Annexes:Mid–Term Review
of the KatineCommunity Partnerships Project
August 2009
Hazel Slavin
iMid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes
Table of Contents
Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... iiAnnex 1: Terms of Reference for the Mid–Term Review of the KCPP, July 2009.........................1Annex 2: Itinerary .........................................................................................................................5Annex 3: KCPP Bibliography/Timeline .........................................................................................9Annex 4: KCPP Visitors Log Sept 2007–July 2009 ......................................................................11Annex 5: Partner–oriented progress reporting in the KCPP .........................................................15Annex 6: KCPP achievements since January 2008 .....................................................................16Annex 7: Self–assessment ...........................................................................................................20Annex 8: Quick survey July 2009 .................................................................................................27Annex 9: Villages x project activities matrices ..............................................................................33Annex 10: Achievement rating scale (MTR) .................................................................................43Annex 11: A process review of the Mid–Term Review ..................................................................46
iiMid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes
Acronyms
AIDS........................... AcquiredImmuno–deficiencySyndrome AMREF...................... AfricanMedicalandResearchFoundation ANC........................... AnteNatalCare ARVs.......................... Antiretrovirals ASRH......................... AdolescentSexualandReproductiveHealth DAC........................... DevelopmentAssistanceCommittee DEO........................... DistrictEducationOfficer DFID........................... DepartmentforInternationalDevelopment(UK) DSC........................... DistrictSteeringCommittee DWO.......................... DistrictWaterOfficer GoU............................ GovernmentofUganda HIV............................. HumanImmuno–deficiencySyndrome HSSP......................... HealthSectorSupportPlan HUMC........................ HealthUnitManagementCommittee ITNs.......................... InsecticideTreatedNets KCPP........................ KatineCommunityPartnershipsProject LC.............................. LocalCouncilor MDD........................... MusicDanceandDrama MDGs......................... MillenniumDevelopmentGoals M&E........................... MonitoringandEvaluation MTR........................... Mid–termreview MoU........................... MemorandumofUnderstanding NGO........................... Non–GovernmentalOrganisation NUSAF...................... NorthernUgandaSocialActionFund OOP........................... OutofPocketExpenses PTA............................. Parent/TeacherAssociation PDC.......................... ParishDevelopmentCommittee PEAP......................... PovertyEradicationActionPlan PHASE....................... PersonalHygieneandSanitationEducation PLWHA....................... PeoplelivingwithHIVandAIDS PREFA....................... ProtectingFamiliesforHIV/AIDS(anNGO) PM............................. ProjectManager PMC.......................... ProjectManagementCommittee(atsub–countylevel) PO.............................. ProjectOfficer PSC........................... ProjectSteeringCommittee(atDistrictlevel) PSC........................... ParishSanitationCommittee PTA............................ Parent/Teachers’Association RBA........................... RightsBasedApproach SMC.......................... SchoolManagementCommittee TASO......................... TheAIDSSupportOrganisation ToR............................ TermsofReference UGX........................... UgandanShillings UWESO.................... UgandaWomen’sEfforttoSaveOrphans VCT........................... VoluntaryCounselingandTesting VDC........................... VillageDevelopmentCommittee VHT............................ VillageHealthTeam VSLA......................... VillageSavingsandLoanAssociation WATSAN................... WaterandSanitation WSC........................... WaterSourceCommittee
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
Annex 1: Terms of Reference for the Mid–Term Review of the KCPP, July 2009
1. Backgroundtothereview
1.1 SummaryoftheprojectInpartnershipwiththeGuardianNewspaperandBarclaysBankandwithtechnicaladvicefromFARM–Af-rica,AMREF,ahealthbasedNGO,isimplementingathree–yearintegrateddevelopmentprojecttoimprovethelivesofpeoplelivingintheKatinesub–districtofnortheasternUganda,oneof17sub–countiesinSorotidistrictwhichhadtheworstindicatorsforpovertyandunderdevelopment.The£2.6mprojectoverthreeyearsisbeingfundedbydonationsfromGuardianreadersandBarclays.Theprojectbringssustainablebenefits to communities in Katine by improving access to health services, water, education, livelihoods and trainingandbystrengtheningitsciviccommitteesanddecision–makingstructures.Whatisunprecedentedisthatsimultaneously,astheprojectinterventionsarebeingdelivered,successesandpitfallsarebeingtrackedbyGuardainjournalists.Guardianreaderscandebate,blogandfollowthestoryofcommunitybaseddevelopmentviaamultimediawebsite(www.guardian.co.uk/katine)whereallprojectdocu-mentationcanbereviewedandcommentedon.
AMREFUK,basedinLondon,managestherelationshipswiththepartners,thefundraising,communica-tions,andadvocacycomponentsoftheprojectwithintheUK,workingwiththeGuardiantofacilitatereport-ing,whileAMREFUgandahasthetechnicalexpertiseanddeliverstheprojectonthegroundinKatine.
TheKatineCommunityPartnershipsProject(KCPP)addressesthekeyconstraintstosustainablecommu-nity development by taking an integrated approach. The specific objectives are:
ImprovedcommunityhealthImprovedaccesstoqualityprimaryeducationImprovedaccesstosafewater,sanitationandhygieneImprovedincome–generatingopportunities(alsoreferredtoasimprovinglivelihoods)*Communitiesempoweredtoengageinlocalgovernance
FARM–AfricaisatechnicaladvisortothelivelihoodscomponentoftheprojectwhichliesoutsideofAM-REF’scorecompetencies.
CAREInternationalandlocalimplementingpartnerUgandaWidowsEfforttoSaveOrphans(UWESO)aredelivering a community–based microfinance project complementary to KCPP. The CARE–UWESO ’Katine VillageSavingsandLoans’projectisfundedbyasmallgrantfromBarclaysandcontributestotheliveli-hoodscomponent.”
Expected outcomes include:Increasedcommunityawareness,accesstoandutilisationofhealthservicesincommunityandhealthfacilities.Improvedaccesstoqualityprimaryeducationforallchildrenandgreatercommunityinvolvementinschoolgovernance.Increasedcommunityaccesstoandutilisationofimprovedwaterandsanitationfacilities.Improvedhygienepracticesinhouseholds.Improvedoperationsandmaintenanceofwatersources.Recovery of livelihoods through diversified and improved sources of income.Strongerabilityofruralinstitutionstoaccessbothadvisoryservicesandmarketsfortheirproductsforincreasedproductionandincome.Increasedcommunitycapacitytoplanandbudgetforcommunityneeds.Strongercommunitycapacityfordatagatheringandutilisation.Communitydemandingandachievingtheirrightsandservices.
AMREF’skeydevelopmentgoalistoclosethegapbetweencommunitiesandbasicservicedeliverysys-temsthroughitsCommunityBasedDevelopment(CBD)approach.Thisisachievedthroughbuildingthecapacityofcommunities,strengtheningsystemsofservicedeliveryandundertakingoperationalresearchto
●●●●●
●
●
●●●●●
●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2
develop,share,scaleupandadvocateforbestpolicyandpracticechanges.TheKCPPprojectisstrength-eningthefunctionalityofexistingcommunity–basedstructureslikewatersourcecommittees,VillageHealthTeams(VHTs)andParentTeacherAssociations(PTAs).Simultaneously,itworkswithandbuildsthecapac-itiesoflocalgovernmentstructuresliketheparishdevelopmentcommittees,theparishsanitationcommit-tees,thesub–countyhealthcommitteeandthefarmers’forumstoensurethattheyplaytheirroleseffec-tively.Theapproachalsoensuresthattheprojectcomponentsofhealth,waterandsanitation,education,livelihoodsandcommunityempowermentworktore–enforceeachothertoensureintegrateddevelopment.
TheprojectmanagementstructureAsub–countyprojectmanagementcommitteehasbeenestablishedtoprovideoversighttotheoperationalaspectsoftheproject.Thecommitteeisinvolvedintheprojectactivitiesandactionplansaresharedonaregularbasis.Itischairedbythesub–countychiefandco–chairedbytheAMREFDeputyCountryDirector.
Atthedistrictlevel,thedistrictsteeringcommittee’sroleistoensurethattheprojectisalignedtorelevantgovernmentpolicyandprogrammesincludingthedistrictdevelopmentplanandsectorstrategiesandhaseffective partnerships. It is chaired by the Chief Administrative Officer who is the head of the civil service at thedistrictlevel;theAMREFcountrydirectoralsoco–chairsthecommittee.
Atthemidtermpointoftheproject,AMREFwillworkwiththegovernancestructuresandprojectpartnerstodevelopexit,scale–upandsustainabilitystrategies.Theprojectwillstrengthenthemanagementandtech-nicalcapacityofthecommunity,sub–countyanddistrictstructures.Itwillalsostrengthenlinksanddialoguebetweencommunitygroupsandlocalgovernmentasabasisforadvocacy,betterplanningandraisingresourcesbeyondthelifespanoftheprojectasAMREF’sroledecreases.
1.2PurposeofthemidtermreviewThepurposeofthemid–termreviewistoassessprogressagainstobjectivesinall5componentstoassesstowhatextenttheprojectisontracktoimprovethequalityoflifeforthepeopleofKatine.TheMTRwillalsoprovidelessonslearnttodatewithclearrecommendationstoinformfutureimplementationandimproveprojectdeliveryfortheremainderoftheproject.Thereviewprocessshouldallowcommunities,localgov-ernment to reflect and learn from the approach to development with consideration of how the learning can beappliedtofutureplansandpolicies.
1.3Scopeofthemid–termreviewThescopeofthereviewshouldfocusoninterimresultsatoutcomelevelthatcontributetoachievingthelongertermgoalofimprovingthequalityoflivesforthepeopleofKatine,whathashelpedandwhathashindered(intermsofexpectedandunexpectedoutcomes)andalsoproviderecommendationsofhowtostrengthen outcomes for sustainability for the remainder of the project. The MTR should look at:
Changestopeople’slivesintheareasoflivelihoods,health,waterandsanitationandeducation.(con-sideringimpactandequityofapproachtodate).Changestocommunityandgovernmentstructuresintermsoftheircapacitiesandtheimpactthishasonthedeliveryoftheprojectandpeople’slivesi.e.areweseeingamoreactivecommunityorpolicychange?(consideringsustainabilityandeffectiveness). The contribution of: 1) AMREF’s activities 2) Partners activities e.g. UWESO, FARM–Africa, CARE (considering relevance, effectiveness and efficiency3) Role of other NGOs operating in Katine, consid-eringtowhatextentthepartnershipsandcollaborationshavehinderedorhelpedtowardsachievingtheendgoal.Thegenderdimensionsoftheprojectandhowgenderequitycanbeenhanced.Explorefactorsthataffectthedeliveryofprojectactivities.Reviewandidentifysustainabilitymechanisms,whatneedstohappenfrommidwayuntiltheendoftheprojectandaftertheprojectlifetimetoensuresustainabilityi.e.replicationofthemodel/scaleupandanexplorationofopportunitiestosupportthat.Noteunexpectedoutcomesoftheproject. Risks and assumptions: consider assumptions in initial design of project, what has been learnt to inform futureimplementation.
●
●
●
●●●
●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
2. Methodology
2.1.Basicmethodologyofthemid–termreviewThemid–termreviewerwillchoosethemethodologyforcollectingandanalysingtheinformationbasedonacceptedprofessionalstandards.Themid–termreviewshouldbeparticipatoryasmuchaspos-sibleandincludefeedbackfromthekeypartnersinUgandaandintheUK(Barclays,GuardianandFARM–Africa).TechnicalsupportonmethodologywillbeprovidedbytheexternalevaluatorRickDav-ies(seefurtherbelow).
Readingthekeysourcesofdocumentationandkeyinformantssuchascommunitysurvey,baseline,andprojectreportswillberequiredpreparation.
ThereviewerwillbeexpectedtoprovidethefullycompletedquestionnairestotheKCPPandallthemanu-alsforthetrainingandalltheotherrelatedrecordingsifany.
Itisproposedthatthemid–termreviewerfacilitatesaparticipatoryandconsultativeprocessinvolvingallstakeholders.
2.2.TentativetimetableThe mid–term review process is divided into five phases, specified below:
Phase 1: DevelopmentandagreementontheToR,agreementonmembershipofMTRteam,recruitmentandbrief-ingoftheteamleader–May
Phase 2: Leadconsultanttoprovideareviewtimetableandprocess.
Phase 3: Conductreview.
Phase 4:Briefing of key stakeholders at end of field work process.
Phase 5:FirstdraftofthereportsharedwithAMREFUgandastaffforinitialcomments(2ndweekofAugust)drafttobesharedelectronicallywithAMREFUKandAMREFHQforreview.
Phase 6:Second draft report shared with partners (Barclays, Guardian and FARM–Africa) for final comments (throughemail)
Phase 7:Finalreportproduced,emailedtoallpartnersfordisseminationontheGuardian,BarclaysandAMREFwebsitesandsharedina2dayActionPlanningworkshopinKatinewithprojectstakeholderson15thand16thSeptember2009.
The workshop will enable partners to internalise the findings and recommendations of the MTR, reach consensusonnextsteps,discusslegacyoptions.OutputswillbeastrategydevelopedforlegacyoptionsforKatinebasedonMTR.Theresultsoftheworkshopwillbesharedwithallstakeholdersanddissemi-natedasabove.
3. Expectedoutputs
Areportofabout25pageswithanexecutivesummarythatprovidesanoverviewofwhathasbeenachievedtodatetoimprovethelivesofthepeopleofKatine.Recommendationsonwhatstrategiestoadopttostrengthentheoutcomesoftheproject.
1.
2.
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
SuggestedoptionsforwhatnextpostKatine.
3.1 FinalreportBothasoftcopyandhardcopyreportswillbesubmittedtoKCPP.
4. Expertise required / Reviewer
The reviewer is required to have the following qualifications and expertise:Goodknowledgeandgeneralfamiliaritywiththeimplementationofcommunitydevelopmentprojects.Knowledge&experienceofcarryingoutsimilarstudieswithreputableorganisations.Academicandworkingknowledgeintheareasofhealth,education,waterandsanitation,livelihoodsandcommunityempowerment.Familiaritywiththepolitical,economic,social,technologicallegalenvironmentandinstitutionalcondi-tionsinUgandaingeneral.Understandingoftheculturesoftheruralcommunitiesinthedevelopingcountries.Sensitivitytosocio–culturalandgenderissuesinSoroti.KnowledgeandexperienceinusingtheevaluationcriteriaofTransparency,Equity,effectiveness,ef-ficiency, impact, relevance and sustainability.Provenpracticalexperienceinproject/programmeevaluationparticularlyinparticipatoryevaluation.Abilitytoanalyseandsynthesiseandtowriteclearreports.Abilitytoseethewiderscopeoftheprojectintermsofit’sfocusoncrosssectorpartnershipfordeliveryandincontextoftheprojectbeingseenasmeansofcommunicatingdevelopment.FluencyinEnglishandpreferablyanabilitytounderstandAteso/Kumam.Readytoabidebytheethicalprinciplesthatguideresearchandstudies.
Thereviewershouldbefamiliarandconversantwithsuitabletechniquesforfacilitationofgroupdiscussionsandanalysisandhaveprovenpracticalexperienceonthis.Therevieweralsoneedsbeabletoworkunderpressureandinnot–optimalphysicalconditions.Theindependentconsultantshouldhaveexcellentreportwritingskillsandhavetheabilitytolisten,negotiateandcollaborateisessentialaswellastheabilitytobringtogetherdifferentpointsofview.
Roleoftheexternalevaluator
The(Guardiancontracted)externalevaluatorwillbeamemberoftheMTRteam,leadbythereviewercontractedbyAMREF.Hewillbepartofthereviewteamandcontributetothedesignandimplementationofthereview.ThereviewerwillberesponsibleforthepreparationoftheMTRreport.Hewillalsomonitorthereviewprocess,andprovideanannextotheMTRreportonthereviewprocess.Hisviewswillbesharedwiththereviewerduringthereview,andwiththeGuardianandothersonthecompletionofthereview.
Theexternalevaluatorandthereviewerwillbothacknowledgeminorityviewsifandwheretheyareimportant.
3.
1.2.3.
4.
5.6.7.
8.9.10.
11.12.
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
Annex 2: ItineraryHazelSlavin,MTRConsultant1
RickDavies,ExternalEvaluatorKatineProject2
10/06 Meeting HazelSlavin,MTRConsultantRickDavies,ExternalEvaluatorKatineProject
23/06 MeetingatAMREF,UK ClaudiaCodsi,AMREFGraceMukasa,AMREFMadeleineBunting,GuardianJoe Confino, GuardianHelenBarnes,CAREMaudeMassu,CAREEdWatkiss,FarmAfricaRickDavies,ExternalEvaluator(RD)HazelSlavin,MTRconsultant(HS)
24/06 TelephonecallwithHS
TelephonecallwithHS
LizFord,GuardianKatineWebsiteManager
Maude Massu, CARE, Microfinance Advisor
25/06 TelephonecallwithHS MadeleineBunting,Guardian
26/06 TelephonecallwithHS
TelephonecallwithHS
SarahBoseley,Guardian
HelenBarnes,CARE,CorporatePartnerships
29/06 MeetingatAMREF,Kampala JoshuaKyallo,AMREFCountryDirectorSusanWandera,DeputyCountryDirector
30/06 MeetingatCARE,Kampala
MeetingatUWESO,Kampala
GraceMajara,VSLAProgManager
BoscoEpila,Socio–economicProgManager
30/06 MeetingatAMREF,Kampala JoshuaKyallo,CountryDirectorSusanWandera,DeputyCountryDirector
01/07
DriveKampalatoSoroti/Katine
MeetingwithProjectTeam,Soroti OscarOketch,ProjectManagerOlwney Martha Kavuna, M&E officerLilian Viko, Project Officer, EducationAmeruaMolly,ProjectAssistant,EducationOtim Joseph, Project Officer, HealthOkurutAlfred,ProjectAssistant,HealthVenansio Tumuhaise, Project Officer, LivelihoodsOgwangDavid,ProjectAssistant,LivelihoodsKasule John Leonard, Project Officer, WATSANOkelloAnthony,ProjectAssistant,WATSANOpesenRichard,CommunityEmpowermentSimon Mugenyi, Communications Officer
1 Attend all meetings unless indicated2 Attend all meeting unless indicated until 09/07
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
02/07 MeetingswithRD,HSandteammembersSteeringCommittee
ManagementCommittee
OjomParishDevelopmentCttee
OjomaParishDevelopmentCttee
12men2women
21men4women
22men14women
22men10women
03/07 MeetingswithRD,HSandteammembers
AsstDHO&staff
OjumHealthCentre2RDmeetingHUMCHSmeetingVHTVisittoCentre
TiririHealthCentre4MeetingwithHUMC(RD)MeetingwithVHT(HS)VisittoCentre
DrOlhadhiCharlesStephen,AsstDHORosemary Anaso, Nursing Officer
4 members (3 men, 1 woman)16members(9men7women)LucyAriamo,Nursein–charge
2members(men)7members(5men2women)JuventineEmayu,sisterin–chargeAlibu Francis, Records Office
04/07 Work in Office
05/07 RandomwalksinMerokandKatinePar-ishes
RD,HS,ProjectDirector
06/07 MeetingswithRD,HSandteammembers
Deputy District Education Officer SchoolInspectorKatine
VisittoAdamasikoSchoolMeetingwithteachers(HS)MeetingSMCandPTA(RD)
OkelloEverestwithRDandteammemberCharlesOkirorwithHSandteammember
EngweduWilliam,Headmaster7 members (4 men 3 women)13 members (11 men 2 woman)
MembersofSchoolHealthTeam(RD/HS)
MeetingwithCentreCo–ordinatingTutor
MeetingwithusersofCommunityResourceCentre(HS)
HeadGirlandHeadBoy
JoshuaOkekeny
5 members (2 men, 3 women)JosephMalinga
07/07 VisittoOjomPrimarySchoolMeetingwithTeachers(HS)SchoolHealthCommittee(HS)MeetingwithSMCandPTA(RD)
EkotuFrancis,HeadTeacher7members(6men,1woman)HeadGirlandHeadBoy13 members (11 men, 2 women)
08/07 OmulaiWaterSourceCommittee
Sub–CountySanitationCommittee
OlwelaiParishSanitationCommittee
MataliWaterSourceCommittee
9members(5men,4women)
10members(9men,1woman)
13 members (12 men, 1 woman)
5 members (2 men, 3 women)
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
09/07 RickDaviesleavesUganda
District Water Office
Sub–countyHealthCommittee
OjamaParishSanitationCommittee
Peter Opwanya, District Water OfficerAdoaStephen,WO,HealthandSanitationFrancisOpolot,WO,CommunityEducationEpeetThomas,CWO,SorotiEmesuSimonPeter,CWO,SerereMulala Fabian, DWD TSU 3
15 members (13 men, 2 women)
7members(5men,2women)
10/07 Meeting at District Production Office
Soroti District Veterinary Office
OjemorunUnitedFarmersGroup
ObalangaAtamakisiFarmersGroup
OkettaWW,DistrictProductionCo–ordinatorEyudu P, District Veterinary OfficerAdutu Patrick, District Natural Resources OfficerOlupot Maurice, Community Development Officer
OpamaMoses,Para–vetAacoAngellaImmaculate,Para–vetEiduJoel,Para–vetEreuFelix,Para–vet
29members(9men,20women)
20members(8men,12women)&2non–mem-bers
11/07 UWESO Office, Soroti
AkiroPoteVSLAGroup
AcanmireVSLAGroup
Owera Jeffrey, Programme officerPatrick Osure, Programme officer
12members(5men,7women)
20 members (7 men, 13 women)
12/07 Preparationforde–brief&planning
13/07 De–briefandplanningmeeting OscarOketch,ProjectManagerOlwney Martha Kavuna, M&E officerLilian Viko, Project Officer, EducationAmeruaMolly,ProjectAssistant,EducationOtim Joseph, Project Officer, HealthOkurutAlfred,ProjectAssistant,HealthVenansio Tumuhaise, Project Officer, LivelihoodsOgwangDavid,ProjectAssistant,LivelihoodsKasule John Leonard, Project Officer, WATSANOkelloAnthony,ProjectAssistant,WATSANOpesenRichard,CommunityEmpowermentOchanLennox,AsstClerkofWorksNicodemusTumukwasibwe,ProjectManager,EUIntegratedProject,SorotiGeorgeEkochu,AMREFaccountant,Soroti
14/07 MeetingatFarmAfrica,Mbale
ReturntoKampala
ShamilahNamusisi,Training&AdvisoryUnitCoordinator
15/07 Preparationandwriting
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �
16/07 De–briefAMREFKampala JoshuaKyallo,AMREFCountryDirectorSusanWandera,DeputyCountryDirector
17/07 HSleavesUganda
20/07 De–briefAMREFUK JoEnsorGraceMukasaClaudiaCodsi
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 9
Annex 3: KCPP Bibliography/Timeline
RickDavies,July2009
Format: Year, Month, Document, Author
Unknowndate�Guardian Sponsored Village (invitation for proposals), Unknown Putting African Communities First. Enhancing Capacity and Participation to Close the Gap in Health Sys-tems AFRICAN MEDICAL & RESEARCH FOUNDATION Strategy 2007—2017,AMREFBoard
2007September�AMREF Katine (rural) Guardian proposal, Susie Hares Community Needs Assessment—Overview, Sonja Patscheke Community Needs Assessment (full report), Carol Idusso, Tim Bromfield (budget)
2007October�Engagement & Communications Plan, Sonja Patscheke Stakeholder Engagement and Communications Approach DRAFT, Graham KJ�KCPP�Conceptual�Framework,�Tim�Bromfield�(Accenture) Health Facility Database, Albert Killian Katine Outputs Tracking Database, Rebecca Copeland Village Health Team database, Rebecca Copeland Contract between Guardian and Rick Davies Online survey of expectations of external evaluator, Rick Davies Draft workplan, Rick Davies Guardian: Opening of KCPP, Alan Rusbridger
2007November�Initial Action Plan (Quick Wins), unknown Community Survey: In November 2007, a survey was carried out to obtain information on what re-sourcesexistedinthetargetcommunitiesatprojectstart–upintheareasofinterestinhealth,waterandsanitation, education, and livelihoods. The Community Survey had three components: a Village Survey, Health Facility Survey, and a School Survey. Information was collected from all 65 villages, 13 schools andthreehealthunits.RebeccaCopeland�Partnership Workshop: 27th November 2007, Manny Amadi Comments on Community Needs Assessment—Overview, RickDavies
2007December�M&E Plan, Rebecca Copeland �Three�year�costed�plan,�Tim�Bromfield��Three�year�implementation�plan,�Tim�Bromfield� 1st quarter implementation plan, unknown�Katine:�It�starts�with�a�village:�(basic�information�briefing�for�Barclays Comments on the KCPP Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Version 3 29/11/2007, RickDavies
2008January�Baseline survey, Rebecca Copeland and Uganda Bureau of Statistics Year 1 Implementation plan, Unknown Impact Assessment report on SUSTAIN, Xavier Nsabagasani et al Uganda Country Strategic Plan 2007–2011, RebeccaCopelandandKathyAttawell
2008February FARM–Africa staff visit to Katine Village Project 28th January to 1st February 2008, Martin Roberts
2008March VSLA proposal for Barclays, Aguga�Draft:�A�project�by�UWESO�in�partnership�with�CARE�International�Community–led�financial�services�for�the Katine community in Uganda, Unknown and undated
3 With AMREF Katine team and Sarah Majota4 With AMREF Katine team (and Sarah Majota
●●
●●●
●●●●●●●●●●
●●
●●
●●●●●●
●●●●
●
●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �0
The Katine Community Partnerships Project (KCPP) First Visit Report, by the M&E Consultant—January 2008, Rick Davies
2008April�Katine stakeholder meeting and Preliminary project steering committee meeting. Soroti Hotel April 3, Carol Idusso Minutes of 16 April district partners meeting with AMREF Uganda, Carol Idusso KCCP—UK Partnership meeting April 30th 2008–05–02, Claudia Codsi Comments on Baseline Community Survey January 2008, RickDavies
2008June�Minutes of 2nd KCPP Project Management Committee meeting held on 13/06/2008 at Katine Sub County Lukiiko Hall, Richard Opesen Katine Community Partnerships Project 6 MONTHS PROGRESS REPORT (OCT 2007 TO MARCH 2008) Submitted to: The Guardian and Barclays, OscarOketchandClaudiaCodsi
2008July�M&E Framework, Becky Copeland Care Uganda Proposed Budget To Barclays Bank For Implementation Of VSLA In Katine Soroti, Korus�Minutes Of The 1st KCPP Project Steering Committee Meeting 14/07/08 From 10:30–15:30 Soroti Dis-trict, RichardOpesen
2008October�Monitoring The Katine Community Partnerships Project (KCPP)The Second Visit Report by Independent M&E Consultant. August 2008, RickDavies
2008November�AMREF�Reflections�On�2nd�External�Evaluation�Of�KCPP,ClaudiaCodsi
2008December�Report of the Baseline Survey of the Village Savings and Loans Associations in Katine Sub county, So-roti District. Prepared for SUSTAIN, Kemigisa Margaret Katine Community Partnerships Project Annual Narrative Report Submitted to: The Guardian and Bar-clays Project Duration: Three Years. October 2007–September 2010, OscarOketch
2009January�Report On Katine Partnership Orientation Attended By CARE—AMREF And UWESO Staff Katine Sub-county–Soroti District Eastern Uganda Region 19th To 22nd January 2009, SylviaKaawe
2009February�Report On Katine Field Visit By CARE Uganda Pd And CARE UK MF Advisor Katine Subcounty–Soroti District Eastern Uganda Region10th To 12th February 2009
2009March�CARE—UWESO FIELD VISIT FOLLOW UP MEETING held on 2nd�March�2009�at�UWESO�head�office
2009June�Katine Community Partnerships Project 6 Month Narrative Report October 2008–March 2009 Duration: Three Years. October 2007–September 2010, OscarOketchandClaudiaCodsi�Comments on the 6 Month Narrative Report October 2008—March 2009, RickDavies
●
●
●●●
●
●
●●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Annex 4: KCPP Visitors Log Sept 2007–July 2009Estimatedhoursspentwithvisitors�
Date NameofVisitor Organisation StaffInvolved Activities Hoursspent
12–17Sept07 JohnVidal Guardian CarolIdussoHellenAkitengJosephEpuru
Fieldvisits 96
9–11Oct07 AlanRushbridgerLindsayMackieDanChungBenGreenXanRiceJoEnsorSueHollickRachaelBarber
GuardianGuardianGuardianGuardianGuardianAMREFUKBarclays
AllKatine Field and office visits
128
25–26Oct07 SarahMargiottaDr.MikeMarksSarahThurston
ManagementCon-sultantDirectReliefInter-national
RichardOpesen
ChrisEmeu
Fieldvisits 14
07–14Nov07 SarahBoseley Guardian CarolIdussoHellenAkitengEpuruJoseph
Fieldvisits 70
8–9Nov07 Dr.FlorenceMuli–MusiimeDr.PeterNgatiaDr.DarausBukenyaBobKioko
AMREFHQ HellenAkitengJosephEpuruRichardOpesen
Fieldvisits 28
14–16Nov07 GibBulochPhoebeBennett
Accenture–ADPPartnerships
HellenAkitengJosephEpuru
Fieldvisits 14
14–26Jan08 RickDavies GuardianEvalu-ator
Allstaff Field and office visits
140
20Feb08 MarieWittsLindsayPouton
GuardianFilms Allstaff 15
30 Apr 08 FlorenceMusiime AMREF Allstaff Fieldvisit 15
9May08 WilliamDurban BarclaysUK Comms officer Fieldvisit 15
14May09 JimSampsonDavidWattsKennyEbonySusieHares
IndividualBar-claysstaffandtwopartnersonprivatevisit
Allstaff Office and field visit
15
15May08 BarclaysVice–ChairmanGarryHoffman,MadeleineBuntingandteam(7)
Barclays/Guard-ian
Allstaff Fieldvisit 42
7–10Jul08 MartinGodwin Guardian KatineStaff Mobilisingcom-munityFacilitatingtransportInterpretationGeneralfacilita-tion
21
5 Time spent is roughly estimated as 7 hours for each day for one member of staff. Number of days/staff is underestimated to err on the side of caution.
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �2
Date NameofVisitor Organisation StaffInvolved Activities Hoursspent
9Jul08 CathyBryantandteam(4). LEMUresearchers Allstaff Researchers 21
30 Jul 08 BaraDelFieiro EU Commsstaff Fieldvisit 15
28–31 Jul 08 AnnePerkins Guardian Katinestaff Briefing staff on thevisitMobilisingareaofcoverageGeneralfacilita-tionFacilitationintransport
28
25Jul–8Aug08
RickDavies GuardianInde-pendentEvaluator
KatineStaff Briefing from staffMobilisingpos-sibleareatovisitUpdatesbycomponentsMeetingswithcommunitystructuresGeneralfacilita-tionFacilitationintransport
140
13–15 Aug 08 LianeFarrer AMREFUK/HQ DriverCommunicationsofficersPM
Getgeneraloverviewofprojectarea
28
12–25Sep08 SarahNason Guardian ChrisEmeuComms Officer DavidOgwangAlfredOkurut
Gather film re-sourcesfortheGuardianXmasappeal
150
25–27Sep08 ClaudiaCodsiCraigPollard
AMREFinUK AllStaff Briefing FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsMeetingswithcommunitymembersGeneralfacilita-tionFacilitationintransport
32
06–14Oct08 SarahBoseleyMartinGodwinDavidSmith
Guardian/Ob-server
PMDriversComms OfficerM&E officerLivelihoods offic-ersHealthAssistant
Fieldvisit 105
27–30 Oct 08 JohnVidal Guardian M&E officerComms officeLivelihoods offic-ersDriver
Fieldvisit 30
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Date NameofVisitor Organisation StaffInvolved Activities Hoursspent
27–29Oct08 AlistairBoyd Ex–BoardMemberAMREF
Allstaff AdvisoryFieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
21
10–11Dec08 AMREFHQ(5)ledbythedeputydirectorgeneralFlorenceMusiime
AMREFHQ Allstaff FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
28
Dec2008 DanChung Guardianphotog-rapher
Comms officer and driver
Generalfacilita-tion
32
12–15Jan09 PragnaGandesha BarclaysBankStafffromUK
AllStaff FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
21
20–21Jan09 DFIDUgandacountrydirectorJohnTurkington,AlistairRobb,JoLofthouseWorldBankCountryMan-agerandteam
DFIDUganda PMComms officerEducation officersHealth officersM & E officer
FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
14
28Jan09 Farm–AfricaUKpro-grammedirectorGeorgeMukath
Farm–AfricaUKprogrammedirec-tor
PMLivelihoodsstaff,M & E officerDrivers
FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
14
3 Feb 09 SorotiDistrictViceChair-manMichaelEwamuCommunity Devt Officer
SorotiDistrictof-ficials
AllStaff FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
12
12Feb09 IvanLewisMP,MinisterforAfricanDevelopmentDFIDUgandaCountryDirectorJohnTurkington,AlistairBoydandteam
UKMinisters PMHealth officersEducation officersComms officerDrivers
Generalfacilita-tion
18
18 Feb–3 Mar 09
GeorgeOmonposah Guardian film maker
LivelihoodsstaffPMDriversComms Officer
Generalfacilita-tion
140
23–28 Feb 09 Jo ConfinoLaurence Confino video-grapher,LizFordWebsiteeditor
Guardian Allstaff FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
60
23–26 Feb 09 AnnieKelly–freelancejour-nalistforthewebsite
Guardian Allstaff FieldvisitsUpdatesbycomponents
21
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Date NameofVisitor Organisation StaffInvolved Activities Hoursspent
Mar09 CountryManagerNathanWassolo
GSK Allstaff UpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tion
10
24–27Apr09 SarahBoseley Guardian DriverComms officer
Generalfacilita-tion
21
29Apr–1May09
MadeleineBunting Guardian Allstaff UpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tionFieldvisit
35
29–30 Apr 09 FourUN–MDVStaff.Dr.RichardAyam,Dr.JohnOkorioJoelleBassoul.
TheMillenniumDevelopmentVil-lageProject
Allstaff UpdatesbycomponentsGeneralfacilita-tionFieldvisit
21
27Apr–4May09
LaurenceTopham,Filmmaker
Guardian DriverComms officer
Generalfacilita-tion
49
20May09 GraceMukasa,ClaudiaCodsi
AMREFUK Allstaff 14
7–14Jun09 PaulandDanChung Guardian DriverComms officer
Generalfacilita-tion
49
13 Jun 09 LillianByrauhanga,MichaelKaddhu
BarclaysUganda Comms OfficerEducation Officer
Fieldvisit 12
15Jun09 ChairmanBarclaysBank,MarcusAgiusandTeam(9)
Barclays Allstaff Fieldvisit 35
1–13Jul09 HazelSlavinRickDavies
AMREF/Guardian Allstaff MidtermreviewBriefing from staffUpdatesbycomponentsMeetingswithcommunitystructuresGeneralfacilita-tionFacilitationintransport
251
14–18Jul09 SarahBoseleyMartinGodwin
Guardian Driver–EugeneHealth Officer
Collectingstoryonhowtheprojectaffectschildren
35
15Jul09 GSKPresidentAndrewWittyandteamAnd7others
GSK Allstaff Fieldvisits 35
Estimatedtotalhours 2110
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Annex 5: Partner–oriented progress reporting in the KCPPRickDavies,7July2009
The last 6 Month Narrative Report was 32 pages long, excluding annexes. Within that the main section describingprogressagainstplansis16pageslong(pages11–27).Theheadingsandsub–headingsofthatsectionarebasedontheAMREFKCPPworkplanheadingsandsub–headings.AsaresultthesearefocusedondifferentcategoriesofAMREFactivities.
Thealternativeistostructuretheheadingsandsub–headingsofthissectionaroundthetypesofpartnersAMREFisworkingwith,anddifferencesamongstthesepartners.Thiswouldmakethewholereportmuchmorepartner–oriented,buildingontheusefulsection5whichprovidesagoodoverviewof“partnershipandcoordinationwithotherbodies”.
Some examples of how the “Progress of Activities” section could be restructured:Educationsectorpartners(previously“Improvedaccesstoqualityeducation”)CommunitySchoolsTeachersSchoolManagementCommitteesParentTeachersAssociationsSchoolHealthCommitteesGovernmentSchoolsTeachersSchoolManagementCommitteesParentTeachersAssociationsSorotiPrimaryTeachersCollegeDistrict Education OfficeEducationSectorCoordinationMeetingsgroup
Under each of these headings and sub–headings AMREF could describe: (a) how it has been work-ingwiththatpartner,includingthetypesofassistancegiven,and(b)evidenceofdevelopmentofthatpartner’scapacities.
Muchofthematerialinsection5on“partnershipandcoordinationwithotherbodies”couldbeincludedinthisre–structuredsection.
Inthe“Healthsectorpartners”sectioninformationaboutthecommunity’shealthstatuscouldbede-scribedinthesub–sectiononthehealthcentres,inparagraphsdealingwithwhatthehealthcentreknowsaboutcommunityhealthstatus.
Annexescouldbeincludedofthetypebeingdevelopedthisweek,providingdetailedsupportinginfor-mationonwhattypesofAMREFsupportedinputshavebeenprovidedtowhichvillages,schoolsandhealthcentres.
A final note: If AMREF 6 months narrative report is shared with partners in Soroti district then partner–orientedprogressreportingmightbemakethereportmuchmorereadabletothem.
1.
2.
3.●●●●●●●●●●●●●
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Annex 6: KCPP achievements since January 2008
Component InfrastructureandHardware Training Results
Health Fridgeandcoldchainfacilities
Bicyclesprovided
LaboratoryatOjomHealthCentre11
15Communityvaccinators
272VHTs
78TraditionalBirthAttendants(TBAs)
130 Community medicinedistributors
5labtechnicianstrained
27healthworkers
3 Health Unit ManagementCommittees
Increased immunisation coverage for <5 (43% at project start) to 89.3%(againstpolio,TB,whoopingcough,hepatitisB,tetanus, diphtheria and haemophilus influenzae)
Increasedknowledge/awarenessonHIV/AIDSPsycho–socialsupportforPLWHACounseling/testingforHIVpromoted(874pregnantwomen,145children>181,441adults)Referralsofsickpersonstohealthcenters(9outof10comparedto2outof10atstartup)DiseasesurveillanceincreasedReduction in cases of diarrhoea (from 38% at baseline to 6% children >5 and 1.4% <5
Promotionoffamilyplanningmethodshasnotbeenasuccess
Promotion of deliveries by skilled attendants (33% at baseline to 3%) has reduced the number of deliveries by TBAs (38% at baseline to 27%)
Home–basedcareofchildhoodillnessImproveddiagnosisandtreatmentofTB,HIV,STIs,malaria,URTI,anaemia,worms.Increaseinuptakeofservices.
ITNsprovidedtohighriskgroups
RefreshertrainingonPMTCT
Managementprocesses,planning,budgeting,monitoring,infectioncontrol,drugmanagement,leadingtoimprovedmanagementandnolossofstaff
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Component InfrastructureandHardware Training Results
Education Rehabilitation
KatineP/s–5classes, 1 office, 1storeOchuloi–8classes, 1 office, 1storeOimai–4, 1 office, 1storeOjama–library,1class
ConstructionAmorikot–7classes, 1 office, 1store
3161 Text books
510Desks
Sportskitssuppliedto13 schools kit includes–(2javelins,2discuses,2shortputs,1volleyball,2netballsrings,2footballnets,1volleyballnet,2footballsand2netballs)2setsofrelaybatonsforsub–county
4bicyclestoKatinebest2girlsandbesttwoboysinPLE
15setsofMDDequipmentsetincludes(10T/shirtsfordancers,12 rafia skirts,5rollsofkitengematerial,Ibigdrum,1mediumdrum,1smalldrum,1 tube fiddle, 1bigthumbpiano,1smallthumbpiano,1handshaker,1xylophone)
26teacherstrainedingamesandsports102teacherstrainedinChildtochild,Rightsofthe child PIASCY andAdolescentreproductivehealth
90teacherstrainedinPHASE
26femaleteacherstrainedingenderasrolemodelsforgirls
26teacherstrainedinMDD
63 PTA members trainedonrolesandresponsibilities
72SMCmemberstrainedonrolesandresponsibilities
12teachersguided270parentsindevelopinglocalteachingmaterial
1800parentsattendedsensitisationralliesonOVCandUPE
300 children trainedandparticipatedinPHASEevent
Katinehas15primaryschoolscomparedtobaselineof13. ( 2 schools Ojom and Ogwolo were pre–schools during baselinenowupgradedtoPrimaryschools)
School enrollments of 361, Ojom and 362 at OgwoloSchool enrollment increased from 7531 at baseline to 9071.
NumbersdecreaseatP.7to426
BookssuppliedtoOchuloi,Oimai,Ojama,Ojago,Katine,KatineTirirri,Adamasiko,Olwelai,Ajonyi,Merok,Obyarai,Amorikot, Kadinya and wall charts for 13 schools
DesksdeliveredtoAmorikot,KadinyaKatineTiririri,Katine,AdamasikoOchuloiandOimaischools
Advocacyforincreasingfemaleteachersinschoolsandparticipationinleadershiprolesinthecommunity
15PTAcommitteesstrengthenedtoimproveschoolmanagement
15SchoolManagementCommitteesstrengthened,formonitoringandsupervision
Productionoflocalteachingmaterials
Improvedlessonplanning
Reductionofteacherabsenteeism
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Component InfrastructureandHardware Training Results
WATSAN 5boreholesrehabilitated, 3 repaired,8newboreholeswithhandpumps,5shallowwellsconstructed and 3 springsprotected.
13 panel toilets inschools,9fourstanceVIPlatrineswithwashrooms,andurinalsin8PrimarySchoolsand9Ecosanlatrinesin9schools.
8rainwaterharvestingtanksinschools
240sanitationkits to 13 schools andcommunitiestoaidinlatrinediggingandconstruction.
4Districtstaff
172VHTs21WaterSourceCommittees6ParishSanitationCommittees.
40Communitymasons(10forlatrines,24forsanplats,6forwaterjars).
3 Hand–pump mechanics
Watersourcecommittees
6Parishsanitationcommittees
2856householdswithaccesstosafe,cleanwaterwithin1.5klms, improved access to 65.5%.
WaterqualitysurveillancetoWHOandGoUstandards.
Facilitiesforgirlshasimprovedattendance
3 equipped with Hand pump tool kit, trained on data collectionandmaintenanceskills.
21established&trainedinmanagementofwatersource,monitoring,administrationoffunds.
6established&trained.
Livelihoods 450bagsofimprovedcassavavarieties8000kgsgroundnutseeds1200kgsuplandrice(50geachoftomatoes,cabbageandonions,18setsofnurserybedmanagementimplements–36 wheel barrows, 36 watering cans, 36 rakes,54spades,36 forked hoes, and1850m–tapemeasure.
18FarmersGroups
7paravets
20ExtensionstaffthroughTOTtrainings(4subcounty,9districtand7community)
VisittoNationalAgriculturalResearchStationInnovationsinagriculture,businessskillsandmarketing
18Farmersgroups/VSLAsetup
Livelihoodsstakeholdersforumestablished(IncludesCCF,UWESO,TPO,governmentprogrammessuchasNAADS,sub–countyanddistrictrepresentatives,PAG(PentecostalAssembliesofGod).)
Skillsinimprovedplanning
Nurserybedsestablishedin18farmersgroups
Groupdemonstrationgardensestablishedforcassava,groundnuts,anduplandrice
Individualfarmersaccesstoimprovedplantingmaterialsfromthecassavademonstrationgardens(bothmembersandnon–membersofthegroups)
Increasedsavingcultureamongstgroupmembers
Increasedborrowingforinvestmentamonggroupmembers
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �9
Component InfrastructureandHardware Training Results
17Radiotalkshows
MediaCentreequippedwith4desktopcomputers
30 IEC working group
62membersin6parishdevelopmentcommittees
16ProjectManagementCommittee(PMC)
11ProjectSteeringCommittee(PSC)(15members)
100+communitymembers30 persons40schoolchildren
MediaCentreCommittee
18communitymembersVideofilming training run bytheGuardian
Developmentofposterswithkeymessages
ReachbeyondtheDistrictwithcallersfromneighbouringarea
Development plans reflecting priorities from villages upwards
5meetings–ensuresinvolvementofDistrictstaff,providesguidancetoandmonitorsProject
1meeting
basictrainingincomputerskills
25persons,onaverage,usethemediacentreeachday
VideosofKatineonGuardianKatinewebsite
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 20
Annex 7: Self–assessment
ObjectivesandActivities Comments Year2 %achievedbyJune09
%achievedbySept09
1 ImprovedCommunityHealth
1.1 Improvecommunity–basedprevention,treatmentandcareforHIV/AIDS,malaria,TB,RH,andchildhoodillnesses
1.1.1 StrengthenthecapacityofVillageHealthTeams(VHTs)
1.1.1.1 ProvidetrainingtoVillageHealthTeamsonfamilyplanningmethods 1VHTpervillagefor
66 100 100
1.1.1.2 ProvidetrainingtoVillageHealthTeamsonissuesofmonitoringdrugadher-ancerelatedtoHIV/AIDS,malariaandTB(throughCBDOTS—CommunityBasedDirectlyObservedTreatmentServices)
2VHTspervillage
132 100 100
1.1.1.3 ProvidetrainingtoVillageHealthTeamsoncounselingandofferingpsychosocialsupportforpeoplelivingwithHIV/AIDSandtheirfamilies
5peopleparish
30 100 100
1.1.1.4 ProvidesupporttoVHTsonhomebasedmanagementchildhooddisease,includingmalaria(fever),pneumonia,diarrhoeadiseases,skinandeyeinfec-tions,immunization,growthmonitoring,nutrition.
0
1.1.1.5 TraincommunityvaccinatorsinEPIandrecordkeepingandsupportimmuni-zationoutreach
onemeetingper 3 months
4 75 100
1.1.1.6 Supporttoactivitiesoftraditionalbirthattendantsi.eoncommunitymobiliza-tionandreferralsystem
4 100 100
1.1.2 StrengthenCommunityOutreachInitiatives
1.1.2.1 StrengthentimelycommunityoutreacharoundservicesprovidedbyCom-munityHealthCentres(suchasChildImmunizationdaytoimprovechildhoodimmunizationcoverage,HIVtests,VHTservices)
134 95.5 100
1.1.2.3 Establishacommunity–basedITNdistributionsystemprioritisingtheU5s,pregnantwomenandPLWAemphasiswillbeonre–treatmentofITNs
1 100 100
1.1.2.4 Supportvillagehealthteamsonfamilyplanning(includingcondomuseforHIVprevention)
10 75 100
1.2 ImprovequalityofhealthservicesforHIV/AIDS,malaria,TB,RH,andchild-hoodillnesses
1.2.1 StrengthenCommunityHealthCentrelabfacilitiesforimproveddiagnosticsandtreatmentofHIV/AIDS,TBandmalaria
1.2.1.1 ProvideCommunityHealthCentreswithequipmentandsuppliesfordiagno-sisofHIV/AIDS,TB,andmalaria(e.g.HIVtestkits)
1 100 100
1.2.1.2 Trainlabpersonnelforimproveddiagnosticsandtreatment(ofHIV/AIDS—in-cludingOIsandSTIs,TB,malaria,urinarytractinfections,anaemia,meningi-tis,worms,diabetes,eclampcia,hypertensionandsyphilis)
0 100 100
1.2.1.3 RenovateandimproveCommunityhealthcentresHCIVandHCIIs 1 0 100
1.2.2 Strengthenhealthcareserviceprovision
1.2.2.1 ProviderefreshertrainingforCommunityHealthCentreworkersonmanage-mentandtreatmentofHIV/AIDS(includesART),malaria(includingseveremalaria,IPTandACTs),TBCBDOTS
2 100 100
1.2.2.2 TrainCommunityHealthCentreworkerstopromotecounsellingandtestingservicesrelatedtoHIV/AIDS
1
1.2.2.3 TrainCommunityHealthCentreworkersonPMTCT—PreventionofMothertoChildTransmissionofHIV/AIDS
1 100 100
1.2.2.4 ProviderefreshertrainingtoCommunityHealthCentreworkersonIntegratedManagementofChildhoodIllnesses(IMCI)throughonjobtraininginformofsupportsupervision
4 75 100
1.2.2.5 Traincommunityhealthcentreworkers(includingmidwives)onsafedeliverymethodsandemergencyobstetriccare(EMOC)
1 0
1.2.2.7 TrainCommunityHealthCentreworkerstoensurepropermethodsofinfec-tioncontrolandmedicalwastedisposal
1 100 100
1.2.2.8 Facilitatecommunityhealthcentrestaffandhealthunitmanagementcommit-teesonlogisticsmanagementofessentialmedicinesandlabsuppliesandprocurementofequipment(toincludetrainingonroles&responsibilities)
1 100 100
1.2.2.8 AMREFcorporatetechnicalsupport
1.3 Strengthenruralhealthsystems
1.3.1 Strengthenhealthinformationandmanagementsystems
HealthComponent—SelfAssessmentofAchievement
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
ObjectivesandActivities Comments Year2 %achievedbyJune09
%achievedbySept09
1.3.1.1 TrainVHTsonplanningandbudgetingforcommunityhealthneedstocontrib-utetodistrictdevelopmentplans
0
1.3.1.2 TrainVHTsoncommunity–basedinformationsystemsincludingimmunizationcoverage,birthanddeathregistration
66 128 128
1.3.1.3 TrainCommunityHealthCentreHealthUnitManagementCommitteeonmanagement processes—planning, budgeting, financial, performance man-agement,monitoringqualityofcare,infectioncontrol,medicalwastedisposal,accesstodrugsanddrugmanagement
1 100 100
1.3.1.4 Strengthensystemforregularmeetings,supervision,andreportingofVHTsathealthcentre,parishandHSDlevels
12 75 100
1.3.2 StrengthenreferralandsupplysystemsbetweenVHTsandtheappropriatelevelofthehealthfacility
1.3.2.1 ConductjointtrainingofVHTsandhealthcentrestaffonreferralsystemandVHTsupplysystem(e.g.HOMAPAK,condoms)
1 100 100
1.3.2.2 StrengthenreferralsystemfromVHTtoappropriatelevelofhealthfacilityandtrackreferrals
0
1.3.2.3 Provideamulti–purposebicycletoeachVHTmemberasaformoftransporttotheCommunityHealthCentre
0 0 0
1.3.2.4 ProvideeachVHTwithadrugstoragekit 0 0 0
1.3.2.5 StrengthenproceduresfortrackingandreplacingVHTdropouts 4 50 75
1.3.2.7 ExploreoptionsforfundingmotivationpackageforVHTs(e.g.torch,gum-boots,umbrella,books,pens)
1080
ObjectivesandActivities Year2 %achievedbyJune09
%achievedbySept09
2 ImprovedAccesstoQualityEducation
2.1 Improveteachingandlearningenvironment
2.1.1 Trainteachersonchildcentredmethodologiestoimproveacademicperformance 1 100 100
2.1.2 Trainteacherstopromoteadolescentfriendlyreproductivehealthcounselling. 3 67 100
2.1.3 Provideteachingmaterialstoteacherstofacilitateteachingandlearning(includingmaterialsforreproductivehealth)
4 50 100
0 Trainteacherstodeveloplocalmaterialstofacilitateteachingandlearning—localmaterialsdevelopment
1 100 100
2.1.5 Supportsupervisionandfollowupofteachertraining 6 67 100
2.1.6 Rehabilitateexistingclassrooms 15 50 100
2.1.7 Increaseseatingfacilities 13 100 100
2.1.8 Constructnewclassrooms 10 50 100
2.1.9 Establishcommunitycommitteestooverseetheconstructionofclassrooms 6 100 100
2.1.10 Strengthenlinkagesbetweenschoolsandthecommunitiestopromotepersonalhygieneandsanitationeducation–phase
6.5 100 100
2.1.11 Improvesanitationfacilitiesforgirlsandboys,providingaccessibilityforthedisabledandspecialfacilitiesforgirls(includingbathshelters,changingrooms)
0 0 0
2.1.12 Sourceaffordablesanitarypadsortraingirlsonhowtomaketheirown 1 100 100
2.1.13 Usemusic,drama,sportsandotheractivitiestostrengthenthecapacityofschoolhealthclubsinhygienepromotion
3 67 100
2.1.14 AMREFCorporatetechnicalsupport £–
2.2 Promoteinclusiveeducationofgirls,disabledchildren,orphans,andvulnerablechildren
2.2.1 Sensitisecommunitiesabouttheimportanceofenrollingandsupportingmarginalisedchil-dren,especiallyorphansandvulnerablechildren,andchildrenwithdisabilities(throughchildrightstrainingandsensitisationcampaigns)
6 100 100
2.2.2 Conductanadvocacyforumwithfemaleteacherstoberolemodelsforgirls 3 100 100
2.2.3 Promoteschooldrama,musicfestivals,andsportseventstoattractchildrentostayinschool(e.g.providesmallinputssuchassoccerandvolleyballballs,nets)
0 0 0
2.2.4 Promotedisability–friendlyteachingmethodsandmaterials,andschoolinfrastructure 0 0 0
2.3 Strengthencommunityownershipoverschoolsupervision
EducationComponent—SelfAssessmentofAchievement
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 22
ObjectivesandActivities Year2 %achievedbyJune09
%achievedbySept09
2.3.1 Facilitateinformationsharingforumsbetweenschoolmanagementcommitteesandinspec-torstoimproveperformance
3 67 100
2.3.2 TrainParentTeachersAssociationsforimprovedcommunitymanagementofschoollearningandteachingprocessesandtoempowerthecommunitytoadvocateforimprovementstoschoolsatthedistrictlevel
3 67 100
2.3.4 Providetrainingtothestakeholders,includingchildren,tocollectdataandmonitorprogressinschools
3 67 100
2.3.5 Supporttheestablishmentofeducationmanagementinformationsystemsintargetschoolsandlinktothedistricteducationsystem
0 0
Additionalactivitiesundertakenbutnotinthe2ndyearplan % achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
Femaleinvolvementinfootballtournament 20
Educationsectorcoordinationmeetings 10
KatineChildrenschat 5
ParishMonitoringCommittee/DistrictSteeringcommitteemeetings 10
SMC/PTAmeetings 50
PreparationforthevisitofBarclaysbankchairpersonvisit 10
Communityresourcemobilisation 80
Interviewsforskilledmasons 10
Timetakenbyadditionalactivities,asapercentageofallworkdoneinOct2009–June2009 x%
ObjectivesandActivities Targetsyear2
%achievedbyJune09
%achievedbySept09
3 Improvedaccesstosafewater,sanitation,andhygiene
3.1 Increaseaccesstosafewater
3.1.1 Rehabilitateexistingboreholes 0
3.1.2 Drillnewboreholesandinstallwithhandpumps 0
3.1.3 Identifyandtraincommunityhandpumpmechanics 0
3.1.4 Procurehandpumptoolkits&protectiveware 0
3.1.5 Install10,000litrePVCrainwatertanksinschools 5 60 60
3.1.6 Constructhouseholdwaterjarsforharvestingrainwater 8 12.5 12.5
3.1.7 Provideon–the–jobtrainingtocommunitymemberstoconstructwaterjars 8 100 100
3.1.8 Protectopensprings 0
3.1.9 Rehabilitateprotectedsprings 1 0 0
3.1.9.1 Constructshallowwells 0
3.1.9.2 Waterqualitysurvailance 0
3.1.9.3 WaterQaulityconsumables 1 0 0
3.1.9.4 WatertestingKit 0
3.2 Increaseratesofpersonalhygieneandaccesstobasicsanitation
3.2.1 Construct4stancepaneltoiletsinprimaryschools 13 69 100
3.2.2 Construct 3 stance Ecosan toilets for primary schools 5 80 100
3.2.3 Provideschoolswithsanitationkitsfordigginglatrines. 0
3.2.4 Provideparisheswithsanitationkitsonamonthlyloanbasis 0
3.2.5 Provideslabstosupporthouseholdlatrineconstruction 120 100
3.3 Facilitatecommunityempowermenttoeffectivelymanagewatersources
3.3.1 Establishandtrainsubcountyhealthcommittees 0
3.3.2 Facilitatesubcountymonthlyhealthcommitteemeetings 0
3.3.3 StrengthentheSub–CountyOperation&Maintenanceworkinggroup 0
3.3.4 StrengthentheSub–CountySanitationworkinggrouponO&Mofsanfacilities 0
3.3.5 StrengthentheSub–Countyhygieneworkinggroupinhygienepromotion 0
3.3.6 Establishparishsanitationcommittees 0
3.3.7 Strengthentheparishsanitationcommittees 0
WATSANComponent—SelfAssessmentOfAchievement
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
ObjectivesandActivities Targetsyear2
%achievedbyJune09
%achievedbySept09
3.3.8 Providebicyclestocommitteesandmechanics 0
3.3.9 ProvidetrainingtoVHTsonhygieneandsanitationpromotion 0
3.3.9.1 supportVHTstoconducthomevisitsprovidinghygiene&sanitationpromotion 0
3.3.9.2 Suppportsub–countysanitationworkingcommitteestosuperviseandmonitoractivities 0
3.3.9.3 EstablishwatersourcecommitteesaspartofCASHE 11 100
3.3.9.4 TrainWaterSourceCommittees 11 50 50
3.3.9.5 Establishsubcountywatersourceaccounts 11 0 0
3.3.9.6 TrainWaterSourceCommitteesinmanagingwateruserfeeaccounts 11 50 50
3.3.9.7 IECMaterials 0
3.3.9.8 Quarterlyjoint–monitoringvisits 0
3.3.9.8 Quarterlyjoint–monitoringvisits 4 75 100
Additionalactivitiesundertakenbutnotinthe2ndyearplan % achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
Waterqualitysurvailance 33 100
Waterandsanitationcoordinationmeetings 75 100
Participatedintheregionallaunchingoftheinternationalyearofsanitation 100
LocalisingmillenniumdevelopmentgoalsforWATSAN 100
Operationalisingsparepartssupplychain 50 50
supportVHTstoconducthomevisitsprovidinghygiene&sanitationpromotion 66 68
Organisingdramaclubstoperformduringthefootballtournament 100
Timetakenbyadditionalactivities,asapercentageofallworkdoneinCct2009–June2009 x%
ObjectivesandActivities Comments Year 2 % achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
4 Improvedincomegeneratingopportunities
4.1 Increasecapacityofruralinnovationgroups(RINGS)tomanagethemselvesforimprovedandsustainablelivelihoods
4.1.1 Groupformation
4.1.1.1 Selection of villages (3/parish) for group formation 0
4.1.1.2 Conductcommunityvillagemeetingstocreateawarenessandseekcommit-ment
0
4.1.1.3 Selectionofgroupmembers(incl.wealthranking) 0
4.1.1.4 Conductbaselineassessmentanddocumentationofgroupandindividualmembercapacity
0
4.1.1.5 BasicTrainingingroupdynamics 0
4.1.1.6 Electionofgroupmanagementcommittees 0
4.1.2 Groupmanagementcapacitybuilding
4.1.2.1 Traininginneedsassessmentskills 0
4.1.2.2 Groupmanagement,groupdynamicsandgenderconcerns 1 0 100%
4.1.2.3 Leadership and communication skills training, conflict resolution, Group financial management,
1 0 100%
4.1.2.4 Groupplanning,visioning,monitoringandevaluation 1 0 100%
4.1.2.5 Ongoingsupportandcapacitymonitoring Groupreviewmeetings
18 0 100%
4.1.2.6 TOTtrainingforextensionstaff 1 0 100%
4.2 Rurallivelihoodsstakeholdersforumestablishedforsustainablecoordinationoflivelihoodsactivities
4.2.1 InitialdevelopmentofTOR
4.2.2 Consultativemeetingwithotherstakeholdersandformationoftheforum 0
4.2.3 FirstmeetingtoagreeTORs,advocacypriorities,etc 0
4.2.4 Quarterlymeetingsinvolvingrepresentativesfortwokeycommodities 4 50% 75%
4.3 Technologyisharnessedtoimprovefoodsecurity,nutritionandincomegeneration
LivelihoodComponent—SelfAssessmentOfAchievement
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
ObjectivesandActivities Comments Year 2 % achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
4.3.1 Basicsforimprovementintechnologyharnessingandutilization
4.3.1.1 Diagnosticsurveyofgroupandcommunitytechnologyneedsandpriorities 0
4.3.1.2 Agree areas of need and cooperation with NARS (Serere, Tororo) and finalize MOU
0
4.3.1.3 Farmers’visittoSerereand/orotherresearchstations 1 0 100%
4.3.2 Supportfarmerinnovationsforcropproduction
4.3.2.1 Technicaltrainingonon–farmtrialsanddemonstrations,soilerosioncontrol,fertilitymanagement,fodderproductionetc
2 50% 100%
4.3.2.2 Ongoingtrainingoncropmanagement,IPM,etc 2 50% 100%
4.3.2.3 Establishmentoffarmerledon–farmtrialsanddemonstrationsincludinginputacquisition
18 100%
4.3.2.4 OFT open days for farmer innovations: Public presentation and displays 1 0 100%
4.3.4 Supportforcommunityanimalhealthservices
4.3.4.1 Baselineassessmentofanimalhealthservicesinthesubcountyandcounty(byFARMAfricaTAU)
TocontractFARMAfricaTAU(Mbale)
0
4.3.4.2 AgreeonanMOUwithFARM–AfricaTAUonCAHWtrainingandselecttwoCAHWspergroup
0
4.3.4.3 Training needs assessment and development of training program: contract TAUFARMAfrica
0
4.3.4.4 TrainingofCAHWsbyTAU 1 0 100%
4.3.4.5 Provisionofdrugkits Kitstoalsoincludebicycle
7 0 100%
4.3.4.6 CAHWexchangevisitwithMbalecounterparts. 0
4.3.4.7 Ongoing support and refresher trainings: Logistics, DVO Soroti 1 0 100%
4.3.4.8 Coordinationandexperiencesharingmeeting 2 0 100%
4.4 Business&marketingskillsareenhancedtoaccessbettermarketsfortheirproducts
4.4.1 Supporttoagro–enterprisedevelopment
4.4.1.1 Farmerexchangevisitsforexperiencesharingonagriculturalinnovations&marketing(Nakasongola–cassavaprocessing,StJudeFamilyProjectMasaka,LiraCooperatives,NyabyumbaUnitedFarmersAssociationKabale)andasuccessfulFarmerssavingandloangroup
1 0 100%
4.4.1.2 Businessmanagementtrainingsforallgroupmembers 2 0 50%
4.4.1.3 Agriculturalmarketingtrainingsincludingcollectivemarketing 2 0 50%
4.4.1.4 Groupmeetingsforenterpriseselection 0
4.4.1.5 Farmerledparticipatorymarketresearch/survey 0
4.4.1.6 Marketvaluechainanalysis(i.e.enterprisedevelopmentofoneselectedcommodity)
1 0 100%
4.4.1.7 Supportforgroupstorageandprocessingtodevelopbestpractice DiscusswithDistrictpdnof-fice on parish orsubcountylevelstore
1 0 100%
4.4.1.8 Discussion/agreementwithgroupsandotherstakeholdersonco–fundingonprocessing&marketinginitiatives
1 100%
4.4.1.9 Establishmentofmarketinformationsystem(MIS) 0
4.4.2.1 IdentifyexistingandpotentialalternativeIGAs
4.4.2.2 Providetechnicalsupporttoexistinglivelihoodalternatives/IGAs 2 50% 100%
4.4.2.3 Co–funding of alternative livelihoods (livelihood diversification) e.g. craft making
Needtoreviewhowtobestusethismoney(withDistrictpdnoffice)
18 0 100%
4.4.3 Microfinance Support withUWESO/CARE
Livelihoodsannualimpactassessment 1 0 100%
Additionalactivitiesundertakenbutnotinthe2ndyearplan % achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
WeeklyVSLAcoordinationmeetingswithUWESO 5%
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
ObjectivesandActivities Comments Year 2 % achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
Attendingtovisitorsincludingjournalists 10%
Attendingmeetingsorganisedbydistrictpartners 5%
Respondingtocommentsonthewebsite 5%
Participatinginproposalwriteup 5%
Timetakenbyadditionalactivities,asapercentageofallworkdoneinOct2009June2009
x% 30%
ObjectivesandActivities Year 2 Target
% achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
5 Communitiesempoweredtoengageinlocalgovernance
5.1 Strengthenlocalgovernance
5.1.1 FacilitatecommunityinformationsessionswithIECmaterialsonthecommunity’srightstobasicservicessuchaswater,health,education
5.1.1.1 Sub–CountylevelconsulativemeetingsonIECmaterials 5 0 60
5.1.1.2 WorkshopwithkeydistrictpartnerstoreviewandidentifyrequiredIECmaterials/keymessages 2 50 100
5.1.1.3 VillagelevelFGDstopretesttheapplicabilityofIECmaterials 1 0 100
5.1.1.4 FeedbackmeetingwithkeydistrictpartnersontheIECmaterialsdeveloped 1 0 100
5.1.1.5 ProcurementoftheIECmaterials 200 0 50
5.1.1.6 Parish level meeting for identification of trainees to desiminate IEC materials/messages 2 50 100
5.1.1.7 TraininginIECuse 1 100 100
5.1.2 CarryoutlocalradioprogrammestoinformcommunitiesaboutVHTs
5.1.2.1 VHTDataAsessment
5.1.2.3 DevelopmentofVHTKeyMessagesforRadioprogrames 1 0 100
5.1.2.4 ConductingVHTRadioprogrammes 5 100 100
5.2 Enhancecommunityplanningtobettermeetcommunityneeds
5.2.1 Trainrelevantcommunitystructures(PDCs,Sub–CountyTechnicalCommittee,SMCs,PTAs)toplanandbudgetforfeasibleandcost–effectivebasicservices
5.2.1.1 Assesment&Selectionofthetrainees
5.2.1.2 PDCtraining 1 100 100
5.2.1.3 SMCandPTAtraining 0
5.2.1.4 SCTCtraining 1 0 100
5.2.2 Pilotamodelofcommunitypartneringfromarights–basedapproachthatcanbereplicatedbyAMREF,governmentandotheractors
5.2.2.1 AMREFStafforientationonRBA 0
5.2.2.2 ConsultativeMeetingforSelectionofpotentialRBApartners 1 0 100
5.2.2.3 RBAorientationatParish&Sub–Countylevel 1 0 100
5.2.2.4 RBAquarterlyCommunitySensitizationMeetings 4 0 0
5.2.2.5 RBAStakeholdersWorkshopsatdistrictlevel 1 0 100
5.2.3 Trainteachers,CommunityHealthCentreworkers,extensionworkersoninformationmanage-ment
5.2.3.1 Assesment&Selectionofthetrainees
5.2.3.2. Jointtrainingforteachers,HCstaffandextworkers 3 0 30
5.2.4 Installcommunity–basedinformationsystems
5.2.4.1 ProcurementandinstalationofITsystems(desktopcomputersandprinters) 1 100 100
5.2.5 TrainkeyusersinbasicITskillsformanagingcommunity–basedinformation
5.2.5.1 Jointtrainingforteachers,CHCworkres&extworkersinbasicITskills 4 50 75
5.2.6 Set up office and comm. resource center
5.2.6.1 Establishment of functional Office and Comm. resource center 0
5.2.7 SetupRadioHub
5.2.7.1 Establishment of functional radio hub in office 0
5.2.8 AMREFCorporatetechnicalsupport 1
5.2.9 Governacemeetings
GovernanceComponent—SelfAssessmentOfAchievement
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
ObjectivesandActivities Year 2 Target
% achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09
5.2.9.1 Districtstakeholedersmeetings 1 0 100
5.2.9.2 ProjectSteeringCommitteequaterllymeeting 4 75 100
5.2.9.3 ProjectManagementcommitteemonthllymeeting 8 63 100
% achieved byJune09
% achieved bySept09Additionalactivitiesundertakenbutnotinthe2ndyearplan
1 Footballcompetetion 100 100
2 RBAstaffOrientation/Training 30 100
Timetakenbyadditionalactivities,asapercentageofallworkdoneinCct2009–June2009 x%
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
Annex 8: Quick survey July 2009N=�3
NAMEOFVILLAGE
NAME : M = 34 F = 19
Who are you? Father = 32 Mother = 19 Other = 2 teachers
AGEunder24 9
25–34 12
35–44 16
45–54 12
55–64 3
65+ 1
Total 53
Havetheirbeenanychangesinyourandyourfamily’slifeinEDUCATIONsincethestartof2008?
Prompts: Does your child talk about things happening in school? YES=51 NO= 2
Ifso,what?(tick)—DO NOT READ OUT THIS LIST — TICK ONLY IF MENTIONED
Schoollatrine 35
Footballcompetition 34
Renovatedschool 31
Newdesks/seats 28
Textbooks 26
Newschoolconstruction 15
Watertanksinplace 11
Newtrainingforteachers 10
MDDkits 7
Sanitationkits 6
ActivePTA 5
Schoolkitchengarden 2
Other?...Footballs/footballpitchCleanandwellorganisedcompoundsImprovedteachingmethodsIncreasedschoolenrolmentFilmshowTalkingcompoundTrainingforsanitation/hygiene—healthclubsActiveSMC
●●●●●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 2�
GamesuniformGoodteachingandtimekeepingbyteachers/nolongerdrink
Whichisthemostimportantandwhy?School/classroomrenovation21Schoolconstruction8Latrineconstruction5Textbooks5Desks 3Increased school enrolment 3Watertankatschool(waterislife)ImprovededucationalperformanceMDDkits–enhanceperformanceIncreased school enrolment 3WatertanksActivePTAFootball
Comments:WithschoolrehabilitationparentscansavemoneyforteachershousesChildrenwillbeattractedtoschoolifithasnewclassroomsNomorestudyingunderatreeTherainwon’tcomein2ImproveslearningenvironmentHelpschildrenstudyOurchildrenarestudyingwellEverythinghashelpedchildrentostayatschoolinagoodlearningenvironmentandsportsClassrooms–goodlearningenvironmentforourchildrenSchoollatrinespreventspreadofdiseasesImprovesqualityandschoolenrolmentClosedclassroomleadstoconcentrationDesksmeanchildrencansitproperlyanddon’tdirtyuniform
Havetheirbeenanychangesinyourandyourfamily’slifeinHEALTHsincethestartof2008?
Prompts: Child immunised? Attending for ante–natal care? YES 52 NO 1
Ifso,what?(tick)—DO NOT READ OUT THIS LIST — TICK ONLY IF MENTIONED
Immunisation/vaccination 48
Treatedbednet 42
VisitfromVHTmember 35
TrainedTBA 14
VHTadvisingonIMCI 14
SchoolHealthCommittee 2
VHTgivingFPadvice 13
VHTprovidingCounselling 13
Renovatedhealthcentre 8
SchoolHealthCommittee 2
●●
●●●●●●●●●●●●●
●●●●●●●●●●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes 29
Other?...CleanhomesteadMothersforante–natalcarePitlatrinesBuildingsheltersDe–wormingofchildrenandadultsReduced illnesses eg: malaria, diarrhoeaGettingdrugsfromVHT(eg;albendazolandformalaria)4BicyclesforVHTs
Whichisthemostimportant?Immunisation17Treatment for worms 2 and filariasis Mosquitonets8Drugs for malaria 3VHTtrainingandvisits–reducedfrequencyofgoingtohospitals/educatedonillnessprevention,betterinformed/broughthealthservicescloser/VHTshavingdrugs7Construction of health centre at Ojom 3Health Centre 3TeachingourchildrenBed nets 3DrugsathealthcentresHouseholdhygieneandsanitation
Comments:My grandchildren benefited, they sleep under an net and they don’t fall sick and the family is happy
Havetheirbeenanychangesinyourandyourfamily’slifeinWATERANDSANITATIONsincethestartof2008?
Prompts: Clean water available nearer to home; Latrines constructed
YES 52 NO 1
Ifso,what(tick)—DO NOT READ OUT THIS LIST — TICK ONLY IF MENTIONED
Sanitationkit 36
VisitfromVHTmember 30
Latrineconstructed 29
Boreholerehabilitated 18
Newborehole 12
Handpumpmechanicstrained 9
Mosquitobreedingsitesremoved 5
Wellsrehabilitated 3
Springsprotected 2
Other?...SensitisationoncleanhomesteadsDryingracksBathingshelterNUSAFboreholeSanitation and hygiene education 3Improvedhygieneinhomestead2Whichisthemostimportant?
●●●●●●●●
●●●●●
●●●●●●
●
●●●●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �0
ImprovedhygieneBorehole/cleanwater19SchoolboreholeLatrine construction 13LatrineconstructioninschoolhadimprovedhygienegreatlySanitationkits5IdealhomesteadsVeryhappytohavecleanwaterHygieneeducationtopreventdiseasesThevisitfromVHTmemberwhichenabledlatrinebuilding4Dryingracks2
Comments:HomeiskeptcleanandnotsmellingCleanwatersomaynotfallsickofwaterdiseasesFaecesspoilthecompound
Havetheirbeenanychangesinyourandyourfamily’slifeinyourFARMINGsincethestartof2008?
Prompts: New types of seeds; Irrigation methods YES 38 NO 15
Ifso,what?(tick)—DO NOT READ OUT THIS LIST — TICK ONLY IF MENTIONED
JoinedaVSLA 24
Improvedgroundnutseeds 20
Newcassavastrain 20
FarmersGrouptraining 15
Improvedvegetableseeds 12
Schoolkitchengarden 6
Tools 5
Improvedriceseeds 1
Other?...PlantedorangesStudyvisittoSerereNAADSgroupmemberCIDIgavecowsandseedlingsHeardaboutnewcassavastrain,FarmersGrouptrainingandVSLAsHeardaboutVSLA
Whichisthemostimportant?Improvedcassavastrainseed/cuttings6Ground nut seeds 3Seeds2VSLA5HeardthatVSLAmembershavemoney/helpsyousaveFarmers group/training is very important 3FarminputsSchoolkitchengardensochildrencanhavesomethingtoeat2ImportanceofgoodcassavaTools2
●●●●●●●●●●●
●●●
●●●●●●
●●●●●●●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
AreyouoranyofyourfamilyamemberofanyCOMMUNITYCOMMITTEES YES 27 NO 9
Which?(tick)—DO NOT READ OUT THIS LIST — TICK ONLY IF MENTIONED
VHT 9
SchoolHealthCommittee 3
PDC 7
VDC 0
SMC 2
HUMC 0
PTA 5
FarmersGroup 8
LC, 1, 2, 3 10
VSLAorothercreditgroup 16
Church Youth Leader 2
ClanCommitteemember 3
WaterSourceCommittee 2
Other?...ChurchdevelopmentcommitteeHomevisitorforCCF(NGO)FuneralCommittee(2)UWESOCommitteePalamioTradingCentreDevelopmentCommitteeReligiousLeaderCatholicChurchCommitteeCaretakerNUSAFBoreholeCIDIcontactfarmerTreasurer,footballclubSanitationgroup
●●●●●●●●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �2
Anycomments?
Whathasn’tchangedthatyouhadexpectedtochange? Whatchangeswouldyouliketosee?
Clean water/bore hole drilled/repair of spring well 23Farmtoolslikehoes,pangas10Oxen,cowsandgoats10New,nearbyhealthcentre8Seedsandsupplies6VHTsshouldhavemalaria/drugs4Moreclassrooms4Construction of teachers houses 3Nurseryschool2Improvedhouseholdincome2Drugsatthehealthcentre2NoschoolfeedingprogrammeDrugs for children under fiveCMDswithmalariadrugsNo skills training eg: tailoringIncome generation projects eg: poultry rearingWantedblanketsforchildrenSpecialsupportfortheelderlySpecialsupportforwidowsandorphansTrainingofPDCsCommunitiestoreceivefoodSomecommunitymembershavecompletelyrefusedtoimprovesanitation&hygieneRefreshertrainingforVHTsLongerprojectdurationScholasticmaterialsSupportforthedisabled2Farminghasn’tchanged–onlyafewvillagesIncomeisstilllowReducepriceofslabsFootballs/goal posts/football boots/sports fields
Clean water/bore holes 23Reductioninfamine/foodsecurity/betternutrition–eatthreemealsaday10Bulls/Oxen/Goats/Cows/poultry10Nearerhealthcentre/services6DrugsdistributedbyVHTs6Improvedhouseholdincome/standardofliving4Drugsatthehealthcentre4Livinginapermanenthouse5Farminputs–tools,ploughs5Teachershouses5Healthycommunities/improvedHealth/absenceofsick-ness 3Seeds 3Latrineineveryhome2Pre–schoolforchildren2MoretrainingforVHTsIdealhomesteadsFocusonpeoplewithdisabilityintermsoftreatment&educationCleanhomesRenovationofschoolsIncomegeneratingactivitiesforyouthNewbednetsSchoolfeedingprogrammeMorefarmersinthefarmersgroupsMalariadrugsavailableMorepumpmechanicsSparepartsforpumpsSupportchildrentogotoschool
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Annex 9: Villages x project activities matrices
Parish VillageO
ldV
illag
eH
ealth
Tea
ms
refo
rmed
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
din
fam
ily
plan
ning
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
din
HIV
/A
IDS
cou
nsel
ling
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
das
com
-m
unity
med
icin
edi
strib
utor
s/v
acci
nato
rs
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
din
inte
grat
ed
man
agem
ento
fchi
ldho
odil
lnes
s
TBA
sw
hoh
ave
rece
ived
trai
n-in
gfro
mA
MR
EF
Imm
unis
atio
nca
mpa
ign
Hou
seho
lds
rece
ived
inse
cti -
cide
trea
ted
nets
Bic
ycle
sfo
rthe
VH
Tm
embe
rs
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
don
ref -
fera
lfro
mA
MR
EF
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
don
com
-m
unity
bas
edh
ealth
info
rmat
ion
man
agem
ents
yste
ms
VH
Tm
embe
rsw
hoh
ave
rece
ived
T–S
HIR
TSfr
om
VH
Tm
embe
rsw
ithd
rug
stor
-ag
eki
ts
Katine Obiol 4 1 1 2 4 2 4 70 4 4 2 4 2Katine 4 1 1 2 4 3 4 57 4 4 2 4 2Ajobi 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Olocoi 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Omulai 4 1 1 2 4 2 4 59 4 4 2 4 2AwidiangB 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Omariai 4 2 2 2 4 1 4 61 4 4 2 4 2
Ojama Obalanga 4 1 1 2 4 4 4 58 4 4 2 4 2Ojama 4 1 1 2 4 4 4 56 4 4 2 4 2Oomai 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 59 4 4 2 4 2Abia 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 61 4 4 2 4 2AtirirB 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 55 4 4 2 4 2AtirirA 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 58 4 4 2 4 2Orieta 4 2 2 2 4 2 4 56 4 4 2 4 2Abarilela 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 56 4 4 2 4 2
Merok AgoraA 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 84 4 4 2 4 2Aputon 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 81 4 4 2 4 2Abata 4 2 2 2 4 1 4 90 4 4 2 4 2Agule 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 73 4 4 2 4 2Omolokony 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 84 4 4 2 4 2Ojwiny 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 80 4 4 2 4 2Merok 4 1 1 2 4 3 4 79 4 4 2 4 2Aber 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 73 4 4 2 4 2Oyimai 4 1 1 2 4 2 4 75 4 4 2 4 2Orechoi 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 80 4 4 2 4 2
Ochuloi Acam 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 54 4 4 2 4 2AwidiangA 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 53 4 4 2 4 2Agaja 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 53 4 4 2 4 2AbariA 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 53 4 4 2 4 2AbariB 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 52 4 4 2 4 2AjonyiA 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 55 4 4 2 4 2AjonyiB 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 53 4 4 2 4 2ObyaraiB 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 56 4 4 2 4 2ObyaraiA 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 61 4 4 2 4 2Ogur 4 2 2 2 4 0 4 52 4 4 2 4 2Adamai 4 1 1 2 4 2 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Olano 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 53 4 4 2 4 2Ojago 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 62 4 4 2 4 2Omodoi 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 55 4 4 2 4 2
HealthComponent
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Parish Village
Old
Vill
age
Hea
lthT
eam
sre
form
ed
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
din
fam
ily
plan
ning
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
din
HIV
/A
IDS
cou
nsel
ling
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
das
com
-m
unity
med
icin
edi
strib
utor
s/v
acci
nato
rs
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
din
inte
grat
ed
man
agem
ento
fchi
ldho
odil
lnes
s
TBA
sw
hoh
ave
rece
ived
trai
n-in
gfro
mA
MR
EF
Imm
unis
atio
nca
mpa
ign
Hou
seho
lds
rece
ived
inse
cti -
cide
trea
ted
nets
Bic
ycle
sfo
rthe
VH
Tm
embe
rs
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
don
ref -
fera
lfro
mA
MR
EF
VH
Tm
embe
rstr
aine
don
com
-m
unity
bas
edh
ealth
info
rmat
ion
man
agem
ents
yste
ms
VH
Tm
embe
rsw
hoh
ave
rece
ived
T–S
HIR
TSfr
om
VH
Tm
embe
rsw
ithd
rug
stor
-ag
eki
ts
Awaca 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 51 4 4 2 4 2Ocholai 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 51 4 4 2 4 2
Ojom Oyama 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 59 4 4 2 4 2Ominit 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 56 4 4 2 4 2Onongo 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 58 4 4 2 4 2Odwogai 4 1 1 2 4 3 4 70 4 4 2 4 2Ojemorun 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 59 4 4 2 4 2Obongoi 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 57 4 4 2 4 2Agora 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Adamasiko 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Obochoi 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 61 4 4 2 4 2Olusai 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Matali 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 55 4 4 2 4 2Alungar 4 2 2 2 4 0 4 55 4 4 2 4 2
Olwelai Olwelai 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 87 4 4 2 4 2Amorikot 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 89 4 4 2 4 2Samuk 4 1 1 2 4 2 4 84 4 4 2 4 2Oderai 4 2 2 2 4 3 4 91 4 4 2 4 2Alere 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 87 4 4 2 4 2AgoraC 4 1 1 2 4 0 4 89 4 4 2 4 2Ojiji 4 1 1 2 4 3 4 89 4 4 2 4 2Amutur 4 1 1 2 4 2 4 88 4 4 2 4 2Kalela 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 87 4 4 2 4 2Oburitok 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 85 4 4 2 4 2Ogwolo 4 1 1 2 4 1 4 89 4 4 2 4 2Kadinya 4 1 1 2 4 5 4 89 4 4 2 4 2
KeySamplednon–livelhoodsSampledlivelihoodsNon–sampledlivelihoods
Notes: The ITNS targeted only children under five and people living with HIV.Fourimmunisationcampaignshavesofarbeendonethisexcludestheroutinestaticandout–reaches.Campaignsincludechildhealthdaysandmassmeaslesandpoliocampaign.
●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Parish Village School
Sch
oolM
anag
emen
tTea
mtr
aine
d
Par
entT
each
erA
ssoc
iatio
nstr
aine
d
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inA
RH
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
finan
ce
ndp
lann
ing
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inlo
cal
mat
eria
lsd
evel
opm
ent
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inle
sson
pl
anni
ng
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inP
HA
SE
(p
erso
nalh
ygie
nea
nde
duca
tion)
Sch
ools
with
fem
ale
teac
hers
trai
ned
re
role
mod
els
forg
irls
Sch
ools
pro
vide
dw
ithM
DD
mat
eria
ls
and
train
ing
Sch
ools
with
new
cla
ssro
oms
Sch
ools
with
repa
ired
clas
sroo
ms
Sch
ools
with
boo
kss
uppl
ied
Sch
ools
with
des
kss
uppl
ied
Chi
ldto
chi
ldte
achi
ngm
etho
ds
Them
atic
cur
ricul
um
Rig
hts
ofth
ech
ild
Gui
danc
ean
dco
unse
lling
Sch
ools
pro
vide
dw
iths
ports
mat
eria
ls
and
train
ing
Katine Obiol Katine 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Katine 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ajobi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Omulai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Olocoi KatineTiriri 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AtirirB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AtirirA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Omariai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AwidiangB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Obiol 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Abia 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Omunyal 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Ojama Obalanga Ojama 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ojama 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Oomai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Orieta 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Abarilela 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AgoraA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Merok Aputon Merok 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Merok 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Agule 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Omolokony 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ojwiny 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Aber Oimai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Oimai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Orechoi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Abata 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1Agora 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Ochuloi AwidiangA Ajonyi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AjonyiB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Omodoi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AjonyiA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AbariB Obyarai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AbariA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ObyaraiB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ocholai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ObyaraiA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Awaca 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ogur 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Omodoi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
EducationComponent
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Parish Village School
Sch
oolM
anag
emen
tTea
mtr
aine
d
Par
entT
each
erA
ssoc
iatio
nstr
aine
d
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inA
RH
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
finan
ce
ndp
lann
ing
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inlo
cal
mat
eria
lsd
evel
opm
ent
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inle
sson
pl
anni
ng
Sch
ools
with
teac
hers
trai
ned
inP
HA
SE
(p
erso
nalh
ygie
nea
nde
duca
tion)
Sch
ools
with
fem
ale
teac
hers
trai
ned
re
role
mod
els
forg
irls
Sch
ools
pro
vide
dw
ithM
DD
mat
eria
ls
and
train
ing
Sch
ools
with
new
cla
ssro
oms
Sch
ools
with
repa
ired
clas
sroo
ms
Sch
ools
with
boo
kss
uppl
ied
Sch
ools
with
des
kss
uppl
ied
Chi
ldto
chi
ldte
achi
ngm
etho
ds
Them
atic
cur
ricul
um
Rig
hts
ofth
ech
ild
Gui
danc
ean
dco
unse
lling
Sch
ools
pro
vide
dw
iths
ports
mat
eria
ls
and
train
ing
Adamai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Olano Ojago 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ojago 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Acam 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Adamai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Acam Ochuloi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Agaja 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Awaca 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AjonyiA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Olano 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Ojom Ojom Ojom 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ominit 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Onongo 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Odwogai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Alungar 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Agora 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Adamasiko Adamasiko 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Olusai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ojemorun 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Obochoi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Obongoi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Matali 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Olwelai Olwelai Olwelai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Amutur 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Oderai 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AgoraC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Amorikot Amorikot 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Samuk 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Alere Ogwolo 1 1 1 1 1 1Ojiji 1 1 1 1 1 1AgoraC 1 1 1 1 1 1Ogwolo 1 1 1 1 1 1Kalela Kadinya 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Oburitok 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Kadinya 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
KeySamplednon–ivelhoodsSampledlivelihoodsNon–sampledlivelihoods
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
WATSANComponent
Parish Village
New
Wat
erS
ourc
eC
omm
ittee
sfo
rmed
Old
Wat
ers
ourc
eC
om-
mitt
ees
treng
then
ed
Bor
ehol
esd
rille
d
Bor
ehol
esre
habi
litat
ed
Wel
lsc
onst
ruct
ed
Wel
lsre
habi
litat
ed
Spr
ings
pro
tect
ed
Han
dpu
mp
mec
hani
cs
train
ed
“Com
mun
ityb
ased
m
ason
s”tr
aine
d
Rec
eive
dsa
nita
tion
kits
Par
ish
sani
tatio
nco
m-
mitt
ees
train
ed
Sch
ooll
atrin
esc
on-
stru
cted
Rai
nwat
erja
rs
Con
stru
ctio
nof
san
d -pl
ats
Rai
nwat
erta
nks
in
scho
ols
Katine Obiol 1 1Katine 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Ajobi 1 1 1 1 1Olocoi 1 1Omulai 1 1 1 1AwidiangB 1 1Omariai 1 1 1 1
Ojama Obalanga 1 1 1 1 1Ojama 1 1 1Oomai 1 1Abia 1 1 1 1AtirirB 1 1 1AtirirA 1 1 1 1Orieta 1 1 1 1Abarilela 1 1
Merok AgoraA 1 1 1Aputon 1 1Abata 1 1 1 1Agule 1 1Omolokony 1 1Ojwiny 1 1Merok 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Aber 1 1Oyimai 1 1 1 1 1Orechoi 1 1
Ochuloi Acam 1 1 1AwidiangA 1 1Agaja 1 1AbariA 1 1 1 1 1AbariB 1 1AjonyiA 1 1 1 1AjonyiB 1 1ObyaraiB 1 1 1 1ObyaraiA 1 1 1 1Ogur 1 1Adamai 1 1Olano 1 1 1Ojago 1 1 1 1 1 1Omodoi 1 1 1 1Awaca 1 1Ocholai 1 1
Ojom Oyama 1 1Ominit 1 1 1 1Onongo 1 1
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Parish Village
New
Wat
erS
ourc
eC
omm
ittee
sfo
rmed
Old
Wat
ers
ourc
eC
om-
mitt
ees
treng
then
ed
Bor
ehol
esd
rille
d
Bor
ehol
esre
habi
litat
ed
Wel
lsc
onst
ruct
ed
Wel
lsre
habi
litat
ed
Spr
ings
pro
tect
ed
Han
dpu
mp
mec
hani
cs
train
ed
“Com
mun
ityb
ased
m
ason
s”tr
aine
d
Rec
eive
dsa
nita
tion
kits
Par
ish
sani
tatio
nco
m-
mitt
ees
train
ed
Sch
ooll
atrin
esc
on-
stru
cted
Rai
nwat
erja
rs
Con
stru
ctio
nof
san
d -pl
ats
Rai
nwat
erta
nks
in
scho
ols
Odwogai 1 1 1Ojemorun 1 1Obongoi 1 1Agora 1 1 1 1 1 1Adamasiko 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Obochoi 1 1Olusai 1 1Matali 1 1 1 1Alungar 1 1
Olwelai Olwelai 1 1 1 1 1Amorikot 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Samuk 1 1Oderai 1 1Alere 1 1 1 1 1AgoraC 1 1Ojiji 1 1Amutur 1 1 1 1 1Kalela 1 1Oburitok 1 1Ogwolo 1 1 1Kadinya 1 1 1 1 1
KeySamplednon–livelhoodsSampledlivelihoodsNon–sampledlivelihoods
Notes: TwonewWSCofKatineandAbokaformedinKatinevillageThreeHPMstrainedtocovertheentiresubcountyTencommunitymasonstrainedtoconstructECOSANtoiletsprimaryschoolsinthesubcountyTwentyfourcommunitymasonstrainedonproductionnofsanplats/slabs,4perparishSixcommunitymasonstrainedonconstructionofwaterjars,1perparishSixcommunitymasonstrainedonspringprotetion,2persite.Sanitationkitswererotatedtoallvillagesonloanbasisthenlaterdistributedtoindividualvillages.Allvillagesarerepresentedintheparishsanitationcommittee.Onerainwaterjarconstructedduringtrainingoflocalmasons.One casting yard for sanitation platform/ slab identified per parish
●●●●●●●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �9
LivelihoodComponent
Parish Village
Farm
ers
Gro
ups
form
ed
Firs
ttra
inin
gin
Sav
ings
&
Loan
Rep
aym
ent
New
VS
LAg
roup
sfo
rmed
Old
VS
LAg
roup
sre
–sta
blis
hed
Trai
ning
inV
SLA
co
ncep
t
Impr
oved
var
ietie
sof
ca
ssav
a
Trai
ned
para
vets
Impr
oved
upl
and
rice
seed
dis
tribu
ted
Impr
oved
veg
etab
le
seed
sdi
strib
uted
Impr
oved
gro
undn
ut
seed
dis
tribu
ted
Equ
ipm
ents
etfo
rnur
s-er
ybe
dm
anag
emen
t
Trai
ning
inim
prov
ed
farm
ing
Trai
ning
inb
uisn
ess
and
mar
ketin
g
Trai
ning
inn
atur
al
reso
urce
sm
anag
emen
t
Par
ticip
atio
nin
ex-
chan
gev
isits
Trai
ning
ing
roup
fo
rmat
ion
and
Mgt
Trai
ning
inM
&E
,P
lann
ing,
Visi
onin
g
Katine Ajobi 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1AwidiangB 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Katine 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Obiol 0 5 5 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0Olocoi 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Omariai 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0Omulai 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0Okwetai 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Owayai 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Merok Abata 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Aber 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0AgoraA 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Agule 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Aputon 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Merok 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1Ojwiny 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 0Omolokony 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Orechoi 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Oilmai 0 4 4 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Anyeri 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0Obiol 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Olel 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Ochuloi AbariA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1AbariB 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Acam 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Adamai 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Agaja 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0AjonyiA 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0AjonyiB 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Awaca 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0AwidiangA 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Obyarai 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0ObyaraiA 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0ObyaraiB 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0OchuloiRock 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Ogur 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Ojago 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Olano 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0Omodoi 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Agule 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Ocolai 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Ajonyi 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Ojama Abarilela 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Abia 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �0
Parish Village
Farm
ers
Gro
ups
form
ed
Firs
ttra
inin
gin
Sav
ings
&
Loan
Rep
aym
ent
New
VS
LAg
roup
sfo
rmed
Old
VS
LAg
roup
sre
–sta
blis
hed
Trai
ning
inV
SLA
co
ncep
t
Impr
oved
var
ietie
sof
ca
ssav
a
Trai
ned
para
vets
Impr
oved
upl
and
rice
seed
dis
tribu
ted
Impr
oved
veg
etab
le
seed
sdi
strib
uted
Impr
oved
gro
undn
ut
seed
dis
tribu
ted
Equ
ipm
ents
etfo
rnur
s-er
ybe
dm
anag
emen
t
Trai
ning
inim
prov
ed
farm
ing
Trai
ning
inb
uisn
ess
and
mar
ketin
g
Trai
ning
inn
atur
al
reso
urce
sm
anag
emen
t
Par
ticip
atio
nin
ex-
chan
gev
isits
Trai
ning
ing
roup
fo
rmat
ion
and
Mgt
Trai
ning
inM
&E
,P
lann
ing,
Visi
onin
g
AtirirA 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0AtirirB 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Obalanga 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Ojama 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Omulai 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Orieta 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Oimai 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Olochoi 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Omunyol 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0AtirirT/C 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Ojom Adamasiko 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Agora 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Alungar 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Matali 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Obochoi 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Obongoi 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Odwogai 1 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1Ojemorun 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1Olusai 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0Ominit 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Onongo 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Oyama 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Damasiko 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Olwelai AgoraC 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Alere 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0Amorikot 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Amutur 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Kadinya 0 3 3 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0Kalela 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Oburitok 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Oderai 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0Ogwolo 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Ojiji 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Olwelai 1 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1Samuk 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0Alere–Angai 0 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
KeySamplednon–livelhoodsSampledlivelihoodsNon–sampledlivelihoods
Notes: One para–vet per parish; 6 in all; 1 extra managing drug store conflicts and conflicts resolution, constitution making, 4 household per village 2 = farmers group and school; 1 = farmers group only records Group formation and mgt training = Group formation, record and record keeping, conflict and conflict resolution, leadership, constitutionmaking.ThevillagessetinbluearenewvillagesappearinginUWESORECORDSbutnotinKCPPdatabase.Thevillagessetinred appear in Ochuloi parish but look like part of either Ajonyi A or Ajonyi B; clarification needed from UWESO.
●
●
●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
GovernanceComponent
Parish Village
Indi
vidu
als
have
bee
ntra
ined
inIT
ski
lls
Par
ish
Dev
elop
men
tCom
-m
ittee
mem
bers
trai
ned
Loca
lCou
ncill
ors
1tra
ined
Rep
rese
nted
inP
MC
m
eetin
gs
Rep
rese
nted
inS
C
Rep
rese
nted
inIE
Cc
om-
mitt
ees
Rep
rese
nted
inth
eR
e-so
urce
Cen
terC
omm
ittee
Mem
bers
trai
ned
inIE
C
Dev
elop
men
t/Use
Katine Obiol 1 1 1 1 4 1Katine 1 1 1 1 4 1Ajobi 1 1Olocoi 1Omulai 1 1 3,4 1AwidiangB 1 1Omariai 1 1 1 4 1
Ojama Obalanga 2 1 4 1 1Ojama 1 2 1 1 3,4 1Oomai 1 1 3,4 1Abia 1 1 1 4 1 1AtirirB 1 1AtirirA 1 1 1Orieta 2 1Abarilela 1 1 1 4 1
Merok AgoraAAputon 1 1Abata 1 1 1 3,4 1Agule 1 1 1Omolokony 1 4 1Ojwiny 1 1 1MerokAber 1 1 1Oimai 1 3,4 1 1Orechoi 1 1
Ochuloi Acam 4 1AwidiangAAgajaAbariA 1 1 1AbariB 1 4 1AjonyiA 4 1 1AjonyiB 1 1 1 3,4ObyaraiBObyaraiA 1 4 1OgurAdamaiOlano 1 1 1OjagoOmodoiAwaca 1 1 1 1 1Ocholai
Ojom OyamaOminit 1 1
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �2
Parish Village
Indi
vidu
als
have
bee
ntra
ined
inIT
ski
lls
Par
ish
Dev
elop
men
tCom
-m
ittee
mem
bers
trai
ned
Loca
lCou
ncill
ors
1tra
ined
Rep
rese
nted
inP
MC
m
eetin
gs
Rep
rese
nted
inS
C
Rep
rese
nted
inIE
Cc
om-
mitt
ees
Rep
rese
nted
inth
eR
e-so
urce
Cen
terC
omm
ittee
Mem
bers
trai
ned
inIE
C
Dev
elop
men
t/Use
Onongo 1 1 4 1Odwogai 1 1Ojemorun 1 1 4 1 1ObongoiAgoraAdamasiko 1 1 1 1 4 1Obochoi 1OlusaiMatali 1 4 1Alungar 1 3,4 1
Olwelai Olwelai 1 1 3,4 1Amorikot 1 1Samuk 3,4 1Oderai 1 1 4 1Alere 1 1 1AgoraCOjijiAmutur 1 1 1 4 1 1KalelaOburitokOgwolo 1Kadinya 1 4 1
KeySamplednon–livelihoodsSampledlivelihoodsNon–sampledlivelihoods
Notes: 2 = PDC Village reps trained 3 = IEC sub–county committee members 3, 4 both IEC sub county and IEC parish committee 4 = IEC parish Committee members
●●●●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Annex 10: Achievement rating scale (MTR)1 = fully achieved, very few or no shortcomings2 = largely achieved, despite a few shortcomings3 = only partial achievement, benefits and shortcomings finely balanced4 = very limited achievement, extensive shortcomings5 = not achieved
KCPPObjectives Summary
Improvedcommunityhealth All five key objectives have been addressed in the first 18 months of the KCPP. Keyoutputsareshownbelow.
UnplannedoutputsincludedtheFootballtournament,repairingtheroofoftheCatholic–fundedhealthcentreandtheneedtoreplaceplasticpanellatrinesthatwerenotabletowithstandstrongrains.
Droughthascausedsevereproblemsforfarmers
Appropriateness: all outputs are appropriateQuality: mostly good but variable (bore holes/school building problems), training qualityappearsgoodSufficiency: quantity training is good, not enough infrastructure (water sources, classrooms,desks)Efficiency and timeliness: some outputs slow and no rights–based training.
Overall score = 2.9
Improvedaccesstoqualityprimaryeducation
Improvedaccesstosafewater,sanitationandhygiene
Improvedincome–generatingopportunities(alsoreferredtoasimprovinglivelihoods)
Communitiesempoweredtoengageinlocalgovernance
Expectedoutcomes Outputs Comments Rating
Increasedcommunityawareness,accesstoandutilisationofhealthservicesincommunityandhealthfacilities.
KnowledgeofHIVincreasedthroughtrainedVHTs.Increase in VCT: 874 pregnant mothers, 145 children between 5–18yearsand1441adultsReferralstohealthcentresincreasedfrom2/10to9/10Reduction of diarrhoea from 38% at baseline to 6% for children > 5 years, 1.4% for children < five by CMDs work at household levelTraining of VHTs in FP; no significant changeImprovedhealthplanningandbudgetingthroughVHTtrainingIncrease in immunisation; 89.3% of children > 5 from 80% in the year 1 and from 43% at baseline Increase in access to ANC 92% compared to baseline 36%Reduction in deliveries by TBAs to 27% from 38% at baseline Increase in births in health centre to 53% from 33% at baseline RenovatedandequippedlaboratoryatOjomH/CIIfordiagnosisofTB,HIV,STIsmalariaandotherdiseasesARVandTBdrugadherenceimprovedthroughVHTtrainingImproveddrugstockmanagementaftertrainingIITNsprovidedtohighriskgroupsimprovementsstaffmanagementafterrefreshertrainingfor45membersofHUMCsImprovedaccesstoPMTCT874expectantmothersaccessedPMTCTVCTofwhich57motherstestedHIV+(prevalence6.5%) and seven HIV+ mothers received ARVs (coverage 12.3 %).Provisionofequipmenttomakevisits(T–shirts,gumboots)andbicyclesProvisionofequipmenttooTBAs(gumboots)
MoreintensiveworkneedstotakeplaceonFP
Thisisalmostatnationaltargetof90%
TrainingTBAstorecognisedangersignsandreferforANCisverysuccessful
Laboratoryrequirestrainedstaff
Drugstockoutsstillexist
ExpansionofPMTCTservicesisnecessary
MoreequipmentforVHTsneeded
2.0
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Expectedoutcomes Outputs Comments Rating
Improvedaccesstoqualityprimaryeducationforallchildrenandgreatercommunityinvolvementinschoolgovernance
2 community schools built increasing number form 13 at baselineto15Increased school enrolment from 7351 at baseline to 9071IncreasednumberofOVCattendingschoolIncreasednumbertakingPrimaryleavingexams,reducednumber unable to sit exams from 5% at baseline to 2.5% and total passed from 300 to 426ImprovedlessonplanningafterteachertrainingReductionofteachersabsentfromschoolProductionoflearningaidsTextbooksdeliveredto9schoolsReduction in desk sharing from 10:1 at baseline to 6:1ClassroomsrenovatedIncreaseinuptakeofsport,26teacherstrainedIncreasedinMDDEffectivemanagementinschoolsincreasedthroughactivePTAsandSMCsestablishedandmemberstrained
DesksharingstilldoubleGoUtarget
SMCsrecognisedasbeingsuccessful
2.5
Increasedcommunityaccesstoandutilisationofimprovedwaterandsanitationfacilities
Increased safe water access from 42% at baseline to 63%Decreaseinwalkingtimetosourcefrom2.5klmsatbaselineto1.5klmsresultsinmoretimeavailableforgirlsandwomenIncrease in latrines built to 43% of households from 7% at baselineIncrease in hygiene coverage in schools from 25% at baseline to 75%Increaseinschoollatrinesin8schoolsDemonstrationECOSANlatrinesin4schoolsIncreaseinsanitaryfacilitiesforgirlsIncreaseinrainwaterharvestingtanksinschools
Lawenshrinedtofine those without latrines
3.0
Improvedhygienepracticesinhouseholds
Sanitation & hygienic practices in households increased from 7% at baseline to 43%IncreaseinrainwaterharvestinginthehomethroughtrainingofcommunitymasonstoproducejarsIncreaseinnumberofdryingracks350 sanplats bought and in place
Improvedoperationsandmaintenanceofwatersources
Revised GoU targets for 100% access to waterHandPumpmechanicstrainedandoperatingFunctioningWSCs
KCPPnotequippedtomeetthistargetwithcurrentresourcesNotallWSCsperformingefficiently and effectively
Recoveryoflivelihoodsthrough diversified and improvedsourcesofincome
Established18farmergroupsmovingfromproductiontomarketingFunctioningFarmer’sGroupVSLAPlannedproducestoretobesetupwithco–fundingPlantingofnewcrops(strainsofcassava,groundnuts,uplandriceetc)Establishmentofnurserybeds
VSLAgroupssavedup to 3 million UGX and diversified business
3.5
Strongerabilityofruralinstitutionstoaccessbothadvisoryservicesandmarketsfortheirproductsforincreasedproductionandincome
Trainedpara–vetsforbetteranimalhusbandrySimpleequipment(hoesetc)deliveredRan2studytoursforfarmers
Para–vetsstillwithoutappropriatekit
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Expectedoutcomes Outputs Comments Rating
Increasedcommunitycapacitytoplanandbudgetforcommunityneeds
Establishedandtrainedcommitteesacrosssub–countyatalllevelsfromDistricttoVillageforplanningandbudgeting
3.5
Strongercommunitycapacityfordatagatheringandutilisation.
CollectionofdatabyVHTs/healthcentres/schoolsandParishlevelcommittees
Communitydemandingandachievingtheirrightsandservices
DebateonrightsandservicesenhancedwithinandoutsideKatinethroughradiotalkshowsFunctioningandusedmediacentre
NoRights–basedtrainingstarted
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Annex 11: A process review of the Mid–Term Review of the Katine Community Partnerships ProjectRickDavies,ExternalEvaluator,Wednesday,12August2009
Contents
1.Whyhaveaprocessreview?2.Theprocessreview—aquicksummary3. Issues arising—about the MTR process4.Issuesarising—abouttheKCPPproject5. DFID “Quality at Exit” checklist: An assessment of the MTR Report
1.Whyhaveaprocessreview?
Inmyexperienceatleast,mostMid–TermReviews(MTR)arecontractedbythedonororganisationfund-ingtheprojectunderreview.Inthisrespectthe2009MTRoftheKatineCommunityPartnershipsProject(KCPP)isunusual.TheKCPPMTRwascontractedbytheprojectmanageri.e.AMREF.Althoughunusual,thisstepwasconsistentwithaprocessproposedtotheGuardianin2008,thattheroleoftheGuardiancontractedexternalevaluatorshouldbeprogressivelyreducedovertime.Behindthisproposalweretwoas-sumptions: (a) that the M&E capacities of the KCPP project staff would be improving as the project devel-oped, through the efforts of the M&E Officer in Katine, supported by an M&E officer at the AMREF head-quarters in Nairobi, (b) that the Guardian would gain confidence over time in AMREF’s ability to objectively monitorandevaluateitsownworkinKatine.
InpracticetheamountofM&EsupportprovidedbytheNairobiHQseemstohavebeenlimited1.Norhas dedicated M&E support been available from the Uganda country office2. However, the London office has had a very significant role, both in refining the draft six monthly narrative reports and in drafting the TermsofReference(ToR)fortheMTR.AMREFUgandahasexperiencewiththemanagementofMTRs.TherehavebeenaleastfourotherMTRsofAMREFprojectsinUgandaoverthepastfewyears.IneachcaseithasbeenAMREFwhohascontractedtheMTRconsultant,notthedonor.
The MTR can be considered as an evaluation, given that DFID (amongst others) have defined an evalu-ationas“Thesystematicandobjectiveassessmentofanon–goingorcompletedproject,programmeorpolicy, its design, implementation, and results in relation to specified evaluation criteria”3.WithinthelifespanoftheKCPPitisprobablythemostimportantevaluationevent,moresothanan“end–of–project”evalua-tionthatmightexpecttobescheduledaroundtheendof2010.ThisisbecausetheMTRresultshavethepotentialtonotonlyaffectthecourseoftheprojectintheperiodremaininguntiltheendof2010,butalsothedecisionsaboutwhat,ifanything,shouldhappenbeyondthatdate.An“end–of–project”evaluationinlate 2010 will be too late to influence judgments about activities (and funding thereof) in the post–2010 pe-riod.Fundingdecisionswillneedtobemadewellbeforethen.
WiththisviewinminditwasproposedthatwhilethemanagementoftheMTRprocessshouldbeinAMREF’shands,itwouldstillbeusefulfortheGuardiantohavesomeformofinvolvementintheMTRprocess.MyproposalwasthattheexternalevaluatorshouldprovideanindependentreviewoftheMTRprocess,bybeinginvolvedinboththeplanningandimplementationstagesoftheMTR.Thiskindof“meta–evaluation”functionisnowbeingseenasanessentialpartofthelongtermprocessofimprovingthequalityofevaluations4.InthelastyearorsobothDFIDandAusAIDhaveinstitutionalisedaprocessofpeerreviewoftheircontractedevaluations,andbothhavedevelopedasetofproceduresforthoseprocesses.Forthe
� ItwasreportedthattheydidnotmakeasignificantcontributiontothedesignoftheMTRTermsofReference� ThereisnoM&EofficerpositionattheUgandacountryoffice� TheUK’spolicyonindependentevaluationforinternationaldevelopment,DFID,March�009,page6� SeeMichaelScriven’seditorial“MetaevaluationRevisited”intheJanuary�009editionoftheJournalofMultidisciplinaryEvaluation
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
KCPPMTRIproposedtheuseoftwosetsofDFIDchecklistsforreviewingevaluationplansandreports5.ThesewouldbeusedinanopenandconstructivemannerwiththeMTRconsultant,tobesharedwiththemastheMTRprocessandeditedinthelightoftheircomments.
Both the MTR consultant and AMREF London office were initially uneasy with the external evaluator be-inginsucha“schoolinspector”typeofrole.Concernswerealsoexpressedabouttheethicsofsuchanapproach,forreasonsthatwerelessclear.TheyproposedthattheexternalconsultantshouldbemoreengagedwiththeMTRprocess,bycommentingonandproposingmethodsofinquiry,andbytakingpartintheMTRinterviewsandmeetings.Thiswasagreedto,solongastheAMREFcontractedMTRconsultantremainedthepersonresponsiblefordeliveringtheMTRreport.Whilethisdecisionmayhavebeenatthecostoftheexternalevaluator’sindependenceitwasexpectedthatitwouldaddvaluetotheMTRprocess.Feedbackreceivedsofarsuggeststhattheexternalevaluator’sinvolvementdidaddvalue.
2.Theprocessreview—aquicksummary
The external evaluator was involved in a number of stages during the MTR process, as follows:CommentingonthedraftTermsofReference,byemailandfacetofacemeetingsintheUKCommentingtoGuardianandAMREFontheselectionoftheMTRconsultantDiscussionwiththeMTRconsultantretheproposedscheduleofactivitiestomakeuptheMTRprocess,includingdatacollectionactivitiespriortotheMTR,andstakeholdergroupsthatcouldbeengaged.ProvisionofinterimfeedbacktotheMTRconsultantontheplanfortheMTR,viatheuseofanadaptedDFID checklist, prior to the beginning of the fieldwork in UgandaParticipationwiththeMTRconsultantinmeetingswithdifferentstakeholdersinKampalaandSoroti6 Commenting on the draft MTR report, by email and meetings with the MTR consultant. (NB: Detailed commentswerealsoprovidedbyAMREFUK,andAMREFUganda)ProvidingfeedbackonthecompletedMTR,viatheuseofasecondDFIDchecklist(insection4ofthisannex)Summarising issues arising from the MTR, via sections 2 and 3 of this annex.
3.Issuesarising—abouttheMTRprocess
Apreface: The working relationship between the MTR consultant and external evaluator was positive and constructivethroughouttheMTRprocess.Whilebothhaddifferentapproachestoevaluationthesediffer-ences were a source of creative thinking, not conflict and confusion.
DesignoftheToRs:
AretheToRsanagreementaboutwhatneedstobedone,orasetofguidingsuggestionsthatcanbeusedasneeded?Myviewerredtowardstheformer,andtheMTRconsultanterredtowardsthelatter.WhileIacknowledgethatitisfrequentlythecasethatnotallexpectationsinaToRscanbemetinprac-tice,thereisanobligationtoaddressthosethatcanandexplainwhereandwhyotherscannotbe. Do the TORs belong to AMREF and reflect their concerns, or should they also reflect the concerns of otherkeystakeholders?WhiletheMTRconsultanterredtowardstheformer,myviewerredtowardsthelatter.ThemembersoftheSteeringCommitteeinSorotiandtheGuardianandBarclaysinLondonrepresentedtwootherstakeholdersgroupswhoseinterestsshouldideallybecapturedintheToRsforaMTR.ThiswasdonetosomeextentthroughameetingbetweenAMREF,Guardian,Barclays,theMTRconsultantandmyself,organisedshortlybeforethebeginningoftheMTR.WhilewedidseektheviewsoftheSteeringCommitteeatthebeginningoftheMTRitwouldhavebeenpreferabletodosobeforetheMTRstarted.
DurationoftheMTR
WhenplanninganMTR,shouldthefocusbeonminimisingdemandsonAMREFstaffmember’stimeorensuringthatallrelevantstakeholdergroupswerecontacted?TheformerwasofconcerntotheMTR
� “QualityAssurance:TemplateforEntrylevel”and“QualityAssurance:TemplateforExitlevel”6 This ended unexpectedly on July 9th, because a family crisis that I needed to attend to in Australia
●●●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
consultant,whereasthelatterwasofgreaterconcerntotheexternalevaluator.Inpracticethetotalde-mandonthetimeofeachcomponentstaffmemberwasprobablyaboutthreedaysincludinginitialbrief-ing, field work split between two, assigned tasks, and the debriefing. The greatest time demand was on the M&E officer who participated in meetings on most days. The reverse was the case with the Project Manager,whowasnotasengagedasmuchasmighthavebeenexpected,giventheimportanceoftheMTR.Overall,mostofthestakeholdersthatwereproposedforcontactweremet.However,withthewis-domofhindsight,itcouldhavebeenveryusefultobringtogetherthestakeholdersforeachcomponent,todiscussissuethatconnectedthem.WiththeMTRprocessthatwasusedtherewasnoopportunityforcommunicationsbetweenstakeholdergroups.ThismayormaynotbepossibleduringaprojectplanningmeetingproposedforSeptember2009.
AMREFstaffengagement
AtthebeginningoftheMTRreviewprocessKCPPprojectstaffwereopenlyscepticalaboutthevalueoftheMTRprocessasdescribed,questioningitsabilitytobeobjectiveandtobecredibleintheeyesofothers.ThiswaspartlyduetotheirfrustrationswiththelackofinformationtheyhadbeengivenabouttheMTRandpartlybecauseofconcernsthattheirownviewswouldnotbeseenascrediblebyothers,includinganysurveydatatheymightgatherfromhouseholds.Thelatterconcernseemstohavebeenin-fluenced by the degree of public scrutiny that the staff feel the project is under, via the Guardian website. WhiletheMTRteamdidmanagetoallaystaffconcernsandobtaintheircooperation,theyhavealsoimplicitlytakenonaresponsibilitytoproduceareportthatwillwithstandcriticalpublicscrutiny.
Participants’views
Whatismoreimportant,howstakeholdersseetheirroleintheKCPPorhowtheyseetherelevanceandvalueoftheassistanceprovidedbyAMREF?ThedraftMTRreportgivesadetailedaccountoftheviewsofthemanydifferentstakeholdergroupsofthevalueoftheassistanceprovidedbyAMREF.Itgiveslessattentiontoanalysesofthefunctionofthesedifferentgroupsandhowtheyrelatetoeachother(ide-allyandinpractice)7. Yet the project is called the Katine Community Partnership Project, and it is these groupswhoarenotonlythekeyrecipientsofAMREFassistancebutalsothevehiclesthroughwhichso-cialchangeisexpectedtohappen.Expectationsabouttheirrelationshipsfallintothecategoryofprojectdesignissues,whichwereraisedbeingofconcernintheLondonconsultationontheToRs.
Comparedtowhat?8
TheMTRreportcorrectlypointsout“AmajorconstraintinattemptingtoreviewandgiveanachievementratingtotheProjectisthelackofasuccinctLogFrame”.TheKCPPConceptualFrameworkdetailstheexpectedOutputs(thingstobedeliveredbyAMREFstaff)buttheexpectedOutcomes(mainlychangesinpeoples’lives)aredescribedonlybybroadinclusivestatementse.g.“Increasedcommunityaware-ness of, access to and utilisation of health services in community and health facilities”. The “Specific Objectives” referred to in the ToRs, and narrative progress reports, are less specific e.g. “Improved com-munityhealth”.TheConceptualFrameworkdoeslist“exampleindicatorsforeachoftheexpectOut-comes.ThesubsequentlyproducedMonitoringandEvaluationFrameworkthenliststheindicatorsthatthe project will monitor, but without any commitment to specific targets that the project (i.e. AMREF and itspartners)hopestoachieve.Bothlistsofindicatorsareamixofoutputs(whatAMREFstaffwillpro-vide),outcomes(changesinthefunctioningofcommunitystructuresandservices)andimpactmeasures(changesinpeople’slives)9.TheMTRreport’sAnnex10tabulationof“achievementratings”hasinheritedthisconfusion,mixingupdifferentkindsofchanges(inhouseholds,communitygroupsandinAMREFstaffactivities)inoneas-
7 Included here are the Parent Teachers Associations, the School Management Committees, the School Health Committees, the Village Health Teams, the Water Source Committees, the Farmers Groups, the VSLAs and the government and quasi government bodies they are linkedtoincludingthe��schools,the�healthcentres,theHealthUnitManagementCommittees,theParishDevelopmentCommittees,theSub–County Health Committee (and sub–committees), and others possibly not included here
� ThequestionaskedbyGrouchoMarx,whenhisfriendcomplainedtohimthat“Lifeisdifficult”9 TheM&EOfficerreportedthatdataisbeingsystematicallycollatedontheseindictaors.Butforreasonsnotyetidentified,thisdataisnot
being systematically reported in the six monthly narrative reports to the Guardian and Barclays Bank
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �9
sessment.InMid–TermReviewsthatIamfamiliarwith10itisimportanttoassessthesetypesofchangesseparately,andtotrytoidentifytheextenttowhichchangesatonelevelhavecontributedtochangesintheother11.Forexample,howhaveAMREFstaffactivities(outputs)contributedtochangesinthecapacitiesoftheSchoolManagementCommitteesandParentTeachersAssociations(outcomes),andthenhowhavechangesinthosegroups’functioningaffectedchildren’sattendanceandperformanceatschool. It is quite possible for project activities to be successfully implemented, but have no significant effectsonsuchcommunitygroups,andviceversa,forimprovementtotakeplaceinthecapacitiesofsuchgroups,despiteprojectactivitiesnotbeingimplementedsuccessfully.
Multiplesectors,multipleactivities
Howdoyoumakeoveralljudgementsabouttheprogressofamulti–sectoralintervention,involvingarange of activities in each sector? Some form of judgement like this is required by the first of the three purposesoutlinedintheToRs(Thepurposeofthemid–termreviewistoassessprogressagainstob-jectivesinall5componentstoassesstowhatextenttheprojectisontracktoimprovethequalityoflifeforthepeopleofKatine).OnesectionoftheMTRreportdoesexamineeachcomponent,intermsofstaffmember’ssuccessinimplementingactivitiesaspertheirworkplans,duringthesecondyearoftheproject.However,thedecisiontostructuremostofthereportarounddifferent“levels”oforganisations(e.g.district,sub–county,parish,households)hasmeantthatinthemaintextofthereporttherehasbeennocorrespondinganalysisofthesuccessofeachcomponentattheoutcomelevel(changesinthefunctioningofdifferentcommunitygroups).Therearetwoannexesthatdisaggregateperformancebycomponents (Annex 6: KCPP Achievements since Jan 2008) and Annex 10: Achievement Rating Scale). The first of these lists various “Results” for each component along side the inputs provided (infrastruc-tureandhardware,training).Thesecondgoesfurtherandgeneratesan“Achievementrating”foreachcomponent. Unfortunately the changes listed as the basis for each component rating conflate changes in outputs(whatstaffhavedone),outcomes(changesinthefunctioningofcommunitygroups)andimpacts(changesinpeople’slives)12. Additional difficulties have been created by the absence of targets, of what wasexpectedtobeachieved.Ideallyanevaluationwillmakeuseofmultipleinformationsources,includingpre–existingdatacollectedbyothers.ThecurrentMTRreportprovidesinformationfromgroupandone–to–oneinterviews,ahouse-holdsurvey,astaffself–assessmentandadatabaseofvillagesxprojectactivities.Howeverthesearereportedinseparatesections.Ananalysisofcomponentbycomponentwouldallowthesesourcestobeintegratedintoonecompositepicture.Informationwasalsoavailablefrompastnarrativeprogressreportsandbaselinesurveys,butthishasnotbeenusedasmuchasmightbeexpected.
Futureplans
The draft report listed a set of 13 activities that project staff thought were of the highest priority during the final year of the project. These were identified through a staff workshop facilitated by the MTR consult-ant,attheendoftheMTRprocess.Whileseenasavaluableexercise,thelistneedstobesupplement-edwithsomeexplanationsforthereasonsbehindthesechoices,sothattheunderlyingstrategyismoreevident,alongwithanyassociatedassumptionsandrisks.ThatiswhatAMREFKampala,theGuardianandBarclaysshouldthenbeattendingtowhenconsideringthesepriorities.ThiskindofinformationshouldalsobeofinteresttootherparticipantsintheproposedSeptemberworkshop.Becauseitwasnotyetcompletedthedraftreportdidnotmakeanyrecommendationsaboutthepro-posedSeptemberworkshop,orpossiblepost–2010activitiestobefundedbytheGuardianandoroth-ers(otherthanthattheprojectshouldbeextendedforatleasanextrayear).Isubsequentlyprovidedsomesuggestionsonhowproposalsforthethirdyear,andaoneyearextension,couldbedevelopedviaastakeholderconsultationprocessduringtheproposedSeptemberworkshop(andpossiblyextendedthereafter).Thesearegiveninpara18below.
10 Oftencalled“OutputtoPurposeReviews”11 SeetheDFIDAnnualReviewformat,foradetailedexampleofthekindofanalysisexpected,athttp://www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/funding/
wahrf–annual–review.xls 12 The same is the case with Annex 6, which includes as results activities carried out by AMREF e.g. provision of books and desks
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �0
Risksandassumptions
Mostevaluationswillseektoidentifyimportantrisksandassumptionsbeingmadebytheprojectmanag-ersand/orintheprojectdesign.SimilarexpectationswerebuiltintotheToRsforthisMTR,inthe“scope”section.InthedraftversionoftheMTRtheseissueswerenotyetaddressed.Oneimportantareawhereassumptionscouldbeusefullydiscussedisthatofdrugsupply.Theoriginalneedsassessmentstudiesidentified problems in this area, but the subsequent project design did not make it clear AMREF’s expec-tationsabouthowtheseproblemscouldbestberespondedto.OtherrisksseemtobepresentwiththearrangementformoneymanagementbytheWaterSourceCommittees.Ourtwovisitssuggestedthatneither government nor project staff were fully informed about the financial status of the groups visited. Yet proposals have been made by some to extend the roles of these groups to take on savings and creditservices.
4.Issuesarising—abouttheKCPPproject
Apreface: The response of the AMREF UK and Uganda offices to the MTR report has been very positive. Theissuesraisedbelowareonesthatstrucktheexternalevaluatorasespeciallyimportant.
Projectcosts
InthemeetingwiththeSteeringCommitteetherewasanintensediscussionofprojectcosts,includ-ing questions about the contribution of the AMREF Kampala and other offices. In response, the Project Managerofferedtoprovidemoreinformationonhowprojectcostswerebrokendown.TheGuardianandBarclaysBankcouldtakeafurtherstep,andrequestthateachsixmonthlynarrativereportontheKCPPincludes a section on the activities of the AMEF London and Kampala offices and the costs they have incurredincarryingouttheseactivities.Ifthisstepistaken,thesenarrativereportsshouldthenberou-tinelysharedwiththeSteeringCommitteeandManagementCommittee,aswellasbeingmadepubliclyavailableviatheGuardianwebsiteasatpresent.Thereisanimportantlargerlessonhere.AidprojectsliketheKCPPinvolvelongandcomplexsupplychains,bringingfundsandtechnicalexpertisetocommunitiesofconcern,fromdistantlocations.Intheprivatesectorintenseeffortisinvestedintomakingeverypartofsupplychangesworkasquicklyandef-ficiently as possible. But in the world of development aid often the focus is almost wholly on the final link inthechain,theorganisationsdeliveringassistanceatthegrassrootslevel.Verylittleattentionisgiventothemoreexpensive13partsofthesupplychainlinedupbehindthem.GiventhattheGuardianhasre-portedlyfoundthecostsofdeliveringaidmuchmoreexpensivethantheyexpectedperhapstheyshouldturntheirjournalisticattentiontowardstheissueofsupplychaincostsininternationalaiddelivery.Seediagrambelowforasummaryviewofthesupplychain.(Therearelikelytobesomeerrorsinthisdiagramwhichwillneedcorrection)
Governmentcontributions
In2009AMREFswitcheditsapproachtothebuildingofschoolclassroomsinKatine,fromcentrallycon-tractedconstructiontolocallycontractedconstruction,plussomematerialandlabour[check]inputfromthesurroundingcommunities.Requiringthesetypesofco–contributionsisacommonplaceaspectofruraldevelopmentwork.Inotherpartsoftheprojecttherearegovernmentcontributions,mostnotablyintheformoftrainingofcommunitygroupsbylocalgovernmentstaff.Butthesetraininginputsarepaidforbytheproject(intheformofmealsandtravellingallowancesand[check]).WhatappearstobemissingisanyformofcontractualagreementaboutthenatureofgovernmentcontributionsthatshouldmatchAMREFinputs. For example, in the form of additional staffing to the health centre facilities or to the schools. Thisexperiencecouldinformthedesignoftheremainingperiodoftheprojecttotheendof2010,andanyextensionofactivitiesthereafter.AgreementsaboutnewinputstobeprovidedbyAMREF,espe-ciallythosemostdesiredbylocalgovernment(e.g.physicalinfrastructure),shouldincludedetailsofthecontributions that government will also make. In the case of staffing commitments, the beginning of new infrastructure works should be dependent upon fulfilment of staffing commitments to previously com-pletedinfrastructurework
13 In terms of the costs of staff time and transport costs involved
●
●
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
Thick blue lines = financial transfers. Broken blue lines = information transfers (not including most of those between yellownodes(intermediariesbetweendonorsandrecipients))
Provisionoftraining
More than 50% of all the activities in the three year workplan for the KCPP are training activities. AMREF considerstheseasanessentialpartoftheproject,enablingthemanycommunitygroupsandgovern-mentservicesthatitisworkingwithtofunctionbetterthaninthepast.Withouttheseimprovementsthebenefits obtained from new physical infrastructure will be reduced. ManyofthetrainingactivitiesinvolvebothAMREFstaffandgovernmentstaffworkingtogether.Ide-allyAMREFstaffwouldbehelpingbuildthetrainingcapacitiesofthesegovernmentstaff.However,ifAMREFissimply“sub–contracting”governmentstafftoprovidetrainingthenthisrelationshipismorequestionable.InthatcaseitmightbearguedthattheGuardianshouldsimplyprovidepartofitsfundingdirecttolocalgovernment,and“cutoutthemiddleman”andtheirassociatedcosts.However,ifAMREFisinfacttryingtobuildstafftrainingcapacitiesthenweneedtoseesomereportingonthisaspectoftheirworkinfuturenarrativeprogressreports.Thatis,notjustdataonwhowastrained,butwhodidthetrainingandhowtheirtrainingcapacitieshavebeenimproved. In interviews with government official at the district and sub–county levels it was clear that budgets availablefortraining(andsupervision)wereverylimited.Thismeanstheprospectsforacontinuationoftraining activities on the scale introduced by AMREF are very small. Yet ongoing training will be needed, becauseofstaffturnoverinschoolsandhealthcentresandmembershipturnoverinthecommunitygroups. These considerations do not seem to have visibly influenced the design of the KCPP develop-ment strategy. There are however two ways in which it could:
Cutbackonthebreadthoftrainingactivitiesundereachcomponent,tofocusonthosewiththemospotentialtobecontinuedbygovernmentbodies,afterthecessationofAMREFinputsBuildincommitmentstomodestincreasesingovernmentfundedtrainingactivitiesduringthelifetimeoftheproject,aspartoftheagreementsproposedaboveongovernmentco–contributions.
Planning for the future: ThefollowingsuggestionsweremadetotheMTRconsultantregardingtherecom-mendationsthathadbeenmade(onpage7ofthedraftMTRreport)fortheone–yearextensionoftheproject.
TheSeptemberworkshopneedstoclearlyidentifywhatisexpectedtobeachievedbytheendof2011.Itisunlikelythatanydonorwouldagreetoafundingextensionwithoutclarityinthisarea.
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes �2
NotintermsofwhatinputsAMREFwilldeliver,butintermsofexpectedimprovementsinthefunctioningofdifferentgroupsandservices(e.g.VHTs,HCs,SMCs,PRAs,Schools,HealthCentres,WSCs,etc).Theseareoutcomesthatshouldleadtosomelongertermimpactsonpeople’slives Those changes will need to be clearly prioritised, otherwise it will be difficult to make an appropriate allocationofresources(orresourceswillbeallocatedaccordingtotheprioritiesofthoseholdingtheresources) The 2011 targets could be defined in relation to existing national targets or national averages Associated with this clarification of expectations, agreements need to be developed that will spell out not onlywhatAMREFwillprovide,butalsowhatcommunitieswillprovide,ANDwhatthegovernmentwillprovide.Multipleagreementsmaybeneeded,perhapscomponentbycomponent.Onegenericagree-mentwillprobablynotwork,becauseresponsibilitieswillbecometoogeneralisedandfuzzy.TheresultingplanshouldbepublicisedasaKatineCommunityPartnersplan,notanAMREFplan.Oneinwhichbothgovernmentpartnersandcommunitygroupsarecommittedtoandclaimastheirown.Therecommendations(page28)forthethirdyearactivitiesshouldconnecttothislongertermplan.Performance during this third year should be sufficient to give a donor confidence that a fourth year of fundingwillbeworthwhile.OnecriteriacouldbethattheSeptemberworkshopisabletodeliverthekindofresultsoutlinedabove,and That progress in 2010 meets a series of benchmarks identified during the September workshopThereisariskthatthecurrentdonorswillnotsupportafourthyearextension,ormaychangetheirmindbytheendof2010.Withthisinmind,theSeptemberworkshopshouldbedesignedsuchthatthepart-nersinvolvedcouldtakeallorpartoftheirdevelopedplanstootherdonors,toseekreplacementfundingfromthem(withtheinterestingchallenge—canyoubeabetterdonorthanG&B?)Thisisanadditionalreasonwhythe2011planmightbetsbemadeupofmultiplepartsIntheargumentabovemyassumptionhasbeenthatAMREFthinksthatafourthyearisnecessary,andthereforeifG&Bwillnotfunditthenfundingwillneedtobesoughtelsewhere.AnyplanstoclosedownAMREF’sinvolvementinprojectattheendof2010wouldundermineanyargumentfortheneedforex-tendedfundingfromG&B.TheycouldalsoundermineAMREF’sreputationamongstotherdevelopmentagenciesThedraftreportproposesthreecriteriaforselectingactivitiestobecontinued,whichcouldbeappliedin the September workshop: impact, sustainability, and what the community wants. Impact and sustain-abilitycriteriawillleadindifferentdirections(e.g.materialsupportversustraining).Thealternativeistofocusonthoseactivitiesthatgovernmentandcommunitiesaremostwillingtoco–investin,alongwithAMREFresources.
Assessingimpactonpeople’slives
InDecember2008CAREcontractedanindependentUgandanconsultanttocarryoutabaselinesurveyofhouseholds’socio–economicstatusinKatinesub–countyandacontrolgroupinKamudasub–county(232 households in all). Because of the simplicity of the method used to collect that data (known as the BasicNecessitiesSurvey)itwillberelativelyeasyandinexpensiveforCAREorAMREFtofundarepeatofthissurveyinlate2010(orlater).Thedatathatwascollectedinlate2008hasnotyetbeenfullyanalysed.NorhasitspotentialbeenrealisedforpubliclycommunicatinghowpeoplearelivinginKatine.Forexample,usingthesurveydataitispossibletoprovideagraphicdescriptionof(a)whatpeopleinKatinethoughtwerethebasisneces-sitiesthateveryoneshouldbeabletohaveandnothavetogowithout,and(b)whatinfacttheaveragehouseholdinthesampledgroupactuallypossessedinDecember2008.Ihaveofferedtocompletetheanalysis,probono.IhavealsoencouragedCAREtoensurethatmultiplecopiesofthesurveydataaremade(andstoredseparately)toensurethatthesurveyresultsarestillavailablein2010andbeyond14.
�.DFID“QualityatExit”checklist:AnassessmentoftheMTRReport(and the field work process lead-ingtothatreport)
14 At present the only digital and hard copies of the survey data are being held by the baseline survey consultant.
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
1 Isthereaclearrationaleforwhythestudyisbe-ingdone,whynowandwhoitisfor?
Partlyso.TherecouldbeamoreexplicitreferencebacktothethreepurposesoftheMTR,asstatedinthe1.2PurposeofthemidtermreviewsectionoftheTermsofReference. And to section 3. Expected outputs.
2 Doesthereportde-scribethescopeandcoverageoftheevalu-ation?Istherationaleoftheinterventionorpolicyclear?
Partlyso.ThebulletpointedlistinthescopesectionoftheToRsshouldbeincludedintheIntroductionsectionoftheMTR.However,theseareavailableinthefulltextoftheToRsinAnnex1.
Whiletheactivitiesandobjectivesoftheprojectarewelldocumentedtherationaleoftheprojectisnotclear.AMREF’sviewsonworkingwithpartners,providingmod-els,undertakingoperationalresearchandadvocacyallhaveaplacehere
3
Isthepolicy,develop-mentandinstitutionalcontextoftheinterven-tionclearlyassessed,includingpoliticalecon-omy,poverty,gender,environmentandrightsissues?
To some extent. There is a reference to the fit between the project activities and the PovertyEradicationActionPlan(PEAP)onpage14.Attentionhasbeengiventodatacollectedonnationaltargetsandaverages,relevanttoonecomponent(Educa-tion),butnotothers.In2008AMREFcommentedontheExternalEvaluators’AugustVisit report: Analysis of KCPP did not fully take into account the wider development contextofKatine,SorotidistrictandUganda.HoweverintheircommentonthedraftMTRtheyhavenothighlightedthisasanissue.
4 Istheevaluationframe-workestablishedandwasitappropriate,ensuringthatdiverseviewswereheard?
Anevaluationframeworkwasestablishedandused.TheIntroductiontotheMTRgivesaquickoverviewofthemethodsusedandtheevaluationissuesattendedto.Theresultsofthedifferentmethodsusedareclearlydocumentedinthereport.
Adiversityofviewshasbeendocumented,Differentcommunitygroupsandgovern-mentbodies,atdistrict,sub–county,parishandvillagelevelwereinterviewedandreportedon.
5
Wasthedatacollectedsufficiently disaggre-gatedtoenablediverseviews to be reflected; wasitcollectedinanappropriatemannerandwasinformationsufficiently triangu-lated?
Thereportseparatelydocumentstheviewofmanydifferentgovernmentbodiesandcommunitygroups.Viewswereobtainedthroughstructuredmeetings,householdsurveysandrandomwalks
Therewasnodis–aggregationofthehouseholdsurveydata
Therewassometriangulationofdatae.g.byrelatinghouseholdsurveyresponsestostaffdataoncoverageofeachvillagebyeachprojectactivity.Moreusemightbeexpectedofdataavailableinthenarrativereportsandbaselinesurveys
6
Doesthereportindicatethestakeholderscon-sulted,thecriteriafortheirselection,andthemethodsandreasonsforselectionofparticu-larstakeholders?
Annex2listsallgroupsthatweremet.Thedecisiontomeetcontrastingpairsofcommunitygroupshasbeenmadeclearonpage27,butnotthecriteriabehindthechoiceof“well”and“less–well”performinggroups.Theseareimportantbecausethe “success” criteria used may or may not fit well with the official objectives of the project.
7 HaveParisDeclara-tionPrinciplesbeenaddressedintheevalu-ation?
AlignmentwithgovernmentpolicywasmentionedviareferencestothePEAPandgovernmenttargetsforeachsector
HarmonisationeffortswithotherNGOshavenotbeendescribed/analysed.Infor-mationwascollectedandcouldbeused(e.g.onthedistrictlevelforumsforwaterandeducationactivities)
8 AresomeoftheDACevaluationcriteria1reflected in an appropri-ateway?
Tosomeextent.TheDAC+criteriawereusedtoinformthequestionsaskedduringinterviews, but the findings on each of these criteria are not easily accessible in the reportascurrentlystructured.RelevanceandeffectivenessofAMREFactivities,asseenbydifferentstakeholders,havebeenemphasisedthemost.Discussionofis-suesofimpact,sustainabilityandtransparencyarelessevident.Genderandequityissues have been analysed in the final version of the report.
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
9 Istheanalysis suffi-cientlyrobust?
Alltherecommendationsaresupportedbysomepriordiscussion.Thereisasig-nificant section of the report (pages 20–27) that are descriptive with little analysis of issuesarising(andanyrecommendationsthatcouldrelatetothoseissues).Thereneedstobesomeformofsummarizingorsynthesizinghere.Asnotedbelow,allre-spondents’ view of project benefits seem to be accepted at face value, and of equal value.Inpracticesomeviewswillbemoreimportantthanothers,bothtotheindi-vidualrespondentsandgiventhestrategyoftheproject
10 Arethefindingsvalid,balancedandad-equatelysupportedbyevidence?
The findings appear balanced, and have been accepted by AMREF, even though somearequitecriticalofAMREFpractices.TheachievementratingsinAnnex10havebeenmadeonthebasisofamixedsetofdataonoutputs,outcomesandim-pact, and in the absence of defined targets or comparators. They must therefore be regardedasimpressions.Theselimitationsneedtobeclearlystated
11 Aretherecommenda-tions sufficiently clear, targetedandpractical?
Yes. But some seem to assume some background knowledge about the issues involved.Anon–AMREFaudiencemightneedsomemorecontext/explanation.Some will need clarification even to the parties referred to, such as those regarding theneedforMoUsandRulesofEngagement
12 Arethelessons2clearlypresentedandappli-cableforwideruse?
Lessonslearnedhavenotbeenexplicitlydocumentsassuch.IntheircommentsonthedraftMTRreportAMREFLondonhavesincerequested“keylearningthatwillimpactwhatwecandodifferently”Tosomeextentthisrequestiscoveredbythelistofrecommendations,butthesearenoteasilyreadasgeneralisationsthatmightberelevanttootherAMREFproject
13 Aretheevaluationresults sufficiently inde-pendentandimpartial,(fromtheevidenceavailable)? 3
Thereportappearsindependentandimpartial.However,perhapssomeofthedatathathasbeencollectedneedstobeviewedmorecritically.Allrespondents’viewof project benefits seem to be accepted at face value. VSLA have been judged as highlysuccessful(accordingtomemberviews),butsomeharddatae.g.onmem-bershipturnoveringroups,wouldbemorepersuasivestill.Trainingisreportedasappreciatedbymany,butthereisnoreferencetoanytechnicalassessmentsoftrainingprogramsthathavebeenprovided.
14 Hastheevaluationprocessandreportadequatelyaddressedtheinformationneedsofthecommissioningbodyandotherusers;anddoesitaddressthequestionsintheTOR?
FeedbackonthedraftreportfromAMREFLondonwaspositive,withrequestsforfurther information on:
keylearningthatwillimpactwhatwecandodifferentlywhyreportsectionswereorganisedaccordingtoparishandgovernancelevelmorepointersona4thyearandwhatweneedtoconsiderfortheprojecttobesustainablePerformancemeasurementagainsteachcomponent(usingDACcriteria)Integrationofprojectactivities,acrosscomponents
(RD)LookingattheToRs,thereareanumberofaspectsoftheScopeofworknotyetaddressed(4of8).Moreinformationcouldbeprovidedand/orreasonsgivenfornot covering these issues (e.g. in the Introduction):
Changestocommunityandgovernmentstructuresintermsoftheircapacitiesandtheimpactthishasonthedeliveryoftheprojectandpeople’slivesi.e.areweseeingamoreactivecommunityorpolicychange?(consideringsustainabilityandeffectiveness)[Notaddressed] The contribution of: Partners activities e.g. UWESO, FARM–Africa, CARE (con-sidering relevance, effectiveness and efficiency3) Role of other NGOs operating inKatine,consideringtowhatextentthepartnershipsandcollaborationshavehinderedorhelpedtowardsachievingtheendgoal[Partlyaddressed]Reviewandidentifysustainabilitymechanisms,whatneedstohappenfrommidwayuntiltheendoftheprojectandaftertheprojectlifetimetoensuresustain-abilityi.e.replicationofthemodel/scaleupandanexplorationofopportunitiestosupportthat.[Notaddressed] Risks and assumptions: consider assumptions in initial design of project, what hasbeenlearnttoinformfutureimplementation.[Notaddressed]
●●●
●●
●
●
●
●
Mid–Term Review Katine Community Partnerships Project, July 2009 — Annexes ��
15 Havestakeholdersincountriesandotherusers been sufficiently engagedintheevalua-tionprocess4;andhascommunicationbeensufficiently transparent?
Largelyso.ConsultationsontheToRstookplacewithinAMREF,andwiththeGuardian,CARE,FarmAfricaandBarclays.TheSteeringCommitteedidnotappeartobeinvolvedinthedevelopmentoftheToRs.
AMREF Katine staff participated in all field visits, meetings and interviews. A plan-ning workshop was held with AMREF Katine staff on the final day of the fieldwork
A debriefing of the results of the MTR took place in Kampala, and will also take place inLondon.Astakeholdersmeetingisscheduledformid–September,anditisexpect-ed the MTR results will be discussed there. The finalised MTR will be available on the Guardianwebsite,andshouldbeprovidedtotheSteeringCommitteeinSoroti.
16 IstheExecutiveSum-maryclear,balancedandofappropriatelength5;anddoesitsufficiently reflect the findings and tone of the mainreport?AretheappropriateAnnexesavailable and of suffi-cientquality?
AnExecutiveSummaryhasbeenprovided,ofappropriatelength.Thesequenceoffindings could be improved, with method descriptions in one place (e.g. paras 1, 3, 5)andoverallassessmentsinanotherplace(e.g.paras4,8).Thedescriptionoftheachievementratingsneedtobeassociatedwithacaveat,relatingtounclearobjec-tivesandpoordata,documentedinthereport.Somestatementsareabitskeletal,and may leave the reader puzzled e.g. paras 8, 13
A list of Recommendations is also provided. These would benefit by references to specific sections of the main text where they are discussed in detail e.g. See page…TheAnnexesprovidesubstantialsupplementaryinformation
(Footnotes)� Relevance,effectiveness,efficiency,impact,sustainabilityplustheadditional�criteriaofcoverage,coherenceandcoordination.2 Note: Recommendations are actionable proposals and lessons learned are generalisations of conclusions applicable for wider use. 3 It is recognised that the QA Assessor may not be able to make a valid judgment, because of lack of evidence; in which case, there should
be an/a response.� Theevaluationapproachshouldincludelearningandparticipationopportunities(e.g.workshops,learninggroups,debriefing,participa-
tioninfieldvisits)toensurekeystakeholdersarefullyintegratedintotheevaluationlearningprocess.� Uptofourpages.
DesignedbyKenSwannwww.kswann.com