memory for the future1 · 2015. 2. 25. · imtp integrated management training programme lf logical...

RCB as memory for the future

RCB as implemented

RCB as planned

Memory for the future1

The stories that shaped the Regional Capacity Building (RCB) Project for Rwanda,

Burundi, South Sudan and South Africa

“We have a common history as we are lacking in skills as post-conflict countries. All those commonalities keep us together as we each have something to learn from the

other countries.

We also have a common goal – serving people.”

1 By Professor Anne Mc Lennan ([email protected]) and Mr Salim Latib ([email protected]), Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, November 2013

mailto:[email protected]

1 | p a g e c a s e | RCB

Table of Contents

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 2 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................... 3

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 4 THE POST CONFLICT PROJECT CONTEXT .............................................................................................................. 5 THE RCB PROJECT AS PLANNED ........................................................................................................................ 6 THE PROJECT PARTNERS .................................................................................................................................. 9

PALAMA, now the National School of Government (NSG) ................................................................... 9 CIDA now integrated into the new Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development ............. 9 Rwanda Institute of Administration and Management (RIAM), now the Rwandan Management Institute (RMI) ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Ecole National d’Administration (ENA) .............................................................................................. 10 Capacity Building Unit (CBU), now the Human Resource Development (HRD) Directorate............... 10

THE RCB PROJECT AS IMPLEMENTED ............................................................................................................... 10 2. THE COOPERATION FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................... 13

AS IT HAPPENED .......................................................................................................................................... 13 Initiation of the project ...................................................................................................................... 14 Scoping and funding secured ............................................................................................................. 14 Cooperation framework and PIP agreed ........................................................................................... 15 Leadership and project coordination changes ................................................................................... 19 Regional office established ................................................................................................................ 20

LESSONS FROM THE STORY OF COOPERATION .................................................................................................... 21 Common experience doesn’t mean similar capability or needs ......................................................... 21 Conduct institutional feasibility studies ............................................................................................. 22 Triangular accountability requires capability, commitment and flexibility ....................................... 22 Consistent operational coordination is critical for implementation .................................................. 23 Regional office must have institutional and decision making capability ........................................... 24

3. MDI ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................. 25 AS IT HAPPENED .......................................................................................................................................... 25

Setting up governance and coordination processes .......................................................................... 26 Managing procedures, finance and M&E .......................................................................................... 27 Building systems and infrastructure .................................................................................................. 28 Developing policy and manuals ......................................................................................................... 30

LESSONS FROM THE STORY OF MDI ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................... 31 Cooperative governance builds support networks and manages diversity ....................................... 31 Project management continuity key to ensuring value ..................................................................... 32 Appropriate delegations improve implementation capacity ............................................................. 32 Practical and usable systems enhance delivery ................................................................................. 33

4. LEARNING AND TRAINING ..................................................................................................................... 34 AS IT HAPPENED .......................................................................................................................................... 34

The learning cycle .............................................................................................................................. 34 Needs analysis and learning methodology ........................................................................................ 35 Curriculum localisation ...................................................................................................................... 36 Training of Trainers (ToTs) ................................................................................................................. 37 Piloting and rollout ............................................................................................................................ 38

LESSONS FROM THE LEARNING AND TRAINING STORY ......................................................................................... 40 Common language and approach to training delivery ...................................................................... 40 Systematically responding to needs through methodological tools .................................................. 40 Curriculum adaption for localisation ................................................................................................. 41 Training confidence through exposure .............................................................................................. 42 Rapid delivery and making a difference ............................................................................................. 43


5. MEMORY FOR THE FUTURE ................................................................................................................... 45 LESSONS FOR SUCCESS .................................................................................................................................. 46

Understand the needs and contexts of partners ................................................................................ 46 Build equal partnerships .................................................................................................................... 46 Build stable project management capability ..................................................................................... 47 Use local knowledge and solutions .................................................................................................... 47 Communicate effectively ................................................................................................................... 47 Try to secure leadership continuity .................................................................................................... 48

SUSTAINING THE INITIATIVE ........................................................................................................................... 48 Regionalising the project ................................................................................................................... 48 Governance, management and systems ............................................................................................ 49 Learning and training ........................................................................................................................ 49 Working with what is possible ........................................................................................................... 49

6. REFERENCES AND RESEARCH MATERIAL ................................................................................................ 50

List of Figures and Tables

FIGURE 1: RCB PROJECT AS PLANNED .................................................................................................................... 7 TABLE 1: PLANNED PROJECT ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................ 8 FIGURE 2: RCB PROJECT AS IMPLEMENTED ......................................................................................................... 11 TABLE 2: INDICATIVE ACTUAL PROJECT ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 11 FIGURE 3: THE COOPERATION FRAMEWORK ....................................................................................................... 14 TABLE 3: PROJECT MEETINGS ............................................................................................................................... 17 FIGURE 4: MDI ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................. 25 TABLE 4: PROJECT UNDER SPENDING................................................................................................................... 28 FIGURE 5: LEARNING AND TRAINING ................................................................................................................... 34 FIGURE 6: THE COMPREHENSIVE LEARNING CYCLE APPROACH .......................................................................... 35 TABLE 5: TRAINING OF TRAINERS FOR DELIVERY OF QUALITY TRAINING. ........................................................... 38 TABLE 6: TOT IN KHAEDU AND IMTP .................................................................................................................... 39 TABLE 7: EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT AND PILOT TRAINING IN KHAEDU ............................................................. 39 TABLE 8: IMTP AND KHAEDU ROLL-OUT .............................................................................................................. 39


Abbreviations and Acronyms

AMDIN African Management Development Institutions Network

APDev African Platform for Development Effectiveness

AU African Union

CAD Canadian dollars

CBU Capacity Building Unit

CDSF Capacity Development Strategic Framework

CIDA Canadian International Development Agency

DFID Department for International Development

DIRCO Department of International Relations and Cooperation

DPSA Department of Public Service and Administration

EDPRS Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy

ECA Economic Commission for Africa

EDP Executive Development Programme

ENA Ecole National d’Administration

FNL Front National de Libération

GONU Government of National Unity

GOSS Government of South Sudan

HDI Human Development Index

HIV/AIDS Human Immune Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

HRD Human Resource Development Directorate

IMTP Integrated Management Training Programme

LF Logical Framework

LM Logic Model

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MDG Millennium Development Goal

MDI Management Development Institute

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

N-S North-South

ODA Official Development Assistance

OVI Objectively Verifiable Indicators

PALAMA Public Administration, Leadership and Management Academy

PIP Project Implementation Plan

PMU Project Management Unit

PSC Project Steering Committee

RCB Regional Capacity Building

RIAM Rwanda Institute for Administration and Management

RMI Rwanda Management Institute

SAMDI South African Management Development Institute

S-S South-South

TNA Training Needs Assessment

TOR Terms of Reference

ToT Training of Trainers

UN United Nations

WB World Bank

ZAR South African Rands


1. Introduction

Capacity development is … a process of enabling individuals, groups, organizations, institutions, and societies to sustainably define, articulate, engage, and actualize their vision or developmental goals building on their own resources. (The 2010 African Union (AU) / New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) Capacity Development Strategic Framework)

The Regional Capacity Building (RCB) project was a South-South partnership project initiated by the Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy (PALAMA)2 in South Africa with funding from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)3. The project attempted to pioneer an innovative method of capacity development in post-conflict countries that combined ‘learning by doing’, peer support, institution building and training. The project aim was to build the capacity of the management development institutes (MDIs) of Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan in order to improve public service practice and service delivery in the countries. The project was a trilateral collaboration with a Southern implementing agent that attempted to build an equal partnership and local leadership on the programme development and implementation side. The project was premised on a conception of capacity building that extends beyond the traditional reliance on training and the provision of technical support to the development of local institutions (the MDIs) and regional knowledge (about building public service capacity in post-conflict contexts). This case documents the stories of the partner institutions, and the project process, focusing on the cooperation framework, MDI organisational development, and learning and training. The project offers lessons on the role of capacity development as a mechanism to enhance development effectiveness in each of these areas. While each section provides a description of the project intention and what took place, the primary focus is to capture the perspectives and voices of those involved in implementing the project so as to identify the lessons, both positive and negative, that might be learned and used in future collaborations. The primary objective is to capture learning from experience, rather than to provide an accurate account of project delivery. This more formal account is provided in five years of project documentation which includes annual reports, mid-term reviews, meeting minutes and workshop notes. The narrative is shaped by the series of interviews conducted with role players active within the project4. The case builds on a previous case documenting the first three years of the project which was developed at part of an initiative led by New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and the African Platform for Development Effectiveness (APDev) as part of a process of South-South (S-S) knowledge exchange drawing from eight African case studies5. These cases were intended to contribute to the understanding of how S-S knowledge exchange could work best by providing policy guidance and good practices at the High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan, Korea in December 2011. The broad conclusion of the research, which focused on development effectiveness, was that capacity development will only be embedded once institutionalised in local working practises and strategies. The case notes, in particular, that the challenge is to define not only the training or technical programmes required, but the

2 At the time of initiation, PALAMA was the South African Management Development Institute (SAMDI). It became PALAMA in 2008. 3 CIDA was integrated into the new Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development in June 2013. 4 The case authors did a week of research and interviews in the three countries in the period 29 September to 6 October 2013. This included visits to each of the institutions and a series of interviews with project managers, MDI heads, training recipients and stakeholders. 5 See http://www.africa-platform.org/events/african-case-study-development for details.

http://www.africa-platform.org/events/african-case-study-development


structures, systems, practices, codes and processes that sustain capacity building initiatives (see Mc Lennan, 2011). The stories which emerge from this updated exploration of learning from the RCB project suggest that there are a number of areas that need to be considered to ensure project institutionalisation and sustainability. It is important to note that this is not an evaluation, but an uncovering of lessons for the future. It explores the RCB as planned, and as implemented, through the stories and experiences of participants and beneficiaries. The purpose of the case is to identify lessons for the future by examining how challenges become learning opportunities and, sometimes, solutions to complex problems. In order to do this, a combination of process reflection and narrative enquiry was undertaken to expose the voices and whispers that shape process, actions and reactions. Process reflection documents the development of the project as planned and implemented. Its purpose is to describe how the process unfolded. The introduction to each section in this case story does exactly this, describe what was planned, who was involved, what problems were experienced and what happened. Narrative enquiry examines experiences as expressed in the lived and told stories of individuals or institutions. It involves a process of telling stories in order to understand the context and analyse the project process. During the story telling process, stories are organised into an analytical structure, to identify lessons to be learned. In this memory for the future, the stories focused on i) the cooperation framework; ii) MDI governance, systems and management; and iii) curriculum, learning and training. These are all explored from the vantage of sustainability within an understanding that changing country and institutional contexts impact on implementation and disrupt process. Experience suggests that building partnerships takes time and effort, but the social capital developed is critical for sustainability.

The post conflict project context

The narrative and related achievements and challenges that characterise the life of the project are framed by the broader context within which the project was initiated. The project involved four diverse countries (Burundi, Rwanda, South Africa and South Sudan) bound by a common thread of having overcome deep conflicts that necessitate, in very different ways, the reconstruction of state institutions and the institutionalisation of active initiatives for enhancing state capacity. Appreciating this common thread is fundamental for an understanding of what has or has not unfolded in the life of the initiative. All four of the partner countries had followed varying paths in reconstructing state institutions. At project initiation, Rwanda and South Africa had been stable for a longer than Burundi and South Sudan, but all were at risk of reverting to conflict. All of the countries recognise that sustaining peace and stability depends on, amongst others, the capacities of governments to deliver appropriate levels of service, equitably. The risk of non-delivery by the state defines the operating parameters of the project and its raison d’etre – to contribute to public service reform. All interviewed suggested that the state and society are more likely to remain stable with better skilled public service managers and improved delivery of public services. Of the countries, South Sudan (previously Southern Sudan) is the most fragile, having only become an independent country on 9 July 2011. A Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed after two protracted civil wars in 2005 and an autonomous Government of Southern Sudan was formed. In 2010, the people of Southern Sudan held national elections and a referendum on secession took place in 2011. As a result of the decades of conflict, millions of the South Sudanese live in refugee camps and scattered around the world. Like all post-conflict countries, South Sudan faces the challenging task of protecting independence as well as facilitating development with extremely limited resources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Peace_Agreementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Government_of_Southern_Sudanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Government_of_Southern_Sudan


Members of the founding team: Rwanda, South Africa and South

Sudan.

Rwanda is the most advanced of the three East African partners in terms of post-conflict reconstruction. Peace and stability is well established, and Rwanda has been successful in overcoming the genocide of 1994, by bringing the major culprits to justice, and adopting a path of national reconstruction. Despite an increase in poverty, the rebuilding process has led to improvements in economic outcomes and social indicators and millions of refugees have been repatriated. The government is addressing corruption and has introduced a decentralisation programme to increase transparency and accountability at local levels. Despite the Arusha Peace Accord in 2000, politically motivated violence occurs intermittently in Burundi, even though much has been achieved since the cease-fire agreements in 2003 and the transformation of the last armed group, the Front National de Libération (FNL) into a legitimate political party in 2009. The major opposition party, the FNL, returned underground once more in 2010. Burundi is host to more than half a million returnees, internally displaced persons and ex-combatants. Reintegration and security is challenged by poverty, new institutions and limited capacity. South Africa is also a post-conflict country having held its first democratic elections in 1994. It has made a largely successful transition to a stable, multi-party democracy, supported by a growing economy. The nature of the negotiated transition has made South Africa a role model in terms of democratic governance, but human security in relation to crime and poverty remains a challenge. South Africa is also one of the key leaders in the African Union (AU) and NEPAD initiative, and uses its political voice to promote African concerns. Despite its many successes, South Africa still faces socio-economic challenges including unemployment, poverty and inequality. Despite their different contextual realities, all the countries face similar challenges of sustaining stability, building social cohesion, developing democratic institutions and most importantly, securing better lives for their citizens. This requires building effective public service capacity to deliver services, improve social conditions and contribute to development. The project design attempts to support the implementation of national development and poverty reduction strategies by building public service capacity. South Africa has recently approved Vision 2030 with its linked National Development Plan (NPC, 2012). Rwanda has an Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy which is consistent with its Vision 2020 National Development Strategy. Burundi adopted a Priority Action Programme for the implementation of its poverty reduction strategy. While South Sudan does not yet have a Poverty Reduction Strategy, the question of an effective and efficient public service, to improve public service delivery, is high on the agenda.

The RCB project as planned

In response to the need to build state capacity for development, the Regional Capacity Building Project for post-conflict countries was initiated as a five year capacity building programme funded by CIDA (CAD 10, 5 million or ZAR 69, 968, 682) with the PALAMA as the implementing agency. PALAMA also operated as a key driver for the initiation of the project as part of its overall mandate to support South African foreign policy by working with post-conflict countries. In this regard, PALAMA responded to a call for proposals from CIDA South Africa. The overall goal of the RCB Project, as initially planned, was to enhance South Africa’s contribution to Africa’s reconstruction through regional


•Setting up field office, baseline and curriculum

design

Year One

•Curriculum and training system development

Year 2 •Technical support

and training delivery for MDIs

Year 3

•Massification of training to public

service in countries

Year 4 •Institutionalisation

within MDIs, evaluation and

closure

Year 5

capacity building programmes that increase the capacity of the public service in post-conflict countries. The more direct purpose was to improve the management and leadership capability of the public service through training and development and institution building in the three countries emerging from conflict. The overall expected impact was improved governance and better service delivery in the targeted countries (and South Africa) by achieving the following outcomes:

Strengthened institutional capacity of PALAMA, and increased capacity within PALAMA to engage in regional capacity building programmes. This outcome was removed when the Logic Model (LM) was introduced in 2010.

Improved curriculum development and training capacity within partner MDIs.

Improved management and leadership capabilities across government departments in Rwanda, Burundi and Southern Sudan.

The initial plan for the project as documented in the project proposal and subsequent agreements was to develop a work programme which began with planning and setting up in year one and concluded with evaluations in year five (see Figure 1). The first year would be used to set up a field office in Rwanda, as well as conduct baseline studies and needs analyses to guide curriculum design. Year two would focus on training delivery systems development and curriculum. Years three and four would be primarily about delivery, focusing on MDI capacity and then rolling out to the broader public service in each of the countries.

Figure 1: RCB project as planned

The approved Logic Model of November 2010 increases the number of intermediate outcomes to include a stronger focus on building the capacity and outputs of the MDIs by:

Improving MDI organisational performance;

Improving MDI regional and in-country collaboration;

Increasing provision of MDI quality-assured training; and

Increasing utilisation of integrated management practice in the work place (public service) The direct intended beneficiaries of the project were the MDIs and a professional cadre of public servants in Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan who will improve their knowledge and improve their skills in areas such as project management, financial management, human resource management, monitoring and evaluation (M&E). The ultimate beneficiaries would be citizens who receive better services as a consequence of a more appropriately capacitated public service. These were ambitious objectives to be achieved through the development of a curriculum framework that links training to service delivery priorities. The project design incorporates innovative approaches and methodologies which foster mutual learning and collaborative engagement.


The project was designed on the basis of key principles which would define project implementation, curriculum design and training. The principles include:

Participation: The design of the project attempts to ensure that the partners have equal access to, and participate in, planning and implementation decisions. Each institution should be enabled through participation to control decision making, project implementation and resource flows.

Comprehensive learning approach: The comprehensive learning approach builds institutional capacity to manage the training and development cycle, from curriculum design and development, to training of trainers, roll-out of programmes and post-course support.

Learning by doing: Each and every activity of the project was designed as a capacity building experience for the project partners. In this way, the partners were empowered to undertake these same tasks in other contexts. For example, Burundi did training needs analyses at national and local levels, based on the skills developed in the project.

Indigenisation: This principle attempted to ensure that all project interventions take country strategies, policies, stakeholders and legislative frameworks into account in recognition of the diversity of public sector and country contexts. In addition, it emphasises the use and development local expertise as far as possible.

Gender equity: The focus on gender equity reflects Canada and South Africa’s common commitment to work towards gender equality. This principle is also recognised by a number of regional and international institutions including the United Nations (UN), the African Union (AU), the African Centre for Gender and Social Development, and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA).

The project time line and anticipated activities, as outlined in the founding project documents, are reflected as general activities in Table 1. Table 1: Planned Project Activities

Period General Activity

Year One 2008

Finalise consultations and agreements with stakeholders and partners Setting-up and staffing of East African Field Office Setting-up of internal project management structures Strengthening SAMDI capacity to undertake regional capacity building Designing and undertaking of baseline studies (including PS frameworks) Undertaking detailed training needs assessments Undertaking curriculum development for initial courses Providing technical support and staff development to MDIs/Ministries

Year Two 2009

Continued strengthening of PALAMA capacity Continued baseline studies in additional countries Continued training needs assessments in additional countries Undertaking curriculum development for more courses and countries Translation and production of training materials Conducting of MDI systems development activity Continued technical support and staff development to MDIs Undertaking the upgrading of training materials and equipment Training of local trainers and start training of senior and middle managers

Year Three 2010

Continued MDI systems development activity Continued upgrading of training materials and equipment in next countries Continued technical support and staff development to MDIs Continued training of senior and middle managers, including by local trainers Conducting mid-term review

Year Four Continued MDI systems development activity


Period General Activity

2011 Continued technical support and staff development to MDIs Continued training of managers, increasing the proportion trained by local trainers

Year Five 2012

Completion of MDI systems development activity Continued development of MDI staff Continued training of senior and middle managers, with onus shifting largely to local trainers Completion of summative evaluation and project close-out

The project partners

The project comprised a number of different institutional partners and collaboration modalities. The primary relationships and institutions are the MDIs of Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan that were involved in the active delivery of the project. PALAMA played a role as the implementing agency and CIDA as the funder of the programme. During the period of the project, a number of the institutions experienced name changes. These new names are reflected in the partner descriptions but the older names are used as they are consistent with the project period.

PALAMA, now the National School of Government (NSG)

PALAMA, formerly SAMDI, is the public service academy of the South African government, mandated to develop a skilled and capable public service management cadre. SAMDI was formed by the post-1994 democratic government in the Department of Public Service and Administration to train and reorient the post-apartheid public service. SAMDI was restructured as PALAMA in 2008 to provide professional leadership and management programmes that inculcate the attributes, values and service culture that support the implementation of the government’s developmental agenda. PALAMA has been under-going a process of further transformation into a fully-fledged National School of Government with on-board training and research capacity which was officially launched on 21 October 2013. As an institution engaged in public service training and development, PALAMA has accumulated a wide range of experience in the management and implementation of development assistance programmes.

CIDA now integrated into the new Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development

CIDA has been Canada's lead agency for international development efforts since 1968. It was merged into a new Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development in June 2013. The intention behind this shift is to retain CIDA’s poverty-alleviation mandate, but ensure that it is increasingly integrated with foreign policy and trade objectives. CIDA supported the RCB Project and strengthened its partnership with the South African Government and reinforced its commitment to regional cooperation in Africa. Canada is a signatory to the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, and has developed its own Aid Effectiveness Agenda based on a strong commitment to principles like alignment and local ownership. Canada’s support for the RCB project promotes African leadership in resolving African challenges, a key component of NEPAD, and in line with the G8’s Heiligendamm Declaration on Growth and Responsibility in Africa. Furthermore, the capacity developed would enhance Canada’s efforts to assist Africa in achieving the MDGs and have positive spin-off effects for CIDA’s geographic programmes and projects in these countries.

Rwanda Institute of Administration and Management (RIAM), now the Rwandan Management Institute (RMI)

RIAM was the most well-established of the three East African partners at the start of the project. It was launched in 2001, but like SAMDI, was preceded by an earlier institution established by Belgium. RIAM is an autonomous public service institution and its human resources and financial management systems are governed by public service legislation and


Case building workshop - 2009

regulations. While RIAM has the necessary physical infrastructure, including ICT and training equipment, this is generally not deemed adequate for its mandate. RIAM’s programme offerings are divided into 6 main categories, which include induction, bridging the skills gap, executive programme and training for retrenched local government public servants. The shift to become the RMI is accompanied by a requirement for the institution to be self-sustaining and generate funding through cost-recovery as well as government funding. The institution is in the process of establishing itself under its revised mandate.

Ecole National d’Admin istration (ENA)

ENA is a relatively new public service training institution in its current form, having been established by Decree No 100/235 on 30 August 2007, which disestablished the old Centre for Professionalization and Training. ENA is charged to deliver two types of training - continuous professional development for senior managers and public servants, and specialised training leading to formal qualifications. Given this mandate, the ENA staff complement is relatively highly qualified and experienced. Even though ENA is a relatively new institution, it is stable and productive. ENA has limited but adequate physical resources at its office in Bujumbura, with offices, training rooms, a library, a computer laboratory, a conference room and a cafeteria, though most of these are in need of upgrading and modernisation.

Capacity Building Unit (CBU), now the Human Resource Development (HRD) Directorate

HRD was preceded in the project by the Capacity Building Unit (CBU). HRD is not a formally established MDI as yet, but functions as one of the five directorates of the Ministry of Labour, Public Service and Human Resource Development of the government of South Sudan. It came into existence, as the CBU, along with the rest of the Ministry in 2006, charged with the mandate for training and capacity building across the public service. As part of a government ministry, the CBU had no operational autonomy and operated within the same framework as the rest of the public service. The CBU was renamed as HRD in 2010 and offered its first programmes in 2011. Its primary role is to fiancé, facilitate and coordinate the delivery of training programmes offered by a range of training partners. HRD works within this mandate and is focused on developing a comprehensive public service training strategy. In 2013, HRD has a Training Centre (built by the African Development Bank) and is in the process of establishing an MDI with the assistance of the World Bank.

The RCB project as implemented

As is always the case with long term projects, implementation doesn’t always follow the plan. In the rollout of the project, there were a number of delays caused by changing leadership and priorities in the various MDIs. The project as implemented can be divided into four distinct delivery phases (Figure 2). These phases provide the frame of the project process, as it has unfolded, rather than as designed. The Project Implementation Plan (PIP) signed by all parties on 31 March 2008, comprised a number of logical frameworks which mapped the expected activities over a five year period. These were also included in the bilateral agreements with each of the institutions. These were amended with time, most notably in 2010, to accommodate revised governance and reporting procedures. In general, the project did not follow its allocated road map, and in practice comprised a number of activities at project initiation and project end with a lull between 2010 and 2011. Much of the planned activity takes place between 2011 and 2013 as a result. The initial excitement that unfolded when the project design was presented is captured by one stakeholder as follows:


I remember when we went to sign the project document in Centurion in 2008; there was a delegation from all the countries, from Burundi, Rwanda, South Sudan and SAMDI. We had a good meeting and when the project started, we expected that it would be delivered faster than has been the case.

Figure 2: RCB project as implemented

Although the general trajectory of delivery was largely maintained, MDIs report delays after the initial momentum of establishing the baselines for each of the countries. Broad activities are captured in Table 2 to illustrate the implementation trajectory. Table 2 shows that the project evolved prior to the establishment of the funding partnership with CIDA. The initial period of buy-in and conceptualisation was followed by activities focused on the formalisation of the project and the development of a baseline understanding of the country and MDI capacity challenges. Finally, and more slowly, the focus shifted towards building the delivery capabilities of MDIs and actual rollout of training within each of the countries. Table 2: Indicative Actual Project Activities

Joint cooperation plans as a result of bilateral meetings (2006).

20

07

/8 -

Bu

y-in

an

d

con

cep

tual

isat

ion

Concept Paper to CIDA February 2007, accepted July 2007.

Scoping exercise with three MDIs individually.

Political buy in and broad stakeholder forums established in each partner country.

Environmental scan.

Planning, preparation and establishment of partnerships.

Development of the project proposal, implementation plan and budget. Project Authorisation Document (PAD) signed by Canadian Ministry for International Development.

Negotiate budget with CIDA from R50m to R70m.

20

08

/9 –

Fo

rmal

isat

ion

an

d

bas

elin

es

Contracts (PIP) signed CIDA/ National Treasury / PALAMA.

Project Charters and comprehensive agreements developed, discussed and approved.

Inception Project Steering Committee in Pretoria, June, 2008. Bilateral agreements signed.

Baseline and training needs analysis (TNA) terms of reference (TOR) developed, advertised and procured jointly.

Monitoring and evaluation plans for project and MDIs commenced.

Curriculum development begins with case study workshop in July 2009.

Kigali office established early 2009 and staff late 2009. Regional coordinator arrested.

Capacity building workshop on baseline/TNA/M&E for project management team and MDIs.

Joint interviews with bidders for baseline, TNA, Oct 2008.

Additional differentiated programme for South Sudan discussed and commenced.

Bonds between 3 MDIs strengthened through collaborative processes.

20

09

/

10

/11

–

Enh

a

nce

d

de

liv

ery

cap

ac

ity 2nd PSC hosted by ENA in April 2009.

Capacity building of MDI staff in baselines and TNA.

•Conceptualisation, buy-in , planning and project coordination

2008-2009

•Formalisation, baseline development

and needs analysis

2009-2011 •Establishment of

regional office, training of trainers

and enhanced delivery capacity

2011-2012

•Pilot training and roll-out

2012-2013


Baseline and TNA Reports completed by MDIs by July 2009.

Guideline and procedures manual for MDIs to conduct TNA with their government departments.

M&E Framework for project developed.

Curriculum planning from baseline and TNA analysis commences August 2009.

Curriculum Reference Group established in October 2009.

3rd PSC hosted by CBU, Oct 2009.

Draft Curriculum Framework presented to PSC in Juba.

Curriculum development and Lead Trainer Development Programme workshop, Juba, Oct 2009.

First draft of Lead Trainer Development Programme, 2010.

Revised and refined draft Curriculum Framework, April 2010.

6 month plan for curriculum development, April 2010.

M&E plans and training for 3 MDIs March and April 2010.

4th PSC held in Rwanda, May 2010.

Workshop on new logic model, July 2010.

Capacity building on procurement and finance, July 2010.

Faculty or lead trainers selected and TOT training conducted, Sept/ Oct 2010.

5th PSC held in Polokwane, South Africa, October, 2010.

New staff recruited for Kigali Office, December 2010.

Appointment of new staff for Kigali office, January, 2011.

Equipment and furniture list for new office, January, 2011.

Orientation of new staff, March, 2011.

RCB strategy session, Magaliesburg, South Africa, 27 March 2011 – 30 March 2011.

6th

PSC held in Bujumbura, May 2011.

Executive Development Programme Delivered August 2011 to April 2012

Gender mainstreaming for Lead Trainers, May to June 2011.

Coaching and mentoring for Lead Trainers, May to June 2011.

20

12

/13

–P

ilot

trai

nin

g

and

ro

ll-o

ut

Project Khaedu Training of Trainers, between May 2012 and September 2012

8th

PSC Meeting held in Kigali, Rwanda, May 2012

Strategic Planning Session Johannesburg, South Africa 29th

July to 1st

August 2013

9th

PSC Meeting held in Juba, South Sudan, November 2012

Project extension until November 2013 granted by CIDA

IMTP Pilot Training, between 5th

and 29th

August 2013

Curriculum redesign and customisation - June 2012 to March 2013

Khaedu and IMTP roll-out in countries, 26th

August to end September 2013

10th

PSC Meeting, Pretoria, South Africa 22nd

to 24th

October 2013

Beyond the broad activities outlined in Table 2, there are a number of activities that relate to detailed delivery. These are captured within each area of the narrative that follows. In articulating the overall story, many of the stakeholders expressed the perspective that there are many factors that contributed towards the project not unfolding as planned. In particular, there was a period between 2009 and 2010 within which there were many delays in actual rollout and where the momentum towards delivery was not being sustained. For some, the challenge of delivery relates directly to the initial design of the project. As has been expressed by one of the stakeholders:

It seems there was no understanding of the internal and external factors that would impact on project delivery. There were also a number of other factors, such as the late creation of the Regional Office, changes in staff in participating institutions and changes in the lead agency.


2. The cooperation framework

[Cooperation] is a particularity of this project. In other projects, the funder presents the project as a guideline and everybody has to follow the guideline. The key person on the Board is someone from the donors. In this project, the people who are participating on the PSC are the beneficiaries. The key people are the beneficiaries that have the possibility to validate and guide.

The initial conceptualisation of the project’s cooperation framework project was premised on the Paris Principles for Development Cooperation and CIDA’s own Aid Effectiveness Agenda and a commitment the principles of ownership and mutual accountability6. CIDA’s Aid Effectiveness Action Plan (2009 – 2012) notes that “action on aid effectiveness is anchored in principles - ownership, alignment, coordination and harmonization, managing for results, and mutual accountability – that provide a reference point for increasing the coherence, impact, and effectiveness of aid efforts”. The same plan specifies that ownership and mutual accountability imply a strong commitment to be more efficient, focused and accountable in achieving development results and reducing poverty. This approach supported PALAMA’s concern, based on the DRC experience, that the unmediated export of training programmes was not effective. As a result, the project cooperation framework is an example of triangular cooperation. There is the S-S cooperation between the three recipient institutions, and between these institutions and PALAMA. There is also a North-South (N-S) relationship between CIDA and PALAMA, as the implementing agency, and CIDA and the MDIs. This complexity of relationships was to be managed through collaborative planning and implementation meetings in the form a Project Steering Committee (PSC) comprising all project stakeholders. The bi-annual PSC meetings were held for the purpose of providing strategic direction to the project, recommending project operational plans and budgets and to ensure regular monitoring of the project. The PSC was intended to facilitate effective communication and co-operation amongst the principal participants in the management of the project.

As it happened

A lack of clarity on roles and responsibilities characterised cooperative engagements, prompted, perhaps, by changes in project leadership in the implementing agency, and the respective MDIs. Most notably, the role of PALAMA shifts over time from being an equal partner as the implementing agent to being a managing agent. This is due to the different leadership styles of the various project managers within PALAMA, but also to uneven capability with the MDIs. The story of cooperation in the project begins with the initiation of the project in 2006 (see Figure 3). This is followed by a very productive period of establishing the partnership through scoping activities, planning and securing funding. The first year of the project saw the establishment of the PSC and a number of cooperative processes directed towards meeting project targets. In 2009, leadership changes began to affect the nature of cooperation established. This is partly resolved with the successful establishment of the Regional Office in 2011.

6 The Paris and Accra Principles define ownership as development partners exercising “effective leadership over their development policies, and strategize and co-ordinate development actions” and mutual accountability as “donors and partners are accountable for development results”.


Figure 3: The cooperation framework

Initiation of the project

By the time of actual project conceptualisation, South Africa had already established a state capacity building support initiative with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and bilateral agreements had been forged between South Africa and Rwanda, and Burundi respectively. In 2006, SAMDI visited both countries as part of a Joint Commission for Cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It was through these meetings that a need was identified to build public service capacity in the post-conflict countries. These early discussions ensured that MDI cooperation was established within the context of an awareness of the national needs and priorities of each of the countries. High level political support for the collaboration was secured through existing country to country bilateral agreements and extended to include the Ministers from each of the relevant public service or human resources ministries. Whilst PALAMA eventually took a lead in the conceptualisation of a formal project, the overall logic of mutual support and learning from each other’s experienced had already unfolded on the basis of past experiences and on the back of larger cooperative agreements between South Africa and participating countries. The Canada-South Africa Development Cooperation Treaty clearly articulates the need for strengthening service delivery in the areas of HIV/AIDS, governance and rural development, while leveraging South Africa’s knowledge to promote regional cooperation, supporting the promotion of demand driven and mutually beneficial transfers of capacities between South Africa and its neighbours. Tripartite cooperation, in which South African and Canadian institutions collaborate to transfer knowledge to a third country in the region, is a key component of this approach. The project rationale therefore took root on the premise that building sustainable democratic institutions and functioning economies in Africa requires a capable and skilled public service that is focused on citizen centred service delivery and good governance. The in-country political support which emerged from the bilateral agreements provided the necessary buy-in for the project and facilitated actual initiation. A driving element of the initial commitment was that there was much that could be shared between countries, given the shared post conflict realties and the overall desire to expand and enhance public service delivery. It was on the back of the bilateral agreements, the initial experience of South Africa in the DRC and the need to facilitate access to resources for more active exchange and capacity building, that the initial concept paper was crafted in response to a call for projects from CIDA.

Scoping and funding secured

Following the approval of a broad concept paper in January 2007, CIDA provided an amount of CAD 100 000 to support the further development of the proposal. The approach to CIDA was based on an understanding that it would be most interested in funding such a capacity initiative as it had already established a relationship with PALAMA through its support for a

2006

Initiation

2007

Scoping and funding secured

2008

Cooperation framework, bilateral agreements and PIP defined

2009

Leadership and project management changes

2011 - 2013

Regional office established and operating


A bull photographed on the scoping trip to Southern Sudan. A participant noted that “it was a difficult environment but we had to take the bull by the horns”.

‘gender capacity building’ initiative. The initial resources enabled SAMDI, at the time, to undertake detailed scoping studies to each of the three potential partner countries. Each visit was undertaken by a senior team of five officials, except in the case of Southern Sudan, where two people joined a much larger Department of Foreign Affairs delegation to undertake the scoping exercise. Each of these visits lasted approximately a working week and involved an intensive programme of consultations with a wide set of role players. There were several follow up visits as well. These included senior government representatives, the Ministers responsible for public services, their Permanent-Secretaries or Directors-General; Heads of MDIs, representatives of their Boards, and cross-sections of their staffs; representatives of local universities and other agencies associated with the MDIs; CIDA representatives as well as other members of the diplomatic and development communities, often including DFID, the Belgian Technical Cooperation, the European Commission, UNDP and the World Bank. It was on the basis of these visits that SAMDI developed a full project proposal. The scoping trip to Southern Sudan was particularly challenging as there were few roads and accommodation facilities. The group had to fly in a ten seat plane and went to visit the regions (on dirt roads), after heavy rains and flooding. There was only one road full of vehicles, cows and people. The project proposal submitted by SAMDI to CIDA identifies the purpose of the project as improving the management and leadership capability of the public service through training and development in three countries emerging from conflict. The story told by the Director-General at the time was that the initial request for funding was for ZAR 50 million. While he discussed various options with the requesting project manager for a lesser amount, he was surprised to discover that she had managed to secure almost ZAR 70 million overall. CIDA notes that the project was approved on the basis of previous work with SAMDI on the gender mainstreaming project which provided a sense that “SA public sector institutions were possessed of the necessary capacity to implement the identified programmes” (Cleary, 2012). The proposed project management frameworks and activities were broadly reflected in the signed Project Implementation Plan (PIP) and Logical Framework Analysis. However, the overall intended impact of the programme notably shifts from building training capability to public service delivery improvement.

Cooperation framework and PIP agreed

The scoping exercise enabled the partners to understand the post-conflict country context and identify common objectives and outcomes for the project. These were captured in a Comprehensive Agreement finalised in May 2008 which detailed the procedures for operations of project. An inception meeting to formalise the project was held in July 2008. It was at this meeting that the formal project Memoranda of Agreement (MOU), Project Charter and Outcomes were defined and agreed. Some initial work had been one in each of the countries before this meeting, but the cooperation was formally defined and established at this meeting. This inception meeting set the tone for the partnership as one based on equal participation, trust and reciprocity. This is evident in the assistance given by members of the team in terms of translation (from French to English), help or legal advice.


The signatories (SAMDI, ENA, RIAM and CBU) to the agreement in July

2008

7th PSC meeting in Pretoria

Participants from each of the countries have a different memory of the meeting. For the Burundi delegate, the meeting was held in the same hotel that he stayed when he was in peace negotiations for Burundi. And it was the same hotel in which he signed the MOU to capacitate Burundi as part of the CIDA project. For South Sudan, it was a near miracle securing the mandate to sign the MOU from Juba with a 24 hour turnaround time. The meeting was attended by a committee from seven ministries. The consultations had started in South Sudan and were finalised in Pretoria. The team did not want to be left out of the process of finalising and signing the agreement. The mandate was given and South Sudan signed together with Rwanda and Burundi.

Beyond the excitement of the formalised document, there was general appreciation of the possibilities that stood before each of the participating countries and the benefits that would emerge from working together to develop capacity enhancement strategies. The approach of establishing a Project Charter with clear indicators of roles and responsibilities was welcomed by all and there was a very positive sprit at the 2008 initiation meeting. In keeping with the approach of mutual accountability and the principle of collective ownership, the project institutionalised participative processes and decision making through the Project Steering Committee (PSC). The PSC was intended to facilitate effective communication and co-operation amongst the principal participants in the management of the project and to ensure regular monitoring of the project. The Project Charter identifies the core functions of the PSC as:

Maintaining the strategic direction of the project;

Establishing the annual operational plans and budgets;

Reviewing project progress reports and monitoring and evaluation findings;

Reviewing financial reports and procurement plans; and

Comparing achievements against planned targets and adjust (if necessary) project approach and design to reflect learning over the duration of project implementation.

The PSC was comprised of Directors General (DGs) and Project Coordinators (PCs) from PALAMA, ENA, CBU, RIAM, and representatives of CIDA, National Treasury, the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), and Departments of Public Services and Administration (DPSA). Relevant Embassy representatives, the African Management Development Institutes Network (AMDIN), other relevant stakeholders and Project Administrators were also invited to the meetings as observers. The PSC meetings were maximised by adding joint capacity building workshops and/or other project management meetings over a week’s duration including weekends to ensure that a range of outputs were achieved. This series of meetings enabled the Project Management Team to do extensive joint planning and develop capacity in a range of areas related to the management of MDIs and the development of curricula and training programmes. After the successful inception meeting, it was agreed that the venues for the meetings would be rotated amongst the four MDIs. Each of the meetings would consist of capacity building workshops, project management meetings, tender evaluations or interviews for staff (when required) and other relevant business of the project. PALAMA would hold special meetings with


individual MDIs to discuss specific issues or challenges they may be experiencing. In addition to these project related meetings, in-country stakeholder meetings would take place to provide an update on the project and ensure on-going support for the project. These meetings were important in building wider support for the programme in-country, mainly within government and amongst political leaders, but also with the broader network of stakeholders that enable the MDIs to implement their respective mandates. Stakeholders invited to these in-country stakeholder meetings included Ministries, government departments and related agencies such as research institutions, universities, CIDA representatives in the country, other donors active in the country, in- country representatives of the embassies of the partner countries. Usually, the MDI would host the stakeholder meeting which was formally opened by the Minister for Public Services within the host country. These meetings ensured that stakeholders received regular feedback and provided inputs to the project. It also minimised duplication of activities and interventions and ensured government and political buy in. The first counsel in Burundi even helped secure the venue for the first meetings during the scoping exercise. All the MDIs note the importance of these meetings in building wider in-country support for the project and the respective MDIs. The cooperation and support of SA embassy officials at missions in Rwanda, Burundi and Southern Sudan was important for mobilising support from high level political counterparts in the country. In Burundi and Rwanda, the Embassy even helped in monitoring project progress and alerting PALAMA to political problems. They attended all the initial meetings but active engagement with the DIRCO and DPSA seems to decrease with time. The project has held nine joint week long meetings on a rotational basis in South Africa (3), Rwanda (2), Burundi (2) and South Sudan (2). The PSC and other project meetings are listed in Table 3. Table 3: Project meetings

MEETINGS VENUE DATE

1st PSC meeting Pretoria, South Africa 18th July 2008

Workshop Kigali, Rwanda December 2008

2nd PSC meeting Bujumbura, Burundi 29th April 2009

Case study workshop Pretoria, South Africa July 2009

Curriculum design Pretoria, South Africa 1-2 October 2009

3rd PSC meeting Juba, Southern Sudan 29th October 2009

4th PSC meeting RIAM Murambi Campus, Southern Province 6th May 2010

5th PSC meeting Polokwane, South Africa 19th November 2010

Strategic Planning Mount Grace, South Africa 27-30 March 2011

6th PSC meeting Bujumbura, Burundi 11 May 2011

RCB Work Session Leopard Lodge, Pretoria, South Africa 29th

June – 1 July 2011

7th PSC meeting Pretoria, South Africa 29 November 2011

8th PSC meeting Kigali, Rwanda 31st May 2012

Strategic Planning Birchwood, Pretoria, South Africa 29th

July – 1 August 2012

9th PSC meeting Juba, South Sudan 22 November 2012

RCB Planning Session Kigali, Rwanda 2-4th

April 2013

10th

PSC Meeting , Pretoria, South Africa 22nd

to 24th

October 2013

During all of the PSC meeting periods a socio-historical or cultural visit or event is included to enable the partners to learn about each country’s histories, contexts and cultures. For example, a visit to the Apartheid Museum in South Africa or a Genocide Memorial in Rwanda ensures mutual learning and builds the implementation team. The visit to the Cradle of Humankind in South Africa emphasised to everyone our common African heritage and links to


8th PSC meeting in Kigali

Cradle of Humankind

humanity more broadly. The Rwandese were exhilarated at Freedom Park, South Africa, when they found they understood the saying, “Umntu, Ngumntu, Ngabantu” meaning “people are people through other people”, because of the Nguni roots of their Kinyarwanda language.

The general agreement on the PSC meetings was that the hosting MDI assumes full responsibility, with a great sense of pride, for planning and hosting the schedule of meetings for the week. Funds are disbursed to the local MDI for the procuring of services related to these meetings. While it would have been simpler for PALAMA to pay for these services directly, this approach ensured not only ownership but also builds experience, systems accountability and capacity for reporting on funded programmes. Despite this intention, the local MDIs were not always given full control over PSC meetings. The HRD notes that they were unable to decide venue or accommodation for the November 2012 meeting in Juba. They indicated that this undermined their hosting role as they were not in control of the process. Despite this, PSC minutes show that the meetings did serve as a vehicle for project management. Issues related to the composition of the PSC, delays in implementation, under-spending and procurement were discussed, in addition to reporting and planning. As the project was directed at enhancing and establishing public service delivery capacity in each of the identified countries, the project commenced with design and implementation of the baseline study. The overall purpose of the study was to build an understanding of the context and capacity needs within each of the countries. As a defining feature of the project was enhancing internal capacity of MDI’s to conduct a baseline, substantive attention was focused on ensuring that all the partners were involved in defining the terms of reference for the project, advertising, short-listing and interviewing the consultants who would conduct the study. This had the consequence of building capacity in the MDIs to conduct these studies themselves.

Burundi, for example, has subsequently completed a baseline and training needs analysis at the local government level utilising capacity developed during the baseline study. All the MDIs note the value of the baselines and their utility even five years later. Many of the institutions refer to the baselines in their internals planning processes. The larger value of the baseline was that it established a substantive perspective on the overall capability for interventions amongst each of the MDIs. The summary reports of the baselines provide direct information and recommendations on interventions that would be relevant and on the capacity enhancement initiatives that would be relevant for building each of the MDIs.

PALAMA was included in the baseline review but withdrew from the process following a complaint by a senior manager. This decision led to shift in resource allocation and a reworking of the project outcomes as per the Logic Model. While the earlier agreement included capacity and systems development for PALAMA, as well as the other MDIs, the LM removed this outcome with consequences for project implementation. There was concern that resources allocated to PALAMA systems development would be better utilised by the other MDIs. The mid-term review notes that this may also have been due to an over-estimation of PALAMA’s capacity to organise and manage projects of this nature.


Heads of MDIs commit to working

together

Leadership and project coordination changes

The RCB project was designed with an awareness of building project and institutional champions to ensure sustainability. The emphasis on joint decision making on every aspect of project implementation, from the development of proposal and budget, the terms of reference, to the selection of providers, to administrative process, was to build capacity in the MDIs to replicate the learning. The learning by doing strategy enabled the project management team to build a team of enabled project champions that understand their common and different experiences and skills. However, project implementation overall and in each country, was at times significantly delayed by a high turnover of leadership at both Director-General level and at project champion level. Continuity is essential to ensuring retention of institutional and project knowledge and learning. PALAMA had a change of DGs in 2009, but more significantly 3 project coordinators in a one year period (from July 2010 to July 2011). The project coordination only stabilised after this period. This high turn-over impacted significantly on internal project management and created a perception amongst MDIs and CIDA that PALAMA lacked internal capacity and commitment to implement the project. The Minister of Public Services in Rwanda had been a keen champion of the project since 2008. However, RIAM was challenged by a series of leadership changes at DG and project coordinator levels. They had 4 DGs and 4 project coordinators in three years. This created challenges for RIAM and slowed implementation of the project in Rwanda. Although ENA has had 6 Directors since the inception of the project, it has had consistent leadership at the project coordinator level. This had enabled the institution to use the learning from the RCB project for the benefit of the institution and the country more broadly. The CBU has also benefitted from consistent leadership at the DG level. Even though a new DG was appointed in 2012, the handover has been smooth, and they remain in contact. They have struggled, however, with full time project coordination and support in recent years. The RCB project shows that while political leadership is important to ensure project support and alignment with country priorities, operational leadership ensures implementation and sustainability. Project coordinators are, therefore, more critical to achieving high quality outcomes than broader political or government support. When the DG and project coordinator of RIAM exited at the same time, implementation in Rwanda was held up for several months despite the consistent support of the Rwandese Minister of Public Services and Labour. In contrast, Burundi has moved forward under the consistent leadership of the project coordinator despite changes at the political level. Despite the almost consistent leadership changes in the project, the project has been implemented, with some frustrating delays. This is because the effect of the turnover within institutions is partly mitigated by the built-in collaborative approach that forces mutual learning across the broader project team. This enables project institutional memory to be developed and facilitates relatively quick induction for new members. Systems and procedures are developed through trial and error. This collective championship of the project holds it together and ensures continuity, joint problem solving and implementation (if sometimes in stops and starts). Despite this, relations of trust and reciprocity can be eroded with changes in leadership and project champions.


Regional office under construction at

RIAM

There is no doubt that changes in project leadership in the implementing agency and at the MDIs impact on programme delivery and slow the achievement of project objectives. It also creates concerns amongst the MDIs about implementation, funding support and meeting country needs. Some MDIs continue to move forward with the programme while attempting to resolve project challenges. Others seem to wait for things to happen. This is an inherent tension in leadership and the project needs to find the flexibility to enable MDIs to work more independently but at the same ensure delivery on agreed objectives.

Regional office established

Despite an earlier attempt to establish the regional office in 2009, the office only became operational in January 2011. The regional office was generously built by RIAM in 2008, indicating their support for the project as well as their intention to lead the regional hub at the time. The scoping study had identified RIAM as the strongest of the MDIs with potential capacity to support the regional activities in the longer term. The purpose of the regional office was to build in sustainability by providing regional support for the project. The rationale was that such capacity would support the institutions long after PALAMA and CIDA had exited. The office was first established in 2009 and an initial Regional Project Coordinator was appointed from 1 August 2009. The arrest of the regional coordinator delayed the establishment of the office and it only became fully after two appointments were made in 2010. When the regional office members were appointed, they went to PALAMA for an orientation, but for the most part were required to set up office with limited support from the MDIs. Given that PALAMA was the overall legal signatory of the project with CIDA and hence carried the burden of responsibility relating to the finances of the project and reporting on its implementation, they were appointed as PALAMA staff and operated with South African financial, policy and legislative frameworks. The Project Charter notes that the Project Regional Coordinator is responsible for the day-to-day project management and implementation of the Project in the three partner countries and takes direction from the PALAMA Project Manager. The Project Regional Administrator is responsible for ensuring the smooth and efficient operations and Project support provided from the Regional Project Office and takes direction from the Project Regional Coordinator. In addition, Charter notes that the role of the regional office is (amongst others):

Managing and implementing the Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan activities of the Project as per the approved annual work plans and budgets;

Designing and supporting the implementation of all the requisite systems and processes necessary to ensure sound project management, as set out in the Comprehensive Agreements between PALAMA and the partner MDIs, and as required in the Project Implementation Plan (PIP) signed with CIDA;

Establishing appropriate working relationships and systems of communication with all key institutions and role-players in PALAMA, the respective MDIs and related Ministries as well as other key associated individuals and institutions, including through regular reporting and travel to each of the sites


“But the challenge was that at the beginning the

countries didn't have same level of internal

organisational capacity - but they had the same

programme. This created problems in terms

problems of progress. Some had to wait to for

others to progress.”

“Common history keeps us together, coming from the

conflict countries, commonalities keep us

together. We all feel that we all have something to learn and to serve people as good public servants.”

“…we call ourselves a family. We have shared

experiences from different cultures.”

The Regional Office suggest that, in addition, they

Hold coordination committees every three months

Facilitate coordination of activities across MDIs by following up, planning and reporting

Integrate reporting

Organise and minute PSC meetings under the guidance of the Chair

Communicate with and to the institutions They had a slow start in getting things moving as there were a number of project management changes within PALAMA and many activities had stalled. These project management changes led to a less collaborative approach to decision making and the regional office operative as a post office, passing messages between MDIs and the PALAMA, rather than a coordinating mechanism.

Lessons from the story of cooperation

The S-S partnership between the four African countries preceded the donor support. These partnerships were established as part of South Africa’s international

relations agenda to build capacity in Africa and support, in particular, post-conflict countries. Putting these into practice, PALAMA sought relationships with MDIs in a number of post-conflict countries including the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan. These existing bilateral agreements and the common post conflict context provided a good foundation for the partnership. This was well supported by CIDA’s interest and commitment in building capacity in the region. These provided a good foundation for cooperation. The PSC provided a solid base for building regional cooperation. It operated as an effective vehicle for planning and oversight despite uneven decision making. Its primary contribution was to build a collaborative network based on mutual experience. There were, however, some challenges

which tested the cooperative framework.

Common experience doesn’t mean similar capability or needs

The PALAMA project initiator, Dr Sal Muthayan, built the partnership on the principles of mutual trust and equal participation. Time was taken in the first few years to build effective relationships, identify common needs and enable joint decision making. In this regard the S-S partnership seems to hold the balance of forces in the RCB Project. However, despite an initial understanding of the differing needs and contexts of the MDIs, as well as extensive discussion and consultation, in practice, planning and decision making seems to be driven by a ‘one size fits all’ approach embedded in the project plan and logical framework analysis. This was not the case initially as there was space for the CBU to take a different path given their different level of development. However, the CBU chose the challenge of moving at the same pace as the other institutions. This is partly a consequence of the project approach of learning by doing, but also of the balance of power which favoured PALAMA and the better organised MDIs. Frustration was expressed on all sides with delays that might be caused by limited capacity in one MDI impacting on progress, or more specifically, by administrative hold ups within PALAMA itself. Despite a commitment from MDIs to learn from each other and to utilise the different strengths of the respective institutions in defining joint projects and deliverables, the differing capabilities, contexts and progress of the institutions gave rise to some tension and some


“It was useful in two ways. Firstly, it built expertise in how to conduct a baseline

and then the findings of the baseline have served to

identify the gap for future capacity building

interventions.”

“There was no baseline before - all the projects that came later were referring

to that baseline.”

“We did not think first of our differences. Our

material conditions were different, for example, Southern Sudan was

really under-developed. The ranking was

Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan.”

“The level of the country itself and how the country

has been committed affected the project. ENA

has full-time staff, infrastructure and support

from the ministry. RIAM only had staff part time.

HRD is not really an MDI. SA wanted all the

countries’ activities to be conducted at the same

time.”

resentment about how decisions are really made and how the balance of power works. It seems that while the regional S-S cooperation has been productive and provided a reliable network for knowledge exchange, it is more established between Rwanda and Burundi as they are both operating MDIs. HRD have had to work hard to keep up and deliver without appropriate infrastructure and human resources. HRD note however, that despite these challenges, they were always included and assisted as needed. Despite challenges from the beginning of the project, the RCB assisted in building capacity and in supporting two administrators and two curriculum experts.

Conduct institutional feasibility studies

All the MDIs note that the baselines studies which were undertaken were very useful in two ways. Firstly, the studies, even though undertaken by South African consultants, built internal capacity to conduct such studies within the country. All of the MDIs allocated staff to participate in the study and a user friendly manual was developed. Secondly, they have provided a useful reference point for planning and assessment of progress. South Sudan refer to their baseline study continuously as they had no prior reference point. All the MDIs suggest that the baseline provided important information for planning and focusing resources. The baseline results were used for reporting in the performance measurement framework until the introduction of the Logic Model. This change seems to have shifted reporting away from the baseline and may have implications for evaluation at the end of the project.

However, insufficient attention was given, in the initial scoping exercise, to the ability of the MDIs to respond to changing economic, social and political conditions in their respective countries. In the course of the project, Southern Sudan became an independent country and both Rwanda and Burundi held elections. These events, and others, impacted on the MDIs’ ability to plan and implement RCB activities due to changes in leadership or country priorities which in turn impact on the institutions. In addition, a more detailed institutional feasibility study might have enabled a more differentiated programme of activities to be implemented in each of the MDIs, leading to a similar outcome of capacity building. Burundi seems to have benefitted most from the RCB project because it is a fully fledged MDI with full-time staff who are able to benefit from capacity development. Both Rwanda and South Sudan have lost capacity because they were unable to retain trainers on payroll. Some more detailed attention to institutional feasibility may have smoothed the project management process. It is noted in the Mid-Term Review Evaluation Report (Cleary 2012) that “had an institutional assessment been done, it seems unlikely that the move to the Logic Model would have seen the downgrading of developing PALAMA’s own capacity”.

Triangular accountability requires capability, commitment and flexibility

The RCB programme advances the principles of aid effectiveness by facilitating South-South and North-South cooperation. The primary aid partnership for the RCB project is between CIDA and PALAMA as donor and implementing agency. This N-S cooperation seems to have been a positive relationship with high levels of collaboration and engagement between the two


“The turnover in project managers created challenges. It

is the same with MDI staff members. When they leave they don't hand over, and you have to start over to get new people

oriented.”

“The project built capacity within MDIs, but also brought them together. We should not

lose this relationship.”

“There is the problem of the changing management team

[five project managers in total, and three in one year]. On one side, PALAMA are a

beneficiary and on the other managing. We really don't

what they have got from the project. Governance of project suffered from

shifting leadership of the institution.”

institutions. CIDA were flexible in their approach to the project, recognising South African financial requirements and providing the space for the S-S partnerships to thrive. PALAMA experienced CIDA as a flexible partner that allowed the project to be implemented under South African legal framework. However, the shifting of project leadership in PALAMA in 2010 led to concerns on CIDA’s part about the organisation’s commitment to and ability to implement. This suggests that the partnership tested the limits of the cooperative agreement particularly in relation to dedicated project management in PALAMA. A lesson learned is that mutual accountability in long term projects requires partners to sustain their commitment to project implementation in spite of institutional change. A consequence is that the MDIs began to respond to PALAMA as a donor rather than as a partner, sometimes feeling bullied into decisions. As noted “the biggest weakness is that signatories don’t hold people to account”.

The other part of mutual ownership is the extent to which the MDIs feel part of decision making processes as equal partners. PALAMA, as implementing agency, holds and disburses project funds to the three MDIs, a role that is strongly contested. As the Implementing Agency, PALAMA is required to play a similar role to development partners. Although the overall commitment is to equality of participation, PALAMA is perceived as withholding funds or delaying implementation. This is partly due to the rather tedious but necessary financial and supply chain management requirements, but also to styles of project management which range from collaborative to authoritarian. The MDI teams all suggest that a significant project improvement would to established project management units in all the MDIs and decentralise financial management accordingly. More flexibility in project management combined with improved

institutional capability might ease these tensions.

Consistent operational coordination is critical for implementation

There is no doubt that changes in project leadership in the implementing agency and at the MDIs slowed delivery and the timely achievement of project objectives. It also creates concerns about implementation, funding support and meeting country needs. Two notable delays were firstly, when the initiating PALAMA project manager and her team was moved another portfolio, and secondly, while awaiting a decision on the no-cost extension. Both had the effect of stalling project activities over a number of months. The inherent tension in project management is to find the flexibility to enable MDIs to work more independently but at the same ensure delivery on agreed objectives. The RCB project was designed with an awareness of building project and institutional champions to ensure sustainability. The emphasis on joint decision making on every aspect of project implementation, from the development of proposal and budget, the terms of reference, to the selection of providers, to administrative process, was to build the MDIs. This approach seems to have enabled some capacity development, but changing project coordination, particularly within PALAMA, impacted on delivery. The movement of a capable project leader from a position of authority and leadership and the

memory for the future1 · 2015. 2. 25. · imtp integrated management training programme lf logical...

Documents