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!