and training was said to be increased participation by women in
discussions to deal with land.
In order for women to obtain titles to their land, the structures and institutions responsible
for land management need to be in place and operational. These structures and
institutions in the areas that former MS Tanzania‟s partners operate in are not in place.
Therefore, Community Research and Development Services (CORDS) and Morogoro
Paralegal Centre (MPLC) have trained village councils, village land councils, and land
use committees on their roles and responsibilities, in order to ensure that they work
effectively. Furthermore, as part of their efforts to ensure greater access to land for
women, MPLC has provided legal aid on land matters to 165 clients so far (139 women
and 26 men), however, due to budget constraints, they have been unable to follow
through on this support, it is therefore not possible to establish the actual impact of this
support.
The former MS Tanzania partners have also been instrumental in supporting community
members make border agreements, survey and demarcate some villages, as well as ensure
that land use plans and certificates have been submitted for approval. All these steps are
necessary in ensuring legal ownership of land. Acquiring these land use plans and
certificates is a prerequisite for the future individual allocation of land to women.
Significant progress has been made by Vijana Vision Tanzania (VVT) towards the
attainment of objective two. VVT has been able to support the formulation of land use
plans designate village forestland, and also supported the establishment and training of
Village Natural Resource Committees (VNRCs) in participatory forest management, as
8
well as their other roles and responsibilities. It now remains to be seen if these
committees will perform their functions in a manner that will ensure that ordinary women
and men have safe and sustainable access to forest resources.
Capacity Development
Capacity-building support is provided in both programme areas, as well as organisational
development. It is worth noting that the capacity support is intense. Some organisations
receive funds for training of their staff through independently contracted service
providers, institutional support components in the budget, support for staff to attend
courses at the MS Training Centre (MS-TCDC), and the support given through the
People for Change Programme through advisors and inspirators.
Partners pointed out that capacity building support is determined through a consultative
process, which ensures ownership and commitment, and that the capacity building
support is relevant to each organisation. They also highlighted the coaching and
mentoring support provided by former MS staff. The partners were of the view that the
coaching and mentoring provides more individual- or organisation-focused support, and
allows them to have more practical and hands on support. It also supplements the training
workshops very well.
The ET noted that due to the various capacity-building activities, the need to plan and
coordinate these activities effectively within the supporting institution is paramount to
avoid duplication and confusion. It was also noted that whilst it was apparent that the
partners have received a lot of capacity-building support, all the partners have not yet
provided a similar investment to the rights holders. This is a challenge that the
programme has also identified, and is largely attributed to the initial emphasis on
strengthening the capacity of partners. The programme will use the remaining period of
implementation to ensure that partners lay more emphasis on their work with rights
holders. One area of capacity building that remains is that of monitoring and evaluation.
The People for Change programme was found to be relevant, however, the relevant
Terms of Reference (TORs) and outputs should be clearly formulated, and realistically
attainable in the time frame provided for inspirators. The Tanzania programme had 28
Development Workers (DW) over the strategic period (both short and long term) i.e.
those whose assignments ended between 2008 and 2010. The role of the DWs was to
provide technical support to the partners, and they were all allocated partners to work
with. Whilst the DWs reports all indicate that the support was provided, it was interesting
that no mention of the support by DWs was made during the interviews held for the
evaluation. This could partly be a result of the various changes that have taken place as a
result of the merger, it is however still surprising.
RECOMMENDATIONS
(i) The programme is still relevant in Tanzania. The significant building blocks are in
place, and heavy investment has been made with the partners, which is why AATZ
9
should consider continuing with the programme over the next two years, or absorbing the
partners that fit in their new strategy.
(ii) The partnership and capacity-building approaches are useful, and intense capacity-
building is required with regard to the community-based partners. In particular, the
partners favour capacity support that is demand-driven and adopts more of coaching than
formal training approach. In their words, “mentoring and coaching are far better and
helpful than conducting workshops”. AATZ should consider the use of similar
approaches in its future programmes.
(iii) Having a thematic approach to the CPS i.e. BLD, Land Rights and Youth for
Development, provided focus and direction for management of the partner portfolio. It
also gave focus to the partners. It is a useful approach that could be replicated in future
AATZ programmes.
(iv) Monitoring and evaluation is an area that needs a lot more attention to ensure that
results are captured. Monitoring and evaluation should also be a way of ensuring that the
support being provided actually results in concrete changes for rights holders.
(v) Outcome mapping is an approach that can better enable the measurement of changes
in attitude and behaviour. It has been used to develop a recent Land Rights project
proposal and found to be useful. It is recommended that AATZ consider using this
approach in future planning with its partners, as part of strengthening capacity in
monitoring and evaluation.
10
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Programme
At the beginning of 2007 Danish organisation Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke (MS) adopted a
new Democracy Focus Policy (DFP), which entailed adopting a thematic approach
focused on five thematic areas. MS also decided to investigate the possibility of
affiliating with ActionAid International. The combined agendas represented wide-ranging
changes for MS, including the development of new five-year Country Programme
Strategy (CPS) documents. The development of the CPS was largely a participatory
process that built on lessons learnt. It also involved MS partner organisations and other
Community-based Organisation (CSO) representatives, as well as programme staff,
Development Workers (DWs), Policy Advisory Committees (PACs), and consultants. In
Tanzania, the process of developing the 2008-2012 CPS was started in 2008 and
completed in May 2009. This CPS focuses on three thematic areas: (i) Building Local
Democracy (ii) Youth for Development (iii) Land Rights.
In September 2008, the MS General Assembly decided that MS should become an
affiliate of ActionAid International. In 2010, ActionAid International gave MS the
overall responsibility for the leadership and management of the ActionAid‟s “Right to
Just and Democratic Governance” theme. In June 2010, ActionAid International‟s
General Assembly approved the affiliation with MS. Thus, MS became a fully-fledged
member of the ActionAid family, and changed its name (in English) to ActionAid
Denmark (but maintained Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke or MS in Danish).
1.2 The Evaluation
As a consequence of the affiliation between MS and ActionAid International, the MS
offices in Nepal, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Guatemala were
merged with those of ActionAid, in 2010. The MS office in Southern Sudan was closed.
The MS programme portfolio in these countries was then taken over by ActionAid.
ActionAid Denmark (AADK) and the national ActionAid organisations have signed
cooperation agreements, which specify that ActionAid is responsible for fulfilling the
objectives of the CPS until December 2011.
The evaluation in Tanzania was carried out between14th and 26th
February 2011, and had
four specific objectives: (i) to provide strategic learning points that will inform
programme development for ActionAid International Governance Team (AA/IGT)
overall as well as the national ActionAid programmes in the countries covered (ii) to
provide a platform for the appraisal of programmes proposed for future MS/AADK
funding (iii) to feed into the overall evaluation of all AADK activities scheduled for the
last quarter of 2011, and (iv) to serve as documentation to DANIDA.
The methodology applied included review of comprehensive and pertinent programme
documents, and meetings and interviews with resource persons and institutions, MS
Tanzania staff, AATZ and local government officials. One workshop was held with all
11
implementing partners, followed by bilateral meetings with selected partner
organisations. Focus group discussions were held with representative target groups of
rights holders. The itinerary is appended as Annex 2 and a List of Persons met is
appended as Annex 3.
A number of national ActionAid offices are currently in the process of reviewing their
Country Strategy Paper (CSP) with the purpose of developing new five-year strategies
and programmes. ActionAid International has been developing a new global strategy in
2011 that will come into effect from 2012. It is assumed that governance will be a focal
theme of the strategy. It is preferable that the lessons learnt through this evaluation from
previous and ongoing AADK-supported governance programmes will feed into the
various strategy development processes, and that the summative evaluation will serve as
an important contribution to both upwards and downwards accountability.
The Evaluation Team (ET) was comprised of: Ashanut Okille (team leader), Kitakaya
Loisa (consultant), and Vince Martino (of AADK, who accompanied the ET). The ET
thanks ActionAid Tanzania (AATZ) and all persons who met the Team for their valuable
contributions and assistance, which highly facilitated the work. This report expresses the
ET‟s views, which are not necessarily shared by MS/AADK or any of the parties
consulted.
2. PROGRAMME STRATEGY AND DESIGN
2.1 Country Programme Strategy
The former MS Tanzania programme sought to respond to the key challenges of limited
awareness amongst Tanzanian citizens about key Government policies in the Education
and Agriculture sectors, and to support activities aimed at empowering communities to
participate effectively in determining priorities and ensuring accountability for use of
resources in these sectors. Support to ensure access and ownership of land, especially for
women, is also an area of focus. The programme also had a specific focus on promoting
participation of youth in democratic governance. With three thematic areas: Building
Local Democracy (BLD), Youth for Development and Land Rights, the specific
objectives are:
Building Local Democracy
o Local Government Authorities (LGAs) provide
improved primary education and agriculture
development projects.
o LGAs and School Committees (SCs) provide
services responding to the needs identified by
ordinary women and men.
Youth for Development o Politically empowered young women and men
influencing Local Government.
Land Rights o More women have secure access to land
o Ordinary women and men in 10 villages have
safe and sustainable access to forest resources
12
The analysis of the context provided in the CPS and the intervention areas identified by
the programme are still relevant today. More recent studies attest to the need to
strengthen civil society participation in democratic governance, using the existing policy
and legal framework.
Effective participation of citizens in the development and implementation of national
policies (a key ingredient of ownership), requires that citizens possess a certain level of
civic competence including skills to mobilise and organise. In addition, they need to
understand their own interests and opportunities within the wider policy framework, and
to possess the necessary information, knowledge and skills on how to engage with
governance structures at the different levels, and the opportunities to apply these. In order
to achieve effective participation, the former MS Tanzania programme supported the
following diverse activities carried out by partners all aimed at ensuring effective citizen
participation in democratic governance in Tanzania. These activities include:
o Raising awareness on various rights and governance issues
o Training of CSOs in the use of Public Expenditure Tracking (PET) and social
auditing
o Training of CSOs, Ward Executive Committees (WECs) and SCs in participatory
budgeting and planning
o Lobbying and advocacy activities, networking and linkages of CSOs
o Organisational capacity building of CSOs
The supported activities sensitise target groups about their rights and responsibilities as
citizens, and encourage confidence of their own legitimacy. Efforts are also being made
to provide skills in advocacy, and to encourage citizens and CSOs to build alliances and
obtain evidence to support their arguments. There is also a deliberate effort to create
opportunities for linkages between the partners operating at both local and at national
levels, mainly on policy issues. It is thus the conclusion of the ET that the supported
activities are in line with the CPS and should contribute to the realisation of the
objectives if effectively implemented.
The former MS Tanzania programme worked with two types of partners: direct
implementers and strategic partners. The direct implementers are primary, grassroots-
based partners. The strategic partners are usually national CSOs that have experience
working on specific issues that are relevant to the programme, and have attracted a
reputation as serious actors and advocates on various issues on the national platform.
They serve the dual purpose of providing a national platform for the primary partners and
also supporting specific capacity building interventions for the primary partners. Below is
the list of partners for the different themes:
13
Building Local
Democracy Youth for
Development Land Rights
Primary
partners
Agricultural Council of
Tanzania (ACT)
KINNAPA (Acronym
for CBOs in 6 districts
in Kibaha)
SHIVIWAKA(an
umbrella organization
representing coffee
farmers in Mbeya)
IADO (Isangati
Agriculture
Development
Organisation)
Kiteto CSO Forum
TAWLAE
UVIMTA
Teachers‟ Resource
Centre (TRC)
Youth Partnership
Countrywide (YPC)
Tanga Youth
Development
Association
(TAYODEA)
TYC
Community
Research and
Development
Services (CORDS)
Mjumita
Morogoro Paralegal
Centre (MPLC)
NARAMATISHO
TAPHGO
Vijana Vision
Tanzania(VVT)
Strategic
partners
HakiKazi
Legal and Human
Rights Centre (LHRC)
Tanzania National
Association of NGOs
(TANGO)
National Policy Forum
(NPF)
Agenda
Participation
2000(AP 2000)
Haki Ardhi
A key contribution of strategic partners to the programme is that they provide a linkage
between initiatives at local level to national policy level. It follows that the choice of an
appropriate strategic partner is instrumental in enabling the programme to elevate the
policy agenda from local/regional to national level. Below is a diagrammatic
representation of the partners and their way of interacting.
Level Actor Activity
National
Parliament, Government
Ministries, ICSOs,
National CSOs, MS
Tanzania
Policy formulation
Policy Influencing
Lobbying & advocacy
Monitoring
National National CSOs
National NGOs
Strategic Partners
Policy influencing
Policy monitoring
Lobbying & advocacy
14
Monitoring
Local
(village,ward or district)
Local communities
District councils
Village councils,
Implementing partners
Policy implementation:
training, lobbying,
advocacy, monitoring
Implementation
A key strategic focus of the programme has been to encourage partners to focus their
interventions in similar districts to ensure coherence, create an opportunity to concentrate
efforts in one location. By working in similar districts, the programme also offers an
opportunity for cross learning, and eventually mutual reinforcement.
The CPS clearly identified gender inequalities as a key source of poverty, and emphasizes
the greater vulnerability of women and marginalised groups to rights violations and
denial. In particular the emphasis on women‟s access to land, which is largely curtailed
by social, cultural, and economic factors. The logical framework of the CPS provides
gender sensitive indicators. The programme also strives to always include women in its
implementation, and has thus far been able to ensure a 50% plus one ratio in comparison
to men in trainings, workshops, associations, and other forums intended for civic
engagement.
2.2 Partnership Approach
The CPS states that MS Tanzania‟s partnership approach places “emphasis on
organisational capacity-building and empowerment, which enables partners to initiate,
plan and implement their programmes within a framework of mutual recognition, linking
practical and strategic intervention…it is fundamental that the partner relation is
equitable and based on mutual trust and respect….”
All the programme partners are relevant in relation to the themes. Anti-corruption is
mainstreamed mainly in the work of BLD partners through the introduction of PET.
There is a deliberate effort to mainstream gender and ensure that the rights of women and
marginalised groups are addressed. All together, the partners are therefore a good fit to
the themes, which can largely be attributed to the significant investment in time and
resources in applying the MS thematic guidelines for selection of partners. A thorough
process that involved 15 steps (see Annex 4) was implemented over about six months.
There is also a good mix of partners i.e. community, national, mid-level, rights,
education, agriculture, land, also specific attention to marginalised groups. They were
carefully selected to ensure value towards attainment of CPS objectives. The selection of
strategic partners has been done carefully, with the former MS Tanzania programme not
only looking for expertise and national linkages for its district-based partners, but also
looking for strategic partners to whom they could add value. For instance, a key value
added with Haki Ardhi is the expansion of their district-based network for purposes of
research, capacity-building, as well as the opportunity to work together with AATZ to
establish the Tanzania Land Alliance.
15
In terms of implementation of the partnerships, the former MS Tanzania programme has
invested a significant amount of time and resources in developing and building
relationships of trust and mutual respect with the partners. In particular, partners
mentioned that their opinions are respected and that they determine the nature of support
and capacity-building effort. Of particular importance to the partners is the fact that the
former MS Tanzania programme sought to include them in the programme, as opposed to
asking them to change their plans and strategies to fit within the overall MS Tanzania
framework. It should also be pointed out that most of the partners started out as very
small organisations with limited capacity, but have grown, developed, and increased
influence and voice within their areas of operation and the wider civil society through the
partnership with MS Tanzania. For instance YPC is now able to demand for the election
register from the district, which was not possible only two years ago because of lack of
clout. Furthermore, the Teachers Resource Centre (TRC) - which was once not a very
well known organisation - is now being sought after by key national CSOs for advice in
the education sector.
Some Key Lessons from the Partnership Approach of former MS Tanzania Programme
(i) Clarity of guidelines for selection of partners is important, and in Tanzania, strict adherence
thereto largely enabled them to select relevant partners.
(ii) Need to have a long-term planning framework and regular reviews to ensure that all partners
are on track. Focusing on activities per se can make an actor forget the bigger picture. In
particular, the quarterly and annual reviews, both as a monitoring mechanism and a platform for
cross learning, were deemed very useful in this regard.
(iii) MS Tanzania staff „walked the talk‟, which means actually listening to the partners,
communicating regularly, being available for the partners, consulting them on their needs and
required support, and following through on commitments.
(iv) The working of partners in the same location (e.g. same district) albeit on different issues
(e.g. one could be on land rights while another is on women‟s rights) has a reinforcing effect
leading to effective action.
(v) The challenge with this approach to partnership is the need for openness, trust, sharing, etc on
both sides.
3. ACHIEVEMENTS
The MS Tanzania programme had a late start with the actual implementation only
beginning in May 2009. It should also be noted that the start of implementation also
coincided with the process of the merger between MS and AATZ, and the transition that
followed. These processes caused some delays in implementation. Yet the former MS
Tanzania partners mentioned that they did not feel the effects of the transition since their
activities continued to be supported, and former MS staff were continually available to
16
them. Nonetheless, the result of these delays is that whilst there have been a number of
activities initiated by the programme, the actual change, particularly with the situation of
rights holders is rather limited. It must however be pointed out, that a significant number
of building blocks that should steer partners towards attaining programme objectives
have been put in place. Below is an analysis of achievements per theme.
3.1 Building Local Democracy
The BLD programme in Tanzania had two main objectives: (i) to provide improved
primary education and agriculture development projects through LGAs (ii) to provide
services responding to the needs identified by ordinary women and men through LGAs
and SCs.
Tanzania has comprehensive policies in agriculture and education. The challenge has
been implementation for instance by ensuring community participation in and
development of DADPs, full constitution and operationalisation of school committees,
and the ability of citizens to hold their leaders accountable for implementation. These are
all areas in which the programme has supported partner interventions at local level.
Under objective one, the programme has created awareness amongst communities about
the importance of their participation in developing District and Village Agriculture
Development Plans (DADPs and VADPs). Specifically, the programme in collaboration
with HakiKazi Catalysts developed a popular version of the DADPs guidelines that are
available in Kiswahili. HakiKazi Catalysts then trained eight Ward Agriculture
Development Teams (WADTs), 65 Village Facilitation Teams and communities on their
rights, roles, and responsibilities in terms of developing and ensuring incorporation of
VADPs into DAPDs. However, the outcome of the training is yet to be seen as the local
government planning cycle is still in process, and establishing the extent to which the
stakeholders and former MS Tanzania partners are able to improve the quality of the
agriculture projects will only be possible at a later stage.
In order to improve access to information about village plans, budget and expenditure
records, the former MS Tanzania programme has secured commitment and facilitated the
use of public notice boards for posting of Whole School Development Plans (WSDPs),
Village Development Plans, budgets and expenditure records in 244 communities in nine
districts. This in turn should lead to increased awareness and focus of ordinary citizens on
ensuring the functioning of local government institutions. To enhance the uptake of
information made available on public notice boards AATZ (and the former MS Tanzania
programme) in collaboration with HakiKazi has trained more than 100 facilitators and
begun the process of establishing PETs committees, to track budgets and expenditures
within the education and agriculture sectors, in 370 villages within BLD and 23 wards
under the Youth for Development programme.
With regard to the education sector the programme has supported the formation of school
committees for primary schools in seven districts by working with the TRC Coalition
who are engaged with Tanzania Teachers Union (TTU) and Ministry of Education and
17
Vocational Training (MoEVT). The key intervention so far has been working within the
existing legal framework to ensure the full constitution and operationalisation of 193 SCs
in accordance with laid down guidelines. Specific manuals were developed for this
purpose. Efforts have also been made to create awareness amongst community members
about their rights, roles and responsibilities as custodians of primary education in
Tanzania, including the responsibility to hold SCs accountable. As a result, there is an
increased level of interest amongst women and men to be active in the management and
governance of schools which has been demonstrated through increased competition and
participation during elections for membership of school committees and in Village
Assemblies on issues to do with education. All this has had the effect of significant
improvements in the performance of the school committees.
Empowered by knowledge of their roles, and understanding the power they have to
influence the quality of education, the school committees have been actively playing their
role by formulating school development plans, monitoring school activities and
encouraging parents to respect and promote the right to education by all children. The
SCs have also been made aware of the working of the relevant structures at different
levels. The working relationships developed between the SCs and the ward education
office has also enabled the locals school committees have their plans factored into the
district and ward development plans. This has since translated into increased resource
allocation to some schools leading to improvements in facilities and learning.
Regarding objective two, the former MS Tanzania programme and its partners have
trained 65 Community Development Facilitators (CDFs) on how to conduct PET within
the government framework. It is assumed that the effective use of PET will empower
communities and result in increased accountability. In this regard therefore the key
building blocks to promote accountability and hence improved service delivery are in
place. Regarding work in the education sector, a central part of TRC Coalition‟s training
has been to empower school committees to develop and demand funding, via the citizens,
for implementation of WSDPs. To this end, the programme aims to influence the 2011
planning cycle, thus the impact in terms of better plans, more funding, better governance
and better quality education was not available at the time of the evaluation. However, it
should be noted that the SCs involve ward leaders, respected members of the community
(selected by the community), and therefore provide a link between the local government
and the school committee. The committee provides its plan to the village assembly for
approval, which is a way of ensuring broader community participation and ownership of
the process of developing education in the region. As a result of the effectiveness of some
of the committees that TRC Coalition has worked with, the Minister of local government
in charge of primary education has publicly promoted the formation and
operationalisation of these committees in other districts.
3.1.2 Concrete outcomes for rights holders
Concrete outcomes have been realised mainly in the education sector. Examples include
the following:
18
o With improved performance of the school committees, the level of commitment
of school leadership has increased. There have also been instances where the
committees have been able to influence the operation of the school.
o As a result of resuming their oversight function two school committees in Kiteto
have filed cases with the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau
(PCCB) against the school management and the village council for
misappropriating funds earmarked for furniture.
o The management of three schools has attempted to dissolve the school committee
as a result of demands for access to records of budgets and expenditure. The
reinstatement of the three school committees is being pursued by KINNAPA with
the district authorities.
3.1.3 Programme design
The partners selected for this programme are getting stronger with increased capacity
building support. Whilst most of the results and efforts so far have mainly been in the
education sector at local level, the potential to link and influence national policies,
especially in the education sector exist. Furthermore, the school committees appear to be
a good model of accountability with proven success i.e. a way of getting citizens at the
grassroots involved in aspects of governance and service delivery.
3.2 Youth for Development
The main intervention in this area has been through support to youth organisations -
TAYODEA and YPC - to conduct civic education, support the formation of youth
forums, which will eventually be supported to carry out PETs in relation to issues of
concern to the youth. Both organisations have also received support for internal capacity
development, information and documentation, and programme and financial
management. The objective of the youth for development component of the programme
is “Politically empowered young women and men influencing local government.”
YPC and TAYODEA with support from the former MS Tanzania programme provided
training to a total 2,325 youth in Kibaha and Kilindi districts in the period from July 2009
to October 2010. Thus, approximately 5% of the 59,300 voters in the two districts
benefitted from public voters‟ education meetings supported by the former MS Tanzania
programme. Furthermore, during the 2010 national elections youth in Kibaha and Kilindi
districts, via their membership of YPC and TAYODEA respectively, were mobilised as
election observers and contributed to the national report produced and delivered to the
National Electoral Commission (NEC) and Parliament by Tanzania Civil Society
Election Observers (TACSEO) - an initiative spearheaded by Legal Human Rights Centre
(LHRC). Whilst it was not possible to concretely determine how this voter education
directly influenced the participation of youth, a study commissioned by AATZ states that
as a result of the interventions supported by AATZ, both YPC and TAYODEA have
experienced, since commencement of the projects, a steady increase in the number of
youth requesting advice and support to engage in the political process – both as voters
and candidates.
19
As part of the effort to facilitate youth engagement and influence of local government,
both TAYODEA and YPC have established structures that create space for youth to
mobilise and discuss issues that affect them. These structures are at the village (youth
embassies and parliaments), ward (ward youth committees) and district (district forums)
levels. The youth forums, although still in their nascent stages, represent a promising
platform from which youth - both male and female - can discuss issues affecting them
and serve as a mechanism for disseminating information to youth, who have been hard to
reach because of exclusion from many a formal structure. The presence of female youth
in the forums is also an attempt to incorporate young women in governance processes.
It should also be noted that the 23 ward youth committees have been recognised by the
local government authorities and representatives have been formally allowed to
participate in the ward development committees (which are usually a closed space for
technocrats). As a result of the sub-district structures put in place it is estimated that
youth in 100 villages in Kilindi and Kibaha districts have started attending village
assemblies, which provides them with an opportunity to influence the planning and
approval of VDPs and budgets.
3.2.2 Concrete outcomes for rights holders
During meetings with the partners and rights holders, it was pointed out that there had
been an increase in youth participation in village assemblies, and during the past
elections. However, there is no data or evidence to back up this information. Even the
number of youth councillors in the 8 wards of operation of YPC could not be verified.
This points to a challenge (both YPC and AATz acknowledge this) of establishing a
monitoring and evaluation system that will enable them captures information related to
these changes. Nonetheless, there were two experiences that were narrated to the
consultant.
o Following the voters‟ education by TAYODEA, 280 pupils at Seuta Secondary
School in Kilindi District overcame an illegal ban preventing them from
registering as voters.
o Two District Youth Forums that were established by YPC and TAYODEA, have
both achieved formal commitments from the District Government Authorities to
fulfill their commitments to put aside 10% of their own source collection to meet
the special needs of women and youth (National Youth Development Policy
NYDP 1996).
3.2.3 Programme design
The foundation set with YPC and TAYODEA can be a good basis for further work on
youth and governance for AATZ.
20
3.3 Land Rights
Support for activities under this objective has been through four partners, namely:
(i)Community Research and Development Services (CORDS), a women‟s land rights
CSO, (ii) Ms Naramatisho, a cooperative organisation for pastoralists and Vijana Vision
Tanzania (VVT). (iii) Morogoro Paralegal Centre (MPLC) that provides legal aid
services, with a focus on supporting women have greater access to land, and (iv) Haki
Ardhi, a strategic partner that joined in early 2011 with the main aim of conducting
research, as well as supporting the capacity, especially knowledge, of partners on the
content and procedures of land ownership and acquisition as stipulated in the law.
Under objective one, CORDS has conducted a number of awareness and sensitisation
activities for women on land rights. These include the use of adult literacy classes,
branded publicity materials including bags, T-shirts and fliers promoting women‟s land
rights and right to education. CORDS has also trained and established anti-corruption
forums in 10 districts (six people trained from each forum) whose role among others, is to
spot, document and report to the group issues to deal with corruption in sale and
allocation of land. The impact of this awareness raising and training was said to be
increased participation by women in discussions to deal with land. MPLC has also been
involved in creating awareness about land rights. However, a meeting with rights holders
indicated that the awareness had not trickled down effectively.
The structures and institutions responsible for land management need to be in place and
operational so that women can obtain titles to their land. These structures and institutions
in the areas that former MS Tanzania‟s partners operate in are not in place, therefore
CORDS and MPLC have trained village councils, village land councils, and land use
committees on their roles and responsibilities, in order to ensure that they work
effectively. MPLC has also trained 75 people in similar structures and is providing 10
VLCs with stationery. MPLC has also gone one step further to encourage communities to
use their own resources to construct land registries, where the files will be kept and the
land titles issued. So far, nine registries have been constructed.
As part of their efforts to ensure greater access to land for women, MPLC has provided
legal aid on land matters to 165 clients so far (139 women and 26 men). However, due to
budget constraints, MPLC have been unable to follow through on this support. It is
therefore not possible to establish the actual impact of this support. Furthermore, CORDS
and MPLC have been instrumental in supporting community members in four villages to
make border agreements, the survey and demarcation of two villages, approval to land
use plans for two villages and have submitted seven village land certificates for approval
by the Commissioner of Land. And in 2010, CORDS was able to attain five village land
certificates for the communities that it works with. MPLC has also been able to develop
five land use plans. Naramatisho has also supported the development of land use plans in
two villages, and VVT has done the same in another 10 districts. Acquiring these land
use plans and certificates is a prerequisite for the future individual allocation of land to
women.
21
Significant progress has been made by VVT towards the attainment of objective two.
VVT has been able to support the formulation of land use plans in 10 districts that all
designate village forestland. VVT has also supported the establishment and training of 10
Village Natural Resource Committees (VNRCs) in participatory forest management, as
well as their other roles and responsibilities. It now remains to be seen if these
committees will perform their functions in a manner that will ensure that ordinary women
and men have safe and sustainable access to forest resources.
3.3.2 Concrete outcomes for rights holders
As mentioned in the findings above increased awareness of land rights has largely been
attained. The partners have been able to support rights holders make informed decisions
about land. For example, through support from Naramatisho, village residents voted out a
village land committee in Bagamoyo district for underhand dealings relating to village
land. An interim committee was in place at the time of the evaluation. Naramatisho is
now working to ensure that communities are able to make informed decisions without
help, and resist unlawful sale of their land.
The other concrete outcome has been the establishment of structures responsible for land
management, and training. The other anticipated outcome will be the acquisition of
certificates of customary ownership by women and more importantly real access to land
by women. Although this has not been attained as yet it should be noted that MPLC has
written notes for approval of customary certificates of ownership for 50 women.
3.3.3 Programme design
Land rights, especially the rights of women to access and own land are considered a key
part of Action Aid International‟s future strategy to ensure respect for women‟s rights,
participation and ultimately as a way of ensuring that more women are lifted out of
poverty. The former MS Tanzania‟s work under the land rights theme with its
combination of awareness, participation, accountability and ensuring access and
ownership of land by women could therefore provide lessons and input to the new AATZ
national strategy.
There is some evidence, as indicated in the sections above, that some of the local
structures of governance are embracing a culture of transparency and accountability.
Furthermore, the former MS Tanzania programme and its partners have been able to put
in place key building blocks like development of training manual, PET frameworks,
carried out initial training, formation of committees, support to information and
documentation and other capacity building activities. The challenge remains for the
partners to use the foundation set, and ensure the attainment of the objectives on their
own. It is expected that the existing capacity, though improved, may not be sufficient.
Inadequate funding may also hamper this effort.
22
3.4 Capacity Development
Capacity building support is provided in both programme areas, as well as organisational
development. It is worth noting that the capacity support is intense. Some organisations
receive funds for training of their staff through independently contracted service
providers, institutional support components in the budget, support for staff to attend
courses at the MS Training Centre (MS-TCDC), and the support given through the
People for Change Programme through advisors and inspirators.
The former MS Tanzania partners were keen to point out that capacity building support is
determined through a consultative process, which ensures ownership and commitment,
and that the capacity building support is relevant to each organization. They also
highlighted the coaching and mentoring support provided by former MS staff. The
partners were of the view that the coaching and mentoring provides more individual-or-
organization-focused support, and allows them to have more practical and hands on
support. It also supplements the training workshops very well.
Working with strategic partners also provides capacity building support and fosters both
horizontal and vertical linkages. However, there is need for caution about how the
relationship will be construed by both partners- a top-down approach would not be
effective. There also has to be full commitment by the strategic partner to the
relationship, and a clear understanding of what the specific value added is, to both
partners from the relationship. This has been addressed through clear formulation of
expectations in the partnership contracts, as well as the plan to follow up on this through
the quarterly and annual reviews.
The ET notes that due to the various capacity building activities, the need to plan and
coordinate these activities effectively is paramount in order to avoid duplication and
confusion. It was also noted that whilst it was apparent that the partners have received a
lot of capacity building support, all the partners have not yet provided a similar
investment in support to the rights holders. This is a challenge that the programme has
also identified, and its largely attributed to the initial emphasis on strengthening the
capacity of partners. The programme will use the remaining period of implementation to
ensure that partners lay more emphasis on their work with rights holders.
One area of capacity of the partners that a remains a challenge is monitoring and
evaluation, at both programme and organisational levels. During the workshop for
partners, it was pointed out that whilst they have been implementing a number of
activities, their capacity to document and record the changes is limited. This could also be
partly attributed to the use of the traditional LFA in planning. AATz (with the former MS
programme) recently applied outcome mapping in its process of developing a proposal on
land rights and found the approach relevant in terms of helping them identify the changes
and actors at various levels. This is an approach that could be relevant for future
interventions in democratic governance.
The ET found that Advisors play an important role in providing capacity-building support
23
to the partners. The partners considered the inspirator programme to be very useful. The
inspirators that the consultants met were clear about their role and were working with
specific staff to ensure that their support would be retained in the organisation after their
departure. However, it was clear in one instance that the scope of work, whilst very clear,
was too extensive for the given timeframe. The existing capacity of the organisation
would require more investment in time by the inspirator in order to attain the required
outputs. Furthermore, on a practical level, positing inspirators in December during a
month of celebration and holidays meant that they could not get to work immediately,
and in addition to the time required for them to acclimatise, this took off at least one
month of work from the planned three or six months periods.
Under the Training for Change programme MS-TCDC has provided intensive training
and technical support to 15 civil society partners and unions in Tanzania to engage on
evidence based accountability as a means to bring about just and democratic governance
(the Empowerment and Accountability course). The use of Tanzania based trainers, with
a good knowledge and understanding of key issues was seen as very positive. Partners
who attended these trainings found them very useful. However, the challenge is that
whilst there is a lot of theoretical underpinning, creation of awareness, as well as change
in attitudes, the course does not go far enough in providing more practical and hands-on
advice and/or follow-up support.
The Tanzania programme had 28 Development Workers (DW) over the strategic period
i.e. those whose assignments ended between 2008 and 2010.2 The role of the DWs was to
provide technical support to the partners, and they were all allocated partners to work
with. Whilst the DWs reports all indicate that support was provided, it was interesting
that no mention of the support by DWs was made during the interviews held for the
evaluation. This could partly be a result of the various changes that have taken place as a
result of the merger, it is however still surprising.
4. KEY LESSONS LEARNT
(i)The approach of working through the key sectors i.e. education, agriculture and land
rights, which are of great interest and of direct importance to communities, is key to
ensuring mobilisation, ownership, and participation of communities. Furthermore,
working with existing structures in these sectors is likely to yield quicker, more
immediate results.
(ii) Whilst the fast pace at which AATZ (and the former MS Tanzania programme) is
working to ensure that CPS activities are implemented will guarantee that key outputs are
attained, there is a risk that doing too much too soon will not be sustainable. Furthermore,
AATZ will need to be careful in managing the relationships with such partners, as letting
go of them too quickly may have the effect of throwing them into the deep, from where
they may find it difficult to keep up.
(iii) Whilst the partnership approach yields dividends in terms of relationships, as well as
2 Some of these were short-term
24
capacity building, it requires a significant investment in time and resources. The regular
reviews, coaching sessions, availability to follow-up on specific issues, and the patience
required to work and support the partners requires a lot of time.
(iv) As efforts are being made to incorporate citizens in the various legally established
governance structures, there is need for caution to ensure that the citizens are not
absorbed into the way of doing things and get compromised. The idea of having active
citizens‟ groups outside of the structures who monitor and support their representatives is
therefore paramount.
(v) The different types of capacity building need to be well coordinated within AATZ in
order to ensure effectiveness and avoid confusion.
(vi) Clear ToRs and realistic outputs are essential for the successful implementation of
the People for Change programme.
5. LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
(i) The programme is still relevant in Tanzania. The significant building blocks are in
place, and heavy investment has been made with the partners, which is why AATZ
should consider continuing with the programme over the next two years, or absorbing the
partners that fit in their new strategy.
(ii) The partnership and capacity-building approaches are useful, and intense capacity-
building is required with regard to the community-based partners. In particular, the
partners favour capacity support that is demand-driven and adopts more of coaching than
formal training. In their words, “mentoring and coaching are far better and helpful than
conducting workshops”. AATZ should consider the use of similar approaches in its future
programmes.
(iii) Having a thematic approach to the CPS i.e. BLD, Land Rights and Youth for
Development, provided focus and direction for management of the partner portfolio. It
also gave focus to the partners. It is a useful approach that could be replicated in future
AATZ programmes.
(iv) Monitoring and evaluation is an area that needs a lot more attention to ensure that
results are captured. Monitoring and evaluation should also be a way of ensuring that the
support being provided actually results in concrete changes for rights holders.
(v) Outcome mapping is an approach that can better enable the measurement of changes
in attitude and behaviour. It has been used to develop a recent Land Rights project
proposal and found to be useful. It is recommended that AATZ consider using this
approach in future planning with its partners, as part of strengthening capacity in
monitoring and evaluation.
25
Annex 1. Terms of Reference
Terms of Reference
Summative evaluation of MS Country Programme Strategies and
programme support within the “Democracy Focus” 1. Background
In 2006, MS (now ActionAid Denmark in English) decided to focus all its programme
activities on democracy, which was considered an important strategic means for poverty
reduction. The „Democracy Focus‟ was developed within the framework of „Partnership
Against Poverty‟ as the guiding strategy for all MS‟ programme work in the South. The
Democracy Focus consisted of five themes: Building Local Democracy, which was made
a key feature in all programmes; Land Rights; Anti-Corruption; Conflict Management,
and Trade Justice (please refer to the respective Thematic Concept Papers). This strategic
change was negotiated with and accepted by MS‟ main back donor, the Danish Ministry
of Foreign Affairs (Danida). MS and Danida have a Framework Agreement, through
which MS receives app. DKK 156 million per year to carry out programmes based on its
own strategic framework and organisational capacity. It is a four-year rolling agreement,
which is negotiated in annual consultations.
Following the decision about the Democracy Focus, a Country Programme Strategy
(CPS) was developed in all the then MS programme countries/regions – i.e. Zimbabwe,
Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Nepal and Central
America. Each CPS, which initially covered the period 2008-2012, outlined the overall
thinking in relation to MS‟ involvement in the country/region in question. It defined the
themes and strategies to be pursued by MS as well as the geographical focus areas. It was
made mandatory for each country programme to allocate 50% of its resources to the
Building Local Democracy theme, while 30% could be allocated to a maximum of two
other themes and 20% could be used for innovative and country-specific activities.
The development of the CPS‟s was largely a participatory process, which built on lessons
learned and involved MS partner organisations and other CSO representatives as well as
programme staff, Development Workers, Policy Advisory Committees, consultants, etc.
Each CPS was subjected to an external appraisal, and an appraisal report with
recommendations for each country programme was elaborated. In some countries, the
existing partner portfolio was more or less maintained, while in others, a large number of
partners were phased out and new ones selected as a consequence of the new CPS.
During the first half of 2008, MS signed Partnership Agreements with app. 15-25 partner
organisations – all working within the Democracy Focus – in each of the above-
26
mentioned countries. External thematic reviews of the programmes within Building Local
Democracy, Land Rights, and Trade Justice were undertaken in 2008 and 2009. In 2010,
Danida carried out an external review of MS, which included country studies in Kenya,
Tanzania, and Nicaragua.
In September 2008, the General Assembly of MS decided that MS should proceed with
the process towards becoming an affiliate of ActionAid International. From 2010 MS was
appointed by ActionAid International to take the overall responsibility for the leadership
and management of the ActionAid theme The Right to Just and Democratic Governance.
In June 2010, the affiliation of MS was finally approved by ActionAid International‟s
General Assembly, and MS became a fully-fledged member of the ActionAid family and
changed its name (in English) to ActionAid Denmark (but maintaining Mellemfolkeligt
Samvirke or MS in Danish).
As a consequence of the affiliation, the MS offices in Nepal, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda,
Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Guatemala were merged with ActionAid in 2010 (and the South
Sudan office was closed). The programme portfolio of MS was taken over by ActionAid
in the respective countries, and the previous MS partner organisations became ActionAid
partners. In all countries, AADK and the national ActionAid organisations have signed
Cooperation Agreements, which specify that ActionAid is responsible for fulfilling the
objectives of the CPS‟s (which have been shortened to four years and hence will run out
in December 2011 concurrently with the individual Partnership Agreements).
From January 2012, MS – or rather AADK – will thus have no formal commitments to
individual partner organisations from the time before the merger with ActionAid
International. In future AADK will support national AAI organisations and their local
partners, programmes, and projects in line with Danida‟s Civil Society Strategy
(“Strategy for Danish Support to Civil Society in Developing Countries”) and with the
framework agreement between Danida and AADK that sets out the specific governance
focus, which is part of AADK‟s own global programme strategy.
A number of national ActionAid offices are currently in the process of reviewing their
Country Strategy Papers with the purpose of developing new 5-year strategies and
programmes. During 2011, ActionAid International is developing a new global strategy,
which will take effect from 2012. It is assumed that Governance will continue to be a
focal theme in the new global strategy as well as in many new country strategies
including AADK‟s own. Lessons learned from previous and ongoing AADK supported
governance programmes should preferably feed into the various strategy development
processes. It is therefore the intention of AADK – to the extent possible – to carry out the
evaluation in parallel with the CSP Reviews undertaken by the national ActionAid
offices. At the same time, the summative evaluation will serve as an important
contribution to both upwards and downwards accountability.
2. Objective
The main objective of the evaluation is to ensure that the lessons learned from the
27
implementation of the MS Country Programme Strategies in Zimbabwe, Zambia,
Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Nepal and Guatemala are collected and
analysed. The information will serve as documentation to the back donor Danida and as
strategic learning points for AAI/IGT as well as for the individual ActionAid
organisations in the countries of cooperation. The evaluation will also be used as an input
in the appraisal of new programmes proposed for AADK funding and contribute to the
overall evaluation of all AADK activities scheduled for the last quarter of 2011.
3. Scope of Work
The evaluation will include, but not necessarily be limited to, an assessment of the
following issues in each country:
The relevance of the strategic objectives and the themes selected to the national context
The relevance of the partner organisations selected in relation to the themes
The value and effectiveness of the partnership approach applied by MS
The commitment of the partner organisations in achieving the CPS objectives
The coherence between the CPS and the supported activities
The overall coherence of the strategy and the selected partner portfolio in relation to
the context – including the opportunities to link local programme activities to
national (or international) advocacy initiatives
The extent to which immediate CPS objectives have been achieved
The contribution of the programme activities to changes at policy level
The concrete outcomes for rights-holders (women, men, youth)
The long-term sustainability of the outcomes
The extent to which gender analysis has been applied and gender mainstreaming
sufficiently incorporated into programme strategies and activities
The extent to which capacity building of partner organisations has been sufficiently
incorporated into programme strategies and activities and the effectiveness of this
The contribution of the People for Change programme to achieving CPS objectives
The contribution of the Training for Change programme
Preliminary assessment of how the programmes may influence the new ActionAid
national strategies
4. Methodology
The evaluation team will use a participatory methodology with an emphasis on collecting
lessons learned, gathering best practices, and documenting illustrative cases.
The evaluation will consist of the following main parts:
Desk study
Kick-off seminar in Denmark
Country studies in Nepal and Tanzania, where the evaluation methodology for the
remaining country studies will be developed
Country studies in Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique, Kenya, Uganda, and Guatemala
28
Debriefing workshop in Denmark
The first step will be a desk review to analyse key documents (Country Programmes
Strategies, CPS Appraisal reports, thematic review reports, annual reports, Partnership
Agreements, etc.). This will be followed by a kick-off seminar in Denmark to establish a
common ground for the assignment through discussing the methodology to be applied
during the first two country studies (Nepal and Tanzania) and the key issues to be
explored in all countries. This seminar will be attended by the respective Team Leaders
for the Nepal and Tanzania country studies, by key staff in AADK and – if possible – by
former MS Country Directors.
The outcome of the seminar will be a preliminary inception note, which describes the
approach and methodology to be tested in Nepal and Tanzania respectively as well as the
main areas of focus in each country. The specific evaluation methodology for each
country will thus be developed during the first two country studies, but it is expected that
all country studies will include at least the following activities:
Review of Country Programme Strategy, reports from previous reviews and
evaluations of the country programme, quarterly and annual reports, and other
relevant documents
Individual interviews with former MS programme staff (where possible) and current
AAI programme staff and SMT
A workshop with all former MS partner organisations
Meetings with representatives of selected partner organisations
Field visits to selected communities and focus group discussions with selected rights-
holders
Meeting with Royal Danish Embassy representatives
Debriefing meeting with SMT of AAI in each country
When the two first country studies are completed, the respective Team Leaders will share
experiences, assess the usefulness of the methodology that has been tested, and decide on
the methodology to be applied in the remaining country studies.
When all country studies have been completed, the Team Leader for the country studies
in Africa will summarise the findings in a synthesis report.
A reference group consisting of experienced resource persons within governance will be
established in Denmark. The role of the reference group will be to give feedback on the
methodology to be applied and on preliminary findings and conclusions. Two external
consultants, two AADK Board members and one (non-Danish) ActionAid International
Governance Team member will be invited to participate in the reference group.
Before submitting the final synthesis report, the Team Leader will hold a debriefing
workshop with the SMT and International Programme Support Team of MS in
Copenhagen. The reference group and the former MS Country Directors will also be
invited to participate.
29
5. Outputs
For each country, the team will produce a country specific report in English of max. 30
pages (excl. annexes) based on a standard outline as presented in the inception note (see
section 4 above) including:
Observations, findings, best practice examples and major lessons learned
Recommendations related to AADK‟s strategy development, including issues to be
pursued through the planned overall evaluation of all AADK activities
Recommendations related to ActionAid national strategy and programme development
Recommendations related to possible AADK support to ActionAid partners beyond
2011
The deadline for the country specific evaluation reports is two weeks after each visit.
The preliminary inception note will be finalised based on the methodology developed
during the Nepal and Tanzania country studies.
In addition, the Team Leader will produce a synthesis report in English of max. 20 pages
describing the main findings, best practices and lessons learned as well as the key
strategic recommendations for the future.
The deadline for submitting the final synthesis report is 13th
June 2011.
6. Composition of teams
The team will be headed by a Team Leader (international consultant) who (in dialogue
with AADK) will compose country specific teams. Each country specific team will
consist of an international consultant and a national consultant specialised in democracy
and governance (except the Guatemala and Mozambique evaluations, which will be
conducted by one national consultant in each country).
As some of the county studies will run in parallel, three international consultants have
been assigned. One will cover Nepal, another Zambia and Kenya, while the third person
(Team Leader) will be responsible for the evaluation in Tanzania, Uganda, Sudan, and
Zimbabwe.
The following resource persons will join the team:
An AAI Programme Officer from another country
The AADK Programme Support Coordinator (country focal point)
A representative of ActionAid International IGT and/or Regional Offices
7. Timing
The evaluation will take place from February to May 2011. A maximum of 20 working
30
days is allocated for each country study (including report writing) – except Nepal and
Tanzania, which will have some extra days for methodology development.
To the extent possible, the evaluation will run in parallel with the CSP Reviews carried
out by the national ActionAid offices. Please refer to the attached tentative time schedule.
8. Background information
Partnership Against Poverty – MSiS Policy Paper 2005
Democracy Focus in MS 2006
MS Gender Policy 2007
Thematic Concept Paper for each theme
Country Programme Strategy for each country
CPS Appraisal reports for each country
Partnership Agreements & Project Documents
MS Guidelines for Thematic Programming
A MS Review of BLD Theme Strategies 2008 (synthesis and country reports)
Review of Personnel Assistance in MS 2008
MS Trade Justice Reviews 2009 (synthesis and country reports)
Land Rights Thematic Review 2009 (synthesis and country reports)
MS in transition 2009
MS ActionAid Thematic Review 2010
ActionAid’s Strategic Plan “Just and Democratic Governance 2006 – 2010” – the
Review Report
Strategic Concept Paper: The Right to Just and Democratic Governance (draft, Nov.
2010)
31
Annex 2. Itinerary
Draft Programme for AADK Evaluation in Tanzania: 14 February – 25 February,
2011
DAY TIME SUBEJCT
Arrivals:
Kitakaya Loisa
Sunday
13.02.11
Arrivals:
Ashanut Okille
Vince Martino
09.00 Team Meeting – getting organized
11.00 Meeting at AAI Tanzania with Country director
and head of programmes, SMT
12.00
Meetings at AAI Tanzania with relevant staff in
areas of democratic governance and the People
for Change coordinator- Albert, Wambura, Elias,
Safina and Sandra
14.00
Meeting with former MS staff: Kristian, Deo,
Scholastica and Martha
ALSO more in-depth meeting with People for
Change Advisor – Kristian, Kmani and Manja
08.00-
16.00
Meeting at the Danish Embassy
Meetings with Key resource persons and/or
organisations in governance in Tanzania
a)Yefred Myenzi, Director of Haki Ardhi
b) Geir Sunder, Land Rights expert and Director
of Accountability programme, DFIDKPMG
c) Policy Forum ( strategic partner) Semkae
Kilonzo
9.00-15.00
Workshop with partners ( 2 representatives from
each organization)- Land Rights thematic area (
CORDS, Naramatisho, MPLC,HAKIARDI )
NOTE- People for Change formats for partners
will be shared at the workshop
32
9.00-15.00
Workshop with partners (2 representatives from
each organization)- BLD thematic area ( YPC,
AP2000, IADA, SHIVAWAK,HKC, TRC
Coalition)
NOTE- People for Change formats for partners
will be shared at the workshop
09.00-11.00
11.00-12.00
Team meeting to discuss outcomes of the
workshops with partners
Discuss preparations for the field work
14.00-16.00
Meetings with other CSOs involved in
governance in Tanzania
a) Tanzania Human Rights Centre
TWAWEZA
b) TNRF
c) HAKIELIMU
d) TGNP
Report writing
Report writing
Arrival of Lea ( who will focus on People for
Change)
7.30
09.00-11.00
Travel to Kibaha
Meeting with Rights holders- (YPC)
People for Change sub-team to have more in-
depth discussion with YPC
11.00-12.00
Meeting with District/local government officials
12.00-13.00 Meeting with Partner- YPC
14.00-15.00
Travel to Bagamoyo Chalinze
15.00-16.00
Meeting with Partner- Naramatisho
People for Change sub-team to have more in-
depth discussion with Naramatisho
17.30 Travel to Morogoro
09.00-11.00
Meeting with Rights holders – MPLC
People for Change sub-team to have more in-
depth discussion with MPLC
33
11.00-12.00 Meeting with District leaders/Local council
officials
12.00-13.00 Meeting with partner- MPLC
14.00 Travel back to Dar
9.00-10.00 Team Meeting to reflect/discuss field visits
11.00-12.00
Meeting with strategic partner TRC Coalition
People for Change sub-team to have more in-
depth discussion with TRC Coalition
14.00-15.00 Meeting with strategic partner- AP 2000
10.0-12.00 Team meeting to prepare for the debrief
14.00-15.00 Meeting with CSP review team( if available)
15.00-16.00 Any pending meetings
9.00-13.00 Consultations with key stakeholders and writing
up document
14.00 Debrief
Saturday
26.02.11
Departure of Team
34
Annex 3. Lists of persons met and interviewed
Former MS Tanzania and Action Aid TZ staff
Aida Kiangi – Country Director, AA Tanzania
Yitna Tekalingne - Programme Coordinator
Albert Jimwaga – Just and Democratic Governance Advisor
Andrew Mhina – Former Manager BLD & Youth Programme, MS Tanzania
Deo Ngass – Program Accountant
Elias Mtinda – Agriculture and food security advisor
Joram Massesa – Accountability advisor
Kimani Njoroge – Organisation capacity building advisor
Kristian Andersen – Governance advisor (People for Change)
Manja Kamwi - Communication Advisor
Martha Jerom – Building local democracy advisor
Safina Hassan – Women rights advisor
Sandra sakala – People for Change
Scholastic Haule – Land rights advisor
Stanley Kachecheba -Education advisor
Partners Workshop participants
Amani Mwaipaja – Morogoro paralegal centre
Cathbert Tomitho – Hakiardhi
Davide chanjeghea – TAYODEA
Edward Massawe – SHIVIWAKA Mbeya
Evance Abdallah – HKC Arusha
Hezekiah Mwakasungula – SHIVIWAKA Mbeya
Israel Ilunde – YPC Kibaha Coast
Jimmy ongollo – law graduate
Jonathan Mwazembe – IADO Mbeya
Mary Mrosso – Hakiardhi
Matthew maguluko – Naramatisho
Nalogwa Shani – TRC Coalition
Samwelly Stanley – YPC Kibaha
Seela j. Sainyeya – CORDS
Sylvester Massawe – Morogoro Paralegal Centre
Focus group discussion at YPC
Abdallah Gurumu – Ilala
Baby mwidowe – Chairperson Kibaha Youth Forum
Grace Karashani – Member, country entrepreneurship
Israel Ilunde – Executive Director, YPC
Peter Emanuel – Secretary, Youth Forum
Samwely Stanley – Programme manager, YPC
Shauri Yombaomba – Member, Youth Forum
35
Upendo John Mbuji – Member, Youth Forum Committee
Focus Group Discussion: Kiziwa Village, Morogoro District
Rajabu Mvumiza – Member, Village Government
Juma M. Kibwana – „‟ „‟
Kasim I. Bogas – „‟ „‟
Ayubu Segumba – Chair, Hamlet
Kasim S. Kiwamba – „‟
Kiango M. Omari – „‟
Moshi M. Sanze – member, village government
Mwanzani M. Sanze – „‟
Abdallah O. Mgaya – chairperson, Hamlet
Saidi A. Mbano – member, hamlet
Asha M. Hamisi – member, village government
Shabani Mhando – member, village land government
Ramadhani Mohamed – Secretary, village land government
Hyasinta B. Kumbulu – member, village land council
Amina J. Zewe – member, village land council
Maimna Rajabu – member, village land council
Rahim K. Kigwa – member, village land council
Msomba A. Liwawa – hamlet representative
Mohamed Salum – member, village land council
Albogast E. Mabwe - ,, ,,
Sikitu Saidi – „‟ „‟
Amina S. Mlwale – ,, ,,
Asha Ahmad – member, village government
Rehema Shabani - ,, ,,
Fadhili M. Sanze - ,, ,,
Ally S. Mjengwa – chairman, Kiziwa village
Tamim A. Mkunize – Member, village land council
Others
Geir Sundet – Accountability Tanzania Programme
Rose Aoko - Twaweza
36
Annex 4. Good Practice: PCM Sequence for partner selection
1 Identification of possible partner & Reassessing Partner Portfolio
2 Invitation Letter
3 Partner Financial assessment
workshop (Followed by verbal
debriefing)
(1day)
Partner Organizational Assessment
workshop
(Followed by verbal debriefing)
(3days)
4 Written Organizational and Financial Assessment (Description of Results)
sent to potential partner for comments
5 Partner Recommendation Form completed by program and financial staff
6 Program Management Decision Point: Red light or Green Light by program
& finance unit based on Partner Recommendation Form
7 Letter from Country Director to Partner formulated providing background for
decision
Green light: Program Management Response letter
Red light: Program Management Response letter
8 Partner Workshop conducted (2 to 3 days):
Revision of LFA,
Budget linked to LFA,
Project Implementation plan formulated,
zero draft of Partnership Agreement formulated
Zero draft of Project Document formulated
9 Further Development of Partnership Agreements and Project Documents via
email with quality assurance discussion at program meetings
10 Partnership Agreement and Project Document sent to DK for approval
11 Formal Signing Ceremony of new partner at Program Office
12 Partner Baseline Workshop conducted
13 Quarterly Reflection and Learning Workshops conducted
14 Annual adjustment of partner project documents based on annual project
review workshop
15 Annual Thematic Countrywide Review Workshop based on - Thematic
results in relation to the CPS indicators