learning partner presentation february 2009 good governance team - ghana engineers without borders
TRANSCRIPT
Learning Partner Presentation
February 2009
Good Governance Team - Ghana
Engineers Without Borders
Your Learning PartnerNick Jimenez – LTOV 2008 – Saboba, Ghana
OBJECTIVES
By the end of this presentation you should know the following:
My work• Dorothy level (situation before)• Local government level (District Assembly)• Dorothy level (situation after)
The good governance team• Our strategy
Dorothy
• Dorothy needs access to basic infrastructure to pull herself out of the cycle of poverty
• Though infrastructure is surely not the only aspect in development, it is indeed a crucial stepping stone
• We look at the major 4
1. POTABLE WATER
3. ROADS
2. HEALTH CARE
4. EDUCATION
1. POTABLE WATERWithout access to potable water, Dorothy stands to fall victim to easily avoidable water borne diseases•Diarrhea•Bilharzia•Typhoid•Guinea worm•Etc.
Women of Nalindo
Child’s leg in Nalindo after guinea worm
4. EDUCATION
• Education is indisputably an essential public service and human right.
• Lack of access to education severely limits Dorothy’s opportunities.
Kpasani children fetching water
Informal school building
CONTEXT
• The District Assembly (DA) is the local government body responsible for developing infrastructure in rural Ghana
• Donors have begun to work through the DAs to build infrastructure
• Thus, for infrastructure development, the DA is the local authority for the planning and implementation of physical projects
THE PROBLEM
No consistent way of selecting
communities for infrastructure
Decisions are made on best guesses, and can be
subject to political interference (corruption)
Processes that are in place lack the
political will to be followed
Planners lack the necessary information
to guide even development
Planners lack necessary tools to analyze large
amounts of data, and thus make transparent decisions
Communities are in the dark with how they receive projects, and thus limited in their ability to participate in development
PROBLEM
EFFECTS
CAUSES
EFFECTS“They told us to get a bank account and collect 200GH¢. We did that and haven’t received a borehole. That was in 2005!”
-Men from Nalindo
Communities that need infrastructure most are left waiting because of unfair distribution of resources from the government
MY WORK - OBJECTIVES
Centers around the planning surrounding infrastructure Formalizing that siting process for rural
infrastructure
Addressing each cause individually• Building tools with government staff• Getting decision makers to own and enforce the formal
siting process• Getting the required information (field realities) to guide
that siting process
1. BUILDING TOOLS . . . HOWCalling together various stakeholders to design criteria needed to assess communities for infrastructure
Designing a scoring methodology so that communities can be objectively ranked for infrastructure
Getting community opinion on what the criteria should be.
Having communities decide what they can do to show ownership and commitment before the government provides the infrastructure
1. BUILDING TOOLS . . . HOWBuilding necessary skills with government staff to design and manipulate these data analysis tools
Using the tool creation as an opportunity for learning and developing skills
Essentially creating a dynamic planning tool, that automatically generates a prioritized list of communities, based on real-time data from the field
Picture of douglas and me working at the computer
2. POLITICAL WILL . . . HOWStructure of the DA
District Education Director
District Health
Director
District Agriculture
Director
Works Department - Engineer
Feeder
Roads
District Chief Executive
(DCE)
District Coordinating
Director (DCD)
District Planning
Officer (DPO)
Deputy District
Coordinating Director
CORE DECISION MAKING POWER
TOP OFFICERS
DEPTARTMENTS
2. POLITICAL WILL . . . HOW
• Decision makers at the DA to drive this initiative. – Making evidence based decisions easier than
current practices (step 1 above)– Empowering the decision makers to be able
to guide the entire tool development process– Training the decision makers to improve their
planning capabilities
1 & 2 COMBINED
TOP OFFICERS - DECISION MAKERS
DEPARTMENTS – KNOWLEDGEABLE
FIELD STAFF
MUTUALLY RE-ENFORCING BEHAVIOUR CHANGE
Top officers requesting
evidence to site infrastructure
Dept. having sound, rigorous analysis of
field realities to guide decisions
3. GETTING FIELD REAILITIES . . . HOW
Conducted a district-wide survey
1. Gathering crucial data for planning and siting infrastructure (getting Dorothy’s voice heard)
2. Educating communities on how the government makes its decisions (increasing transparency)
3. Educating communities on what steps they can do to advocate needs (empowering Dorothy)
3. GETTING FIELD REAILITIES . . . HOW
THE SOLUTION
No consistent way of selecting
communities for infrastructure
Decisions are made on best guesses, and can be
subject to political interference (corruption)
Processes that are in place lack the
political will to be followed
Planners lack the necessary information
to guide even development
Planners lack necessary tools to analyze large
amounts of data, and thus make transparent decisions
Communities are in the dark with how they receive projects, and thus limited in their ability to participate in development
PROBLEM
EFFECTS
CAUSES
A formal transparent siting process based on field
realities is followed
Planners have developed their own custom tools to manage vast amounts of
data and prioritize communities
The leaders of the government are
championing formal processes
for siting infrastructure
Planners contain an up-to-date accurate
picture of the district
Decisions are made based on field realities and
corruption is minimized
Communities know how the government makes decisions, and
knows where they stand on the prioritized list. Also they know how to advocate their needs and better
their chances at selection
EFFECTS
• November 2008 – 40 communities were selected for World Vision borehole projects in a transparent manner using the WATSAN ranking tool.
• Communities will start owning their development and showing commitment to the government in order to access public services
QUESTIONS?
Good Governance Team – August 2008
NICK LOUISJEN
ROBIN
KRISTYCOURTNEY
Good Governance Team - Present
Nick – DPCU, Saboba
Jen - RPCU
Dan – DPCUCentral Gonja
Louis Dorval – Team Lead
Mary - RPCU
Communities
Government of Ghana
National Development Planning Commission
Regional Planning and Coordinating Unit
(RPCU)
Development Partners
District Planning and Coordinating Unit
(DPCU)
Development Partners
Community Organizations, Private
Contractors, local NGOs
MORE CONTEXT
Activity Hub
MORE CONTEXT
TEAM STRATEGY
1. Do all of my work down at the district level
2. Build the regional
That’s the VERY brief explanation!