A Case Study of Scaling Up
Community Driven Development
in Social Investment Fund Programme of Zambia
Prepared
by
Kwame M. Kwofie, PhD
World Bank Consultant
For
The World Bank
Africa Region
Washington DC
USA
Lusaka, Zambia
July 2003
1
Contents
Page
Acronyms and Abbreviations…….………………..……………………………4
Summary……...…………………. ………………..…………………………………5
1.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Introduction ……………………..………………………10
What is Community Driven Development
Africa’s Vision of CDD
Purpose of Document
Approach to this Case Study [to come]
Structure of document [to come]
2.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Context of the Case Study…..…………………………16
Zambia: the Land and People
Historical Perspective
Phases of Decentralization Initiatives
Earlier CDD Initiatives leading to present ZAMSIF Programme
2.4.1 Poverty Alleviation and Poverty Reduction Projects
2.4.2 The Micro projects
2.4.3 The First and Second Social Recovery Programmes
Achievements of the Social Recovery Programmes
Overview of CDD Principles in the Social Recovery Programmes
Summary of Lessons for CDD
2.5
2.6
2.7
3.
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
Zambia Social Investment Fund Programme…….30
Background
ZAMSIF Programme Description
3.2.1 Programme Development objectives
3.2.2 Main Programme Components
Description of Main Programme Components
3.3.1 The Community Investment Programme Component
3.3.2 The District Investment Programme Component
3.3.3 The Poverty Monitoring and Analysis Component
3.3.4 The Institutional Support Component
3.3.5 Other Programme Components
Expected Programme Benefits
Framework of Programme Management
Guiding Principles
4.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Stock - Taking of CDD in Zambia………….…………44
Introduction
Follow up of CDD Benchmarking
Factors that can Inhibit CDD Scaling Up Efforts
Summary of Findings on CDD Workshop on Planning and M&E
4.4.1 Conceptual Framework of CDD Planning and M&E
4.4.2 Summary of findings on M&E Strategy and Planning approach
5.
5.1
Applying the CDD Principles to ZAMSIF Programme……51
Empowering Local Governments to Manage Development
5.1.1 CIF Planning Activities
5.1.2 Monitoring and Evaluation
ZAMSIF CDD Planning Cycle
5.2.1 Stages in the Planning Cycle
5.2.2 The Strategic Planning Processes
5.2.3 Project Planning and Budgeting Processes
5.2
2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
7.
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
Monitoring and Evaluation Processes
5.3.1 What to Monitor
5.3.2 What to Evaluate
M&E at Community, Local and Central Government levels
5.4.1 M&E of Community-Level Programme Activities
5.4.2 M&E of Local Government-Level Programme Activities
5.4.3 M&E of Central Government-Level Programme Activities
Summary
ZAMSIF Implementation Successes and Challenges……64
Introduction
ZAMSIF Management style and CDD
6.2.1 Empowerment of Local Government
6.2.2 Empowerment of Local Communities
6.2.3 Improving Accountability and Transparency
6.2.4 Building a Learning-by-doing Culture
Factors Conducive to CDD
6.3.1 Technical Assistance and Facilitation
6.3.2 Ladder of Fiscal Rewards and Penalties: Performance by Results
6.3.3 Partnerships with Implementing Partners
6.3.4 Co-Financing by Communities
Challenges Facing ZAMSIF Programme Implementation
6.4.1 Some Observations on ZAMSIF Planning Processes
6.4.2 Targeting Mechanisms
6.4.3 Integrating Participatory Planning into Planning cycle
Consequences of Slow Progress in Strategic Planning
6.5.1 Slow Graduation on Capacity Ladder
6.5.2 Delays in Assessing Funds
6.5.3 Low Rate of Utilization
6.5.4 Sustainability
Possible Effects of ZAMSIF Scoring System on Implementation Progress
Suggested Approach to Scoring Capacity Levels
Scaling Up CDD in ZAMSIF Programme……………………90
Introduction
What to Scale Up in ZAMSIF
7.2.1 Framework of a Participatory Planning and M&E
7.2.2 Some Features of Proposed Planning Framework
How to Scale Up CDD in ZAMSIF Programme
Summary
Conclusions
ANNEXES…………………………………………………………………..102
Acronyms and Abbreviations
BESSIP
CBO
CSO
GTZ
IDA
IEC
IPF
LCMS
LCMU
MCDSS
O&M
MOFED
OVC
Basic Education Sub-Sector Investment Programme
Community Based Organisations
Central Statistical Office
German Development Co-operation
International Development Agency
Information Education and Communications
Indicative Planning Figure
Living Conditions Monitoring Survey
Living Conditions Monitoring Unit
Ministry of Community Development and Social Services
Operations and Maintenance
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
Orphans and Vulnerable Children
3
PPM&E
ROADSIP
SC
SNV
SOPU
VIP
Participatory Planning Monitoring & Evaluation
Road Sector Investment Programme
Steering Committee
Netherlands Development Organisation
Strategic and Operational Planning Unit
Ventilated Pit Latrines
4
Summary
A Case Study of Scaling Up Community Driven Development in Social Investment Fund
Programme of Zambia
Background
01.
Over the past 20 years, the World Bank has supported Zambia in implementing three major
social investment fund programmes that used the Community Driven Development (CDD) approach
which advocates for prosperity through empowerment of local communities. The first one, called
Social Recovery Programme I [SRP I], began in 1991 and ended in 1995. This was followed by a 5year Social Recovery Programme II [SRP II]. The present Social Investment Fund programme,
referred to as Zambia Social Investment Fund [ZAMSIF], is one of Zambia’s poverty reduction
instruments. It was approved in May 2000, became effective on 11th July 2000, and will run for a
period of 10 years (2000-2010). The first phase, covering 5 years, is supported by a World Bank
loan/credit amount of US $ 64.7 million. ZAMSIF is a successor to the Social Recovery Project II.
ZAMSIF is based on the experiences and lessons learnt from both Social Recovery Project I and II.
ZAMSIF
Objectives and Stages of this Study
02.
This case study is about Community Driven Development [CDD] in the context of Social
Investment Fund Programmes in Zambia. Specifically, the case study sets out to identify the key
factors that can promote or inhibit efforts to scale up CDD initiatives in the present and future
Social Investment Fund programmes in the country. The stages of the study consisted of: (i) a desk
review; (ii) stock taking of CDD initiatives in Zambia; (iii) analysis of ZAMSIF management style;
(iv) field visit to selected ZAMSIF programme activities; and (v) an in-depth interview of principal
stakeholders of ZAMSIF to elicit their views on what and how to scale up CDD in the ZAMSIF
programme.
Findings from Desk Review
03
From this study, it is evident that the two precursor Social Recovery Programmes [SRP I
and II] made substantial contributions to the welfare of the population; strengthened institutional
capacity at both local government and community levels; and empowered local communities to confinance a number of sub-projects. However, participation by communities and sector agencies was
limited. Furthermore, as result of inadequate government counterpart funding, and lack of
community maintenance of the infrastructure facilities created during the programme, the benefits of
the programmes could not be sustained when funding for the programme ended.
Lessons from Past Social Fund Programmes
04.
The main lessons emerging from the earlier social fund type of programmes include the
need to: (i) place social fund programmes in the broader context of an overall national poverty
reduction strategy; (ii) integrate such programmes in the system of intergovernmental and local
development financing in order to ensure sustainability; (iii) address issues of sustainability by
taking into account on-going reforms particularly those that can promote effective democratic
decentralization; (iv) build capacity in participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation at national,
district and community levels; (v) strengthen targeting mechanisms for the purpose of achieving
efficient distribution and use of available financial and human resources.
Use of Lessons in design of ZAMSIF
5
05.
The development objectives and components of ZAMSIF reflect the above lessons. In
particular, the Community Investment Fund (CIF) and the District Investment Fund (DIF)
components are in line with the CDD vision of achieving prosperity through empowerment of local
communities and local governments. The Community Investment Fund (CIF) component, for
example, funds priority community-based projects that are identified, co-financed, and implemented
by the communities themselves. And the District Investment Fund (DIF) component aims at creating
the capacity in districts so as to contribute to improved local governance. Under the DIF component,
local governments are provided with the means to improve their strategic development planning,
technical, management and financial capacity and to apply these skills towards their development
efforts.
06.
An innovative feature of ZAMSIF programme is the capacity ladder. This is an incentive
mechanism consciously designed to motivate districts to improve their capacity for district planning.
Each district proceeds to climb up, according to its own capacity, the 5 levels of the planning
capacity ladder. As the capacity of the district increases, its responsibilities also increase. And as its
responsibilities increase, its access to financial benefits also increases. This is a learning- by-doing
process which is one of the cardinal principles of CDD. The planning capacity ladder has attracted a
great deal of interest worldwide.
Reflections on Past CDD Initiatives in Zambia
07.
As part of this study, stock was taken of the main outcomes of two recent CDD events in
Zambia – a CDD Benchmarking exercise, and a CDD Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation [M&E]
workshop. These two events took place at the time ZAMSIF programme was just starting. A
follow-up of the CDD Benchmarking exercise revealed that issues that are most likely to inhibit
CDD scaling up efforts in Zambia are directly related to: funding mechanisms, capacity building at
all levels, sub-district organizational structures, and planning, monitoring and evaluation. The CDD
Planning and M&E workshop endorsed a simple conceptual framework that can serve as a useful
planning tool for managing both CDD and national poverty reduction strategies. Taking into account
the findings from the stock-taking exercise, this case study began to critically examine the planning
processes of ZAMSIF. This was done for two specific purposes: first to understand the nature of the
management style of ZAMSIF, and secondly, to assess if the planning approaches currently in use
by ZAMSIF can promote or inhibit effective implementation of the CDD vision and principles.
Findings from Analysis of ZAMSIF Management Style
08.
Findings from the analysis of ZAMSIF planning style clearly show that : (i) ZAMSIF
planning places undue emphasis on project planning activities and less emphasis on strategic
planning and M&E processes; (ii) the role of communities in the planning processes, for instance, is
currently limited to project identification, application, implementation, justification and completion;
(iii) communities do not participate in M&E; (iv) strategic planning and project planning (involving
13 discrete activities, referred to as ‘cycle’ for each of the 5 capacity levels/ladders) are not
conceived as an integral part of the overall planning and M&E; (v) the criteria for graduating a
district from one level to another places more stress on bureaucratic efforts and less emphasis on
development results; and (vi) M&E indicators are strong on outputs and outcomes but very weak on
inputs and beneficiary reach (i.e. beneficiary access, use, and satisfaction).
Findings from Field Visits
09.
Field visits to ZAMSIF programmes in selected districts in the Northern Luapula and
Lusaka provinces were undertaken as part of the Mid –Term Review [MTR] to observe CDD at
work on the ground. The field visits provided a unique opportunity to: (i) observe, at first hand, the
planning processes at work; (ii) capture the implementation successes of the programme; (iii) learn
more about ZAMSIF management style at district and community levels; (iv) identify factors that
are conducive to CDD in ZAMSIF
6
programme operations; and (v) understand the challenges facing the implementation of ZAMSIF
programme components
10.
Findings from the field visit, affirm that ZAMSIF management style clearly reflects the
CDD principles: the programme is empowering local governments, and local communities,
improving accountability and transparency, and building a learning-by-doing culture. It was also
observed that factors conducive to CDD include the technical assistance and facilitation provided by
a highly motivated, competent and dedicated district teams; the ladder of fiscal rewards; and the
formation of partnerships with implementing partners including NGOs.
Findings from In-depth Interviews of Stakeholders
11.
The in-depth survey of stakeholders shed light on their functions and interests, and revealed
the key challenges facing implementation of ZAMSIF programme activities. Information gathered
covered: proposed actions to overcome challenges; how Zambia’s successes in CDD could be scaled
up without waiting for the creation of strong local government structures; what CDD principles to
scale up, and how to do so in an efficient manner.
CDD Scaling UP Challenges
12.
A fundamental challenge facing the implementation of ZAMSIF programme concerns slow
progress in achieving democratic decentralisation. The current administrative system does not
provide for the establishment of sub-structures at sub-district level to enable local communities
participate effectively in their development activities. District Development Coordinating
Committees (DDCCs) lack a legal framework to back their operations. ZAMSIF designs assumes
decentralized administrative structures.
13.
The absence of a single head of district administration will continue to contribute to
ineffective coordination of development programmes in the district and sub-district levels. In the
past, this situation led to duplication of effort at district and provincial levels resulting in wastage of
resources. It is acknowledged that decentralization of authority from the centre to sub-district levels
will enhance community participation, reduce a sense of overdependence on the central government,
and improve in inefficiency in service delivery.
14.
Other challenges include: (i) slow progress in executing the strategic planning; (ii) reduced
planning capacity particularly at community level; (iii) weak linkage between the national poverty
reduction strategy and ZAMSIF programme; (iv) limited dissemination and actual use of M&E for
decision-making; (v) lack of targeting mechanisms; and (vi) inadequate integration of participatory
planning into the planning cycle.
15.
The implications of the observed weaknesses in the planning processes include: (i) slow
progress made by districts in climbing up the planning capacity ladder. By June 2003, only 47
districts, out of 73, have graduated to Level 2. (ii) District face delays in accessing programme
funds. (iii) The average utilization rate of 27% is an indication of serious management problems that
can be traced to the issues of decentralization, management and the timely flow of government
counterpart funds to the programme.
What and How to Scale Up CDD in ZAMSIF
16.
The Management Unit of ZAMSIF (ZAMSIF-MU) is committed to overcome a number of
the above challenges. Indeed, the M-TR of June 2003, has proposed practical measures to address
some of these challenges. For these reasons, this study contributed solutions to three specific issues,
directly related to the planning processes, that are considered critical inhibitory factors to
accelerating the implementation of ZAMSIF programme as a whole and for scaling up CDD in
particular.
7
17.
The first solution concerns the planning cycle: In place of the existing five project cycles,
this study has unified the strategic planning, project planning, M&E, and the district poverty review
processes into a single learning-by-doing planning cycle. It is hoped that this simplified framework
will contribute towards the acceleration of capacity building process currently underway.
18.
Secondly, the this study has proposed, for consideration, a solution that can assist district to
climb up the capacity building graduation ladder. And finally, in order to accelerate the
implementation of district and community-based sub-projects, a framework that can assist ZAMSIF
to promote and institutionalize a participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation [PPM&E] style
of management has been presented for consideration. The PPM&E has the potential to: raise
ownership and autonomy of primary stakeholders; increase accountability and transparency of
service delivery institutions and improve their performance; build on the voiced perceptions and
assessments of the poor; strengthen these perceptions to support decision-making; provide fast
feedback on implementation progress of development activities; and give early indications of
outcomes.
Areas of Future Investigation
19.
All the above three proposals can be considered without waiting for the full implementation
of the decentralized policy. Of immediate interest, in support of the capacity ladder, is the need to
fine-tune the scoring system of the capacity ladder itself. This will require some analytical research
to establish simple, objective factors, as opposed to the current subjective scoring system, based on
the proposed revised criteria.
8
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1
What is Community Driven Development?
1.01
This case study is about Community Driven Development [CDD] in the context of Social
Investment Fund Programmes in Zambia. Over the past 20 years, the World Bank has supported
Zambia in implementing three major social investment fund programmes that used the CDD
approach. The first one, called Social Recovery Programme I [SRP I], began in 1991 and ended in
1995. This was followed by a 5-year Social Recovery Programme II [SRP II]. The present Social
Investment Fund programme, referred to as ZAMSIF III in this paper, was started in 2000. It will
run for a period of 10 years (2000-2010).
1.02
All these ZAMSIF programmes have some elements of community participation; they aim
at building the capacity of local governments so that they can take over the full responsibilities of
managing the development at the district and sub-district levels. There is mounting evidence that
CDD as an approach to development can make a difference in poverty reduction and sustainable
development. But what is CDD; and Why has Zambia been so much attracted to CDD?
1.03
The term Community Driven Development [CDD], as used in this paper, refers to both (a) a
vision of development, and (b) a management style or approach. As a vision of development, CDD
reflects the evolving thinking that sustainable development is only possible if the cultural dimension
of development1, embracing issues of: empowerment, good governance, accountability,
transparency, and the rule of law,2 are explicitly integrated into the overall poverty reduction
strategies that are designed to achieve it. This vision of development sees poverty as the processes
that dispossess or deprive individuals/households and communities of opportunities or means to
fully participate in making decisions, and taking actions, that affect their own destinies.
1.04
According to this view, the processes that dispossess or deprive individuals/households
/communities of opportunities include (i) a lack of voice (people need avenues to express their
needs); (ii) lack of empowerment (people need the resources and authority to take charge of
programmes that benefit them); lack of good governance (poor people become poorer not only
because they lack cash income, education and access to basic social services, but also because their
leaders and officials are corrupt, unaccountable, and unresponsive to their needs). As result of this
new vision of development, there is now an emerging consensus that the notion of empowering poor
people and communities should be viewed as a form of poverty reduction in its own right.
The UNESCO Conference on Cultural Policies in Mexico City in 1982, which launched the United Nations Decade on Cultural
Development, defines culture broadly as “the whole complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that
characterize a society or social group. It includes not only arts and letters, but also modes of life, the fundamental rights of the human
being, value systems, traditions, and belief.” See, Ismail Serageldin and June Tabofoff, ed. Culture and Development in Africa,
Proceedings of an International Conference held at The World Bank, Washington, D.C., April 2 and 3, 1992, page 2.
1
Towards the latter part of the 1980s, the poverty reduction debate, began by the World Bank in the early 1970s, incorporated culturerelated concepts such as: empowerment of people and community, participatory decision-making, transparency, accountability,
institutional pluralism, and the rule of law. For an incisive discussion on this subject, consult Ismail Serageldin and June Tabofoff, ed.
Culture and Development in Africa, Proceedings of an International Conference held at The World Bank, Washington, D.C., April 2 and
3, 1992.
2
9
1.05
The key concept in all this is ‘participation.’ This means widening the development process
to include those who are most directly affected by it. At the community level, this implies involving
communities to: negotiate about development priorities; identify what they perceive as their own
development problems; encouraging members of the community to define benchmarks and
indicators which they can understand and use to monitor and evaluate their own development
activities.
1.06
In sum, Community-Driven Development (CDD) is development that is initiated and
executed by people who experience common problems in a given community or geographic area.
Here, development activities reflect the specific needs of the community as perceived by
themselves. Members of the community participate in diagnosing their own problems; they identify
solutions to these problems; and they contribute material and/or financial resources to solve their
own problems.
1.07
CDD, with its emphasis on issues of good governance, and the need for participatory style
of planning, reflects a changing perception of the poor as passive recipients of development
outcomes to active development agents who have the capacity to identify their own poverty
experiences (based on their own perceptions of what poverty connotes); search for solutions to their
own problems; identify with, and feel ownership of, the projects; monitor and evaluate the projects;
and carry the projects forward long after the projects officially come to an end.
1.2
Africa’s Vision of CDD
1.08
In 2000, the Africa Region of the World Bank formulated its CDD vision3 as prosperity
through empowerment of local communities. This new vision of development is based on five
principles, namely: (a) empowering communities; (b) empowering local governments; (c) realigning the service delivery of the central government; (d) ensuring transparency and
accountability; and (e) making development a learning -by- doing process.
(a)
Empowering communities
1.09
CDD planning processes seeks to (i) assist people improve their capabilities and functioning
so that they can confidently take charge of local affairs, (ii) build on social capital by harnessing
community participation, (iii) improve social capital by strengthening incentives for participatory
development at the local level, (iv) give voice to socially excluded groups. CDD emphasises: the
need to recognise existing strong social capital of communities; provision of financial resources and
authority to enable communities themselves to issue and manage contracts; participatory, inclusive
decision-making to build and sustain a sense of ownership; the need to assist communities to have a
say in the identification, prioritisation, designing, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of
their own development activities.
(b)
Empowering Local Governments
1.10
This principle stresses the need for: local governments to have adequate skills and
knowledge to enable them to manage and account for funds intended for development activities; an
enabling environment in which communities can release their creative energy; fiscal and
See, World Bank, Community Driven Development in Africa: A Vision of Poverty Reduction through Empowerment,
www.worldbank.org/cdd,page 5. and The World Bank, Africa Region, The community driven development approach in the Africa
region: a vision of poverty reduction through empowerment”, December 2000.
3
10
administrative decentralization that enables local governments to accelerate decision-making below
the central government.
1.11
Furthermore, this principle assets that in order to sustain community empowerment, there
will be need (i) to harmonize decentralization of the political, administrative and fiscal elements; (ii)
to empower local Authorities [LA] to collect revenues and have a share of the revenue from the
central government; and (iii) for communities and Local Government Authorities [LGA] to
contribute to project costs, as well as operation and maintenance costs.
(c)
Re-aligning the service delivery of the central government
1.12
This CDD principle sees the development of policies for creating an enabling environment
for development as the major role of the central government. The central government acts as a
service provider, through local government, and not as decision- maker on matters that can easily be
resolved at local levels. This means that central government should focus more attention on
facilitating local government activities, setting standards, monitoring outcomes, providing training
to lower levels, and providing rewards and penalties to improve efficiency of government.
(d)
Ensure transparency and accountability
1.13
This implies that (i) the direction of accountability should be downward to local people, not
only upward to central governments and donors, and (ii) traditional forms of upward accountability
should be strengthened though, for example, empowering communities to monitor and evaluate local
project activities. This means that community leaders, including politicians, should be held
accountable to people they are supposed to serve; and the communities should also account to
authorities at all levels. This implies changes in cultural attitudes that can support openness and
transparency
(e)
Make development a learning –by- doing process
1.14
CDD believes that (i) poor people and local communities have an inherent capacity for
problem-solving through learning-by–doing, (ii) communities can identify, analyse their own
development problems, and search for solutions for their own identified problems. Technical
assistance from central government, NGOs, and donors, should facilitate, rather than supplant, this
inherent capacity.
1.3
Purpose of this Case Study
1.15
This document describes and analyses the planning processes of the on-going Zambia
Social Investment Fund [ZAMSIF] programme for the purpose of gaining a better understanding of
the extent to which the CDD principles elaborated above are being implemented in practice. The
principal objective is to identify the key factors that can promote or inhibit efforts to scaling up
CDD initiatives in the present and future Social Investment Fund programmes in the country.
1.4
Approach to this Case Study
1.16
The Africa Region of the World Bank provided the framework4 and the orientation for the
conduct of this case study. The framework document sets out the CDD principles, and elaborates the
stages and preconditions for scaling up CDD initiatives in different socio-political contexts. In
addition to numerous illustrations from many developing countries, the framework also contains a
number of data collection/collation instruments. .
See Hans Binswanger and Swaminathan Aiyar, . ‘Scaling Up Community Driven Development: Theoretical Underpinnings and
Programme Design Implications, 2002.
4
11
Stages in the Conduct of the Case Study
1.17
The framework served as a useful guide to the framing of pertinent questions for the case
study. Annexes C, E.1, and E.2 are samples of the questionnaire developed following a judicious
study of the framework document. The checklists shown in Annexes E.3, F.1 and F.2 represent
adapted versions of the formats in the framework. The original checklist for these three
questionnaire modules were entire open ended. Lessons from the pre-testing of these particular
modules suggested the need to pre-code the responses for some of the questions. This modification
reduced the amount of time taken by respondents to complete the checklist modules. The
preparation, pre-testing, adaptation, selection and finalization of the relevant data collection
instruments concluded the first stage of the case study process.
1.18
The second stage in the study process involved: preparation of the synthesis of framework
document as well as briefing notes, shown in Annex A.1); selection of field assistants for the
conduct of the survey; consultations with ZAMSIF programme authorities; intensive face-to-face
discussions with senior officials of ZAMSIF office in Lusaka; selection by ZAMSIF senior officials
of stakeholder groups of ZAMSIF that were to participate in the survey (see Annex A.2).
1.19
The sequencing of the remaining three stages of the study, and the link between these stages
and the various stakeholder groups, is described in Table 1.1. The second column (column a) of
Table 1.1 covers the activities of the third stage of the study. Broadly, the activities included: a
systematic review of the relevant background documents on previous social fund programmes in
Zambia; stock taking of CDD initiatives undertaken in the country over the past two years preceding
this case study (see Annex B); a review of the on-going ZAMSIF programme, including its
planning, monitoring and evaluation processes; an overview of ZAMSIF Operation Manual,
programme log frame (see Annex D); an overview of the Zambia Poverty Reduction Strategic
Framework; an analysis of the decentralization policy; a review of District planning documents,
Progress reports of Community-based projects; and Profile of selected community-based projects.
1.20
The shaded areas of Table 1.1 represent the main activities undertaken during the fourth
stage of the study. They consisted of the administration of pre-tested questionnaire modules
presented in Annexes C, E and F; the processing and analysis of the survey data; and initial drafting
of this document. Parallel to the drafting of the report, a field was undertaken. This was the last
stage of the study.
The field visit provided a unique opportunity to observe and learn about ZAMSIF programme
implementation on the ground; review ZAMSIF capacity building scoring system (Annex G);
review a number of ZAMSIF district planning documents, progress reports, as well as profiles of
selected community-based projects.
1.5
Structure of this Document
1.21
The rest of this document is structured as follows: Chapters 2 through 5 contain information
based on the stick-taking and the review of the available relevant documents on ZAMSIF (see Table
1.1 column 2). Much of the information obtained from the stakeholder analysis and CDD design
elements (Table 1.1, columns 3 and 4) is contained in Chapter 6. Information from the field visit is
presented in Chapter 6. The last Chapter (chapter 7) provides information on what and how to scale
up CDD within ZAMSIF.
12
Table 1.1 Methods used to obtain Case Study data from Stakeholder Groups
Stakeholder Group
1. Senior Level
Policy Makers: PS,
Heads of Donor/
Lending Agencies
(a)
Stock-Taking
& Documents
Review
Zambia CDD
Benchmarking
Study of 2001
(Annex B.1-B.2).
(b)
Stakeholder
Analysis
(c)
CDD
Design
Elements
Institutional &
Stakeholder
Analysis
(d)
CDD:
What and
How to
Scale Up
in
ZAMSIF
Openended
Scaling up
Questions
(Annex E)
Zambia CDD
Planning &
M&E Workshop
of 2002 (Annex
B.3).
2. ZAMSIF
Department
Heads/ Directors
Review of
ZAMSIF
programme log
frame
Zambia CDD
Benchmarking
Study of
2001(Annex B.1B.2).
(Annex C)
Institutional & Communit
Stakeholder
y Design
Analysis
Elements
and Tools
(Annex E)
(Annex
F.1)
Zambia CDD
Planning &
M&E Workshop
of 2002.
(Annex B.3)
Scaling
Up Design
Elements
and Tools
(Annex
F.2)
Review of
ZAMSIF
programme
documents
3. Directors/
Department Heads
of Core & line
Ministries
4. Programme
Managers of
Implementing
Partners, NGOs,
Researchers
Zambia CDD
Benchmarking
Study of
2001(Annex B.1B.2).
Zambia CDD
Componen
ts of
Scaling up
Manual
(Annex
E.2)
Institutional &
Stakeholder
Analysis
(Annex E)
Institutional &
Stakeholder
Analysis
(Annex E)
13
(e)
Field Visit
& Review of
Documents
5. Directors/
Department Heads
of MLGH
Planning &
M&E Workshop
of 2002 (Annex
B.3)
Review of
Institutional &
Decentralization Stakeholder
policy documents Analysis
(Annex E)
Openended
Scaling up
Questions
(Annex C)
Review of
ZAMSIF
Capacity
building
Scoring
system
(Annex G)
Review of
District
planning
documents/
Progress
reports and
profiles of
selected
communitybased
projects
6. District/
Community
14
Chapter 2
Context of the Case Study
2.1
Introduction
This section summarizes the historical, political, and social factors which provide a background and
a rationale to the current Zambia Social Investment Fund [ZAMSIF] programme. This overview is
considered important because it enables the reader to gain a better perspective of the context in
which the programme has been developed.
The Land and People
Briefly, ZAMSIF is being implemented in a country whose land mass [752,614 square kilometres] is
equal to the combined size of the United Kingdom, West Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands,
Switzerland, Denmark and Ireland. The country is divided into 9 provinces and 72 districts. There
are only 10 million persons. Nearly half of the population lives in the rural areas in scattered
settlements.
Most of these rural communities are separated from each other by wide distances. Access to basic
social infrastructure service facilities such as elementary school, health clinic, hammer-mill, post
office, bank, telephone, radio, motor transport, rural markets, latrines, and clean sources of drinking
water, for example, is very difficult. The level of human deprivation (as measured by accessibility to
basic services, household assets, water and sanitation and monetary income) is high particularly
among the population living in remote districts of the country. Management decisions are made in
the capital city of Lusaka and passed down the line to the 9 provinces. Accountability is generally
upwards to the centre. The official language is English. But a large proportion of the population in
most rural areas cannot read or speak English. The revenue base for most local authorities is low.
2.2
Historical Perspective
(i)
Pre-independence
Zambia was colonised and ruled by Britain at the turn of the century. The country was administered
by the British South African Company [BSA] as two entities: North-Western Rhodesia and NorthEastern Rhodesia. In 1911, the two entities were amalgamated to form Northern Rhodesia with the
capital located in Livingstone. In 1923 the British Colonial Office [BCO] took over the
administration from the British South Africa Company. In 1935, the capital was moved from
Livingstone to Lusaka. Between 1953 and 1962, Northern Rhodesia was incorporated in the British
Central African Federation [BCAF] of Rhodesia [comprising Northern Rhodesia and Southern
Rhodesia] and Nyasaland.
Upon attaining independent sovereign status in 1964, Northern Rhodesia became known as Zambia.5
(ii)
Post independence Period
Zambia’s post-independent political and economic development can be divided into 3 phases: (a)
First Republic (1964-72); (b) Second Republic (1972-90); and (c) Third Republic (1990-present).
(a)
Phase I: The First Republic (1964-72)
Southern Rhodesia became Zimbabwe and Nyasaland became Malawi when they became independent in 199... and 1999
respectively. At independence, the UN characterised Zambia as “the least educated country in the least educated continent.”
This was largely due to colonial policies together with the practices of the settler community which discriminated against the indigenous
population.
5
15
The Constitution of the First Republic was formulated by the colonial authorities. It incorporated,
among other things, the Bill of Rights, the principles of separation of powers, a multiparty system of
political organisation; a commitment to a mixed economy in which the private and the public sectors
were to play a complementary role. At independence, Zambia was racially divided: majority of
indigenous Africans (the blacks) were poorly educated, and economically weak; there were no
Zambians entrepreneurs; international companies and the settler community who had the resources
were reluctant to increase their investments in Zambia. Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) was Zambia’s
major trading partner.
In order to improve the economic and social status of the African majority, government undertook a
number of major reforms. This covered substantial investments in both social and physical
infrastructure.
Towards a One-Party State
Following the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in 1965, and the subsequent imposition
of sanctions, Zambia was compelled to move towards a one-party state. For instance, between 1968
and 1970, the government nationalised the mining companies and most of the large commercial and
smaller banks, insurance companies, agricultural finance companies, provident funds, the building
societies, and other industrial companies were nationalized.
In 1971, the ruling party, the United National Independence Party [UNIP], set up a Commission of
Inquiry to find out from the general public on how a one party state could be established. A year
later, the main opposition party, the African National Congress [ANC], was dissolved and its
members were invited to join UNIP
(b)
The Second Republic (1972-90)
The Second Republic saw the end of the multi-party system and the institutionalization of a oneparty, and state-controlled, centralised planning. The power of the state sector increased. Economic
and political management of the economy was modelled along socialistic lines. UNIP, the only
political organisation in the country, became supreme. Numerous parastatal companies were
established. Major appointments to these bodies were made by the President through an intricate
system of patronage. Participation of local structures in decision-making and management
diminished. Central government became the engine for economic growth and the main provider of
employment, public goods and social services. The role of development partners was considerably
reduced: for example, Government took over private schools and hospitals their services made free
for everyone.
As part of its populist policies, the government introduced food subsidies, controlled prices, and
promoted the growing of maize throughout the country.
The government was able to finance these programmes using earnings from copper-related taxes and
reserves inherited from the colonial government.
Towards the close of 1980s, the situation changed dramatically: the economy had sunk into a deep
recession. It became clear that these populist policies could not be sustained; the government could
no longer maintain schools, hospitals, roads, and other public works.6
(c)
The Third Republic (1990-present)
Between 1971 and 1973, the contribution of mineral tax to central government current revenue was 13.3% this fell to 1.8% for the
years 1981, 1982 and 1983. During the period of 1977 to 1979, mineral tax as percentage of government revenue averaged 1.2 (CSO
Monthly Digest of Statistics, vol. XX, No. 12 December 1984, p.25); expected income from investments in the state-controlled parastatal
companies could not be realised; in fact, these parastatal companies became totally dependent on government subventions. The effect
of the oil crises worsened the economic hardships.
6
16
The Third Republic saw the return to a multiparty system of government. The government pursued a
market- oriented economic system, favouring liberal economic policies such as privatisation of
state-owned enterprises. Centralised planning was altogether discontinued.
2.3
Phases of Decentralization
Parallel to the above political-historical processes, there were also efforts to decentralize the
administrative system. Below is a brief account of the various phases of the decentralization
initiatives undertaken to date. For simplicity, three phases have been identified, corresponding to
each of the three Republics, described above. An understanding of these phases provides an
important context for this case study. Table 2.1 gives a summary of the decentralization initiatives
in Zambia from 1964 to the present.
According to Table 2.1, during the period of the first Republic (1964 through 1970), there were dual
structures at district level, i.e. Local Council and District Administration. The administration of
these structures proved costly to the Government. There were also problems of accountability. For
example, provincial heads of departments were accountability to their respective Permanent
Secretaries at the centre. The District Secretary, who was head of field administration, was
accountable to the public Service Commission. Duplication of effort at district and provincial levels
resulted in wastage of resources. Centralisation of authority tended to reduce community
participation, created a sense of overdependence on the central government, and resulted in
inefficiency in service delivery.
Table 2.1
Summary of Decentralization initiatives in Zambia from 1964 to the present
Phase
Central Government

The First
Republic
(1964 – 1970)


Local Government
(Province/District/Sub-district)
At Provincial level:
 Resident Commissioner responsible for
coordination of Provinces and Districts.
 Provincial Commissioner: head of
provincial and district administration;
 Civil servants answerable to Provincial
Commissioner.
 Provincial Development Commission
(PDC), chaired by the Provincial
Minister, scrutinised all district
development requests and forwarded
them to the NDC for further scrutiny
and budgetary support.
Provision was made for Ministry
responsible for Local Government
headed by a Cabinet Minister;
Permanent
Secretary
for
administration of local authorities;
line Ministries headed by Permanent
Secretaries; Minister of Local
Government
and
Housing,
responsible for local government
administration.
National Development Committee
(NDC) comprising all Line
Ministries was responsible for
overall management of the economy
Planning was centralized.
At the District level (composed of
municipality and township councils),
 Elected representatives controlled the
Local Government
 District Commissioner [who headed
field Administration, supervised all field
staff in the district] was answerable to
the Provincial Commissioner.
 From 1967, District Secretary replaced
the District Commissioner as head of
district administration. In the following
year, the District Governor was
appointed political head of the district.
 The DDC consolidated the district
development requirements and
17
forwarded them to the PDC for scrutiny
and submission to the NDC.
At sub-district level:
 Councils were headed by the
Mayors/Chairmen who were elected
political heads of the council.
 Town Clerks/Council Secretaries,
appointed by the Municipal, Rural and
Township Councils] were administrative
heads of Local Authorities and were
accountable to the council.

The Second
Republic
(1971-1990)

In 1980, Central and local
Government Administration were
merged with Party Administration.
The Ministry of Decentralisation,
assisted by a Minister of State, was
created in the Office of the Prime
Minister

Local Government elections were
abolished and replaced by party
elections.
At Provincial level: the Member of Central
Committee assisted by the Provincial
Political Secretary
 The District Council was supported by
Party structures of Ward, Branch and
Section Committees
 Permanent Secretary was head of
administration. In some provinces there
were two Provincial Political
Secretaries, one for Political and the
other for Development.
At District level: the District Governor who
was a political appointee headed the
integrated district administration
At Sub-district level: Ward Development
Committees [WDC] and Village
Development Committees [VDC] were
created under the 1979 Village
Development and Registration Act, No. 30.
18
Table 2.1 Summary of Decentralization (continued)
Phase
Central Government
Local Government
Following the shift from one Party State At Provincial level, the Deputy
to a multi-party democracy, the Minister, assisted by the Permanent
The Third
following changes were made:
Secretary, was appointed head of
Republic
Provincial Administration.
(1991 - 1999)
 At National level, the Ministry
of
Decentralisation
was
 The Provincial heads of
transformed into the Ministry of
departments continued to be
Local
Government
and
answerable to their respective
Housing[MLGH]
Ministry Headquarters.
 MLGH was responsible for
 At District level, there was
local government
no
head
of
district
 Cabinet Office was responsible
administration to coordinate
for Provincial and District
all sectors of government.
Administration.
 The Town Clerk or District
In 1995, the Government introduced the:
Council
Secretary
coordinated sector Ministry
 National Development
activities.
Coordinating Committee
[NDCC]; Provincial
 The Councils remained body
Development Coordinating
corporate
and
operated
Committee [PDCC]; and
independently
from
District Development
administration.
Coordinating Committee
[DDCC] to coordinate activities
at respective levels.
The Third
Republic
(2000 to the
present)
At both National and Provincial levels,
the structures set up during the period of
1990-1999 remained unchanged. Only
reporting relationship have changed
slightly.




District Administrators [DAs]
were appointed in 2000.
They report directly to the
Office of the President.
Town Clerks/Council
Secretaries report to the
Council who are their
employers.
District Councils operate
independently from field
administration at district
level.
District Heads of Sector
Ministries report directly to
their Ministerial
Headquarters through their
provincial heads
The second Republic (1971 to 1990) saw the creation of sub-district structures to support effective
decentralization. The village was to become the primary focus for local development with emphasis
19
on self reliance and mutual cooperation. Because of the deteriorating economic situation, these
decentralized structures could not be implemented.
The merging of the Party, Local Government and District Administration enhanced supremacy of
the Party; but it did not promote effective coordination of development programmes.
Decentralization was limited to transfer of central government administrative functions without
matching financial resources. It is acknowledged that there was noticeable political interference in
administration and coordination of development programmes: key positions were occupied by party
functionaries most of whom lacked the requisite administrative management capacity; the integrated
district administration system increased administrative cost at all levels; the appointment of the
District Governor as Chairperson of the Council undermined community and local government
empowerment. The delivery of basic economic and social services was constrained by the
deterioration in the country’s economy.
The discontinuation of national planning, monitoring and evaluation during the entire period of the
third Republic (1900-2000) created severe problems of transparency and accountability. Cash
budgeting was introduced as a measure to control government spending. Centralisation of authority
continued. This situation did not promote effective decision-making at lower levels. Provincial
heads of departments were controlled from the centre; their limited budgetary allocations were
determined from the centre.
As the reader will note in Table 2.1, the decentralization policy endorsed by Parliament in 2002 has
retained the office of District Administrator [DA]. This situation may contribute to the
strengthening of the dual system at the district level. The current administrative system does not
provide for the establishment of sub-structures at sub-district level to enable local communities
participate effectively in their development activities. District Development Coordinating
Committee (DDCC) lacks a legal framework to back its operations. The absence of a head of district
administration will continue to contribute to ineffective coordination of development programmes in
the district and sub-district levels.
2.4
Earlier CDD Initiatives leading to present ZAMSIF Programme
The deterioration in the economy, during the period of the second Republic, forced government to
embark on structural adjustment programmes [SAP]. The economic reforms imposed by both the
government and the multilaterals had the immediate effect of worsening the quality of life of the
same people the government sought to protect. SAP was perceived as an imposition by the Bank, the
IMF and the multilaterals. This perception leads to a decline in public support of the leadership. The
government began to lose legitimacy in the eyes of the general public. At the same time, the
opposition to the government started to gain popular support. In 1985, the Government decided to
abandon the Bank- IMF structural adjustment policy.
In late 1988, however, the government resumed its policy dialogue with the World Bank and
International Monetary Fund and SAP was reintroduced. The Bank strategy in Zambia at the time
consisted of immediate action to redress the economic and social distress and to initiate longer- term
action that would address policy issues in the agricultural, education, and health sectors. As part of
SAP, the government started to implement a host of poverty alleviation and poverty reduction
projects throughout the entire country. Both groups of projects have some elements of CDD.
2.4.1
Poverty Alleviation and Poverty Reduction Projects
The poverty alleviation programmes [PAPs] were designed to mitigate the social costs of
implementing the Structural Adjustment Programme [SAP]. They consist mainly of social welfare
assistance schemes or safety nets, intended for the poor and vulnerable segments of society.
Examples of poverty alleviation interventions in Zambia are: (i) Public Welfare Assistance Scheme
(PWAS), which provides education support, shelter, clothing and food to destitute persons: (i.e.,
20
disabled, widows, the aged and children; (ii) Health Care Support Scheme, which ensures that poor
persons who cannot afford medical service fees have access to health services; (iii) Family Health
Trust, which provides home-based care to persons living with HIV-AIDS, children in distress, run
always, stranded persons, and victims of disaster; (iv) National Trust Fund (NTF) for the Disabled,
which provide credit facilities to the disabled to enable them to engage in income generating
activities; and Food – for- Work [FFW], which provides temporary employment to persons, mainly
women, in carrying out infrastructure activities (e.g. construction of roads, health centres, culverts,
pit latrines, etc] and (vi) Water Sanitation and Health [WASHE], which seeks to improve the
provision of safe water, sanitation and good health practices in rural areas.
The poverty reduction projects, on the other hand, were intended to reduce the incidence of poverty
by empowering the poor with capacity-creating instruments such as work, credit, training, etc. and to
improve the delivery of social services. A few examples of PREP interventions are: (i) MicroBankers Trust, which promotes micro-credit delivery to poor persons through independent nongovernmental financial intermediaries; (ii) National Vocational Rehabilitation Programme (NVRP),
which provides training in vocational skills to disabled youths and injured workmen to enable them
engage in small- scale enterprises; (iii) National Programme of Action for Youth (NPAY), which
provides skills training for the youth; and (iv) Tasintha, an NGO, which rehabilitates commercial
sex workers by providing them with skills in more socially acceptable productive activities.
Interventions under both poverty alleviation addressed the manifestations of poverty while those
under and poverty reduction projects focused on some aspects of the immediate causes of poverty.
Most of the interventions were small
in scale and short-term in nature. They were donor-driven. They all targeted the poor and sought to
enlist the participation of the intended beneficiaries at the community level. However, they were not
adequately integrated into the overall economic framework of the country. A majority of these
interventions remain fragmented, uncoordinated, and unsustainable [MCDSS, 1999].
2.4.2
The Micro projects
As early as 1985, the European Union (EU) initiated a Micro project programme. It was
administered by the Micro projects Unit (MPU) in the Ministry of Finance. The primary objective
was to support small investments dealing with education, health, women in development, water
supply, sanitation, and small-scale industries.
The approach of MPU consisted of: (i) promotional campaigns to encourage communities to submit
project proposals for funding; (ii) formation of project committees comprising individuals from the
community; (iii) submission by the project proposals for funding by MPU; (iv) review and selection
of proposals by a pre-appointed committee; (v) disbursing funds directly into bank accounts created
by projects’ committees, and (vi) giving the projects’ committees control over the use of the funds.
This approach was new. It stressed community participation in the identification and implementation
of the projects, particularly in the education sector. For instance, within communities, parents
contributed cash (by way of fees) and the communities provided labour to build primary schools and
purchased the learning inputs. especially in rural areas. This revival of a self-help tradition marked a
dramatic change from the dependency syndrome that had characterised the style of development
during the period of the first Republic when the economy was prosperous.
2.4.3
The First and Second Zambia Social Recovery Programmes
Two Social Recovery Programmes were initiated, with support from the World Bank, during the
early years of the third Republic. (see Sections 2.2 and 2.3). Table 2.2 gives a summary of the
programme objectives and components. The activities of these social fund programme ranged from
simple, quick-impact projects to complex, structural changes in sector policy, planning, and
operations. The main focus of these programmes was on immediate action. The design elements of
these programmes retained the community-driven features of the successful ongoing EU-supported
21
Micro projects. The Bank also used the same project management structure as the EU and agreed on
a joint-management with it.
The government supported this new approach because: (i) the traditional public sector agencies were
already over-stretched with the implementation of the economic reforms [SAP], and (ii) basic social
and economic services could be more efficiently delivered by using local communities to identify,
design, and implement such projects; (iii) the government was assured of incremental funding to
support the social sector at a time when it was faced with severe economic crisis; (iv) the
government saw SRPI (or ZAMSIF I) as complementing the on-going poverty alleviation and
poverty reduction programmes (see Section 2.4.1). Furthermore, the Bank’s own strategy in Zambia
in the early 1990’s was consistent with the community-driven approach of the two programmes.
Table 2.2 Objectives and Components of the Social Recovery Programmes I and II
Social Fund
Programme
[SRP]
Community-level
Local Governmentlevel
22
Central Government
level
Social Recovery
Programme I
[SRP I]
Project ID:
P003242
1991-1998
Cost:US$46.4
million:
SRP II
Project ID:
P003210
1995-2000
Total costs of
$34.4
Fund community
Bolster provincial and
initiatives in education,
district staff capacity
health, nutrition, and food
in the above sectors 7
security sectors;
 supporting rehabilitation
and improvement of
existing infrastructure
and service delivery in
these areas; for the
purpose of mitigating
the effects on the poor
of the structural
adjustment programme.
Community initiatives (89%
of funding),
Conduct surveys and
analyses to enhance
government planning
and policy making in
the social sector;
 Survey
analysis
and
monitoring
(4%).
 Institutional
support (of the
Micro projects
Unit – 6%), and
Community Initiatives to
finance subprojects (74.4%)
– These would be identified,
prepared and implemented
by communities, and
appraised by the Micro
Projects Unit (MPU.)
To assist the
Government of the
Republic of Zambia’s
(GRZ) poverty
reduction
programme through
building capacity for
quantitative and
qualitative poverty
analysis monitoring.
 Living Conditions
Monitoring Unit
(7.0%) – Capacity
building and data
collection through
a LCMS (Living
Conditions
Monitoring
Survey)
 Poverty Analysis
Study Fund (3.1%)
 Participatory
Poverty Analysis
(6%)
Institution Building
and Support (14.9%) –
Capacity building for
both subproject
implementation and
decentralised
government agencies
Community initiatives would
assist the poor and
vulnerable to meet their own
priority needs. Community
initiatives would improve
the capacities of both
communities and
government staff to plan,
appraise, manage and
maintain investment projects
through learning by doing
on the subprojects.
2.5
Achievements of the Social Recovery Programmes
Table 2.3 presents a summary of main outcomes/Impacts and lessons learned from the first two
Social Recovery Programme. Between 1995 and 2000 the project supported: the construction of
220 new classrooms and the rehabilitation of 1500, over 700 teacher’s houses and water supply and
sanitation infrastructure for school including 96 boreholes and 2,500 ventilated pit latrines. A post
evaluation survey of these two programmes showed that all the SRP-supported schools had above
average percentage trained teachers; greater demand for places; and increased attendance and
enrolment. Maintenance of the infrastructure was incorporated up-front and most of the sampled
This objective emerged from decisions made at the mid-term review, and was accomplished by reallocation of funds from community
initiatives into capacity building and institutional support
7
23
subprojects were of satisfactory quality at the time of survey. Community ownership and skill levels
to maintain the assets were reinforced by capacity building measures.
24
Table 2.3
Summary of Main Outcomes/Impacts and Lessons Learned from the Social
Institutional
Recovery
Outcomes/Impacts
Programmes
25
Lessons Learned
Level
Community




Local
Government







Project supported construction of
220 new classrooms and the
rehabilitation of 1500.
Over 700 teacher’s houses were
constructed.
Supported water supply and
sanitation infrastructure for school.
This included 96 boreholes and
2,500 ventilated pit latrines.
the project introduced more intensive
training and technical assistance for
communities.

the project introduced training for
district, provincial staff
Project promoted the use of District
teams because they were found to be
more effective than working with
individuals from various
departments.
strengthened capacity at the , both in
the community level
strengthened capacity in regional
offices
which
supported
the
government’s policy of devolving
authority.
As District staff became more
involved in MPU activities, linkages
between regional offices and district
staff were strengthened.
The SRP extended the regional
office network from one (as planned
in the SAR) to 7, and provided
training and sub-project experience
that enhanced the ability of district
staff to work effectively with
communities.
supporting government’s efforts to
decentralise and devolve
responsibility to the district.










26
These outputs rehabilitated
and provided much-needed
improvements in small-scale
social infrastructure
Built the capacity of
communities in identifying,
designing, and implementing
small-scale social
investments
strengthening institutional
capacity both in local
government and at the
community level contributed
to the government’s
decentralisation goals.
enhance
project
launch
workshops,
improved
training
programmes,
Stressed the need for
significant capacity building
inputs
Despite completion of much
training, district level staff
capacity was rated
unsatisfactory
The capacity of district staff
and the DDCC to act as
agents of change, providing
information and assisting
communities to apply for
projects, was reported
limited.
Linkages between district
level staff and communities
were seen as weak.
The project design reflected
the need to devolve safety net
activities to local groups
stressed the importance of
participatory planning and
implementation of
intervention by and for the
poor...
Central
Government
Elements of CDD
Principle
2.6
On Surveys and Analysis
 Performance in terms of timely
completed of surveys and provision
of data was considered highly
satisfactory
 weaknesses in analysis and use of
information from the LCMS data.
 The analysis and monitoring
components of the project yielded,
for the first time, useful data for the
government. This stimulated useful
debates on poverty.
 strengthened local research capacity.
 34 policy and operational studies,
including
five
Beneficiary
Assessments were completed
What this Element of the CDD Principle
 LCMS contributed to the evaluation
says
of both SRPs as well as providing
data for the SIF 2000 study.

Poverty Analysis Study Fund
completed a total of 5 priority
and 23 small scale studies
 Use of these studies were
considered limited.
 despite the recruitment of
Research Advisor in 1996
only the priority studies have
had any direct impact on
policy decision.
 Due to dependence on
external funding
sustainability of this
component was rated
“unlikely.”
 The impact of policy studies
Evidence of presence or
improves where the full
absence of this CDD
participation of major
principle in the SRP I and
stakeholders.
II
Overview of CDD Principles in the Social Recovery Programmes
Table 2.4 summarises for the reader evidence of the presence/absence of CDD vision as presented
in Section 1 and elaborated in the case study guidelines.8 The presentation covers: (i) Information
and Communication, (ii) Participation, (iii) Co-financing by communities, (iv) Manuals, (v)
Decentralization, and (vi) Sustainability. The second column of the tables state the CDD principle,
and the third column gives information, obtained from the available literature, to show whether or
not the particular CDD element was part of the operations of the two SRPs.
Table 2.4 Evidence of CDD Principle: Communication/Information in the Social Recovery
Programmes
8Hans
Binswanger and Swaminathan Aiyar, Scaling Up Community Driven Development: Theoretical Underpinnings and Programme
Design Implications, February, 2002.
27
Communication &
Information








primacy of Informed Choice in
Demand- based Initiatives
regular, unbiased, and bi-directional
information flows vertically between
responsible institution down to the
community level as well as
horizontally within each type of
organisation;
incentives for the community to
participate in project activities; and
opportunity and mechanisms for varied
groups in the community, to voice
their demand.
Fostering a learning culture
Effective expression of community
choice
CDD requires that communities have
adequate information about what is
offered, know the terms of the offer,
and understand the implications of
their choice (particularly their O&M
obligations). This often requires that
an
information
campaign
and
community sensitisation precede the
offer of funds.
A communication strategy that
provides a two-way flow of
information.








Logistics: Manuals
Successful CDD require manual :
 to train: all communities, associations
and other co-producers.
 The
logistical
systems
for:
disbursements,
financial
accountability, and auditing system.
 Simple, clear and concise guidelines
for accessing funds can reduce
political manipulation.
 The logistical systems for: contracting,
procurement and distribution of goods
and services for the programme...
28
Attention was given to
information
dissemination and
subprojects identification
processes
Use was made of
information from
independent evaluations.
There was increased
contact between
communities and district
councils through District
workshops
There was improved
communication,
familiarization, and skill
development
District workshops and
desk appraisal helped to
strengthen the
participation of district
officers in the subproject
Improved field appraisal
and subproject launch
workshops contributed to
better understanding,
commitment, and
performance at the
community level.
There was closer
interaction with
communities and local
government.
Beneficiary Assessment
and other evaluation
confirmed the
importance of early
information-sharing and
outreach.
To assist communities
identify and implement
projects:
 maintenance manuals
were developed.
 Application guidelines
and project
implementation manual
for project committees
were also developed
 Other logistical system
were not developed
Table 2.4 continued
Elements of
CDD Principle
Participation:
Participatory
appraisal and
planning
(PA&P);
NGO
Participation
What this Element of the CDD
Principle says
 Real participation
aims to
involving citizens at every stage and
level. This includes the micro or
community level, the meso or
intermediate
level
(local
governments, NGOs.) and the macro
or national/policy level (central
government, World Bank staff).
 Real participation implies
that:
development choices
are taken
under conditions of full information,
full representation of all interests
 Real stakeholder participation is
required in:
 appraisal,
and
planning,
implementation and M and E.
Participatory appraisal and planning
(PA&P) by all stakeholders help:
 Strengthen decision making at the
community level.
 It is the starting point for acquisition
of citizen information about options,
resources,
constraints,
latent
capabilities,
and
the
likely
consequences of each subproject for
each stakeholder.
 It helps bring about the conditions
for optimal social choice;
 strengthen or create community
development committee and relevant
subcommittees; and identify group
leaders and appropriate institutional
arrangements...
 Communities and local
governments need to be involved
in: the design, execution,
maintenance and operation of
projects.
29
Evidence of presence or absence
of this CDD principle in the SRP
I and II
 Community participation in
project identification was very
limited. This gave room to elite
capture.
 Communities
were
not
involved in the design,
monitoring/appraisal
and
evaluation of the projects.
 The participation of NGOs in
SRP was limited;
 NGOs were not directly
involved in the design of the
SRP.
 only 10 percent of the
subproject funded under SRPI
involved NGOs
Co-financing by communities promotes
local ownership;
To inculcate a sense of local ownership,
communities should contribute to:
 both capital costs and maintenance
costs of projects meant for their
benefit. Contributions can be in cash
or kind (labour, local materials).
 Requiring community contribution
also instills a sense of ownership and
responsibility for subprojects and
increases sustainability.
 Where communities have no sense
of ownership, assets may atrophy for
want of motivation in operation and
maintenance.
 CDD needs to be financed by intergovernmental transfers mandated by
a revenue-sharing formula
 This gives communities and local
governments an assured shared of
central revenue.
 It also needs to be financed by the
own resources of communities, local
governments
and
other
coproducers.
 Funding for communities should
become a fiscal right, not largesse
from donors or the central
government.
Co-financing by
Communities

under SRP I, actual community
contributions averaged 26
percent of subproject costs
 communities contributed
substantially to subprojects
funding through the provision
of labour, materials, and land
 At the macro-project level,
funding of the SRP was largely
provided by donors.
 government funding was an
issue throughout project
implementation
 Government counterpart
funding was almost never
provided on time and in full.
 On the other hand, the
community contributions to
subprojects costs were
substantial (totalling
$6,569,002 for SRPI)
 Provision of government
funding was unsatisfactory –
only $0.1 million of an
expected $3.6 million was
received.
 At the macro-project level, the
government relied heavily on
donor funding to sustain the
project.
 As a result, at the close of the
project there were “…seriously
dilapidated facilities and lack
of maintenance…”
Technical
assistance &
Facilitation
Communities and local governments
already have latent capabilities.
Empowerment will harness these skills
through learning by doing. This should
be supplemented by relevant capacity
building.
To assist with participatory appraisal,
planning and programme and sub
project design and implementation,
communities need:
Capacity building component
was emphasised. Content of the
training programme was not
available for review
Decentralization

See Table 2.1.
Under the second Republic
efforts were made to implement
a decentralized system. The
village was to become the basic

Local government structures,
policies and funding must be in
place to support activities of a
Social Investment Funds.
Well-designed
Decentralization
30



Sustainability






should
cover
political,
administrative ,and fiscal aspects
Decentralization outcomes tend to
be poor in all cases where the
local councillors: were not elected,
were accountable to central
governments rather than the
people they served, lacked enough
fiscal means to make a real
difference.
Decentralization works best in
cases where local leaders are
committed, serious and provide
ample fiscal resources.
Decentralization should give local
governments
a
predictable,
transparent share of revenue
(including foreign aid), preferably
by a legally-mandated formula.
This will empower them with
financial viability
Fiscal
sustainability,
Asset
9
sustainability, and
Social sustainability are all
essential.
Participation
and
real
empowerment are the bedrock on
which all forms of sustainability
must rest. Only through these
processes can fiscal, asset,
environmental
and
social
sustainability be ensured.
Government
should
provide
evidence of a real increase in
budgetary allocations for nonwage recurring costs to support
maintenance costs.
Matching grants for communities
from donor can kick-start CDD,
but the process cannot rely forever
on donor programmes. It must be
embedded in a permanent
institutional framework.
Communities
and
local
governments
can
be
truly
empowered only by: giving them
an assured flow of funds from the
central government.

unit of planning. Planning was
discontinued under the third
Republic; and the dual system
put in place. At the time of the
first and second SRPs the
government had not approved
the decentralization policy. The
policy was approved in 2002.






At the macro-project level,
the government relied
heavily on donor funding
to sustain the project.
government funding was an
issue throughout project
implementation
Government counterpart
funding was almost never
provided on time and in
full.
As a result, at the close of
the project there were
“…seriously dilapidated
facilities and lack of
maintenance…”
relevant sector agencies
may not have been
involved adequately and
early on in decision of what
is financed
Note, during the period of
the project implementation
the government had
abandoned national
planning. Cash budgeting
was the norm. There was
no long-range planning.
See Section 2.2).
This means that communities and local stakeholders assume full responsibility for (i) maintenance of community most assets, and (ii)
authority to levy user fees and local taxes to finance maintenance. Funds raised from user fees and local taxes can then be used to
maintain community assets.
9
31
Table 2.4 continued
2.7
Summary of Lessons for CDD
Social fund programmes, such as the SRP I and II, must be placed in the broader context of an
overall national poverty reduction strategy. Furthermore, in order to ensure sustainability, such these
programmes should be integrated into the system of intergovernmental and local development
financing. Issues of sustainability should take into account on-going reforms particularly those that
can promote effective decentralization.
Lessons from Zambia’s first Social Recovery Programmes clearly show that CDD can work in
Zambia. However, to be effective, due attention will have to be accorded capacity building in
participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation at national, district and community levels. Given
the size of the country, lack of a specific targeting mechanism and weak coordination may lead to
inefficient distribution and use of available financial and human resources.
32
Chapter 3
Current Zambia Social Investment Fund Programme
3.1
Background
3.01
The present Zambia Social Investment Fund [ZAMSIF III] programme [Project ID:
P063584] was approved in May 2000 and became effective on 11th July 2000. This programme is a
successor to the Social Recovery Project II. It is based on the experiences and lessons learnt from
both Social Recovery Project I and II. ZAMSIF is one of government’s poverty reduction
instruments. The programme will cover a 10-year period. The first phase, covering 5 years, is
supported by a World Bank loan/credit amount of US $ 64.7 million.
3.02
The formulation of ZAMSIF coincided with the final phases of the preparation of the
national Poverty Reduction Strategy [ZPRS] and the long-awaited decentralization policy. The
ZPRS was finalized in March 2002. In April of the same year, Parliament approved the
decentralization policy. The poverty strategy represents the nation’s development planning and
resource programming tool. Its goal is to reduce the level of poverty through “sustained economic
growth and employment creation.” The strategy firmly recognizes the multi-dimensional nature of
the concept of poverty, and puts the reduction of poverty at the centre stage of the country’s overall
development. This means that the causes, as well as the consequences, of poverty should now be
addressed in an integrated and coherent manner. The key assumptions contained in the poverty
reduction strategic framework are summarised in Fig. 3.1 below in order to assist the reader to
appreciate the linkage between the ZPRS and the current ZAMSIF programme objectives.
Fig. 3.1
A Diagrammatic View of Zambia Poverty Reduction Strategic Framework
showing main Components and linkages
SOCIAL
SECTORS [4]
INTERVENTIONS
IN
INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT
[7]
MACROECONOMIC &
CROSSCUTTING
ISSUES [6]
GOVERNANCE
[3]
SUSTAINED
ECONOMIC
GROWTH
&
EMPLOYMENT
CREATION
[2]
POVERTY
REDUCTION
[1]
ECONOMIC
SECTORS [5]
Key
Influence of Infrastructure development is direct
Influence of infrastructure development is indirect
3.03
According to Fig.3.1, infrastructure development and good governance are essential for
sustained economic growth and poverty reduction which is the stated goal of the ZPRS. The diagram
emphasizes that sustained economic growth and employment creation (though necessary) will not be
sufficient to reduce the deepening poverty in the country unless sufficient attention is paid to issues
of governance and microeconomic stability.
33
3.04
Finally, Fig. 3.1 says that interventions in infrastructure development [1] (covering road,
rail, and river transport, post office, cattle dip, school buildings, clinics, hospitals, markets,
electricity, water wells, police station, bank, hammer mill, agricultural input facility, etc) will
promote social [4], and economic [5], progress as well as impact on cross-cutting issues [6], such as
HIV-AIDS, gender, and environment.
3.05
The ZPRS contains measures that address issues such as: community empowerment
(broadening consultations with the citizens through their various elected representatives to derive
public priorities); promoting accountability; transparency (participatory budgeting, procurement and
contracting procedures); separation of powers; the need for a policy of ‘zero tolerance’ of corruption; and
the urgency for implementing the policy of decentralization (both administrative and fiscal).
3.06
ZAMSIF programme explicitly reflects the above poverty–reduction strategies. The
programme is also conceived against the background of the decentralization policy whose successful
implementation is expected to empower both local governments and communities to fully participate
in all the development processes that affect their own welfare.
3.2
ZAMSIF Programme Description
3.2.1
Programme Development Objectives
3.07
The programme development objectives are as follows:
(i)
To achieve sustainable improved availability and use of quality basic social
by beneficiary communities and specific vulnerable groups;
(ii)
To contribute to the building of capacity for improved local governance; and
(iii) To strengthen the capacity to provide timely information on poverty and
social conditions and facilitate its use in policy making.
services
3.08
Objective (i) aims at empowering local communities through the financing of sub-projects
identified, implemented, managed and maintained by the communities. Objective (ii) will support
the process of strengthening the capacity of local government administrations and their
accountability vis-à-vis local communities. Objective (iii) gives a framework for poverty monitoring
and analysis activities and provides the opportunity for linking this activity to policy-making.
3.2.2
Main Programme Components
3.09
The programme components as presented in the PAD (Annex 3, p.50) are as follows:
 Community Investment Fund (CIF)
 District Investment Fund (DIF)
 Poverty Monitoring and Analysis (PMA), and
 Institutional support/Operational Costs
3.10
Cost of Programme Components and percentage share of each component is presented in
Table 3.1.
Table 3.1.
Programme Components and Cost
ZAMSIF Programme Component
Community Investment Fund (CIF)
District Investment Fund (DIF)
Poverty Monitoring and Analysis (PMA),
34
Total
Cost $
million
33.5
10.3
2.8
%
of Total cost
57%
17%
5%
Institutional support/Operational Costs
Total baseline Cost
3.3
12.6
59.2
21%
100%
Description of Main Programme Components
3.3.1
The Community Investment Fund Component
3.11
This component finances priority community-based projects. The full range of projects that
can be funded under the CIF component is given in Table 3.1. These projects may include:
(i)




Social infrastructure such as:
primary health,
basic education,
rural water and sanitation and
initiatives for women and other vulnerable groups.
(ii)






Economic infrastructures such as:
community roads, markets, bridges,
natural resource management,
basic skills training,
training of trainers,
capacity building;
small-scale community projects that aim to improve the productivity and employment for
vulnerable groups, and other community based activities which meet the priority needs of poor
communities.
35
Table 3.2
[CIF] of
Range of Sub-projects that can be Funded under the Social Investment Fund
ZAMSIF Programme, Zambia.
36
Primary and
Basic
Education






Health
Roads
Water and
Sanitation
Rehabilitation and extension of existing primary schools,
new schools that qualify under current GRZ sector policy and
where the recurrent costs and service provision, especially
trained teachers, are ensured.
Community managed pre schools may also be supported.
Community based strategies which address the problem of
poor school attendance, especially for girls and vulnerable
children, will be developed.
functional literacy training for women, and
development of long distance learning possibilities.
Priority will be given to primary education in:
 rehabilitation ,
 expansion and
 improvement of primary schools,
 including classrooms,
 water & sanitation,
 furniture,
 staff houses and
 dormitories for remote schools and those with pro-OVC
policy.
 rural health centres
 and small clinics where the recurrent costs and service
delivery are ensured by the Ministry of Health.
 construction for community based managed health posts.
 interventions to improve the access to health facilities by
remote and poor communities could include:
 mobile clinics,
 training for community based health workers
 and strengthening of the concept of neighbourhood health
committees.
 rehabilitation and expansion of existing health centres
together with maternity wards, out-patients and maternal
child health blocks, water and sanitation and necessary
furniture and equipment and electrification.
 construction of staff houses and relative’s shelters at health
centres.
 community managed roads using labour based methods.
 Earth roads,
 drainage,
 bridges,
 footbridges,
 culverts,
 causeways,
 drifts and splashes
 Training of district staff in simple technical skills for road
rehabilitation using hand labour
 community based and managed rural water and sanitation
facilities.
 construction, installation and rehabilitation of protected wells
and boreholes with hand pumps;
 rehabilitation or extension of communal piped water supplies;
 construction of Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP) latrines; and
 ablution blocks.
37
Gender and
Women






Infrastructure development that address priority practical and
strategic needs of women
Capacity building for district institutions that are able to
support community based organisations [CBO]
gender sensitisation,
training of trainers and development of a gender module
which will be delivered to all community based projects
funded by the CIF.
information exchange regarding lessons learnt through the
various committees and the IEC strategy.
The living conditions of women will be monitored and
analysed with the support of the PMA component of
ZAMSIF
Table 3.2 continued
38

Natural
Resource
Management 
and the
Environment 
HIV/AIDS
Orphans
and
Vulnerable
Groups
(OVC
Communitybased
Capacity
building and
training
programmes
Community based natural resource management that
emphasises sustainable way, use of natural resources
projects which control soil erosion and deforestation and
preserve wildlife.
capacity building and information dissemination for
communities, district staff and others to be aware of, and
mitigate against, environmental damage and to strengthen
their stewardship capacity in natural resource management.
 Expansion of PEF/ESP programme interventions to other
districts.
The CIF component will support community-based strategies
which deal with the impact of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. These
will include:
 development of modules and an information strategy.
 support to the National Strategy for AIDS.
 Demand-driven sub-projects, which would aim to address
the problems of the impact of HIV/AIDS.
 community schools: support to schools which have a
positive policy towards Orphans and Vulnerable Children
(OVC) – (e.g. PTA pays fees of OVC; community
provides shelter, uniforms, books etc for OVC; community
provides food for vulnerable children in school;) teachers
training costs for “untrained teachers” for remote and
“OVC” friendly schools;
 capacity-building activities, such as training programmes
for community volunteers
 support to training for counsellors and home based care
givers; support to community based organizations which
aim to address HIV/AIDS.
 interventions aimed at supporting orphans and vulnerable
children (OVC) that keep them in the family structure.
 OVC interventions that originate in the community and are
aimed at providing communities with adequate information
to make decisions, capacity building and resources for
solutions
 Grandparents which support orphans
There will be three aspects of this capacity building:
 ‘Learning by Doing’
as communities plan, implement and maintain their community
based projects will form a major part of management capacity
building.
 Training modules
The modules will be short discussion sessions using various
participatory techniques and adult learning methods and will be
delivered by trained facilitators. The modules will include
topics such as maintenance, HIV AIDS, gender sensitisation,
development of a community based OVC strategy,
environmental appraisal and management, procurement,
financial management and so on. The modules will be
facilitated during project implementation at different stages of
the project cycle.

Community Training:
39
Training of community members in community based service
delivery, such as home based care, counselling, business and
entrepreneurship skills, traditional birth attendants, community
health workers and community.
Projects to
be piloted in
the first
year of
ZAMSIF
Examples of such sub-projects will include:
 projects which support Neighbourhood Watch associations
 improvements to local courts in both urban and rural areas,
 cattle clubs,
 community managed post offices
 communication centres
 irrigation systems.
Special Design Elements of CIF
3.12
This list clearly shows that the present social fund programme differs significantly from the
previous ones in the following respects:
 There is a shift from the community project as an infrastructure project to the community project
as a focus for the provision of opportunities for social development and information
dissemination. Projects for vulnerable groups such as orphans and vulnerable children (OVC)
and women have been added.

The focus on community empowerment is quite clear: communities are expected to identify,
implement, manage and maintain their own priority projects. It is expected that ZAMSIF will
assist the implementing communities through ‘on the job’ training. District officers who will be
trained in facilitation and relevant technical skills under the District Investment Fund (DIF),
described under section 4.2.2, are expected to provide the communities with all the assistance
they need to enable them implement, manage and maintain their projects successfully.

Communities will be assisted by specialist Non Governmental Organisations (NGO) or private
sector for community based capacity building in such areas as home based care and counselling,
natural resource management, participatory planning techniques, literacy and so on.
The community project will become a focus for community development and a focus for
information resource base.
Modules will be developed for gender, environment, maintenance and operations, HIV/AIDS
etc, and facilitators trained in their use at the community level.


CIF Target Groups
3.13
The main target population for CIF-funded sub-projects are poor communities, mostly
located in rural and particularly remote areas of the country. Within a given selected community,
special consideration will be given to at risk and most vulnerable population groups such as orphans
and vulnerable children, women, female headed households and families affected by HIV/AIDS.
These vulnerable groups will be identified by the communities themselves and their needs
addressed.
40
Community Participation
3.14
Investments under the CIF will be available to all the 72 districts. Full participation of the
target communities is considered critical for the Community Investment Fund (CIF). This is to
ensure that community members contribute to the improvement of their own welfare. The subprojects will be identified, prepared, implemented, managed and maintained by beneficiary
communities.
3.15
The responsibility for operation and maintenance of the sub-projects will depend on the
nature of the sub-project, but is likely to be that of the community and line ministry. Each
community will be expected to contribute about 15% of the total cost of each project, in cash,
materials or unskilled labour or a combination of these. Note, that community contribution under the
previous community-level projects managed by the Micro-projects Unit [MPU] was set at 20 %.
3.3.2.
District Investment Fund Component
3.16
The overall objective of the District Investment Fund (DIF) is to create the capacity in
districts so as to contribute to improved local governance. The specific aims of DIF are:




To provide local governments [LG] with means to improve their strategic development
planning, technical, management and financial capacity and to apply these skills and thereby
contribute to the achievement of the development objectives of ZAMSIF.
To provide funds to local governments (district councils) to finance economic and social
infrastructure benefiting more than one community such as district health facilities and
market places.
To provide funds in support of capacity building and skills training for district officers on a
demand led basis so that they will be able to facilitate the activities of CIF- and DIF-funded
projects.
To support the training of trainers for community capacity building activities such as home
based care, HIV/Aids counselling, participatory techniques, and so on.
Main DIF Activities
(a)
Mandatory District Capacity building
3.17
This activity is designed to improve the capacity of all districts to facilitate communitybased planning, implementation, management, and maintenance of social and economic
infrastructure projects described in Table 3.2. Funding under the DIF capacity building component
is available to all districts that sign the Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] and opens a DIF
bank account. The support is to enable districts to develop skills in strategic planning and project
planning and budgeting. On this more will be said in Chapter 5
3.18
The strategic planning includes the preparation of district situation analysis, poverty
assessment, District Development and Poverty Reduction strategy and Annual Investment Plan. The
plans will guide the process of allocating resources to the poorest and most remote communities.
Project planning and budgeting focuses on project design, costing, financial management and
accountability, and the ability to respond to the varied priority needs of different communities.
Based on a capacity assessments10 carried out by the Provincial Assessment Team [PAT], a capacity
building programme is designed. A sample of a capacity building programme proposed11 at the start
of the on-going ZAMSIF programme shows the following topics:
10 At the start of ZAMSIF programme, a capacity assessment is carried out for each district in order to establish the nature of training needs and timing of training inputs.
11 See Mudenda et al, Development of a Strategy to Enhance Capacity for Local Governance for the New Social Investment Fund (ZAMSIF) ,
41
2000.














Introduction to ZAMSIF - CIF/DIF
Participatory approaches to development – related to CIF cycle,
facilitation skills for project identification, appraisal, planning, monitoring and evaluation.
Technical skills
refresher training including procurement, appraisal, costing and budgeting, technical
supervision.
Financial Management
Introduction to District Planning for ZAMSIF
Data Analysis: Poverty Analysis & Mapping (District Situation Analysis)
Participatory Poverty Assessment
Strategic Plan & Poverty Reduction Strategy Development
Report writing & presentation
Computer training
Training of Trainers for Modules in: environment, maintenance, financial management,
HIV/AIDS, gender sensitisation, OVC strategy
District information system & poverty monitoring
Target Group
3.19
The above programme illustrates the district/province-level capacity building programme
targets the following groups:




(b)
DA, Councillors, MPs, Council management and DDCC (incl. DTT)
District Finance Department
DPOs, DTTs, members of DDCC
DDCC, NGOs,
District Projects funded under DIF Programme Component
3.20
In addition to capacity building, funds from the DIF components can also be assessed to
finance district development projects that benefit more than one community. Unlike CIF projects,
which are to be identified specifically by communities, DIF-funded projects are to be identified by
members of the District Council, Line Department staff, and Non governmental organizations
[NGOs]. It is the responsibility of the district administration to ensure successful operation,
management and maintenance of all such projects.
3.21
ZAMSIF Operations Manual stipulates that all DIF-for-district projects must meet the
following criteria:








The projects should benefit more than one community and/or are likely to benefit the total
district population;
DIF projects must be simple enough for the district to manage, implement and complete in one
year;
DIF projects must be financially sustainable and viable and provision for operations and
maintenance assured;
DIF projects should be a priority investment in the district plan;
DIF project should complement the District Poverty Reduction Strategy with defined priority
beneficiary group
Should involve intended project beneficiaries in identification, implementation and subsequent
management;
Should have no negative impact on the environment; and
The district Council must be prepared to providing about 15% of the project costs, which may
be in form of technical assistance, local materials and/or funds.
42

Only districts which are in Levels 2 – 5 qualify to submit DIF-for-district projects proposals.
Districts at this level are expected to have attained the capacity for some district planning
especially for poverty reduction and coordination.
3.22







(c)
A few examples of DIF-for-district projects include:
district markets;
expansions and improvements to district hospital;
water and sanitation for secondary schools,
water and sanitation for district or sub district centres;
non community roads;
public sanitation;
shelters for bus stations.
Demand-driven capacity building
3.23
In addition to the general capacity building activities described above, individual districts
that realize the need to improve their competency in specific areas of strategic planning and project
planning, can also access DIF funds. Funds for such demand-led capacity building cover strategic
planning, financial management, design and costing of projects and training of trainers for
facilitation of various ‘modules’ related to maintenance, environment, gender, HIV/AIDS etc.
3.24
The cost for community-based training conducted by district staff is met from the CIF
component. Funding for such community-based capacity building activities cover the actual training
and training of trainers.
District Capacity Building Ladder
3.25
Under ZAMSIF programme, CIF and DIF funds are available to all districts. The level of
funding to districts for DIF projects depends on the capacity of the district to facilitate CIF project
cycle activities. There are five levels of district participation in the CIF project cycle, indicating
various levels of responsibility and involvement. BOX 3.1 shows the five levels of capacity and
related criteria. The strategy assumes a gradual handing over of tasks to district staff according to
their assessed capacity and agreed criteria until districts at level 5 have a strategic poverty reduction
plan and capable for assuming full responsibility for all project cycle activities including the
disbursement and accounting of all CIF funds. Movement of a district from one level to the next will
be based on an annual assessment by a Provincial Assessment Committee [PAC].
43
BOX 3.1
Levels and Criteria for Capacity Building Ladder
Level 1:
Districts in Level 1will be those districts which:
 have signed the MOU
 are able to adequately sensitize communities
 are able to facilitate the access of communities to CIF,
 can perform desk appraisals and
 can monitor community projects
Districts in Level 1 cannot access DIF funds for DIF capital projects but will be able to demand
training, technical assistance and capacity building.
Level 2:
Districts which:
 have demonstrated capacity to facilitate CIF project cycle activities which include
participatory identification processes with communities,
 can conduct desk appraisals regularly,
 can facilitate field appraisals,
 can regularly monitor and evaluate community projects, but still need assistance to
complete an accurate project budget.
 have sufficient technical capacity to implement a DIF project and account for the funds;
 have evidence that the DDCC meets quarterly with good attendance;
 have some sectoral coordination mechanisms in place, including a District Planning
Officer;
 have completed a District Situation Analysis and approved by the District Council
Meeting these criteria will allow the district to access the DIF for DIF projects worth up to total
of US $ 30,000.
ZAMSIF staff will assist district at Level 2 to develop their project budgets for both the CIF
and DIF projects.
Level 3 :
Districts which have:
 performed well at Level 2,
 proven financial management capacity,
 developed District Poverty Assessment (DPA) and District Development and Poverty
Reduction Strategy (DDPRS) approved by the District Council,
 shown evidence that approved CIF projects reach those targeted by the DDPRS ,
 design, costing and budgeting skills
Districts at Level 3 are resources to fund one or more DIF projects up to a cumulative amount of
US $ 75,000. Districts in this category will be in Level 3 of the CIF.
Level 4:
 Districts which:
 continue to perform satisfactorily on the pre agreed criteria and are in Level 4 of the
CIF (i.e. the district performs all tasks of the CIF project cycle, except the
disbursements to community projects but including approval and accounting for funds
by the communities implementing projects),
 have an approved Annual Investment Plan based on the DDPRS,
Level 5:
44
Districts that:
 show consistent good performance of councils for more than one year,
 have a basic poverty information system,
 have evidence of some sub district planning
3.3.3
Poverty Monitoring and Analysis Component
45
3.26
The objective of the PMA component is to strengthen the capacity to provide timely
information on poverty and social conditions and facilitate its use in policy making. This component
is designed to improve the sustainability of data collection and analysis as well as facilitate
improved linkages between policy formulation and available survey information.
3.27
More specifically, this component of ZAMSIF is to:
 support the functioning of the Strategic and Operational Planning Unit [SOPU] located within
MOFED for the purpose of co-ordinating poverty monitoring and analysis;
 support the collection of economic and social statistics at household level and qualitative
participatory information on poverty;
 mainstream the analysis of poverty data, including the production of an annual poverty and
social indicators monitoring report.
 finance a range of activities which are designed to strengthen the institutional, technical and
financial framework for sustainable monitoring and policy-use of poverty information.
3.28
During the first five years of operation (2000-2004), the focus of PMA activities will be on:
 training and a pre-agreed cycle of household surveys, including one Living Conditions
Monitoring Survey (LCMS) and one Indicators Monitoring Survey (IMS), conducted by the
LCMU in CSO;
 priority policy studies and analyses of poverty using qualitative and quantitative data;
 preparation and dissemination of an Annual Poverty Review which provides a poverty update
synthesising different sources of information on social conditions including from household
surveys, administrative systems, participatory assessments, etc. including findings from the
studies;
 training, technical assistance, capacity-building and support to the operation of a Strategic and
Operational Planning Unit in MOFED;
 establishment of capacity for evaluation.
3.2.4.
Institutional Support Component
3.29
This component covers the administrative cost of operating the ZAMSIF programme. The
programme is managed by a semi autonomous Management Unit (MU)12 established within the
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MOFED). The programme is represented in the
Provinces by 13 Regional Officers and support staff.
ZAMSIF MU is headed by: Programme Director, supported by: Operational Management, (Technical Services, Field Operations,
Capacity Building, Information Management, Information and Education campaign), Finance and Administration, Monitoring and
Evaluation, and Poverty Monitoring and Analysis.
12
46
3.30
Table 3.4 gives a summary of ZAMSIF programme objectives, interventions and expected
results for three institutional levels: community, local Authority and central Government.
Table 3.4
Summary of ZAMSIF Programme Objectives, Interventions and Expected Results
Institutional
Level
Logic Level
Strategic Goal
Development
Objective
Community
Increase income and
living standards for the
vast majority of
Zambians who are poor
Improved, expanded use
of services provided in a
governance system where
local government and
communities are
mutually accountable
CBOs enabled to manage
own
Development
Local Authority
Central Government
Services provided in a
governance system
where local government
and communities are
mutually accountable
Improved quality for
priority and demandled studies carried out
and disseminated; and
survey results analyzed
Communities
hold
service
providers accountable
Improved quality for
priority and demandled studies carried out
and disseminated; and
survey results
analyzed
Communities have
confidence in district
officers
Outputs
Inputs
Community
projects Districts taking over
financed and completed
from MU Unit in
management of CIF
Basic services improved;
District staff trained as
Orphans and vulnerable
trainees in various
children (OVCs) assisted modules including
participatory planning,
Communities have access project management
to
and maintenance,
improved AIDS
environment,
information
Communities have access HIV/AIDS;
to
improved AIDS
Districts able to develop
counselling
a district strategic
development plan
US$ 42 m
Districts able to manage
district projects
US$ 13 m
Share of US$ 3.5 m
47
Cost-effective,
coordinated
household survey
programme
implemented
Annual report on
poverty and social
conditions prepared
Share of US $ 3.5 m
Share of US $ 15.7 m
Share of US$ 15.7 m
Source: Adapted from ZAMSIF PAD
3.3.5
Other Programme Components
3.31
In addition, ZAMSIF also manages the community demand-driven components of three
sector-level programmes:
 Basic Education Sub- Sector Investment Programme (BESSIP) under the Ministry of
Education,
 Pilot Environmental Fund (PEF) of the Environmental Support Programme (ESP) in the
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources,
 Community Transport Infrastructure (CTI) of the ROADSIP.
It is useful here to note that these components are not covered under the World Bank loan/credit
agreement.
3.4
Expected Programme Benefits
3.32
The project is expected to generate the following benefits:
1. increasing access to, and improving the quality of, basic social and economic services at the
community level;
2. strengthening the capacity of poor rural communities to design and manage development
activities that affect their welfare;
3. strengthening the capacity and accountability of district authorities' staff;
4. supporting the collection, analysis and dissemination of poverty information and data; and
5. strengthening the national capacity to analyse poverty issues, effectively monitor poverty trends,
and formulate policies that will effectively contribute to poverty reduction.
Details of the outputs, outcomes and impacts of ZAMSIF are given in the programme log frame
shown in Annex 3.1.
3.5
Framework of Programme Management
3.33
At the national level, there is a Steering Committee (SC) chaired by the Permanent
Secretary for Budget and Economic Affairs of the MOFNP, as the controlling officer for ZAMSIF.
Membership of the SC consists of: Permanent Secretaries and/or Chief Planners from all the relevant
ministries, representatives from various non governmental institutions, and donors to ZAMSIF.
3.34
The role of the SC is as follows:
(i)
to guide, develop, and harmonise the programme strategy;
(ii)
to review the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the management strategy put in
place by the MU;
(iii)
to be informed of poverty issues and
(iv)
to recommend relevant policy change as appropriate;
(v)
to advice on government policy and sector policy issues; and,
(vi)
to endorse programme activities.
48
3.34
The District level is the hub of all programme activities. Committees involved in ZAMSIF
activities at this level are:
- the District Development Co-ordinating Committee (DDCC);
- the District Planning sub-committee of the DDCC;
- Full Council;
- Plans, Works and Development sub-committee of the Council.
3.6
Guiding Principles for Programme Implementation
3.35
ZAMSIF is designed to support the government’s plans for poverty reduction and for
decentralisation by:
- empowering poor communities;
- strengthening the capacity of district authorities in their major role in the
implementation of the poverty reduction;
- improving the targeting of public resources to the poorest segments of the population;
and
- putting in place a permanent mechanisms to monitor the impact of government policies
and programmes on the poor, and
- provide relevant inputs to policy-making.
- ZAMSIF will pay particular attention to sustainability issues of self-reliance,
community management and maintenance and sector social service delivery obligations.
- ZAMSIF will establish networking links with relevant sector ministries so as to keep
informed of sector policy change that might impact on ZAMSIF activities and visa
versa.
- ZAMSIF will co-ordinate its activities closely with those of other programmes with
similar objectives.
49
Chapter 4
Stock-Taking of CDD in Zambia
4.1
Introduction
4.01
This Chapter takes stock of the status of CDD in Zambia. The implementation of the first
phase of ZAMSIF programme, described in the preceding Chapter, began in July 2000. Since that
time, Zambia has staged two national workshops focusing on CDD. The first workshop concerned a
CDD Benchmarking in 2001. This was followed in 2002 by a CDD workshop on M&E. For the
purpose of this case study, it was decided to follow-up on the main findings and recommendations
of these two workshops because they are considered pertinent to CDD scaling up in general. The
results of this stock-taking exercise are used, in subsequent chapters, to shed light on the factors that
can promote or inhibit scaling up efforts in the on-going ZAMSIF programme.
4.2
Follow-up of CDD Benchmarking
4.02
As indicated in Chapter 2, prior to the current ZAMSIF, the government, together with
donors and NGOs has been implementing a host of development programmes and projects that
support some aspects of the CDD vision elaborated in Sections 2.4 of Chapter 1. For quite
sometime, decision makers have realised that there was an urgent need to harmonize the various
approaches used by a large number of on-going, largely uncoordinated, CDD-related development
activities in the country. In early 2001, the Lusaka-based CDD Benchmarking Steering Team,
composed principally of the Governance Development Unit (GDU) of the Ministry of Legal Affairs
(MLA), the Ministry of Local Government and Housing (MLGH), and a donor-organized Working
Group on local governance and decentralization carried out a CDD Benchmarking Exercise.13
4.03
The specific objectives of the CDD benchmarking exercise were as follows : (i) to improve
the level of awareness and the need for coordination among the multilateral and bilateral agencies
and NGOs, and their relevant counterparts in government agencies, supporting CDD approach to
development; (ii) to harmonize CDD approaches supported by World Bank lending operations; and
(iii) to expand the “one-set-of-procedures” approach to interested and concerned donors and
Government programmes.
4.04
A summary of the main findings of the CDD benchmarking exercise is presented in Annex
4.1. The information describes the status of CDD in Zambia in 2001. Concerning the status of
CDD, this case study sought to know (i) whether or not the situations described in Annex 4.1 had
improve, stayed the same, or worsened, at the time of this case study, in 2003. Next, the respondents
were asked to identify those situations, that have not improved, that were most likely to inhibit CDD
scaling up efforts in the country. The findings from this case study have been summarised in BOX
4.1
See, Strengthening Community-Driven Development in Zambia, Prepared by the World Bank Zambia Country Team in collaboration
with country counterparts and the Donor Working Group on Local Governance and Decentralization, Lusaka, Zambia April 4, 2001
13
50
BOX 4.1
Existing Situations that are most likely to Inhibit CDD Scaling
up efforts in Zambia







Lack of coordination among projects.
On-going development activities use different
approaches and have different funding conditions.
Inadequate human, financial, and material resources.
Multiple project committees at the community level with
no clear institutional framework or mandate.
Inadequate organizational structures at sub-district
level, resulting in duplication of efforts, confusion and
wastage of resources.
Local governments have greatly reduced capacity
especially for community-level development. This
situation negatively impacts on their relationship with
the communities.
Newly-introduced structures at the district level (e.g.
sector boards and DAs) have strained the local resource
base and increased recurrent costs at the expense of
investment at the local level.
4.05
The CDD benchmarking exercise also came up with 25 far-reaching recommendations on
improving the effectiveness of community-driven development in the country. Annex 4.2 contains
the workshop recommendations. They address five specific areas: (i) sub-district organizational
structures; (ii) funding mechanisms; (iii) capacity building at province, district and sub-district
levels; (iv) clarification of roles of stakeholders; and (v) planning approaches at district and subdistrict levels. The task of implementing these recommendations was assigned to various
government institutions. This case study sought (i) to know the implementation status of these
recommendations, and (ii) to identify the particular recommendations that are most conducive to
scaling up CDD in the country.
(i) Sub-district organizational structures
4.06 In this case study, it was recognized that inadequate organizational structures at sub-district
level has greatly contributed to duplication of efforts, poor planning, and creation of multiple project
committees at the community. A number of these committees have no clear institutional framework
or mandate to manage community-level development activities. This situation has implications for
accountability at the community level.
4.07 This study found that action has been initiated by MLGH, District Councils and DDCC
towards the development of a framework for the involvement of sub-district structures in local and
national planning processes. Currently, elections still go up to the ward level only. The MLGH has
yet to revise the current electoral law to allow for elections at the sub-ward level. MLGH has
however initiated action that will ensure that there are mechanisms for inclusion of community
members at sub-district level. The Local Authorities are also making efforts to strengthen the
coordination role of the DDCC. No action has as yet been initiated by MLGH and Cabinet Office to
ensure that all line departments at district level are responsible to the Local Authority. It is expected
that such action will come from the implementation of the decentralization policy.
(ii)
Funding mechanisms
51
4.08
The findings indicate that no action has been taken by MOFNP to increase the proportion of
the national budget allocated to Local Authorities: District Councils still do not receive line ministry
budget allocations. Local Authorities also do not receive a share of locally generated taxes; they are
also not funded directly using a single channel for resource allocation. Because District Councils
still do not possess a reliable and dedicated budgetary allocation, it can be concluded that they are
not financially autonomous. Above all, the District Councils are unable to access loans for
commercially-viable services.
(iii) Capacity Building at District and Sub-district levels
4.09
The findings on capacity building at District and Sub-district levels were more encouraging.
Serious efforts are being made by the MLGH and Cabinet Office (i) to create a capacity building
fund at the national level; (ii) to harmonize the various pieces of legislation which facilitate
implementation of sector activities at district and sub-district level; and (iii) to enhance the capacity
of MLGH to play a pivotal role in policy formulation and implementation in regards to CDD.
(iv) Roles of stakeholders and Planning approaches at District and sub-district levels
4.10 The DDCC is making efforts to improve coordination of projects under one umbrella.
Currently, the MLGH is working on a Community Driven Development [CDD] policy that will
clarify the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. On planning, this study found that the dominant
approach is top – bottom. However, some efforts are being made to rationalize a CDD approach to
planning, monitoring and evaluation, project implementation, plan preparation, and the
dissemination of information on development plans.
4.3
Factors that can Inhibit CDD Scaling Up Efforts
4.11 Information obtained from the respondents concerning the key issues that can inhibit efforts to
scaling up CDD in the country has been summarised in Table 4.1 for three levels of decisionmaking, namely the Community, Local Government and ZAMSIF/MOFND. These responses are
based on the data sheet shown in Annex 4.2.
52
Table 4.1
Summary of Findings from Zambia CDD Benchmarking Exercise of 2001
related to Issues that Can Inhibit CDD Scaling Up efforts in Zambia
CDD Issues
Funding
mechanisms
Community Level





Capacity
Building





Communities to
access development
funds directly from
the district
Communities to
manage
development funds
Recognize
community
contribution in kind
for user fees and
capital projects
Encourage
communal work for
self help
Communities
should be
empowered to
collect rents for use
of community based infrastructure
services.
Strengthen
Community
Leadership &
Mobilization skills
Strengthen
community
functional literacy
Stress Resource
mobilization and
management skills
Strengthen
networking among
CBOs
Involve community
in learning-by-doing
planning processes
Local Government
Level
 District Council to
be financially
autonomous
 District Councils
should be able to
access loans for
investment (in
commercially
viable social
services (water and
sewerage, land
development)
 District Councils to
receive line
ministry budget
allocations





53
Stress: coordination
monitoring and
evaluation &
facilitation skills
Improve
information
gathering sharing
and dissemination
Promote
community
ownership and
commitment
Ensure technical
skills to support
communities to
meet statutory and
quality standards
Facilitate
functional literacy
ZAMSIF/MOFND





Fund District
Councils directly
Allocate funds using
a formula
Adopt one channel
for resource flows
Ensure a reliable and
dedicated budgetary
allocations to
projects
Ensure Constituency
and Youth
Development Funds
are disbursed to
Local Governments
Provide skills in the
following areas:
 Planning and
budgeting; project
coordination,
monitoring and
evaluation;
supervisory and
mentorship;
programme
development
management and
reporting;
formulation of a
district strategic
plan; facilitation;
policy formulation
and interpretation;
project cycle
management;
technical skills to
support communities
to meet statutory and
quality standards;
functioning
logistical support to
districts; conflict
resolution;




Sub-district
organizational
structures
Participate in
revision of the
current electoral law
to allow for
elections at the subward level
(currently elections
go up to the ward
level only)





Planning


PRAs/PLAs should
be done in a
systematic manner
for a specified timeframe.
PRAs/PLAs results
should be
coordinated by the
DDCC, distributed
and used for
planning purposes.

54
Reconfirm
coordination role of
DDCC
Mechanisms for
inclusion of
community
members in
structures at subdistrict level
All line
departments at the
district level should
be accountable to
the Local Authority
Have an elected
coordination
structure alongside
the public service
administrative
structures
Build consensus
within sub-district
structures
Ensure planning
processes/approach
es at district and
sub-district level
include sub-district
-level structures:
Village
Development
Committees, Zone
Development
Committees
Ward Development
Committees,
District
Development







mobilization; project
identification
resource
mobilization and
management; project
proposal
development
Strengthen
networking
Establish and
maintain provincial
database
Provide adequate
resources to support
capacity building at
the district level
There should be
legally recognized
structures at the subdistrict level
Structures should be
harmonized with
those already legally
existing e.g. with the
Chiefs Act Village
Act Local
Government Act
Health Reforms Act
etc.)
Provide mechanism
for conflict
resolution among all
stakeholders
Support the
development of a
CDD policy
Clarify roles and
responsibilities of
co-producers
Strengthen
coordination among
NGOs and donors at
district level
Make strategies and
plans transparent to
potential funding
agencies and
members of
Coordination
Committees,
District Councils
55
committees.
4.4
Summary of Findings on CDD Workshop on Planning and M&E
4.4.1
Conceptual Framework of CDD Planning and M&E
4.12
In 2002, Zambia hosted a CDD workshop in which a number of CDD practitioners from
several African countries participated. The main objective of workshop was to enable CDD
practitioners in the African region to understand the nature and functions of CDD-specific M&E
systems, and, on the basis of this understanding, examine practical ways and means of integrating
CDD-specific M&E systems into national M&E Poverty Reduction Strategy [PRS] initiatives. The
workshop was based on a Zambia case study14.
4.13
A significant outcome of the workshop was the adoption of a simple conceptual framework,
shown in Fig. 4.1, as a useful guide to CDD planning processes. According to Fig. 4.1, CDD
planning processes (referred to as “Loop B”) is indeed a sub-loop within the national poverty
reduction strategy planning process. These two interlinked planning processes can be divided into
four stages.
4.14
Stage one deals with the formulation of the district poverty strategy and plan [1]. The
second stage focuses on creating development results. This requires bureaucratic processes and
actions involving the provision of adequate development inputs [2], as well as efficient
implementation of planned development activities [3], and outputs [4]. The third stage assesses the
effects of on-going development efforts on beneficiaries [5]. This stage is concerned with the
knowing whether programme beneficiaries have access to, use of, and satisfied with, programme
outputs. Note that stages two and three deal with monitoring processes. The fourth stage of the
planning process is concerned with evaluation. It compares the effects of the development efforts on
target beneficiaries using the targets stated in the district poverty strategy and investment plan. [6,
7]. Information from all the four stages is to be used for reviewing the status of poverty at the district
level. This completes the CDD (Loop B) planning cycle.
4.4.2
Summary of findings on M&E Strategy and Planning Approach
4.15
Concerning M&E strategy, the workshop observed the following: a lack of a unified CDD
M&E strategy; lack of clarity and consensus about the purpose and real goals of M&E; lack of
consensus about planning processes and M&E concepts; lack of unified planning and reporting
formats for multiple government, donor and NGO -supported projects; and lack of a unified
methodology for monitoring poverty reduction indicators. At the project level, there exists different
project funding arrangements resulting in large volume of paper work, and very little emphasis
about effectiveness of actual service delivery and use.
See, by Kwame Kwofie, John Milimo and Jim Edgerton, Building Blocks for Designing National CDD Monitoring and Evaluation
System: A Zambia Case Study, Lusaka, Zambia, August 2002.
14
56
Fig.4.1:
A General Conceptual Framework of Planning Processes and Monitoring and Evaluation
Zambia
Poverty Reduction
Strategy [ZPRS]
Loop A
15
Annual
Poverty
Report
[1]
Link B
Link A
Loop B
ZAMSIF/CDD
Planning
Processes
CDD-ZAMSIF
REVIEW [8]
Strategy
[1]
Intermediate indicators
M&E
INPUTS
[2]
ACTIVITIES
[3]
Final indicators
OUTPUTS
[4]
REACH
Access,
Use,
Satisfaction
OUTCOMES
[6]
IMPACTS
[7]
[5]
Bureaucratic Processes [Efforts]
Development Effects [Results]
Adapted from: "Building Blocks for Designing National CDD Monitoring and Evaluation System: A Zambia Case Study", by Kwame Kwofie, John Milimo and Jim Edgerton (presented at a Forum for Practitioners of Community-Driven
Development for Anglophone Africa May 6-10, 2002Lusaka, Zambia, August 2002.
15
57
4.16
The workshop also noted that the approach to planning and M&E share the following
features: it is top-down, as opposed to bottom-up; officials at central and district levels do the
planning, set priorities, allocate and prepare the project budget, define targets, and monitor
predetermined M&E indicators. Primary stakeholders provide data and information. Development
results are externally – defined. In general, accountability is upward from the community through
the district/province to central government, and to funding agencies.
58
Chapter 5
Applying the CDD Principles to ZAMSIF Programme
5.1
Empowering Local Governments to Manage Development
5.01
The CDD conceptual framework presented in the preceding chapter will be adapted and
used here to interrogate the on-going ZAMSIF planning processes. This study found that all the subprojects funded under CIF component are community based activities. In order to manage these
development activities in an efficient manner, ZAMSIF has put in place an incentive mechanism
that is designed to motivate districts to improve their capacity for district planning. The graduation
scheme has five levels stating from level 1, the lowest, to level 5 representing the highest level. Each
level represents the level of planning capacity. BOX 3.1 describes the criteria for moving from level
1 to level 5. These set of criteria correspond to the level of performance in the capacity building
ladder.
5.02
Under this graduation system, each district proceeds to climb up the 5 levels of the capacity
[competence] ladder according to its own capacity. As the capacity of the district increases, its
responsibilities also increase. And as its responsibilities increase, its access to financial benefits also
increases. It is acknowledged that competence in the district planning process will be a gradual
process. Under this scheme, all districts start from level 1. To determine the start level classification
for districts, the Provincial Assessment Committees [PAC]16, based in each of the nine Provinces,
carry out a district capacity assessment. The assessment covers the ability of the district to
effectively facilitate CIF project cycle activities; technical capacity; financial management; district
planning and coordination. The assessment is done each year in order to ascertain the graduation or
demotion of a district from one level to the next.
5.1.1
CIF Project Planning Activities
5.03
Table 5.1 shows that each of the five levels has 13 activities, starting from project
identification through project evaluation. This constitutes what ZAMSIF describes as a ‘project
cycle.’ As the reader will note, the project cycle activities do not include the preparation of District
Situation Analysis [DSA], Poverty Assessment [PA], District Development and Poverty Reduction
Strategy [DDPRS], District Annual Investment Plan [DAIP], and the review of the poverty situation.
The production of these documents should be considered an integral part of ZAMSIF the planning
processes. They capacity building programme provides training in these strategic planning areas,
(see Chapter 3).
5.04
A closer examination of Table 5.1 indicates that for all the five levels, communities are
involved in only five, out of the 13, planning activities. These activities are project identification,
application, implementation, justification and completion. ZAMSIF’s strategy is towards a gradual
devolution of project cycle activities to local governments according to the capacity created to
support the community based project cycle activities. In line with this strategy, Table 5.1 clearly
shows the role of the District administration in the project cycle activities increases, and that of
ZAMSIF MU decreases, as the level increases. As indicated earlier in paragraph 3.25, eventually it
is hoped that local governments will acquire the requisite capacity so that they can replace the
ZAMSIF MU in financing local development activities.
Membership of PAC includes: representatives of district offices, Provincial Officers of the Ministries of: Health, Education, Community
Development and Social Welfare, Local Government and Housing, Works and Supply, Environment and Natural Resources and
Communication and Transport; Directors of the Department of Water Affairs and Roads; Donors; NGOs with programmes in the
Province; and ZAMSIF MU Regional Office management staff.
16
59
Table 5.1 Planning Activities for the Five Levels of CIF Planning cycles showing the roles of
Community, District and ZAMSIF
Project Planning
Activities
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
2. Application
Community/
DA
Community
ZAMSIF/DA
4. Field Appraisal
ZAMSIF/DA
5.Costing and
Budgeting
ZAMSIF
6. Approval
ZAMSIF/S
C
Communit
y/DA
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion
District
Administra
tion
District
Administra
tion
District
Team/
ZAMSIF
7. Project Launch
ZAMSIF/
Steering
Committee[S
C]
ZAMSIF/DA
Communit
y/DA
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion
District
Administra
tion
District
Administra
tion
District
Administra
tion
Community/
DA
Community
3. Desk Appraisal
Communit
y/DA
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion
District
Administra
tion
ZAMSIF
8. Funding
ZAMSIF
ZAMSIF
District
Administra
tion
ZAMSIF
District
Administra
tion
ZAMSIF
9. Implementation
Community
10. Justification
Community
11. Monitoring
ZAMSIF/DA
12. Completion
Community
13. Evaluation
ZAMSIF/DA
5
Communit
y
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion
Communit
y
ZAMSIF/D
A
5
Communit
y
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion
Communit
y
ZAMSIF/D
A
5
Communit
y
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion
Communit
y
ZAMSIF/D
A
5
District
Administratio
n
District
Team/ SC
Community
7
5
2
3
2
6
5
8
8
8
1. Identification
No. Community
appearance
No. ZAMSIF
appearance
No. District
Administration
appearance
ZAMSIF/D
A
Source: Adapted from ZAMSIF Operations Manual
60
District
Administratio
n
District
Administratio
n
District
Administratio
n
DC/ZAMSIF
Community
District
Administratio
n
Community
ZAMSIF/DA
5
5.1.2
Monitoring and Evaluation
5.05
Table 5.1 shows that for all the levels, communities do not participate in monitoring and
evaluating their own projects. On monitoring, reporting and supervision, ZAMSIF has this to say:
“Community projects in districts in level 1, quarterly monitoring visits to each project
will be conducted by the ZAMSIF Regional Officers, Provincial Regional Planning of
MLGH and relevant district officers. For those districts in level 2 – 5, which have
adequate capacity, the monitoring of community-based projects will be entirely the
district responsibility, coordinated by the District Planning Officer [DPO]. ZAMSIF
and the PAC will monitor projects on an ad hoc basis. The District Officers will be
expected to visit the projects once a month or at any other times as and when it is
necessary. The monitoring team will check expenditure against physical progress,
technical quality of the project, compliance with environmental safeguards and
community involvement and be available for problem solving. The District Team
members will report to their sector line ministry supervisors as well as to ZAMSIF
Regional Office and the PAC using standard monitoring forms.”
The District team fills in a completion certificate as soon as a project is completed. Twelve [12]
months after the project is completed, another evaluation form has to be completed. This evaluation
form is designed to collect information from the completed project so as to compare with the
‘before’ data collected during the project appraisal with the ‘after’ data.
5.2
ZAMSIF CDD Planning Cycle
5.2.1
Stages in the Planning Cycle
5.07
The CDD planning cycle, referred to as Loop B in Fig. 4.1 is modified by explicitly
including the project planning activities [2]. The modified planning cycle is displayed in Fig.5.1.
For the purpose of this paper, the ZAMSIF-CDD planning cycle is subdivided into five main stages.
These stages are: (a) Strategic Planning, (b) Project Planning and Budgeting, (c) Monitoring, and
Evaluation, and (d) Review of the District Poverty situation. Stage one is concerned with the
formulation of the district poverty strategy and plan [1]. The second stage focuses on planning and
budgeting [2] for district- and community-level projects (see chapter 3). Stage three, monitoring,
deals with systematic tracking of: development inputs [3], implementation progress of planned
development activities [4], development outputs [5], the effects of on-going development efforts on
beneficiaries [6].The fourth stage of the planning cycle evaluates the Outcomes [7] and Impacts [8]
of the development activities. It compares the effects of the development efforts on target
beneficiaries using the targets stated in the District Poverty Strategy and Investment Plan [1]. The
final stage of the planning cycle consists of a review of poverty situation in the district [9].
61
Fig. 5.1:
A Diagrammatic View of ZAMSIF-CDD Planning Cycle
Project
Planning
&
Budgeting
ZAMSIF
Strategy
[2]
District Annual
Poverty
Review [9]
[1]
Planning Processes
Intermediate
M&E
INPUTS
[3]
indicators
ACTIVITIES
[4]
Bureaucratic Processes [Efforts]
Final indicators
REACH
Access,
OUTPUTS
OUTCOMES
Use,
Satisfaction
[5]
[6]
Development Effects [Results]
62
[7]
IMPACTS
[8]
5.2.2
The Strategic Planning Processes
5.08
This first stage in the planning cycle consists of the preparation of following planning
documents:
District Situation Analysis [DSA],
5.09
The task of preparing the DSA is assigned to the District Planning Office [DPO]. The
DSA is supposed to contain information an area description; the status of development of the
district; sector programmes; and status and location of district development programmes. The DSA
is endorsed by the DDCC and approved by the District Council.
Poverty Assessment [PA]
5.10
The Poverty Assessment [PA] document is to synthesise information from the DSA and
provide a broad statement of strategic development objectives. The document will contain
localised definitions of poverty and poverty reduction strategies; as well as sector-wise definitions
and a disaggregated analysis of poverty at the level of geographically recognised units within the
district. This information, presented in a map form, will highlight target groups/areas for poverty
reduction at district and sub-district levels.
District Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy [DDPRS]
5.11
The District Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy [DDPRS] will include a broad
statement of strategic development objectives based on problems identified in District Situation
Analysis & Poverty Assessment; Target Groups/Areas for Poverty Reduction will be identified as
well as sector and area objectives.
District Annual Investment Plan [DAIP]
5.12
The District Annual Investment Plan [DAIP] is a district plan. It is based on the District
Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy. It will contain priority district projects and budget.
It takes into account the resource envelope and approved / ongoing projects by sector/ funding
source/ cost / location. It is expected to assist the district authorities prepare realistic projects
based on available resources.
5.13
All the above mentioned documents are supposed to provide the key and logical
information for the identification and prioritization of the following development activities: CIF
projects DIF-for- district (or capital) projects; DIF District Capacity Building Projects; DIF
Community Capacity Building Projects; and Demand-driven Study Fund Projects.
5.2.3
Project Planning and Budgeting Processes
5.14
A review of the available literature, supplemented with information from the field visits,
revealed that the second stage of the CDD planning cycle applies to both CIF and DIF district (or
capital) projects. The Project Planning and Budgeting stage [2] entails carrying ten out of the 13
project planning and budgeting activities mentioned in Table 5.1. These activities are:
 Identification,
 Application,
 Desk Appraisal,
 Field Appraisal,
 Costing and Budgeting,
 Approval,
 Project Launch workshop,
 Funding,
 Implementation, and
63

(a)
Disbursement
Project Identification and Application
5.15
CIF-funded projects are identified by the communities themselves with assistance from the
District Team. The kinds of projects that are eligible for CIF funding were presented Table 3.2.
DIF-for-district projects, as they are called, are projects that benefit more than one community.
These projects are to be identified by members of the District Council, Line Department staff, and
Non governmental organizations [NGOs]. It is the responsibility of the district administration to
ensure successful operation, management and maintenance of such projects. Technical support for
the completion of DIF-for-district project identification application forms is provided by the
District Planning Unit.17
(b)
Project Appraisal (Desk & Field)
5.16
Desk appraisal of CIF and DIF projects18 is carried out by the planning sub committee of
the District Development Coordination Committee [DDCC]. A desk appraisal report is submitted
to the Plans, Works and Development Committee. But it is the full District Council that approves
the project appraisal report. An in-depth project appraisal or field project appraisal is initiated
once the project proposal is approved by the Districts council. A project appraisal form must be
filled in to conclude the appraisal process.
(c)
Costing and Budgeting
5.17
The completed field appraisal form is sent to ZAMSIF MU, or presented to the office of
the District Planning Unit [DPU], for costing and budgeting.
The District Planning Unit [DPU] provides the relevant application forms for CIF and DIF projects. The information contained on the
forms include: an indicative cost, operations, management and maintenance plan, etc. The planning sub-committee of the District
Development Coordinating [DDCC] provides technical advice to the applicant.
17
The appraisal involves an environmental assessment, sector and social assessment, financial and economic viability assessment,
and assessment of the responsibility for the operations and maintenance. This information serves as baseline data in the evaluation
process.
18
64
(d)
Project Approval
5.18
Once the design, drawings, schedules and budget are complete, the project is presented by
the Plans, Works and Development Committee to the full District Council for approval.19 Approval
of district DIF projects comes from the Provincial Assessment Committee [PAC].
(e)
Project Launch Workshop
5.19
The approved project is launched by the technical and relevant district sector staff in a
workshop. The project launch provides the occasion to share information concerning project
implementation modalities. These modalities cover: project procurement procedures; contractor
selection and employment; project reporting and supervision procedures; district contribution to
the project; and the signing of contracts and financing agreements with the elected project
committee.
(f)
Project Funding and Disbursements
5.20 For CIF-funded projects for districts in levels 1 – 3, ZAMSIF-MU disburses funds directly
to the CIF or DIF project account operated by the community or the district.20 Prior to the release
of any funds relating either to capacity building, or to the annual commitment, financing
agreements21 are required to be signed between ZAMSIF and the relevant implementing agent (i.e.
community, district or NGO). DIF for-district projects are managed by the District Council
Finance Department.
5.3
ZAMSIF-CDD Monitoring and Evaluation Processes
5.3.1
What to Monitor
5.21
From the point of view of the overall ZAMSIF programme objectives, and on the basis of
the CDD conceptual framework presented in Fig. 4.1, the following should be monitored on a
routine basis:
(a)
(b)
Strategic Planning process [1]
Project planning and Budgeting process [2]
5.22
These planning processes should be monitored in terms of the content, quality, and
timeliness of their outputs. The outputs of the Strategic Planning process are:
5.23
District Situation Analysis [DSA],
Poverty Assessment [PA],
District Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy [DDPRS], and
District Annual Investment Plan [DAIP].
The main output of the Project Planning and Budgeting process is a project document.
Where the full district council does not meet, this task may be delegated to the Plans Works and Development sub committee of the
Council and the Council informed of the decision. For districts in Levels 1 – 3, the CIF and DIF projects are presented to the ZAMSIF
MU Steering Committee for approval.
19
For districts in Level 1, receiving only support for capacity building and CIF project cycle activities, ZAMSIF-MU disburses funds into
the DIF account. Project funds are disbursed in tranches of 36%, 24%, 24% and 16%. Before any disbursements are made, the 15%
community or district contribution must be made.
20
Financing agreements have to be completed between: ZAMSIF and CIF community committee for CIF projects; ZAMSIF and DIF
project committee for DIF projects; and ZAMSIF and the District Council for annual commitments for both the CIF and DIF projects.
21
65
Again, the content, quality, and timeliness of this output must be monitored. Information obtained
from monitoring these outputs will guide za0s5f management on what actions to take to improve
the quality of the outputs and also to accelerate implementation of the DIF programme. According
to Fig. 5.1 monitoring of ZAMSIF programme activities will focus on tracking the following:
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Inputs [3]-both financial and non-financial
Implementation progress and problems [4]
Outputs [5] and
Beneficiary Reach (access to services; use of services; and
satisfaction with the use of services) [6]
5.3.2
What to Evaluate
5.24. Guided by the CDD conceptual framework presented in Fig. 4.1, and given the fact that
the ZAMSIF programme is an integral part of the government’s poverty reduction strategy, the
following should be evaluated systematically:
(a)
Outcomes of the programme components
(b)
Impacts of the programme components
(c)
Impact of the overall programme towards the reduction of poverty
(d)
District Annual Poverty Report (in terms of presence/absence, content, quality and
usefulness)
5.25
Annex 5.1 displays the log frame for ZAMSIF programme. Provision has been made for
monitoring the various components of ZAMSIF programme using a mix of quantitative and
qualitative data from participatory and non-participatory sources. A careful review of the
Operations Manual clearly shows that monitoring will focus mainly on Inputs and Implementation
progress. Evaluation will be concerned with Outputs and Impacts of the programme. No provision
has been made for monitoring the Strategic Planning [1] and the Project planning and Budgeting
[2] processes described in Fig. 5.1. Similarly, the proposed M&E system does not provide for a
routine monitoring of beneficiary reach [6].
5.4
M&E at Community, District and Central Levels
5.26
To permit a closer overview of the proposed M&E indicators of ZAMSIF programme,
three tables that describe the programme objectives and the indicators according to three levels- ofinterest corresponding to three stakeholder groups, namely: (a) Community, (b) Local
Government, and (c) Central Government.
5.27
At district level, the task of monitoring and evaluating ZAMSIF community and district
programme activities is carried out by the District Team. The Provincial Assessment Committee
[PAC] oversees commitments to districts, and also monitors the performance of all districts
participating in ZAMSIF programme activities. Information from the M&E is presented and
discussed by the DDCC that coordinates all development activities at the district level.
Membership of the DDCC includes all district officers (technicians) and representatives of the
District Council [DC], and NGOs. The DDCC is chaired by the Council Secretary or Town Clerk.
It reports to the full Council. Although the Planning Sub Committee (PSC) of the DDCC; and the
Works and Development sub Committee [PW&DSC] of the District Council are involved in some
management functions of ZAMSIF programme activities, they are not responsible for the M&E
activities.
5.28
Ideally, the District Planning Unit [DPU], that is staffed with a number of adequately
trained District Planning Officers [DPOs], and equipped with all the necessary tools to mange
M&E data/information would be fully in charge of all matters related to M&E. Unfortunately, this
is not the case. Information from ZAMSIF indicates that the post of DPO was established only in
2003; and most districts do not have a DPO.
5.4.1
M&E of Community –Level Programme Activities
66
5.29
Table 5.2 shows the indicators proposed for the monitoring and evaluating communitylevel interventions funded under the CIF component of the ZAMSIF programme. As the reader
will note, no indicators are defined for monitoring Inputs [3] Activities [4] and Reach [6] for any
one of the eleven interventions. Furthermore, only seven Output [5] and Impact [8] indicators
respectively have been defined for these interventions. (see Fig. 5.1). As indicated earlier,
communities do not participate in monitoring or evaluating any of the indicators shown in Table
5.2.
5.30
Although the immediate beneficiaries of the interventions mentioned in Table 5.3 are
communities, the members of these communities do not participate in making the decisions on
what indicators to use for monitoring and evaluating the activities. Under the ZAMSIF
programme, District Councils are required to account to ZAMSIF at least 75% of the funds
disbursed and 100% of the previous one, before receiving the next tranche.
5.31
Replenishments of project funds are made only on submission of statement of expenditure,
supported by bank statements and physical progress reports, and only after approval has been
received from the Provincial Assessment Committee [PAC]. For this reason, monitoring of all
ZAMSIF project funds, using agreed reporting formats, is mandatory. Monitoring of financial
inputs requires the completion of a number of reporting formats covering, for example,
procurement, Local Purchase Orders, and payment vouchers. Similarly, DIF and CIF accounts are
audited by ZAMSIF on a regular basis. Annual audit of these accounts are also expected to be
carried out by external auditors who are appointed by the Provincial Assessment Committee
[PAC] in consultation with the Auditor General and/or ZAMSIF. Unfortunately, the indicators
from all these monitoring exercises are not stated in the log frame.
Table 5.2
Monitoring & Evaluation of ZAMSIF Programme Objectives: Community Level
Level/Objectives
Community Investment
Fund (CIF):
Outputs


1. Community projects 
financed
2. Community projects 
completed

3. Basic services
improved

4. Orphans and
vulnerable
children (OVCs)
assisted
5. Communities have
access to improved
AIDS information
6. Communities have
access to improved
AIDS counselling


Outcomes/Impacts
500 projects financed
400 projects completed
0.4 million beneficiaries.
80,000 OVCs assisted.
400 AIDS modules
delivered.
500 beneficiary
communities have
improved counselling.
500 non-urban project
committees trained
20 urban residential
development committees
trained
7. CBOs enabled to
manage own
development
8. Communities hold
service
providers
accountable
9. Communities have

10% increase in CDDactivities

5% increase in
successful project
applications,
5% increase in

67
confidence in
district officers
Communications
Strategy
10. Improved
information to remote
communities and
marginalized groups
communities satisfied
with district services




300 radios/year
regular radio
programmes developed
and broadcast in
vernacular languages
regular publication of a
newsletter and
pamphlets
website established

11. Improved
availability and use of
quality basic services
by beneficiary
communities





10% reduction in time
and distance to
facilities; 10% increase
in year that community
is accessible.
1% increase in school
attendance in
beneficiary primary
schools by sex/grade.
1% increase in MCH
attendance;
10% increase in
orphans and vulnerable
children attending
school in beneficiary
communities,
25% increase in
numbers using safe
water, in rural/urban
areas.
5% increase in numbers
using safe water, in
urban areas (both
before/after)
5% increase births
attended by trained
personnel
5.32
District Monitoring Teams [DMT] are expected to monitor implementation progress of
community-level interventions. However, the District Monitoring Team is unable to visit these
community projects, every month as expected, because these communities are separated by wide
distances from the district capital where the DMTs live.
5.33
A review of samples of the implementation monitoring reports obtained during the field visit
in May 2003 shows that they are prepared on a standard monitoring format. They are prepared with
care; and the quality is quite high. The reports contain information on project applications and
status, approvals, and launch, disbursements and justifications; physical progress, technical quality
of the project, and the degree of community involvement. The report is submitted to the Provincial
Assessment Committees [PAC] and ZAMSIF MU. Individual District Team members submit their
progress reports to their immediate supervisors.
68
5.4.2
M&E of Local Government –Level Programme Activities
5.34
Table 5.3 shows the indicators for monitoring and evaluating six ZAMSIF programme
objectives relevant to the Local Government. All the six objectives are linked to the Strategic
Planning process [1] described in Fig. 5.1. The log frame contains indicators for monitoring
Outputs and for evaluating Outcomes/Impacts. Output indicators are defined for five of the six
objectives.
5.35
An attempt has been made here to shift under “Beneficiary Reach” indicators originally
included under “Outputs”. Beneficiary Reach and Outcomes/Impact indicators are missing for the
entire Strategic planning processes considered critical in the overall ZAMSIF-CDD planning
cycle. (see Fig. 5.1). Admittedly attempts are being made, by the district authorities including the
District Monitoring Team, to monitor the inputs as well as the implementation progress of the six
objectives shown in Table 5.3. However without indicators, it is difficult to systematically analyze
the reasons for the slow progress in the delivery of the expected outputs of these objectives.
Table 5.3
Monitoring & Evaluation of ZAMSIF Programme Objectives: Local Government Level
69
Project Objectives
Outputs
District Investment
Fund[DIF]:

1. Districts taking
over from MU in
management of
CIF
2. District staff
trained as trainees
in various modules
including
participatory
planning, project
management and
maintenance,
environment,
HIV/AIDS etc.
3. Districts able to
develop a district
strategic development plan
4. Districts able to
manage district
projects








Beneficiary
Reach
Outcomes/Impac
ts
Satisfaction with:
 Council
administration
 local line agency
reps.
 NGOs/CBOs
 traditional
authorities
 No. of project
committees not
completing
Community
sub-projects
Annual public
consultation or
review of
poverty and
social
conditions[Annu
al Poverty/CDD
Review]
No. staff in 72
districts trained
in 40 modules.
All 72 Districts
developed
District Situation
Analysis[DSA]
40 Districts
completed
Poverty
Assessment
20 districts
completed
District
Development and
Poverty
Reduction
Strategy
15 districts
implemented
District Annual
Investment Plans
40 districts
implemented
DIF-for-district
projects
80 districts
projects financed,
0.8 million
beneficiaries
Increasing
number of
districts at
defined capacity
levels at years 15.
5. Services provided in
a governance system
where local
government and
communities are
mutually accountable
70
Study Fund
6. Improved quality
for priority and
demand-led studies
carried out and
disseminated and
survey results
analyzed


At least 12 studies 
funded by Study
Fund use survey
data
5 studies analyse
impact of
HIV.AIDS

5.4.3
5% districts
using
information
from
Monitoring
Management
System in
planning
10% of study
results used for
policy,
M&E of Central Government –Level Programme Activities
5.36
The blank boxes indicate that beneficiary reach and outcomes/impact indicators of are
missing in the log frame for all the six objectives that are of immediate interest to the central
government.
Table 5.4
Monitoring & Evaluation of ZAMSIF Programme Objectives: Central Government Level
Project Objectives
Outputs
1. Services provided
in a governance
system where local
government and
communities are
mutually accountable
2. Improved quality
for priority and
demand-led studies
carried out and
disseminated; and
survey results
analyzed

Poverty Monitoring
and Analysis (PMA)

3. Cost-effective,
coordinated
household survey
programme
implemented
4. Annual report on
poverty and social
conditions prepared
Beneficiary
Reach
Annual public
consultation or review of
poverty and social
conditions[Annual
Poverty/CDD Review]






Full cycle of household
surveys (LCMS and IMS)
completed and LCMS III
report, Provincial reports
Poverty reports, IMS
reports prepared and
disseminated 6 months
after field work and HH
survey data made
available on CD-ROM.
4 Annual Poverty reports
produced
40 demand-led studies
produced (Phase 1)
10 priority studies
completed in Phase 1
6 persons trained in
71
10% of
study
results
used for
policy
Outcomes/Im
pact
following household
survey design, data entry,
analysis and report
writing.
15 capacity-building
workshops
5. Government has
recognized need to
solve problem of
coordination and has
approved the
establishment of a
Strategic Planning
Unit [SOPU] in the
Ministry of Finance
and National Planning
[MOFNP]
6. ZAMSIF
Institutional support







5.5
SOPU established in
MOFNP
Capacity built in SOPU

SOPU
managed
at least 5
studies.
Commitments and
disbursement follow
profiles, procurement
plans and AWPB
Administration costs less
than 20% of total
ZAMSIF
Reports produced on time
Reports user friendly and
accurate
ZAMSIF achievements
mentioned in ministers
brief.
Summary
5.37
A single CDD planning cycle, in place of the existing 5 planning cycles, has been
presented and used to describe the planning processes of the ZAMSIF programme. It can
contribute towards ZAMSIF programme effectiveness.
72
Chapter 6
ZAMSIF Implementation Successes and Challenges
6.1
Introduction
6.01
This Chapter presents information obtained from field visits22 undertaken during the month
of June, 2003 as part of ZAMSIF Mid-Term Review Mission [MTR] sponsored by the World Bank.
The MTR had two principal objectives: (i) to review progress that has been made towards the
achievement of the overall ZAMSIF programme development objectives presented in Chapter 3; and
(ii) to assess the implementation progress of each of the ZAMSIF’s programme components23.
Participation in the MTR provided the author with a unique opportunity to observe, at first hand,
evidence of CDD approach within the context of ZAMSIF operations on the ground. Information
obtained from the field visits together with my own interpretation of the outcome of discussions held
with ZAMSIF management staff in both ZAMSIF Lusaka office and in the districts visited have
been summarised and presented in this Chapter.
6.2
ZAMSIF Management Style and CDD
6.02
Overall, the management style of ZAMSIF marks a significant shift from the previous
Social Recovery Project framework described earlier in Chapter 2 and elaborated in Chapter 4.
Under SRP I and SRP II, there were elements of participation. The emphasis was more on delivering
project outputs that building the capacities of communities and Local Governments to take charge of
development. Almost all the activities in the planning cycle described in Chapter 5 (Fig. 5.1) were
carried out by the central implementation unit of the SRPs.
6.03
In contrast, the design of present ZAMSIF takes into consideration key principles of CDD,
such as empowerment of local government authorities and communities, accountability and
transparency, elaborated in Chapter 1. There is a clear recognition by ZAMSIF that local authorities
and communities have latent capabilities. The DIF component of ZAMSIF, for instance, is
consciously designed to harness these latent capacities by systematically building the capacities of
local governments so that they can contribute in an efficient manner to improved local governance.
Under ZAMSIF, the district team is the backbone of the development planning processes described
in Chapter 5.
6.2.1
Empowerment of Local Government
6.04
Empowerment of local government is expected to be achieved through the DIF component.
The overall objective of the District Investment Fund (DIF) is to create the capacity in districts so as
to contribute to improved local governance. Three of the specific aims of the DIF programme
component are directly related to the strategic planning processes. The first is to provide local
governments [LG] with means to improve their strategic development planning, technical,
management and financial capacity. The second is to provide funds in support of capacity building
and skills training for district officers on a demand led basis so that they will be able facilitate the
activities of both CIF and DIF project activities. The third is to support the training of trainers for
community capacity building activities such as home based care, HIV/Aids counselling, and
participatory methods of planning.
6.04
Under the DIF component, Local governments (district councils) are given funds from DIF
to assist them: to improve their strategic development planning, technical, management and financial
capacity; to finance economic and social infrastructure service facility, such as district health
facilities and market places, that benefit more than one community; to build capacity to undertake
There were two teams for the field visits: one team visited Eastern province. The second team visited Northern, Luapula and Lusaka
provinces. The author was part of the second team. Altogether the two teams visited a total of 13 districts over a period of 5 days.
22
A second MTR is planned for August 2003 for the purpose of (i) evaluating ZAMSIF implementation experience; (ii) providing
implementation support, as appropriate; and (iii) to chart the way forward.
23
73
skills training for district officers on a demand- led basis for areas such as planning, financial
management, design and costing of projects so that they can confidently facilitate the activities of
both CIF and DIF project cycles; to train trainers for facilitating community capacity building
activities such as Home Based Care [HBC], HIV/Aids counselling, participatory techniques, etc. At
the time of the field visits in June, 2003, 47 districts had graduated to level 2 of the DIF ladder.
These districts had prepared the District Situational Analysis [DSA]. Eight DIF projects had also
been approved with total commitments amounting to US$471, 300.
6.2.2
Empowerment of Local Communities
6.06
Details of the Community Investment Fund (CIF) component were given in Chapter 3 (see
Table 3.4). By May 31, 2003 ZAMSIF had approved a total of 261 community projects in 61
districts. The total cost of these projects was US$20.34 million. This amount represents 55% of the
total CIF budget for the period of 2000-2005. The distribution of these 261 projects by province and
by sector is shown respectively in Figs. 6.1 and 6.2 respectively. Clearly, the district-level capacity
building efforts already underway seems to be paying dividends.
6.07 The portfolio of projects that can be supported by ZAMSIF was presented in Table 3.2. A
closer examination of this portfolio shows that communities pattern of choice of project activities is
very much similar to that observed in the SRP I and II. Fig. 6.2 shows that the distribution of the
261 projects by sector Education and health sectors continue to dominate the list of project that
communities select for funding. Of special interest, however, is that all the 261 community projects
were identified by the communities themselves. Real community participation was observed in all
the projects visited in Northern and Luapula provinces in June 2003. These community project
activities are small in nature. They consist of infrastructural service facilities such as VIP toilets,
wells, health clinics, school classrooms.
74
Fig. 6.1
Distribution of CIF Approved Projects by Province, Zambia, May 2003
50
Number
40
30
20
10
0
l
t
ra bel tern aka ula ern tern ern tern
t
n
r
s
s
th es
th es
ap
u
Ce ppe Ea
Lu Lu Nor
w
W
So
th
r
Co
No
Province
Source: Based on Data from the Field Visit in Jume 2003
For most remote communities in Zambia these service facilities represent invaluable social capital.
They are initiated, and constructed by the local communities themselves with technical assistance
support from district authorities and financial inputs from ZAMSIF staff. It is clear from Fig. 6.2
that greater efforts will be needed to widen the range of projects to cover particularly sectors such as
community capacity building, HIV/AIDS, markets, and roads. Interventions in these sectors will
contribute to the expected impact of the education and health sectors.
75
Fig. 6.2
Distr ibution of CIF Appr oved Pr ojects by Activity, May 2003, Zambia
Number
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
s
s
e
g
S
n
n ent lth
D ket oad tio
in lfar tio
a
I
n
m He /A
a
i
ar
R nita
ra We duc ron
V
M
T
I
a
i
E nv
H
/S
ty nity
r
i
e
E
u
un
at
m mm
W
m
Co
Co
Project Activity
Sour ce : Bas e d on Data fr om Fie ld V is it in June 2003
6.08
Concerning the funding of the 261 community –level projects, the available information
confirm that the communities are given untied funds from the CIF. These funds are crucial to the
success of the community project because they enable the communities to choose their own
priorities, and create skills through learning by doing. The community has real control over the
financial resources committed to be used in carrying out the project activities. The provision of the
funds enhances the participation of the community members, builds confidence and ownership.
76
6.09
Evidence of real participation in development abounds in all the ZAMSIF community level
projects. Here, the local communities with technical assistance from the district line ministries, local
government officials, and various district-level committees, together with financial and technical
support provided by ZAMSIF,
decides on what priority activity they want to undertake.
6.10
In Rosa, a remote village of some 11, 00 inhabitants, located in the Mungwi district of
Northern Province, the community has successfully initiated, planned and co-financed the
construction of a rural health centre. A profile of the Rosa project is shown in Box 6.1. ZAMSIF
provided financial and technical support. Additional technical assistance was provided by the district
line Ministry who are also members of the Planning Sub-committee of the District Development
Coordinating Committee [DDCC]. The community members decided to hire and pay for the services
of highly skilled carpenters and masons, who live in the community, using funds approved under
CIF. At the time of the construction, these service providers were retirees; the project offered them
paid employment. A magnificent health centre is near completion. The completion of this
construction project has been delayed because of procurement delays.
6.11
Community members themselves freely negotiate their development options, based on
information received from district facilitators and community project committee members; they then
commit themselves to co-finance the project (in cash and/or in kind); and implement, and maintain
the project. Formal monitoring and evaluation of the project by the community members has yet to
be introduced into ZAMSIF programme. The above example illustrates the participatory aspects of
the on-going community-level project management.
6.12
The next example of a community-level driven project which was initiated, planned and is
being implemented by the community with financial assistance from ZAMSIF, is Makeni Primary
School Expansion. Makeni is located in the district of Kafue in the Lusaka province. The School
was previously rehabilitated through funding from Micro Projects Unit (MPU). However due to the
growing population, some children of school going age are not able to enrol into the school because
classrooms are inadequate. The school also has inadequate accommodation for teachers.
6.13
The headmaster of the school initiated a participation process. This consisted of consultation
with several members of the Parent Teachers’ Association [PTA]. Following a number of DDCC
meetings, members of the community decided to construct additional three classrooms; one 2 semi
detached teacher’s houses; 4 VIP latrines. Provision was made for suitable furniture and equipment
for the classrooms and the teacher’s houses.
The project budget was prepared with assistance of ZAMSIF MU. The community agreed to
contribute building material (consisting of 600 concrete blocks, 70 tons of river sand, 40 tons of
building sand, 55 tons of crushed stones); unskilled labour; and funds to meet administrative costs.
The total project budget amounted to K272, 901, 977.00. Of this amount, ZAMSIF contributed
K209, 023,013.00 and the local Community contributed K 63,878,964.00.
77
BOX 6.1: PROJECT PROFILE OF ROSA RURAL HEALTH CENTRE
GENERAL DETAILS
PROJECT NAME:
Rosa Rural Health Centre Construction
PROJECT NUMBER:
2/2802
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
ZAMSIF
PROVINCE:
Northern
DISTRICT:
Mungwi
SECTOR:
Health
DATE OF PROPOSAL:
DATE DESK APPRAISED:
30/12/99
DATE FIELD APPRAISED:
20/04/00
DATE APPROVED:
27/11/00
DATE PROJECT LAUNCHED:
29/01/01
TOTAL BENEFICIARIES:
10,780
NUMBER OF OVCs IN PROJECT AREA:
380
APPROVED PROJECT BUDGET:
ZAMSIF Contribution:
K215,528,903
US$ 71,843
Local Community Contribution: K 44,657,508
US$ 14,886
TOTAL BUDGET:
K260,186,411
US$ 86,729
Rosa Rural Health Centre was originally part of the Catholic Mission facility established in the
early 1920s.
The Rosa RHC construction sub project is purely a community driven project, which was
initiated, planned and implemented by the community with financial and technical assistance
from ZAMSIF. Technical assistance was being provided to the communities through the
district staff from various government departments who are members of the Planning Sub
Committee of the District Development Committee (DDCC) of Mungwi. The DDCC is
responsible for ensuring planned development in the district. The Planning Sub Committee
provides technical support to the communities through the project appraisal process and
recommends community proposals for approval.
The existing health centre was in a very poor state of disrepair and was almost collapsing. The
walls had major cracks and the roof and substructures were heavily infested by termites. The
centre is too small to accommodate over 10,780 people in the catchment area. The centre did
not have facilities for conducting safe mother deliveries and no facilities for relatives to lodge
in whilst caring for sick relatives. Sanitation was inadequate and so was basic clinic equipment
and furniture.
An environment impact assessment of the project was conducted. Mitigation measures were
built into the project as part of the project design and costing.
Within the community there are vulnerable groups including OVCs and people affected with
HIV/AIDS. The project has been a centre for information dissemination and focus for social
capital development. It included awareness creation on HIV/AIDS, OVCs, Gender,
Environment and Operation and Management. In order to ensure that these issues are
addressed effectively and that project benefits are sustained with development of social capital,
specific Task Forces have been formed to spearhead the awareness campaigns and community
organisation. As part of their contribution, the community has provided 180,000 bricks, 65mt
river sand, 48 mt. crushed stones. They have been providing unskilled labour and funds to
meet administrative costs.
It is hoped that upon completion of this project, the community will achieve the following
benefits:
 Improved access to quality health services.
 Increased awareness on HIV/AIDS and Environmental issues.
APPROVED ACTIVITIES/TARGETS:
78
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Construction of maternity block.
Construction of relatives’ shelter.
Construction of 4 No. VIP latrines.
Construction of ward block.
Construction of out patient block.
Provision of equipment.
Provision of furniture.
Provision of solar power supply.
Environmental Mitigation Measures including construction of an incinerator.
COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO ISSUES ARISING FROM PROJECT
The community has formed various Task Forces to deal with issues concerning HIV/AIDS,
Environment and Operations and Management. The community has identified problems
concerning these issues and agreed activities/solutions, which have to be spearheaded by these
Task Forces.
6.15
The project proposal was submitted to ZAMSIF on 6 March 2001; desk appraised on 11
January, 2002; field appraised on 15 March 2002; approved on 13 December 2002; and launched on
24 December 2002. Actual implementation activities began in 2003. At the time of the field visit in
June 2003, the construction of the 3 classroom block had been completed. The remaining
79
construction had been temporarily delayed because of problems encountered at the block
manufacturing factory.
6.16
Within the community, there are vulnerable groups including orphans and vulnerable
children [OVCs] and people affected by HIV/AIDS. ”The community has agreed to form Task
Forces and come up with workable measures aimed at addressing the needs of these vulnerable
groups. The project will also be a centre for dissemination of information and focus for social
capital development. Environmental concerns were identified and some funds have been allowed in
the project budget to cover mitigation measures.”
6.17
Notice that, like the Rosa rural clinic, technical assistance in the Makeni project is being
provided to the communities by the District staff from various government departments. The district
staff comprises members of the Planning Sub-Committee of the District Development Committee
(DDCC) of Kafue District. The DDCC is responsible for ensuring planned development in the
district. The Planning Sub Committee also recommends community proposals for approval by the
DDCC and the Council. The Planning Sub-Committee provides technical support to the
communities during the project appraisal process, implementation and monitoring.
6.18
The project will directly benefit 1,219 children between the age of 6 and 16 and 2 teachers.
Other expected benefits from the project will include improved access to education services;
improved learning and teaching environment; and increased literacy levels.
6.19
The above two examples illustrate how community members participate in making
development choices under conditions of full information provided by authorities who have easier
access to information, The community meetings were observed to take into account the interests of
all social groups, namely adult male and females [in ROSA adolescent females were not seen; young
children were present and contributed their views on the community priorities. The priorities of the
different social groups are not the same. Women in Rosa mentioned hammer-mill to enable them to
reduce the back-breaking and time-consuming task of milling the maize grain using stones. The
male adults indicated feeder road from the main road to Rosa as the most critical. In would appear
that both hammer-mill and feeder road are high development priorities in the Rosa community
because their availability and use can equally contribute towards a reduction of suffering
experienced by most of the women and children living in this remote rural setting. In particular, the
use of these services will free women’s time and encourage them to fully participate in community
meetings. In the absence of hammer mills, most of the women currently have to spend nearly 30%
of the day grinding maize using a stone. The issue of who finally decides on core community
development priorities deserves attention.
6.2.3
Improving Accountability and Transparency
6.20
Almost all traditional accountability has been upwards, to central governments and donors.
In all the projects visited in the Northern and Luapula Provinces, District councillors, chiefs and
members of project committees gave the impression that district and community-level leaders are
accountable to the community members, users of project outcomes and to their own peers. One of
the facilitators narrated an instance where community members decided to take corrective actions
against their own member of parliament who was judged to be corrupt.
6.21
Overall, ZAMSIF management approach is slowly enforcing transparency and
accountability. For example, the IPF is published for all district authorities to know how much funds
has been allocated to them for their development. Further evidence of accountability and
transparency in ZAMSIF operations is provided in BOX 6.2. The communities account to their
immediate community leaders, as well as the district authorities. In turn, the community holds their
community leaders, district authorities, as well as ZAMSIF for the success or failure of their
development efforts. At the community level, a great deal of time is needed to observe and
document changes in cultural attitudes that will be necessary to support a culture of openness and
transparency. What is gradually unfolding, however, is that the latent capabilities and strong social
capital of local communities are being harnessed by ZAMSIF programme efforts.
80
6.2.4
Building a Learning –by- doing Culture
6.22
The scale of community-level projects provides opportunities for learning-by-doing. As
noted earlier, the level of funding to districts for DIF projects depends on their capacity to facilitate
CIF project cycle activities. These activities consist of project Identification, Appraisal, Costing and
Budgeting, Approval, Launch, Disbursements and Justifications, and Implementation, Reporting and
Supervision of the DIF project, Reporting and Auditing of the District Performance. These project
cycle activities are designed to facilitate the implementation of ZAMSIF planning processes
6.23
For the moment, only district-level planners are targeted for the training. Each module of the
project cycle activities appears to be executed in a discrete fashion. However, every effort is made to
reflect on the lessons learned during the course of carrying out a cycle activity. These lessons are
then used as fresh input for refining the module. A good example is the District Assessment
Guidelines. Lessons learned over the past two years for using the original District Assessment
Manual has led to the production of a more refined Assessment Manual published in 2003.
6.24
The revised Manual will guide the work of the Provincial Assessment Teams [PAT] and
District Teams. The present Manual has attempted to replace the previous subjective method of
grading district capacity with a scoring method. The assessment criteria and the performance
indicators are said to be improved in the present Manual. Critical indicators for each level of the
ZAMSIF CIF/DIF ladder have also been included. The critical indicators define”…the level of
competence and capacity that a district should possess and demonstrate in order to move from one
level to the next higher level on the ZAMSIF CIF/DIF ladder and in the process assume additional
responsibilities and functions in the facilitation of district development.24
6.3
Factors Conducive to CDD
6.3.1
Technical Assistance and Facilitation
6.25
The staff from ZAMSIF Headquarters in Lusaka together with support staff from the
Provinces and districts provides technical support to districts and communities in the
implementation of the CIF and DIF planning cycles. These officers carry out Awareness
Workshops, District Assessments, and Demand-Led Training Programmes
6.26
In particular, the regional and district facilitators have established closer links with the
districts and communities. They possess deep knowledge of the environment; they know what kinds
of information to gather and process. They serve as technical experts providing information about
the technical designs about projects, the social benefits and costs of various development projects, as
well as their technological options, and the consequences for the project beneficiaries. They make
their expertise readily available on demand to the district authorities and the communities. Through
the DIF, these facilitators have developed and implemented an ongoing system of training and
retraining of their sector specialists. They are able to respond to requests from communities.
6.27
The Provincial Assessment Committees [PAC] have been actively involved in assessing the
planning capacities of all 72 districts. Information from this assessment has been used to make
decisions regarding which districts qualify to receive capacity building funds from DIF. All 72
districts have received funds from DIF to upgrade the capacity of district – level planning
institutions and the skills of individuals in these institutions. District capacity assessment has been
institutionalized in the planning process through the diligent work of the Provincial Assessment
Committees. The District Council, Line Department staff and Non Governmental Organisations
See, District Assessment Guidelines for Development and Poverty Reduction: A Manual for Use by Provincial Assessment Teams
and District Teams, page ii.
24
81
[NGOs] actively participate in the identification of district capital projects and community-level
intervention.
6.28
Efforts to institutionalise a unified planning process to support poverty reduction at the
district level are in progress. The expected outcomes of the planning process will consist of the
preparation of the following planning documents (i) District Situation Analysis,25 (ii) Poverty
Assessment, (iii) District Development & Poverty Reduction Strategy, and (iv) Annual Investment
Plan. ZAMSIF is strengthening the DDCC: NGOs are actively participating in deciding on district –
level development priorities. Some District Councils have already established the post of a District
Planning Officer- a key person in the District Planning Unit [DPU].
6.3.2
Ladder of Fiscal Rewards and Penalties: Performance by Results
6.29
At the start of ZAMSIF, all the 72 districts were in Level 1 of both the CIF and DIF. During
the first year of ZAMSIF programme operation, a district assessment was undertaken by Provincial
Assessment. Findings from the assessment are used to determine the start level classification for all
districts. It is this kind of information that is used to make decision on the graduation or demotion of
a district from one level to the next.
6.30 ZAMSIF is pioneering an innovative planning mechanism, based on a system of fiscal
incentives and penalties, under which local governments are granted additional authority and funds
that meet graduated benchmarks. The benchmarks [ranging from 1 to 5] correspond to the level of
the district’s capacity to manage development. [See Box 6.1]. As the capacity of the local
government increases, its responsibilities also increase. And as its responsibilities increase, the level
of its access to ZAMSIF development funds also increases. Districts are promoted or demoted to a
given funding level according to findings from objective capacity assessment.
6.31
This incentive scheme is empowering districts to manage by results. The evidence shows
that the scheme can: spur competition between local governments; promote local government
commitment to carry out district development programme functions and tasks; enhance a learningby-doing approach; provide incentives compatible with programme objectives; foster a common
culture of transparency among programme participants; induce accelerated skill development for
improved performance; serve as a powerful deterrent to possible elite capture, corruption and social
exclusion which constitute serious dangers to empowerment at all levels. As high-performance
communities climb up the ladder and receive bigger CIF budgets, their leaders invariable also build
up reputations; they are held in high esteem in their communities. Fiscal rewards and penalties for
good or unacceptable performance can also induce greater accountability from local governments/
communities
6.3.3
Partnerships with Implementing Partners
6.32
ZAMSIF has already initiated discussions on joint venture or partnership arrangements
among different levels of government and civil society groups based on their comparative
advantage. In the Northern Province, for example, Irish Aid and ZAMSIF have hosted a number of
participatory workshops aimed at reaching agreement/commitment on how best they can allocate
functions and work harmoniously to deepen community development.
6.33
In a given community, development partners can unite their energies and capital to address
priority development concerns. For example, coordinating ZAMSIF activities with development
partners already or intending to create capacity at district level will equally be useful. For this to
happen, ZAMSIF will have to facilitate the reaching of common ground where there is a
In June 2003, the author carefully reviewed the Isoka District Situation Analysis 2002, compiled by the Planning Sub-Committee of
the DDCC of the Isoka District Council. The review shows that the sources of information for compiling this document can readily be
obtained from administrative sources within the district; unfortunately, no information from the most recent Living Conditions Monitoring
Survey [LCMS 1998] is included in the document.
25
82
convergence of interests for the benefit of all; facilitate interchange of experience among CDD
practitioners; build trust; and change entrenched attitudes and mind-sets among its own staff and its
current development partners such as GTZ, and SNV; and ensure that all key stakeholders know
what to do.
Co-financing by Communities
6.34
Communities willingly contribute both capital and maintenance costs of projects meant for
their benefit. Contributions are either in cash or kind (labour, local materials). Co-financing of these
community development activities inculcate a sense of local ownership and it is likely to motivate
the community in operation and maintenance of the infrastructure service facilities after ZAMSIF
funding comes to a close.
6.4
Challenges Facing ZAMSIF Programme Implementation
6.35
Prior to the field visit, a questionnaire had been distributed to stakeholders groups to elicit
information related to their interests, importance, influence and participation strategy. A sample
copy of the questionnaire appears in Annex 6.1.
The responses from this survey served as input to the face-to-face questions that were posed to a
number of district officials met during the field visit. A summary of the findings from five
stakeholders groups (ZAMSIF, Local Authority, Community, Sector Ministry and NGO) is
presented in Table 6.1
6.36
Officials of ZAMSIF, according to Table 6.1, have a clear sense of the objectives of the
programme as well as its linkages with the national poverty reduction strategy. However, The
concept of CDD as a development approach rather than a project/programme does not appear
obvious from Table 6.1. The table also shows that the development objectives of ZAMSIF
programme are consistent with what is perceived by the Local Authorities, the Community and
NGO as development priorities.
6.37
In addition to the above inquiry, stakeholders were also asked to describe what they
consider to be the main challenges facing the implementation of the on-going ZAMSIF CDD-related
activities; and to indicate what can be done to overcome such implementation challenges. The
responses to these questions were found to be similar to a number of the lessons, presented in Table
2.3 in Chapter 2, learned in the course of implementing SRP I and SRP II. During the field visit, it
was decided to closely observe ZAMSIF planning operations particularly at the community level. It
became quite clear that most of the issues that were identified two years ago (see Table 4.1) as
inhibiting CDD scaling up efforts in the country (funding mechanisms, capacity building, subdistrict organizational structures and planning) are still pertinent and deserve serious consideration.
Table 6.1 Summary of Stakeholders’ Functions and Interests
Stakeholder Group
ZAMSIF
Stakeholders’ main interests
Stakeholder CDD-related
development activities




ZAMSIF is a CDD
programme.
Capacity building of local
administration;
Community Project funding
(e.g. infrastructure- based
activities for service
delivery)
Capacity building in
districts and communities
83




Ensure transparency and
accountability.
Use planning process to target the
poor.
To contribute to social
development and influence the
approach to the country’s
development to be communitybased.
Development of planning
capacities at district level
Stakeholder Group
Local Authority
Stakeholders’ main interests
Stakeholder CDD-related
development activities

Road rehabilitation through
HIPC activities








Community
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Sector Ministry
Ministry Of Energy
& Water
Development
Ministry Of
Education
Ministry of
Community
Development &
Social Services
Ministry of Health
Central Statistical
Office
Gender In
Development
Division





Small-scale infrastructure
facilities for schools;
construction of water
sanitation facilities; clinic,
etc
Afforestation projects
School construction and/
rehabilitation.
Construction of self-help
schools, health centres,
bridges, feeder roads
Rehabilitation of Health
Centres country wide.

To make it easy for the
community to have access to
these basic services within
walking distances

Providing water and sanitation for
rural communities.
District education staff are
advised to encourage schools to
apply for funds for the education
projects
To improve the standard of living
through improved health and
communication.
To provide Zambians with equity
of access to cost effective, quality
health care as close to the family
as possible
Provision of timely information
on poverty and social conditions
for use at local level.
Promotion of gender equality in
community activities
Promotion of participation of
women in decision- making/
Promotion of rights-based
approach to development.
Increase and diversify food
production
To increase seed availability.
To increase production of cassava
for food security.
Contribute towards capacity
building of level organizations
To improve service delivery
through
citizen participation



Information to support CDD
Engendering
policies
and 
programmes at all levels of
development.







2. Programme Against 
Malnutrition
NGOs
1. World Vision
Zambia
3. Netherlands
Development
Organisation
Food security/ HIV/AIDS
Water and sanitation.
Health education
Food security pack.
Support to District
Councils.






Food for Assets.
84
Poverty reduction.
Rural development.
Policy formulation and
Development
Planning
Ensuring that all projects and
programmes being implemented
are within government policy.
Project identification,
implementation, appraisals,
monitoring
Sound financial management and
accountability.
Promote and monitor community
participation
Stakeholder Group



(SNV)
Stakeholders’ main interests
Stakeholder CDD-related
development activities
Home-based care
Supplementary feeding
Urban OVCs intervention


4. Embassy Of Ireland

5. UN – World Food
Programme
6.4.1
Governance and Maintenance
issues.
Resource mobilization,
coordination ,counterpart funding
& M&E
Control of AIDS
Some Observations on ZAMSIF Planning Processes
6.38
A summary of the main challenges facing each of the five stakeholder groups as well as the
proposed solutions are given in Table 6.2. For the sake of brevity, the reader is encouraged to
compare this Table with the observations presented in Tables 2.3, 4.1 and BOX 4.1. The rest of this
Chapter will now focus attention on a few of the issues presented in Table 6.2.
Slow Progress in Strategic Planning
6.39
It was indicated in Fig. 5.1, that the strategic planning process is considered critical for the
overall planning cycle. Progress in this area has been quite slow despite the huge efforts at capacity
building. Positive results from the capacity building efforts seem to be emerging now: by June of
2003, 47 (or 65 %) out of the 72 districts have completed the preparation of their District Situation
Analysis [DSA]. None of the 72 districts has produced any one of the following required strategic
planning documents: a Poverty Assessment [PA], District Development and Poverty Reduction
Strategy [DDPRS], and District Annual Investment Plan.
6.40
Among the factors that have contributed to the slow pace of the strategic planning process
include:(i) weak links between the national and sub-level poverty reduction strategies and
programme; (ii) general weaknesses in the overall planning mechanisms at all levels; (iii) the nature
of the capacity building efforts; (iv) delays in the implementation of the decentralization process;
and (ii) failure to target districts with weak planning capacities. These issues are not new. They were
identified in Chapter 4. They appear to reflect development discontinuities outlined in Chapter 2.
Reduced Planning Capacity at the Centre
6.41
At the national level, the role of planning, including coordination of development
programmes, is still weak. It is acknowledged that the current capacity of Strategic and Operational
Planning Unit (SOPU) of Ministry of Finance and Economic Development to effectively use data
and analysis in its planning functions is low. Although the Poverty Monitoring Unit [PMU] of
ZAMSIF relocated to MOFNP in March 2003, its relationship to the Directorate of Planning in the
ministry is still unclear. To be effective, the PMU will have to resolve its dual accountability and
reporting problems. This is situation will take some time to resolve.
6.42
Reduced planning capacity at the centre seems to affect the ability of MOFNP to give
effective guidance and technical support to line ministries and other government institutions [such as
the Poverty Reduction Unit in the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services, Task
Force for Orphans and Vulnerable Children, National AIDS Council and so on] that address poverty
issues.
Table 6.2
85
Key Implementation Challenges Facing ZAMSIF Programme
Stakeholder
Group
ZAMSIF
Community
Local
Authority
Sector
Ministry
What do you consider to be the main
challenges facing the implementation of
the on-going CDD-related activities?
 CDD may at times be in conflict with
line Ministry needs identification and
prioritization mechanisms especially if
there is no objective problem
identification and prioritization
 Difficult to harmonise reporting cycles,
procedures and format with line
ministries.
 Proliferation of development
approaches at district/ community.
 Inadequate legal framework to back
up actions/process and procedures.
 Absence of decentralisation policy
 Lack of adequate capacity in
communities to implement projects.
 Lack of adequate knowledge about
CDD activities within Zambia.
 Concentration of CDD projects in
education sector
 Lack of information on which to base
community-level planning
 Poverty makes it difficult for many
people to participate in projects
 Centralist tendencies in the
administration of development
activities.
 Long-winded bureaucratic procedures.
 Unorganised local communities.
 Inadequate local knowledge of CDDrelated activities.
 Lack of information for communities
on how to access development funds
 Lengthy process of accessing funds by
communities
 The challenge is to formulate small
projects that can address the real
problems of the rural/urban poor.
 Mobilizing the communities to actively
participate in development
 Disaggregate poverty and other
information to sub-district levels.
 Lacking infrastructure for information
dissemination at local level
 Lack of gender responsiveness.
 Inadequate gender disaggregated data.
 Weaknesses in Planning and M&E
What can be done to overcome such
Implementation challenges?









Provide rewards and incentives to
encourage full community
participation

Provide monitoring funds to
Provincial and District
Administration to monitor project
implementation progress.
Make resources available to LG and
Communities
Build district capacity for planning,
monitoring and evaluation.
Intensify facilitation of communitybased development activities
Address complaints on information
provision to communities.
Coordinate internal activities among
development partners to reduce
waste.









86
Improve IEC.
Improve awareness of political
leadership and line ministry staff.
Lobby for adoption of common
planning processes.
GRZ to guide donors in CDD.
Increase training of communities
and improve further skills mix
within ZAMSIF.
Include micro-credit financing to
ZAMSIF project portfolio
Fully implement the
Decentralisation Policy
ZAMSIF to harmonize it with the
Local Government Act
MOFNP to provide adequate
counterpart funds and technical
assistance to Local Government.
Actively involve community during
all phases of project planning and
implementation.
Collaborate with co-operating
partners.
Accelerate implementation of
decentralization policy.
Stakeholder
Group
NGOs
What do you consider to be the main
challenges facing the implementation of
the on-going CDD-related activities?
 Insufficient funding from donors.
 Insufficient community contribution
due to high levels of poverty.
 Top-down approaches with pre- set
ideas by donors about how their money
should be used.
 Late receipt of funds for input
procurement
 Absence of strong CBOs
 Limited engagement between
communities and locally-elected
leaders.
 Local authorities have no capacity to
provide effective support to CDD.
What can be done to overcome such
Implementation challenges?







Good governance at National,
Provincial and District levels to
ensure that local resources are
mobilized and put to good use.
Improved infrastructure in rural
areas.
Increased community capacity
building and adequate funding of
projects.
Improved food security
Build capacity to monitor local
councils.
Prepare vulnerability assessments
Lobby for more resources for
serious capacity building at all levels
Planning Capacity at District and Community Levels
6.43
Concern has been expressed by some district authorities “…at the failure of the district to
access funds for development projects.” This problem has been attributed to a number of factors.
Chief among these factors are (i) ZAMSIF project funding application process; (ii) lack of capacity
by district authorities; and (iii) change in the application procedures from those used under the
Micro Project Unit (MPU) to the ones that are currently used by ZAMSIF. See BOX 6.2.
6.44
Progress in building capacity for planning and M&E at local level remains limited. This is
due to some of the assumptions that underlie the design of the ZAMSIF programme. For example, at
the start of ZAMSIF programme in 2000, it was assumed that some districts are well advanced in:
data analysis, poverty assessment, participatory and district planning. It was also assumed that “…
each district, at least, is able to desk appraise CIF project proposals, assist with some aspects of the
project field appraisal, and can monitor community projects”. Three years later in the ZAMSIF
programme, it has become clear that not a single district has reached Level 3 of the capacity building
ladder. It was hoped, at the start of the ZAMSIF programme that DIF funds could be used to build
adequate capacity for district planning including strengthening the strategic links with the Poverty
Monitoring & Analysis [PMA] component of ZAMSIF in relation to the identification of national
poverty indicators, data collection and analytical approach.
6.45
Concerning capacity for data analysis, this case study confirms that “…there have been few
district-level attempts at poverty analysis although significant amount of data are collected and
maintained in the district by sectors”. At the district level, considered the hub of ZAMSIF
operations, skill gaps exist for data analysis and participatory and strategic planning, project
planning and budgeting, and M&E. It is recognised that there have been few district level attempts at
poverty analysis although significant amount of data are collected and maintained in the district by
sectors. Few districts have district plans on which community–level planning should be based.
Although some districts have a District Situation Analysis [DSA], many districts do not have a
functioning DDCCs.
6.46
The intention of ZAMSIF to “…post staff to more difficult to reach and poorer areas” has
not materialized. Situational constraints within districts are partly responsible for the inability of
district facilitators in making frequent visits to remote communities in the districts. Attention was
87
drawn, in Chapter 1, to the fact that access to remote rural communities is difficult; and
transportation cost is prohibitive.
Weak Link between National Poverty Reduction Strategy and ZAMSIF
6.47
The link between the national Poverty Reduction Strategy [PRS] and the district poverty
reduction strategy, of which the ZAMSIG programme is a part, appears weak. As noted earlier, the
formulation of the current ZAMSIF programme took into account the overall national development
strategies contained in the ZPRS. A detailed list of the priority development activities was prepared
as an annex to the ZPRS document. Unfortunately, these project activities have not as yet been
consolidated into programmes and budget at both national and district levels.
Limited Dissemination and Actual Use of M&E for Decision-Making
6.48
As noted in Chapter 2, under the SRP I, information to support planning was not available.
This situation has changed considerably over the years. Now, adequate data and information exists.
For example, district-level information from the 1998 LCMS data as well as the 2000 census of
population and housing is now available. In addition poverty information, disaggregated to district
level, produced from the 1998 LCMS data also exits. This information has yet to be disseminated for
use. Such information can be used for the preparation of the district Poverty Assessment [PA],
District Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy [DDPRS], and District Annual Investment
Plan [DAIP].
6.49
What is needed is a careful repackaging of the available information for use by the district
authorities. Discussions with a number of district officials revealed that the districts are not aware of
the existence of such information. Some district officials indicated that currently the presentation of
information from poverty analysis is in formats (statistical tables) that cannot easily be understood
by a majority of the district level planners.
6.50
Closely related to data and the analysis of data is the weak flow of information from poverty
analyses. This problem is directly linked to the fact that there are no incentives for serious and
timely analysis, dissemination and use of information from survey data. The demand for, and the
actual use of, M&E for decision-making is limited to central government ministries. As a result,
administrative records continue to serve as an important input for decision-making on project
financial and non- financial inputs.
6.51
It was observed that, in general, planning and M&E (M&E) are seen as discrete activities in
ZAMSIF. The quality of monitoring reports reviewed is quite high. Due to time constraint, the use
of these project reports could not be investigated during the field visit. Regarding the use of
information to improve the quality of decision-making for the purpose of achieving development
results, it will be safe to conclude, on the basis of the field visit, that there is still room to improve
the effectiveness of the current practice of planning and M&E, at least, in all the districts visited.
6.4.2
Targeting Mechanisms
6.52
Policy makers are well aware of the benefits of targeting. Efficient targeting ensures that the
available material, human and financial resources go the segment of the population that needs them
most. ZAMSIF is aware that poor targeting can contribute to low returns particularly on many of the
community-based interventions.
6.53
On the issue of targeting, the Operations Manual of ZAMSIF has this to say: “District
councils and authorities in the poorest areas of the country will be targeted so that their planning,
management and implementation skills will be strengthened in order that the priority needs of the
poor are met.” Further, the Operation Manual says that “…rigorous screening criteria will be used
during micro-project appraisal, including a mandatory field appraisal and social assessment of
88
beneficiaries, to ensure that only poor communities and beneficiaries are served and that the voice of
the marginalised is heard. Particular emphasis will be placed on targeting poor and vulnerable
groups, such as orphans and vulnerable children, female headed households, women, and persons
living with HIV/AIDS, the disabled and their care givers”.
6.54
Projects funded from the CIF component are expected to target poor communities,
particularly those located in rural and remote areas of the country. For political reasons, current
community–level interventions are self targeting. This case study however found that a number of
NGOs (e.g. Tables 2.3 and 6.1) employ systematic targeting of their beneficiaries.
6.4.3
Integrating Participatory planning into Planning cycle
6.55
Participatory planning methods, such as participatory poverty assessment [PPA], beneficiary
assessment [BA], focus group discussions [FGD], are widely used by ZAMSIF facilitators.
Currently, the use of these participatory methods in a number of projects supported by ZAMSIF is
viewed as shortcut M&E techniques within conventional M&E. A number of useful studies abound.
Undoubtedly information from some of these studies have contributed to the empowerment of
project beneficiaries; provided fast feedback during project implementation; created a sense of
project ownership; and enhanced project sustainability. However, most of the studies do not go
beyond ‘listening to the voices of the poor’. They are conceived and carried out as ad-hoc, researchoriented studies. They have been commissioned by the Government, donor agencies and NGOs.
They are not integrated adequately into the mainstream of the on-going ZAMSIF planning and M&E
processes.
6.5
Consequences of Slow Progress in Strategic Planning
6.56
As a result of the slow progress in strategic planning, graduation on Capacity building
ladder, described in BOX 3.1, has not been as fast as expected. Districts experience delays in
accessing ZAMSIF funds for development; and there is a low utilization of funds committed for
development activities.
6.5.1
Slow Graduation on Capacity Ladder
6.57
Most districts do not have adequate capacity to complete strategic planning process
corresponding to stage 1 of the CDD planning cycle presented in Fig.5.1. As noted earlier, by June
2003, only 47, out of 72 districts have managed to complete a District Situation analysis. This task
has been carried out as a technical requirement for assessing ZAMSIF funds. Some districts do not
as yet see the reasons for linking the District Situation Analysis, Poverty Assessment, District
Development & Poverty Reduction Strategy, and the Annual Investment Plan documents to their
request for funding priority development projects to be funded under the DIF component. Some
districts have submitted district capital projects for DIF funding. District authorities seem to prefer
these capital projects to small, infrastructure community-level projects such toilets, and water wells
shown in Table 3.2. These DIF district capital projects are development activities which district
officials believe can empower most of the communities in the district because they can benefit more
than one community and are likely to empower a larger segment of the poor people in the district.
For now the temptation for “elite capture” appears quite high because the selection of these projects
does not seem to involve the participation of a wide segment of the community they are supposed to
benefit.
6.58
Eligibility for DIF project, has to meet additional criteria such as evidence that the districts:
show a minimum capability in facilitating certain functions of the CIF; have a functioning District
Development Coordinating Committee (DDCC); and have some financial management skills. For a
district project to be approved for DIF project funds, the District Council must commit itself to
provide about 15% of the project costs, which may be in form of technical assistance, local materials
and/or funds. This requirement seems impossible for many districts because, as noted in Table 4.1,
most districts do not have such money.
89
6.59
BOX 6.2
District
US$ 1 million ZAMSIF Funds go begging in Kitwe
DIF
capital
Over one million United States dollars allocated to Kitwe under the Zambia Social
projects Investment Fund (ZAMSIF) has remained unutilised due to failure by the District
are
Development Coordinating Committee (DDCC) to provide adequate technical
suppos
information on projects. A DDCC meeting in Kitwe heard that nine out of 12 projects
ed to be submitted to ZAMSIF to date had been rejected for failing to meet the laid down
based
criteria for accessing the social fund.
on the
District
Kitwe Town Clerk Ali Simwinga, wondered why project applications were being
Plan
rejected for failing to meet the ZAMSIF criteria when there was a technical planning
and
sub-committee charged with the responsibility of handling applications.
address
a
Mr Simwinga said it was saddening to note that over K8 million had been spent on
priority
allowances for desk and field appraisals that have yielded very little in terms of
need
development. He demanded that the technical planning sub-committee explain to the
for the DDCC why they had been failing to successfully complete project applications and
entire
the problems they may be facing in the process. Mr Simwinga suggested to DDCC
district.
meeting held at the Civic Centre, that the committee should consider enlisting the
But
services of technicians from the Copperbelt University (CBU). “Why should we be
none of talking about accessing funds for new projects, when we have not completed the
the 72 previous ones,” queried the Town Clerk.
districts
has
District Administrative Officer, Solomon Sakala equally expressed sadness at the failure
prepare
of the district to access funds for development projects. Kitwe based members of
d
a Parliament (MP) at a meeting in Ndola recently expressed concern at the failure of
district
the district to access funds for development projects, saying the situation was working
plan.
against government’s efforts to improve lives of Zambians. However, members of the
Again,
technical sub-committee, admitted facing problems with the ZAMSIF project
some
funding application process ad they lacked the capacity. They also argued that the
districts change in application procedures from those used under the Micro Project Unit
, that (MPU) to the ones under ZAMSIF had brought about confusion. The technical
deserve committee noted that there was urgent need for a capacity building workshop.
DIFfunded
capital projects, do not have a functioning DDCC in place to coordinate such projects. District
capital projects are accessible only to those districts which are in Levels 2 - 5. But currently, most
districts lack the capacity to prepare a budget that meets the requirements of ZAMSIF.
6.5.2
Delays in Accessing Funds
6.60
The above narrative illustrates the link between the strategic planning and project panning
and budgeting elaborated in Chapter 5. Inadequate capacity for carrying out strategic planning can
frustrate efforts being made by many districts to access CIF and DIF funds. The level of funding to
districts, particularly for DIF capital projects, depends on the capacity of the district to facilitate CIF
project planning and budgeting activities. And this in turn depends on the capacity of the district to
carry out the strategic planning processes (see Fig. 5.1).
90
Source: Times of Zambia, Monday, February 17, 2003, page 5
6.61
This apparent feeling of frustration is captured in the sentiments expressed, in BOX 6.2, by
one District Council official from the district of Kitwe in the Copperbelt Province. Such sentiments
point to the need for a critical review of the capacity building scheme, including a systematic testing
and critical evaluation of the recent revised scoring system related to the five graduation levels
described in Box 3.1.
6.5.3
Low Rate of Utilization
6.62
Table 6.3 shows that the average utilization of ZAMSIF funds was less than 30% as of
March 2003. The rate of utilization ranges from 3.7%, in the Copperbelt Province, to 61.1% in the
Western Province. The reasons for such high disparities need some investigation. Information from
the field visit indicates that the low utilization rate can be directly attributed to delays in
procurement. The current procurement procedures of ZAMSIF stipulates the following requirements
(i) a minimum of three quotations per item from suppliers; (ii) selection of suppliers must be based
on the quality of materials (also based on physical inspection of materials on site or incorporated
into the works); (iii) in order to ensure that the selection of suppliers is transparent, evidence (in the
form of Minutes) of the meeting that led to the selection of suppliers, is required; and evidence that
the CIF/DIF project committees in the district have sought for Tender Authority based in Lusaka.
91
Table 6.3
Allocations, Commitments and Utilization of ZAMSIF Community Investment Funds to
Provinces in Zambia as of March 2003
PROVINCE
1 CENTRAL
2 COPPERBELT
3 EASTERN
4 LUAPULA
5 LUSAKA
6 NORTHERN
7 NORTH WESTERN
8 SOUTHERN
9 WESTERN
Gross Total
ALLLOCATIONS
[IPF IN US $]
3,216,000
4,125,000
4,188,000
2,274,000
3,207,000
4,248,000
1,623,000
3,813,000
3,303,000
29,997,000
COMMITMENTS
[ IN US $]
910,008
151,423
598,548
1,366,114
458,696
1,141,939
396,957
1,270,346
2,018,266
8,312,297
% UTILIZATION
28.3%
3.7%
14.3%
60.1%
14.3%
26.9%
24.5%
33.3%
61.1%
27.7%
Source: ZAMSIF Report to the National Steering Committee, July-December 2002.
March.2003
6.63
The analysis, thus, far also shows that the low utilization rate is the consequence of the
planning approach, of which procurement is only a part. The problem of procurement delays
frustrate the efforts of communities, such as Rosa, that are eager and motivated to participate in
community development. From the above, it seems clear that the time has come to devise a practical
mechanism for targeting districts specifically for stage 1 planning cycle. The immediate candidates
will be those 47 districts that have completed their District Assessments. Next, it may be useful also
to re-orient the content of the entire capacity building activity from one of classroom-type of
training to one of problem-solving that will emphasize learning- by-doing. In the light of this study
findings, the current content of the capacity building, outlined in Chapter 3, will need serious
adaptation to meet the immediate needs of the districts authorities and communities. These
suggestions are based on lessons from (i) previous SRP I and II (Chapter 2), (ii) status of CDD in the
country ( Chapter 4), and field experiences arising out of this case study.
6.5.4
Sustainability
6.64
The issue of sustainability of social fund projects is not unique to the present ZAMSIF
programme. In Table 2.4, this issue was noted for SRP I and II. Information regarding the level of
government counterpart contribution to the present ZAMSIF programme is presented in Table 6.4.
According to this table, the average government contribution to the entire programme, as of March
2003, was in the range of 19-23%. This raises the question “Can the government sustain the
programme after funding from ZAMSIF comes to an end?”
Table 6.4
Relative Contributions of Donor and Government contribution to ZAMSIF Programme cost
Province
Total Project
Cost
[IN US $]
Donor
Contributio
n
[ IN US $]
92
% Donor
Contributio
n
% GRZ
Contributio
n
Source: ZAMSIF Report to the National Steering Committee, July-December 2002; March.2003
6.65
Discussions held with district officials during the field visit revealed that this persistent
problem of low, or delayed contribution of the government to the past as well as the present social
fund programmes may have something to do with the attitude of many decision makers towards
such Bank-supported programmes. The general perception is that “ZAMSIF is World Bank
programme”. This erroneous impression, is likely to deepen rather that weaken donor-dependence
1 CENTRAL
1,566,618
1,227,130
78.3%
22.7%
2
1,924,700
1,549,717
80.5%
19.5%
COPPERBELT
3 EASTERN
1,431,599
1,137,806
79.5%
20.5%
4 LUAPULA
3,917,974
2,966,925
75.7%
24.3%
5 LUSAKA
915,224
696,535
76.1%
23.9%
6 NORTHERN 3,067,231
2,472,505
80.6%
19.4%
7 NORTH
1,042,232
878,342
84.3%
15.7%
WESTERN
8 SOUTHERN 2,702,178
2,103,550
78.8%
21.2%
9 WESTERN
2,955,629
2,361,757
79.9%
20.1%
Gross Total
19,523,386
15,394,272
78.4%
21.6%
syndrome which seems to characterise past development initiatives. Correcting this perception may
contribute to a true ownership and long-term sustainability of the present and future social fund
programmes in the country as a whole.
6.6
Possible Effects of ZAMSIF Scoring System on
Implementation Progress
6.66
In the concluding section of this Chapter, an attempt has been made to analyze the possible
effects of ZAMSIF scoring system related to the five graduation levels described in Box 3.1. On the
basis of the analysis, some suggestions are offered on how the scoring system can be improved. Of
course it is expected that the suggestions will need to be evaluated in a learning-by-doing process
which appears to have motivated attempts to revise the original scoring scheme. The original scoring
approach was considered subjective. The edited version of the revised scheme is shown in Annex
XXXXX. Under the present system, the District Assessment is based on the following seven broad
categories:
A.
B.
C.
D.
Observations and information gathering
General Conditions
District Management, Coordination and Administration
Financial Management
93
E.
F.
G.
Technical and Procurement Capacity
Planning Capacity
Facilitation of Processes for Community Based Development;
6.67
For categories B through G, there are five columns. The first column spells out the key
criteria/questions relevant to the category. This is followed by a list of “indicators.” that describe
bureaucratic requirements that must be met. It is these criteria that are assigned scores ranging from
1 through 5. According to the present scoring scheme, “For a district to qualify to the next level it
has to pass all the critical indicators. In level one pass ( a district must pass) all critical indicators
and 80% of the non-critical indicators. In level 2 to 4 ( a district must pass), all the critical
indicators and 60% of the non-critical indicators”. The scores for each of the five graduation levels
are as follows:
Level I
Level II
Level III
Level IV
Level V
Total Score 31
Pass Mark 25
Total Score 271
Pass Marl 163
Total Score 91
Pass Mark 55
Total Score 23
Pass Mark 14
Total Score 54
Pass Mark 32
6.68
Table 6.5 shows a graphic presentation of the total scores for each of the five capacity
building levels against six categories (B through G) that are to be assessed. Note, the table ignores
the distinction made between “critical indicators and “non-critical indicators” because nearly 90% of
the indicators fall under the “non-critical indicators” class of indicators.
The shaded areas in Table 6.5 indicates the level at which the capacity assessment is applicable.
From the analysis, the following observations can readily be made:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
Level 1 is assessed on only one of the six capacity building categories;
Level 2 is assessed on all the six capacity building categories;
Level 3 is assessed on three out of the six capacity building categories;
Level 4 is assessed on two out of the six capacity building categories; and
Level 5 is assessed on only two out of the six capacity building categories;
Table 6.5
ZAMSIF Revised Capacity Level Scoring System
…..
Main Areas Covered under the District
Capacity Assessment
Level of
Capacity
General
Conditions
[B]
District
Management,
Coordination &
Administ
ration
[C]
Financi
al
Manage
ment
Technica
l&
Procure
ment
Capacity
[D]
[E]
94
Plannin
g
Capacit
y
Facilitation
of Processes
for
Community
Based
Developme
nt
Maximum
Scores
(based on
“indicator
s”)
[F]
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
1
2
3
4
5
[G]
31
271
91
23
54
6.69
The uneven distribution of the capacity building criteria applicable to the capacity building
levels may be contributing to the slow pace of ZAMSIF programme implementation. The
information presented in Table 6.5 seems to suggest that districts that Level 2 contains all the six
assessment categories. This means that districts currently under Level 2 are being assessed in areas
that fall under Levels 3, or 4 or 5. By implication, districts that obtain the pass scores for Level 2 can
all be said to have graduated to Level 5. The cumulative score for Levels 1 through 5 equals 470. Of
these total scores, Level 2 takes a disproportionate 58%, Level 3 takes 19%; Level 5 takes 12%,
level 1 takes some 7% and level 4 takes only 5%. (see Fig 6.3 ).
95
Total Scores Needed to Graduate at each
Planning Capacity Level
300
271
250
Scores
200
150
91
100
54
50
0
31
Level 1
23
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Planning Capacity Level
Source: Zamsif District Assessment Form as of May 2003
6.70
Another striking finding from the analysis of the proposed revised scoring system is the fact
that the six capacity building categories (General Conditions, District Management, Coordination
and Administration, Financial Management, Technical and Procurement Capacity, Planning
Capacity, and Facilitation of Processes for Community Based Development) on which the scoring
system is based does not cover most of the CIF project planning activities presented in Table 5.1.
6.7
Suggested Approaches
6.71
In the light of the findings from the above analysis, it is proposed as follows:
(i)
(ii)
Table 6.6
Ensure that all the activities that make up the planning cycle, elaborated in Chapter
5, are included in the scoring system.
Distribute the activities across the five capacity building levels taking into account
the stages in the planning cycle. Table 6.6 illustrates the above two proposals.
Proposed Alignment of Planning Activities and Five Levels of Capacity Building
showing the roles of Community, District and ZAMSIF
Project Planning
Activities
1. Strategic
Level 1
ZAMSIF/DA
Level 2
96
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Planning
2. Identification
/
Community/
Consultants
Community/
DA
3. Application
Community
4. Desk Appraisal
ZAMSIF/DA
5. Field Appraisal
ZAMSIF/DA
6. Project Planning,
Costing &
Budgeting
7. Approval
8. Project Launch
9. Funding
10. Technical &
Procurement
Capacity
11. Implementation
ZAMSIF/
District
Administra
tion
ZAMSIF/
Steering
Committee
ZAMSIF/D
A
ZAMSIF
ZAMSIF
Communit
y/
DA
12. Facilitation for
CommunityBased
Development
13. Disbursement/
Justification
14. Monitoring
Communit
y/
DA
Communit
y
Communit
y
District
Administra
tion/Comm
unity
15. Completion
16. Evaluation
17. District Poverty
Review
Source: Adapted from Table 5.1. See also Box 3.1 and Fig 5.1
97
Communit
y/
DA
District
Administra
tion/Comm
unity
Communit
y/
DA
ZAMSIF/D
A/
Communit
y/
Consultants
ZAMSIF/D
A
Communit
y
Community/
DA
District
Administratio
n/
Community
Community/
DA
ZAMSIF/DA
/
Community/
Consultants
ZAMSIF/DA
Community
(iii)
Elaborate and test (through a careful analysis) the criteria that are considered
relevant for 17 activities of the district assessment. Findings from the testing will
assist ZAMSIF to arrive at a more objective scoring system. The current scoring
system is based on “indicators”. The assignment of the maximum scores to these
“indicators” appears subjective. What is needed is a set of objectively-derived
indicators that reflect the criteria pertaining to the activities themselves. A simple
checklist of the factors can prepared and used for the district assessment. This
approach will considerably reduce the time for assessing the planning capacity of a
district.
(iv)
Match the District Assessment activities with the stages in the proposed planning
cycle described in Chapter 5 (see Figs. 5.1. and 7.1).
Align incentives to the outcomes of the stages in the planning cycle
(v)
98
Chapter 7
Scaling Up CDD in ZAMSIF Programme
7.1
Introduction
7.01
On the strength of the findings of this case study, this concluding Chapter now outlines for
the reader aspects of the CDD vision or principles that can be scaled up within the ZAMSIF
programme. The implementation successes of ZAMSIF were noted in Chapter 6. The challenges
that are likely to inhibit CDD (see Table 4.1), are related to funding mechanisms, capacity building,
sub-district organizational structures, and planning processes. The findings of this study clearly
points to planning processes as the principal area that deserve immediate attention (see Chapter 5).
Stakeholders’ perceived benefits of scaling up CDD in ZAMSIF are given in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 Perceived Benefits of Scaling up CDD in ZAMSIF Programme
Stakeholder
Group
ZAMSIF-MU
What will be the possible benefits of scaling up the CDDrelated development activities in your area?






Communities will be involved in making decisions that
affect them.
More resources for development can be harnessed.
Avoid wastage of resources.
Scaling up CDD-related development activities can
encourage healthy competition in developmental activities
among districts
Increased transparency in the utilization of development
resources.
Improved ownership of development processes by
communities.
Local
Government



Capacity for development management at district level
Spread services and benefits throughout the province.
Accelerate poverty reduction in project areas.
Community






Sector Ministry

Empower communities.
Reduce poverty in communities.
Improve living standards of the local people.
Improve literacy levels.
Improve service delivery.
Communities will be informed and will be able to plan,
implement and monitor their own development. This will
result in social and economic development in the district as
a whole.
Community empowerment to support control over natural
resources.
Citizen participation in governance.
Promote sustainable development because communities
will be involved in their own development activities.
Improved delivery of basic services to communities.
Development will be “owned” by the community.
The pace of development will be determined by the
community
Poverty will be greatly reduced.






99
Stakeholder
Group
NGOs
What will be the possible benefits of scaling up the CDDrelated development activities in your area?




There will be wider coverage of development.
Development will reach out to marginalized groups
Can contribute to increased rural food production and
Increased food security.
Reduced incidence of poverty and related problems.
Only accelerated implementation of the ZAMSIF programme activities can bring about the above
benefits. For this to happen, ZAMSIF may wish to adopt a more participatory planning style that
sees development as a learning-by-doing process.
7.2
What to Scale up in ZAMSIF
7.02
This section presents an outline of framework for Participatory Planning Monitoring &
Evaluation [PPM&E]. PPM&E is proposed for consideration because it is a problem-solving
approach to planning. It has the potential to empower local communities and local government. This
approach to planning will enable more districts to climb up the capacity ladder, considered an
outstanding feature of ZAMSIF design. Currently only 47 districts have been able to achieve level 2
of the capacity ladder despite efforts in capacity building.
7.03
PPM&E can readily build on, and exploit Zambia’s experiences with participatory planning.
It will ensure full participation of local communities in all the stages of the planning cycle, and
integrate participatory (learning-by-doing) approaches into the overall planning and M&E processes.
This planning approach can encourage the communities to: articulate their own priorities based on
their poverty experiences; define their own benchmarks that capture their own perceptions of
poverty; define and develop M&E indicators in a language they understand; empower community
service users to use these indicators to measure community-level development results.
7.2.1
Framework of a Participatory Planning and M&E
7.04
The proposed PPM&E is summed up in Fig. 7.1. Fig. 7.1 draws on Figs. 4.1 and 5.1 and
reflects successful CDD participatory approaches currently underway in Sierra Leone.26 According
to Fig. 7.1, there is only one planning cycle in the proposed PPM&E. The planning cycle can be
divided into 5 stages: ZAMSIF-CDD Strategy [A], District Plan [B], Monitoring[C], Evaluation [D],
and CDD Review and District Annual Poverty Report [F].
7.05
The following important features of the planning process are noteworthy. Note, the link
between first four stages and the last stage. The lessons learned [E] box is intended to emphasize the
need to reflect, during the course of carrying out the activities related to each one of the five stages
in the planning cycle, on the significant lessons from the planning process. This feature is intended
to stimulate the use of M&E for improving decision-making. The four boxes [1-4] indicated on top
of each of the first four planning stages [A-D] identify the basic information needed to accomplish
the planning processes at each of these four stage. For example, in order to answer the question
“Where are we now?” the district authorities must prepare the District Situation Analysis, District
Poverty Assessment, District Poverty Reduction Strategy and, and critically access and make
realistic projections of the revenue sources for financing the district investment plan. It is essential
that this first stage of the planning cycle is completed before embarking on the second stage of the
planning
cycle
[B].
26
Communication with Jim Edgerton, 2002.
100
Fig. 7.1 A Simplified View of a Proposed Participatory Planning Monitoring and Evaluation Processes
District:
 Situation Analysis
 Poverty Assessment
 Poverty Reduction
Strategy
 Investment Plan
 Revenue Base
(1)
ZAMSIFCDD STRATEGY
Where are we Now?
[A]




Intermediate Indicators on:
 Expenditure Tracking
 Disbursement/Justification/Audit

Service Delivery(Access to services;
District Development
Priorities
Community Priority
Projects
Programme & Budget
M&E Indicators
(2)
Use of services; & Satisfaction with services)
Implementation Problems

(3)
DISTRICT PLAN


Final Indicators on:
 Development
Outcomes
 Development Impacts
(4)
MONITORING
Where do we want to go?
How do we get there?
[B]

How do we know if
we are getting there?
EVALUATION

How do we
know we got
there?
[C]
[D]
LESSONS
LEARNED
[E]
CDD Review & District
Annual Poverty Report
[F]
101
7.2.2
Some Features of Proposed Planning Framework
7.06
As the reader will note, information from this first stage serves as the base for the subsequent stages in
the planning cycle.27 Briefly, each stage in the planning cycle should be conceived as a ‘learning loop’. And
each learning loop is designed to elicit the full participation of a wide cross-section of the people affected by
the planning process. For instance, learning loop in the first stage begins in A through E and back to A.
Activities connected with each stage in the planning cycle should be guided by learning-by-doing, with full
participation of stakeholders/beneficiaries. The planning process is not mechanistic; it should be seen as
dynamic, incremental and iterative. This process is referred to as “reflection-in-action” in the sense that each
stage in the planning process is consciously designed to yield lessons; and the cumulative lessons learned, in
the course of executing the planning activities, are then used as fresh inputs for initiating subsequent actions.
7.07
Other features of the PPM&E planning style can be seen in the guiding questions inserted in the first
three stages of the planning cycle [BOX A, B, C and D]. In order to provide answers to these questions, it will
necessary to combining participatory, qualitative methods, such as Focus Group Discussion [FGD], and
gaming, etc with the conventional quantitative methods. The use of FGD, for example, can assist many
communities, currently excluded from the planning process, to be included in training sessions so that they
can have a voice in the planning, monitoring and evaluation of their development activities. Most people in
rural communities, in particular, will be able to reach agreement about what should be monitored and/or
evaluated; how and when data will be collected and analysed; what the information means; and the kinds of
action that they will have to take to improve their lives.
7.08
The last stage in the planning cycle is the CDD review and the District Annual Report [Box F]. This
stage will review and document the cumulative lessons from the overall planning cycle. It will also provide
information that can assist policy makers and implementing partners alike to ascertain the extent to which the
targets stated in the District Investment Plan have been achieved. This process completes the planning cycle.
7.3
How to Scale up CDD in ZAMSIF Programme
7.09
As part of this case study, stakeholders were asked the following questions: (i) “What are the main
challenges that face efforts to scale up on-going CDD-related activities under your institution? (2) What
actions are you taking, or plan to take, to overcome these challenges? (3) How can Zambia’s successes in
Community Driven Development [CDD] be scaled up without waiting for the creation of strong local
governments. (4) How can your successful pilot CDD-related projects at provincial and district levels be
scaled up to full national coverage.” A summary of the responses to the first two questions are given in Table
7.2. Table 7.3 covers stakeholders’ responses to the last two questions. Both tables have relevance for the
proposed PPM&E.
Table 7.2 CDD Scaling up Challenges and on-going Efforts to overcome them
An important observation from this case study is that under the current ZAMSIF planning approach, this important first stage in the proposed
planning style is perceived as optional. The focus of the planning activities is on the second stage although the outputs of this first stage are
acknowledged to be essential for the success of the remaining stages in the planning cycle. This situation seems to account, in part, for the apparent
frustration expressed by a number of districts in climbing up the capacity ladder (see Section 6.4).
27
102
Stakeholder
Group
ZAMSIFMU
What are the main challenges that
face efforts to scale up on-going
CDD-related activities under your
institution?
 Competing resources from other
sources.
 Different planning procedures and
processes.
 Insufficient implementation
capacities in communities.
 Lack of funds to monitor CDD
related activities.
 Inadequate involvement of other
key stakeholders like traditional
authorities.

Local
Government




Community



Sector
Ministry




What actions are you taking, or plan to
take, to overcome these challenges?





Political will to fully devolve
community development
interventions to the district and
community levels.
Local Councils do not have the
capacity (finance and human) to
facilitate on-going CDD-related
activities at community level.
Financial and human resource
constraints at provincial level
especially for follow-up activities.
Loss of self confidence among
communities due to economic
hardships
Shortage of capacity at all levels.

Procedures for Accessing ZAMSIF
funds
It takes too long to complete small
projects.
Delays in procurement demoralize
community
Availability of funds and capacity
of communities.
Making the activities selfsustaining.
Acknowledging that community
programmes oftentimes conflict
with farming/fishing seasons.
Inadequate financial resources













103
Participate in dialogue with ministries
and stakeholders to develop strategic
framework and planning.
Hold discussion with donors
cooperating partners aimed at
harmonizing development approaches
Insist on same form of district
coordination.
Sensitize communities about income
generating activities.
Provide capacity building to enhance
management capacity.
Decentralization of decision making
on CDD activities.
Development of community level
structures.
Sensitization of communities on how to
access the funds for community
development.
Promotion of preparation of DSA,
Poverty assessments, District
Development Poverty Reduction
Strategies and Investment Plans. The
use of these documents will assist the
identification and targeting of most
needy communities
Creating awareness among the
population.
Sensitizing community about ZAMSIF
programme
Sensitizing community about other
sources of development support
Poverty mapping exercise.
Developing and establishing Wide
Area Network with CSO regional
offices.
Mainstreaming gender into all
development activities.
Undertaking surveys such as (i) time
use for women and men; (ii)
establishment of the National Gender
Resource Centre.
Promotion of community participation.
Introducing communities to funding
agencies
Capacity building.
NGOs




Lack of adequate resources to
conduct effective monitoring of
projects.
Poor infrastructure in rural areas.
Increased community capacity
building and adequate funding of
projects.
Poor nutrition of the people.









Creation of indigenous resource base to
lessen dependence on donors.
Negotiating with government for
increased funding and early release of
Hold discussions with CBOs.
Implement a governance programme
cantered on citizen participation.
Work with local authorities to
strengthen coordination
Build capacity to support CDD.
Support process to develop
decentralization implementation plan.
Enhanced targeting of most vulnerable
group in selected district/ communities
Promotion of routine monitoring of
development activities.
Table 7.3
Summary of Stakeholders’ Responses on how to Scale up CDD in ZAMSIF Programme
Stakeholder
Group
How can Zambia’s successes in CDD be
scaled up without waiting for the creation of
strong local governments.
104
How can your successful pilot CDDrelated projects at provincial and
district levels be scaled up to full
national coverage
Stakeholder
Group
ZAMSIFMU
How can Zambia’s successes in CDD be
scaled up without waiting for the creation of
strong local governments.













To accelerate strategic planning process,
simplify preparation of Strategic Planning
documents
Employ only qualified technical
supervisors and staff who have
requisite/relevant skills and training to
support a more efficient implementation of
ZAMSIF programme activities.
On capacity building, provide adequate
budget to support increased community
field facilitation and monitoring visits by
district teams.
Simplify and harmonize capacity building
approaches with implementing partners in
all districts
Provide further training to district staff in
community capacity building
Support community development
promoters in the facilitation of community
planning processes
Share experiences and sharing best
practices (i.e. what works and does not
work), by government involving CDD
practitioners in policy formulation and
strategic planning, and through capacity
building of district administration.
Support and insist that community/district
projects are identified through a common
planning process
Pilot CDD activities in a few carefully
selected districts where potential to
succeed is assessed to be adequate. Other
districts may then follow.
Create partnerships and harmonization of
processes and procedures by all
development agencies.
On targeting, collaborate with line
ministries (e.g. MCDSS), NGOs, church
groups, /UN agencies (UNICEF, WFP) to
improve targeting of vulnerable population
groups.
Simplify and streamline planning
procedures for project planning &
budgeting activities (e.g. project
application forms). application and
funding. For example, reduce lengthy
application forms.
Pre-test and fin-tune these checklists.
105













How can your successful pilot CDDrelated projects at provincial and
district levels be scaled up to full
national coverage
Stress foremost that CDD is a good
and effective way to reach most poor
regions which cannot be reached
through conventional development
approaches.
Ensure that the Government provides
assured funds to support and sustain
CDD-related activities.
Share best practices with other
donors/provinces.
Encourage and support exchange
visits among and between districts
implementing CDD projects.
Replicate successful pilot CDDrelated projects in other provinces of
the country.
Test revised DIF graduation criteria,
and simplify instructions.
Use District Teams in high levels of
graduation ladder to train districts in
lower levels of ladder
Identify which sub-projects are
directly related to ‘priority PRS’
projects.
Clarify/ define role & responsibilities
of district within ZAMSIF structure
Simplify and test procurement
procedures for community-based
projects;
On information and Information, stage
national workshops to facilitate
exchange of good/best practice and
lessons learned and to share the
experiences how to improve
implementation of strategic planning
and project planning; exchanges ideas
on good practices
To increase sensitization on shift from
SRP to current ZAMSIF programme
design, disseminate more widely
information about ZAMSIF
programme activities through both
print and non-print media
Provide simple and flexible guidelines
for community contribution taking
into account their specific realities.
Stakeholder
Group
How can Zambia’s successes in CDD be
scaled up without waiting for the creation of
strong local governments.

Local
Government 







Review ZAMSIF log frame
Involve traditional rulers and their
communities.
Ensure a holistic participation to
community development by line ministry.
For example, Agriculture camp officers
could be used to educate the communities
about development programmes..
Use development plans and improved
community information systems aimed at
provision of relevant information to
communities so that they make informed
decisions and can plan their own
development.
Involve communities actively in decisionmaking.
In order to strengthen community
facilitation, encourage District teams to
train large numbers of Community
Facilitators who live in the communities.
Train Facilitators to be aware of full range
of CIF fundable portfolio (see Table 3.1)
Use district teams who are well trained in
facilitating skills to assist communities (i)
identify vulnerable segment of community
population and (ii) find ways and means
of meeting their needs using either
ZAMSIF funds or other funding sources.
Consolidate and computerize community
project profile information (see Box 6.1)
How can your successful pilot CDDrelated projects at provincial and
district levels be scaled up to full
national coverage
 Involve political leaders e.g. members
of parliament (MPs)
 Consolidate District Development
Plans into provincial plans which will
in turn be used to produce national
plans.
 Distribute profiles of community
projects from one district to other
districts.
 Produce and disseminate ZAMSIF
newsletters and magazines to share
CDD experiences.
 Use Radio programmes to inform
public about CDD
and to provide information about the
need for
community participation through the
media.
 Include consolidated community-level
projects in the national annual Poverty
Reduction Strategy (PRS) Plan and
Budget.
 Include the consolidated district-level
CDD annual review as a chapter in the
Annual Poverty Report
Table 7.3 continued
Community
Ensure that members of district Team 
going
to
communities
for
facilitation/field appraisal and project 
implementation are those who have
received the required training for these
tasks. trained.
 Simplify procedures for accessing
ZAMSIF funds
 Make information available to
communities
 Simplify procurement to speed up
project implementation at
community level
106
Make all procedures simple for
community to understand
Introduce small income
generating activities
Sector
Ministry





Build capacity at local level
amongst stakeholders in project
development and implementation.
Strengthen district and sub-district
structures.
Use traditional leaders such as
chiefs and headmen who have
great influence in the community
Strengthen existing CBOs.
Strengthen sub districts through
workshops
107


Complete coverage of the
remaining districts
Improve communication on CDD
NGOs
Central
Government
(MOFND)28

Strengthen local government
 Increase the resource base at
structures because Local
district level.
government lacks resource base
 Build capacity of CBOs
and good
 Make known best practices to
leadership.
other CDD practitioners
 Work more closely with NGOs
 Involve MoLGH in all advocacy
who can implement some of
initiatives
ZAMSIF programmes.
 Mentor stronger local authorities
 Provide direct capacity building
with weaker ones.
support to implementing partners
 Document experiences and
involved in CDD.
disseminate information at all
 Build capacity of communities to
levels.
manage their own projects
 Carry out pragmatic advocacy &
including financial management
consultation with relevant
and allocating money directly.
national line ministries/authorities
 Provide financial support to
 Emphasize simplified guidelines
councils for activities designed to
that reflect local situations.
promote CDD
 Utilize existing local leadership
structure
 Engage NGOs
(local/international)
 Strengthen existing networks of
collaborating partners
Coordinate and harmonize M&E concepts
 Support the establishment of a high-level inter-ministerial committee to
include a broad section of stakeholders (civil society, research institutions,
donor community, private sector) with responsibility for coordination of
overall CDD M&E issues at national, district, sub-district, and community
levels.
 Strengthen local government structures for participatory planning processes
as a means to accelerate poverty reduction through CDD-related projects.
Strengthen Planning
 Review projects contained in the current national PRS to know those which
are related to the CDD vision/principles elaborated in Chapter 1.
 Fine-tune method of computing the IPF by expanding the variables that
describe various aspects of households’ deprivation. Such variables can be
found in recent survey and census data.
 Use existing disaggregated, district-level analysis of poverty information to
improve district planning.
 Refine Impact indicators for PRS M&E through a more systematic and indepth analysis of existing survey and census data.
Note that these actions are part of the recommendations arising from the CDD Planning and M&E workshop staged in 2002 in Lusaka Zambia.
They were identified by stakeholders during this case study for implementation by SOPU of the Ministry of Finance and Planning.
28
108
7.4
Summary
7.10
This case study set out to identify the factors that can promote or inhibit CDD scaling up efforts in the
on-going Zambia Social Investment Fund [ZAMSIF] programme. ZAMSIF builds on the experiences of the
SRP I and SRP II. This study has shown, in Chapter 2, that these two SRPs made substantial contributions to
the welfare of the population, strengthened institutional capacity at both local government and community
levels. The evidence presented in Chapter 2 shows communities con-financed the sub-projects; however
participation by communities and sector agencies was limited; in adequate government counterpart funding
together with poor community participation in maintenance of the infrastructure facilities created during the
programme, the benefits of the programmes could not be sustained when the programme ended.
7.11
The lesson that has been learned is that Social fund programmes such as the ZAMSIF must be placed
in the broader context of an overall national poverty reduction strategy. ZAMSIF should be integrated in the
system of intergovernmental and local development financing in order to ensure sustainability. Issues of
sustainability should also take into account on-going reforms particularly those that can promote effective
decentralization. Lessons from the Social Recovery Programmes clearly show that CDD can work in Zambia.
However, to be effective, capacity building in participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation will be is
critical at national, district and community levels. Given the size of the country, lack of a specific targeting
mechanism and weak coordination may lead to inefficient distribution and use of available financial and
human resources.
7.12
The design of the present ZAMSIF takes account of the above lessons from the SRPs. The programme
development objectives and components, presented in Chapter 3, are in completely line with the CDD
principles elaborated in Chapter 1. The CIF components funds community-based sub-projects. An innovative
aspect of the programme that has attracted a great deal of interest is the capacity ladder. This is an incentive
mechanism designed to motivate districts to improve their capacity for district planning. Each district
proceeds to climb up the proceeds to climb up the 5 levels of the capacity ladder according to its own
capacity. As the capacity of the district increases, its responsibilities also increase. And as its responsibilities
increase, its access to financial benefits also increases. This is a learning- by-doing process.
7.13
As part of the case study, stock was taken of the main outcomes of two recent CDD events in Zambia
– a CDD Benchmarking and CDD Planning and M&E workshops- which took place at the time ZAMSIF
programme was just starting. A follow-up of the CDD Benchmarking revealed that there issues directly
related funding mechanisms; capacity building at all levels, sub-district organizational structures, and
planning, are most likely to inhibit CDD scaling up efforts in the entire country. These issues are summarised
in Table 4.1. The CDD Planning and M&E workshop adopted a simple conceptual framework, shown in Fig.
4.1, to serve as planning tool for CDD and national poverty reduction strategies.
7.14
This case study critically examined the planning processes taking into account the findings from the
stock-taking exercise. This part of the study was a diagnostic in character. Its principal objective was to
understand the nature of the planning style of ZAMSIF, and to identify if the approaches currently in use
promote or inhibit effective implementation of the CDD principles.
7.15
This study found that: (i) ZAMSIF planning places under emphasis on project planning activities
(Table 5.1) and less emphasis on strategic planning and M&E processes; (ii) role of communities in the
planning processes is currently limited to project identification, application, implementation, justification and
completion; (iii) Communities do not participate in M&E; (iv) strategic planning and project planning
(involving 13 discrete activities referred to as ‘cycle’ for each of the 5 capacity level/ladders) are not
conceived as integral part of the overall planning M&E; (v) the criteria for graduating from one level to
another stress bureaucratic efforts; (vi) there is limited stress on development effects (results); and (vii) M&E
indicators are strong on outputs and outcomes but very weak on beneficiary reach (access, use, and
satisfaction).
7.16
In place of the existing five project cycles, this study has unified the strategic planning, project
planning, M&E, and the district poverty review processes into a single learning-by-doing planning cycle. It is
hoped that this simplified framework will contribute towards the acceleration of capacity process.
109
7.17
A field visit formed an essential part of this case study. The information presented above served as
useful background to the field study. The main objectives were to observe CDD at work on the ground. The
concern here was to: (i) capture the implementation successes of the programme; (ii) learn more about
ZAMSIF management style at district and community levels; (iii) identify factors that are conducive to CDD
in ZAMSIF programme operations; (iv) understand the challenges facing the implementation of ZAMSIF
programme components; (v) observe the planning processes at work; and (vi) analyze the consequences of the
planning processes.
7.18
Findings from the field visit, presented in Chapter 6, affirm that ZAMSIF management style clearly
reflects the CDD principles presented in Chapter 1: the programme is empowering local governments, and
local communities, improving accountability and transparency, and building learning by doing culture. It was
observed that factors conducive to CDD include the technical assistance and facilitation provided by very
competent and dedicated district teams; the innovative ladder of fiscal rewards and penalties; and the
formation of partnerships with implementing partners including NGOs.
7.19
The main challenges facing the implementation of the programme relate to the planning process.
These include (i) slow progress in executing the strategic planning; (ii) reduced planning capacity particularly
at community level; (iii) weak linkage between the national poverty reduction strategy and ZAMSIF
programme; (iv) limited dissemination and actual use of M&E for decision-making; (vi) lack of targeting
mechanisms; and (vii) inadequate integration of participatory planning into the planning cycle.
7.20
As a result of the weaknesses in the planning processes graduation on the capacity ladder has been
quite slow: only 47 districts have made it to Level 2 by June 2003. District face delays in accessing
programme funds. The average utilization rate of 27% as an indication of serious management problems that
can be traced to the planning process. Finally, there are problems with the flow of government counterpart
funds to the programme
7.21
On the strength of the study findings this study concludes that there are two critical issues that deserve
immediate attention (i) strengthening participatory planning and M&E processes and (i) ensuring the flow of
counterpart funds to the programme. Concerning CDD scaled up within ZAMSIF, this study proposes that in
order to accelerate the implementation of the community-based sub-projects, ZAMSIF may wish to consider
the following: (i) design, test, implement and institutionalize a participatory planning, monitoring and
evaluation [PPM&E] style of management.
7.5.
Conclusions
7.22
This proposal emerges from responses, received during this study, from senior level decision makers
within ZAMSIF, Local authorities, communities, sector ministries, and NGOs. Above all, the use of PPM&E
for CDD planning has potential to: raise ownership and autonomy of primary stakeholders; increase
accountability and transparency of service delivery institutions and improve their performance; build on the
voiced perceptions and assessments of the poor; strengthen these perceptions to support decision-making;
provide fast feedback on implementation progress of development activities; and give early indications of
outcomes.
110
Appendix
Development and Testing of Types CDD Approaches:
Towards the Identification of CDD Scaling Up Factors in Zambia
1.
Introduction
1.01
Today, the reduction of poverty is the centerpiece of the development strategies of most African
countries. The style of development seems to vary markedly from country to country. However, a careful
overview of the numerous development programmes and project activities that are being implemented by
government agencies, donors and NGOS, clearly reveal that most of the development efforts share, or
advocate for, the vision of CDD.
1.02
Decision makers agree that the vision of CDD, with its emphasis of governance (empowerment of
community and local government, accountability, and transparency, and the rule of law) offers greater hope
and promise to achieve a genuine and sustainable development than past development approaches. The CDD
vision is clearer now than it was some 20 years ago. And a number of African countries are currently
searching for ways and means of promoting its wider application to their development efforts. This paper is
inspired by this surge of interest.
2.
Study Objectives
1.03
The principal objectives of this study are (i) to develop a set of simple and practical analytical tools
that can assist CDD practitioners and decision makers (i) to know what, and how to scale up their
successful community-based, poverty reduction development programmes; (ii) to identify the factors that
are inhibiting progress in implementing a CDD approach to development; and (iii) to deepen an
understanding of the dominant features of the types of CDD approaches that can be implemented
successfully in the various areas of their country. This study attempts to build on, and extend, a recent World
Bank-supported country case studies on CDD Scaling up, as well as initiatives by the World Bank to build a
CDD typology.
3.
The Research Problem
2.01
National politicians, donor and lending institutions will like to scale up programmes in order to widen
their benefits to many people. Over the years, a number of developing countries have adopted the CDD
approach in implementing several development activities. The donor and/lending agencies of these
programmes will want to support the desire of national authorities to scale up their community-driven
development activities. On the issue of scaling up the CDD approach, national authorities are confronted with
the following fundamental questions: (i) Can the decision on whether or not to scale up a programme be
made without undertaking a case study? (ii) Which sub-projects within a given programme should be scaled
up to national level? (iii) Which indicators can tell us when a programme is ripe for scaling up?
2.02
For donor and lending institutions, the key questions on scaling up development programme, in
general and CDD approach in particular, are as follows: (i) Are there different types of CDD approaches? (ii)
What differentiates one type of CDD approach from the other? (iii) Can we classify countries according to the
type of CDD approach they use? And (iv) Which of the countries so classified deserves most assistance for
CDD scaling up?
2.03
It is acknowledged that efforts to promote the CDD approach to development will very much depend
on the ability of CDD practitioners provide both politicians and donors/lenders unambiguous answers to the
above pressing questions. It is also appreciated that CDD scaling up decisions should be guided by a sound
knowledge, and clear understanding, of a practical typology CDD approaches, as well as the critical factors
that influence them.
100
4.
Conceptualization
4.01 The conceptualization of the research problem posed, in Section 3, draw on the recent CDD scaling up
country case studies. From these case studies, it can be stated that CDD is at work at different levels in
various countries. Differences, however, exit in terms of the degree of implementation of the CDD approach.
These differences can be explained by factors such as the prevailing country situation; the nature of the ongoing programmes and projects; and the scale at which these programmes and projects are being
implemented. Some countries have been quite successful in implementing the CDD approach; others have not
been so successful. Differences in the relative success of the CDD approach seem to depend largely on the
complex interaction among three principal areas: (i) the programme environment; (ii) the nature of the
development programme; and (iii) the CDD principles being promoted. A diagrammatic representation of the
interaction among these three areas is presented in Chart 1.
4.02
The term “Enabling Environment” [E], as used in this paper, covers all those factors that are
conducive or inhibitory to the promotion of the CDD principles. Examples include the structure and functioning
of Local Governments; nature of decentralization; community control; funding mechanisms; and style of
planning at community, national and sub-national levels, etc.
4.03
From the recent CDD scaling up case study in Zambia, it was confirmed that among the situational
factors that can inhibit CDD Scaling up efforts in the country the following deserve immediate attention: lack
of coordination among projects; use different approaches and different funding conditions by a multiplicity of
development partners; inadequate human, financial, and material resources; multiple project committees at
the community level that have no clear institutional framework or mandate; inadequate organizational
structures at sub-district level, resulting in duplication of efforts, confusion and wastage of resources; reduced
capacity by Local Governments, especially for managing community-level development activities; slow pace of
decentralization;
4.04
The key characteristics of a programme or project [P] will cover variables such as type of
intervention; focus of intervention; sources of funds, beneficiary types and numbers; programme coverage,
executing agency, implementing agency, implementation status; total budget; status of the programme in
District Plan Project Recurrent cost
4.05
Concerning the CDD Vision [V] data will be need to measure the key concepts (i.e. empowerment of
communities and local government, accountability, capacity building, transparency, learning-by-doing, etc.29
5.
Methodology of Study
5.01
Carrying out this study will entail six methodological steps: First, to build a scaled index that can be
used to measure an environment that is considered conducive to CDD [E]. The second step will build a scaled
index to measure the various CDD principles [V]. Step 3 will build a composite index using the indices for
both [E] and [V]. We will call this composite CDD index [EV]. The fourth step will involve the consolidation of
project activities into types of programmes, and the creation of relevant variable categories. The fifth and
critical step will establish the typology of CDD approaches. This step will use the scaled composite index [EV],
and the variables associated with Project Characteristics [P]. Finally, in order to ascertain the CDD typology
for practical planning purposes, it will be essential to examine the assumptions embodied in the model shown
in Chart 1. This will conclude this study.
29
101
Chart 1:
A Model showing linkages among Factors influencing CDD Scaling Up
Project Characteristics
Enabling Environment
-
Conducive/inhibitory
factors
Local Governments
Community Control
Funding Mechanisms
Planning approach
-



[E]
Type of Intervention
Location
Sources of Funds
Beneficiary types
Coverage
Executing agency
Implementing agency
Implementation status
Total Budget
Status in District Plan
Project Recurrent cost
[P]
CDD Vision
-
Community Empowerment
Local Govt. Empowerment
Accountability
Transparency
Learning-by-doing



[A]
[V]
6.
Study Limitation
6.01
The study will be limited to ZAMSIF programme operations. This is because the findings from the
recent CDD Scaling up case study suggest the need for the findings of the proposed study as a critical input
to efforts currently being made to accelerate the implementation of the programme following the CDD
approach. Other direct beneficiaries of the study, of course, go far beyond ZAMSIF. will include the Ministry of
Finance and National Planning which is searching for CDD planning approach to the implementation of the
national Poverty Reduction strategy.
7.
Data Sources for the Proposed Study
7.01
Table 1 shows that data are available within ZAMSIF for all the three components of this study. In
order to obtain the existing data, it will be necessary to design appropriate data collating formats.
Table 1: Sources and Nature of Data for this Study
102
System
Component
1. Project
Characteristics[P]
2. Enabling
Environment[E]
3. CDD Vision [V]
Variables
Sources
of Data
Nature
of Data
See Chart 1
Zamsif
See Chart 1
Zamsif
Interval
scale,
Categorical,
Qualitative
Binary
See Chart 1
Zamsif
Binary
7.1. Data on Project Characteristics [P]
7.02
All community-based projects funded by ZAMSIF prepare 1-2 page profile of the project. This data
can readily be collated using the data collating format shown in Annex A.1. To facilitate data capture and
subsequent analysis of such data, the qualitative information such as type of project, focus of project, etc, will
be coded. Annex A.2 shows a example of coded project interventions and their related categories. These
codes will be entered on the form in Annex A.1.
7.2. Data on Enabling Environment[E]
7.03
A Zambia Scaling up case study30 contains information on the factors that promote/inhibit CDD
scaling up as well as factors that influence the implementation of ZAMSIF-specific projects. This qualitative
information, which is displayed in Annexes B.1, B.2, and B.3, is considered relevant for this study. A simple
questionnaire, of a binary nature, will be prepared and administered using this kind of information.
7.3. Data on CDD Vision [V] or Principles
7.04
Similarly, the Zambia Scaling up case study contains useful information that will be used to construct
an appropriate questionnaire for obtaining data on the CDD principles. An example is given in Annex C1.
This study will extend the Uganda CDD scaling up case study attempt to measure the CDD concept. Data will
be binary. Unlike the Ugandan case, the questionnaire in this study will be pre-coded (see Annex C.2, to
come).
8.
The Data Collection Instruments and Data Quality Control
8.01
Data will be obtained through structured questionnaire. The objects of the study will be the ZAMSIF –
funded community-based (Community Investment Funds) and District Investment Fund (DIF) projects.
Managers of these projects will be the primary respondents. Currently, there are nearly 300 of these projects
distributed in 72 of Zambia’s districts.
8.02
The questionnaire will be in a pre-coded format similar to the one displayed in Annex A.1. This
format will facilitate data entry. A data entry programme, with built-in data quality checks, will be prepared in
ACCESS format. This will ensure that the data generated by the survey are of the highest quality possible.
30
See KMK………………………2003
103
9.
Nature of the Analyses of the Data
9.01
The nature of the analysis is dictated by (i) the study problem posed in Section 3; (ii) the
conceptualization of the research problem outlined in Section 4, (iii) the proposed methodology for the study (
see Section 5), and (iv) the nature of the data that will be collected for the study. From Chart 1, it is quite
obvious that the analysis has to grapple with a multidimensional problem. For example, there are several
variables listed under “Enabling Environment“[E], and “CDD Vision” [V]. And each one of these variables has
binary categories. Next, there are several variables that describe “Project characteristics” [P]. The variables
here consist of a mixture of interval scale, binary and qualitative (see Table 1). According to the model in
Chart 1, all these variables are interrelated.
9.1
Multidimensional Analytical Approach
9.02
The search for objective and stable types of CDD approaches, given the nature of the variables just
described, suggests the use of a multidimensional statistical tool. The one recommended for this study
problem is Multiple Correspondence Analysis [MCA]. It is a variant of Principal Component or Factor
Analysis). MCA will be used to reduce the dimensions of the variables by searching for common the factors 31
in the variables belonging to “Enabling Environment“[E], and “CDD Vision” [V]. Each of the factors will be
scaled32. Understanding where a given country lies on each CDD scale will be useful for CDD scaling up.
9.2
Examples of Scaled
Indices
9.03
From the analysis of the variables under “Enabling Environment“[E], A number of factors can be
extracted. For the sake of a simple illustration, suppose one factor is extracted as dominant. Let us call it
“Enabling Factor” 1. This Factor can be assigned a 3-interval scale as follows:
Under 25 %, 26-75%, and above 75%. This interval scale will correspond to one interval scaled factor as
follows:
Not Enabling at all
Not so Enabling
Enabling
25%,
75%,
100%
9.04
The category “Not Enabling at all” is so named because it is associated with all those issues that are
not conducive to the promotion of CDD approach. Examples of these issues are contained in Annexes B.1
through B.3. The second category, “Not so Enabling” will have both conducive and inhibitory elements.
And, as expected, the “Enabling” category will be loaded with all the conditions that can promote CDD
approach. This scaled factor will represent an Enabling Development Environment Index; Call it
[EDI].
9.05
Using the same approach, a number of scaled factors can be abstracted from the analysis of the
binary CDD Vision [V] variables. Recall that the factors of interest will be abstracted from all elements related
to the CDD principles (i.e. Community Empowerment, Local Government Empowerment; Accountability;
Transparency; and Learning-by-doing). A few examples of the variables ( shown against each bullet point)
that define some of the CDD principles are given in Annex C.1, for illustration. It is these variables that will
be entered in the analysis. The exact number of factors that could be extracted cannot be determined a
priori. For the sake of this illustration, suppose that from the analysis one factor, that strongly reflects
Community Empowerment, Local Government Empowerment and Accountability dimension of the CDD vision
is identified. Call this dimension “Empowerment-Accountability Factor”.
9.06
The “Empowerment-Accountability Factor” can be scaled to measure
Community/Local Government Empowerment & Accountability as follows:
relative
degree
The Uganda case made an attempt to measure these basic concepts. The analysis of the binary data, in my view, has to go beyond simple
frequency count.
31
32
104
of
Low Empowerment-Accountability
25%,
Moderate Empowerment-Accountability 75%,
High Empowerment-Accountability
100%
9.07
Each one of the scaled indices can be used to classify all the districts in which SAMSIF is supporting
projects. Such information will be invaluable for monitoring the status of districts with respect to progress
made, in the course of the ZAMSIF programme, in (i) creating conducive environment for the programme to
succeed; and (ii) promoting community and local government empowerment and accountability. For the
moment these very crucial aspects of development cannot be monitored in any systematic manner.
10.
Typology of CDD Approaches
9.08
The next important step in the analysis will use the scaled indices obtained from the factors
associated with [E] and [V] as data input to build a composite scaled index or indicator. For now, let us label
the Index as [E-V]. The example below is contrived. It illustrates types of CDD approaches that take into
account the dimensions of [E] and [V]. Four types are of approaches can be identified.
Type of CDD
Approach
[E]
[V]
A
Enabling
High Empowerment-Accountability
B
Enabling
Low Empowerment-Accountability
C
Not Enabling
High Empowerment-Accountability
D
Not Enabling
Low Empowerment-Accountability
9.09
The next step in the analysis is to answer the question: “What are the characteristics of each Type of
CDD approach?” A multivariate analytical toll suitable for classifying objects [centroid] will be used. The input
variables for this analysis will consist of all the variables under project characteristics [P] and the E-V
(categorical) variable represented by the four types of CDD approaches. This kind of analysis will reveal which
of the project characteristics [P] variables are associated with each one of the four types of CDD approaches.
This will conclude the search for the CDD Typology.
11.
Testing CDD Scaling Up Assumptions
9.10
The assumptions that can be verified in this study are contained in Chart 1. These are: (i) the nature
of the development environment[E] directly affects the degree of success or failure of a given development
programme; (ii) the nature of the development environment[E] directly affects the degree at which CDD
vision can be achieved; and (iii) the type of CDD approach that can be implemented is influenced directly by
both the nature of the development environment[E] and the characteristics of the development activity[P].
The third proposition is of immediate interest for practical planning purposes.
9.11
A Multiple Classification Analysis [MCA] is best suited to the testing of all the three assumptions.
Under the third assumption, the dependent variable consists of the four types of CDD approaches. This is a
categorical variable: There are four categories.
The analysis can be approached in two ways. The first
approach will involve creation of a binary variable for each of the four categories of the Types of CDD
approaches and using the binary variable as the dependent variable. In the second approach, the four
categories have to be collapsed into one single binary variable. That is to say, A and B categories are
collapsed into 1 (representing an environment in which CDD is considered favorable. The C and D categories
are then collapsed into a zero (0) indicating an environment that is not supportive of CDD. In this study, it is
proposed to apply both approaches in the analysis.
12.
Expected Contributions of this Study[To come]
105






A deeper understanding of the critical factors that influence CDD approach to development
Typology of CDD approaches provides an objective and efficient tool for classifying countries and
administrative units within countries for CDD scaling up and consolidation. Donors/lending institutions will
be able to target countries for CDD scaling up efforts; take appropriate action to accelerate CDD in
lagging countries.
Provides a platform for “selling” CDD to a wider audience.
The CDD typology can serve as a diagnostic tool for more efficient targeting and use of available
development.
A critical input to poverty reduction strategy implementation.
A contribution to a better understanding and appreciation of factors hitherto considered “cultural” and
unquantifiable. The factors in question are all related to the concept of governance which features
predominantly in almost all Poverty Reduction Strategies of African countries.
13.



14.












Presentation of Findings
Findings will be presented in simple diagrams and maps to facilitate communication to a wider audience.
Findings will be translated in the local languages to ensure that those who do not read in the English
language can understand, internalize and use the knowledge in their day-to day lives.
National and regional workshops will be staged to disseminate the main findings and to encourage the
civil society and decision makers in government and non government institutions claim ownership of the
research enterprise.
Proposed Work Plan
Design Research Instruments
Pre-test and Finalize Research Instruments
Prepare data entry programme in ACCESS
Administer Questionnaire
Edit and Process Data
Analyze Data
Prepare Draft Report
Stage one Day Seminar with Selected Stakeholders
Finalize Draft Report
Repackage Study Findings including Translation into local languages
Stage regional workshops
Share Findings with wider world [internet]
Estimated Duration: Not to exceed 3 months
106

1.
3.
Annex A.1 Profile of Community –based Development Projects
FORM NUMBER [Leave Blank: For Office Use Only]
PROJECT
NUMBER
4. Province Name
code
code
6. District Name
code
6. Ward Name
PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Very Brief)
code
7. MAIN TYPE OF INTERVENTION
8. FOCUS OF MAIN INTERVENTION
code
9. PRIMARY AREA OF FOCUS
Service Delivery….1;
Capacity Building;……2; Advocacy..……..3;
Others [specify]_____________9
10. MAIN SOURCE OF FUNDS
Central Government….1; ZAMSIF…..2; Sector Ministry…..3;
NGO……..6; Others…9[specify]_________________________
Donor/Lender...4; District Council…….5;
11. PRIMARY PROJECT TARGET BENEFICIARY (Name):
12. IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
Active/On-going ….1; Approved but not Started…….2; At Negotiation Stage….3; On Schedule….4;
Ahead of Schedule….5; Behind Schedule….6; At a Stand Still……7; Completed but Facility not in Use……8;
Completed and Facility in Use…….9; Suspended………10.
13. PROJECT COVERAGE
A Community ………1; Several Communities within a district……..2; Entire District…………..3;
Several Districts in the Province …………..…4; Entire Province………..5; National……………….9
14. NUMBER OF TARGET BENEFICIARIES
Under 500...……1; 500 to 999.….2; 1,000 to 1,999….3; 2,000 to 2,999…4; 3,000 to 3,999….5;
4,000 to 4,999….6; 1,000 to 1,999.….7; 2,000 to 2,999….8; 3,000 to 3,999….9; 4,000 to 4,999; 10. over 5,000.
15. PRINCIPAL EXECUTING AGENCY
ZAMSIF …….1; Sector Ministry…..2 ; Provincial Administration…3; District Administration …….4;
Ward Council………..5;
Others……….5 [specify]…………………….
16. PRINCIPAL IMPLEMENTING AGENCY
Community…..1; Sector ministry….2; District Council…..3; NGO (Local)….4; Private Sector……5;
NGO (International)…….6; Community-Based Organization……7; Others…...8 [specify] _________________
17. PROJECT START DATE (Month/Year)
18. PROJECT END DATE (Month/Year)
19. TOTAL PROJECT FUNDS (FROM ALL SOURCES)
Actual Duration (Years/Months)
[ in Zambia Kwacha]
20. TOTAL AMOUNT CONTRIBUTED BY GOVERNMENT
[ in Zambia Kwacha]
[ in US $]
[in US $]
21. STATUS OF PROJECT IN DISTRICT INVESTMENT PLAN
Project Included in District Plan….1;
Don’t know……..9
Project Not included in District Plan……..2; No District Plan exits…..3;
22. STATUS OF PROJECTED RECURRENT COSTS OF PROJECT (For sustaining project )
Adequate Funds included in District Budget Estimates to cover remaining costs…..1; Inadequate Funds
included in District Budget Estimates to cover remaining costs…..2; Some Funds exist, outside Government
budget exist, to cover remaining costs…..3; No Budgetary Provision made at all to cover remaining costs…..4;
Don’t know……..9
23. PRESENCE or ABSENCE OF A PROJECT DOCUMENT
Present……..1; Absent……..2
24. RELATIONSHIP OF PROJECT TO POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGY
Very High Priority…..1;
Somewhat High Priority…2; Low Priority……3; Very Low Priority…..4.
Codes for Main Intervention Type [# 7]
01. Primary and Basic Education
02. Health
03. Roads
04. Water and Sanitation
05. Gender and Women
Codes for Primary Project Target Beneficiary [#11]
01. Rural Community with difficult access to service facilities
02. Urban community with difficult access to service facilities
03. Local Governmental Institution
04. Street Children/Orphans
05. Women's Organization
06. Community Based Organization
99. Others(Specify)___________________________
06. Natural Resource Management and the Environment
07. HIV/AIDS, Orphans & Vulnerable Groups (OVC)
08. Community-based Capacity building & Training
99. Other Projects (Specify)___________________________
107
© KMK-2003
Type of Main
Intervention
Focus of Main Intervention Type
Annex A.2: Projects Eligible for Funding under the Social Investment Fund [CIF] of ZAMSIF Programme, Zambia
108
1. Primary and Basic
Education
CDD Issues
2. Health
3. Roads
4. Water and
Sanitation
5. Gender and
Women
6. Natural Resource
Management and the
Environment
7. HIV/AIDS
Orphans and
Vulnerable Groups
(OVC
8. Community-based
Capacity building
and training
programmes
9. Projects to be
piloted in the first
year of ZAMSIF
11. Rehabilitation and extension of existing primary schools (rehabilitation, expansion and improvement of primary
schools, including classrooms, water & sanitation, furniture, staff houses and dormitories for remote schools and
those with pro-OVC policy
12. New schools that qualify under current government sector policy and where the recurrent costs and service provision,
Community
Level are ensured.
Local Government Level
ZAMSIF/MOFND
especially
trained teachers,
13. Community managed pre-schools .
14. Development of Community based strategies which address the problem of poor school attendance, especially for girls
and vulnerable children
15. Functional literacy training for women
16. Development of long distance learning possibilities.
21. Rural health centers
22. Small clinics where the recurrent costs and service delivery are ensured by the Ministry of Health.
23. Construction for community based managed health posts.
24. Interventions to improve access to health facilities by remote and poor communities could include(mobile clinics,
training for community based health workers and strengthening of the concept of neighborhood health committees.
25. Rehabilitation and expansion of existing health centers together with maternity wards, out-patients and maternal child
health blocks, water and sanitation and necessary furniture and equipment and electrification.
26. Construction of staff houses and relative’s shelters at health centers.
31. Community managed roads using labor based methods.
32. Construction of community Earth roads, drainage, bridges, footbridges, culverts, causeways, drifts and splashes
33. Training of district staff in simple technical skills for road rehabilitation using hand labor
41. Community based and managed rural water and sanitation facilities.
42. Construction, installation and rehabilitation of protected wells and boreholes with hand pumps;
43. Rehabilitation or extension of communal piped water supplies;
44. Construction of Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP) latrines; and
45. Production of ablution blocks.
51. Infrastructure development that address priority practical and strategic needs of women
52. Capacity building for district institutions that are able to support community based organizations [CBO]
53. Gender sensitization,
54. Training of trainers and development of a gender module which will be delivered to all community based projects
55. Information exchange regarding lessons learnt through the various committees and the IEC strategy.
56. Monitoring of living conditions of women using existing survey data
61. Community based natural resource management that emphasizes sustainable way and use of natural
resources
62. Projects which control soil erosion and deforestation and preserve wildlife.
63. Capacity building for district staff and others to be aware of, and mitigate against, environmental damage
64. Strengthen stewardship capacity of district staff and others in natural resource management.
65. Information dissemination for communities on natural resource management
66. Expansion of PEF/ESP programme interventions to other districts.
Community-based strategies which deal with the impact of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. These will include:
71. Development of modules and an information strategy on HIV/AIDS.
72. Support to the National Strategy for AIDS.
73. Community schools that have a positive policy towards Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC) –
(e.g. PTA pays fees of OVC; community provides shelter, uniforms, books etc for OVC; community
provides food for vulnerable children in school;) teachers training costs for “untrained teachers” for
remote and “OVC” friendly schools;
74. Capacity-building activities, e.g. training programmes for community volunteers
75. Support to training for counselors and home based care givers;
76. Support to community based organizations which aim to address HIV/AIDS.
77. Interventions aimed at supporting orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) in the family structure.
78. OVC interventions that originate in the community and are aimed at providing communities with adequate
information to make decisions, capacity building and resources for solutions
79. Grandparents which support orphans.
There will be three aspects of this capacity building:
81. Learning by Doing’ (as communities plan, implement and maintain their community based projects will form a major part of
management capacity building).
82. Training modules (short discussion sessions using various participatory techniques and adult
learning methods delivered by trained facilitators. Modules will include topics such as maintenance,
HIV AIDS, gender sensitization, development of a community based OVC strategy, environmental appraisal and
management, procurement, financial management and so on. The modules will be facilitated during project
implementation at different stages of the project cycle.
83. Community Training (Training of community members in community based service delivery, e.g. home based
care, counseling, business and entrepreneurship skills, traditional birth attendants, community health workers and
community).
91. Examples of such sub-projects will include: projects which support Neighborhood Watch associations;
improvements to local courts in both urban and rural areas; cattle clubs; community managed post
offices; communication centers; irrigation systems.
Annex B.1
Enabling Environment: Factors that can Promote/Inhibit CDD in Zambia
109
Funding
mechanisms





Capacity Building





Communities to access development funds
directly from the district
Communities to manage development funds
Recognize community contribution in kind for
user fees and capital projects
Encourage communal work for self help
Communities should be empowered to collect
rents for use of community - based
infrastructure services.

Strengthen Community Leadership &
Mobilization skills
Strengthen community functional literacy
Stress Resource mobilization and
management skills
Strengthen networking among CBOs
Involve community in learning-by-doing
planning processes







Sub-district
organizational
structures

Participate in revision of the current electoral
law to allow for elections at the sub-ward level
(currently elections go up to the ward level
only)





Planning


PRAs/PLAs should be done in a systematic
manner for a specified time-frame.
PRAs/PLAs results should be coordinated by
the DDCC, distributed and used for planning
purposes.

District Council to be financially
autonomous
District Councils should be able
to access loans for investment (in
commercially viable social
services (water and sewerage,
land development)
District Councils to receive line
ministry budget allocations




Stress: coordination monitoring
and evaluation & facilitation skills
Improve information gathering
sharing and dissemination
Promote community ownership
and commitment
Ensure technical skills to support
communities to meet statutory
and quality standards
Facilitate functional literacy
Provide skills in the following areas:

Planning and budgeting; project
coordination, monitoring and evaluation;
supervisory and mentorship; programme
development management and
reporting; formulation of a district
strategic plan; facilitation; policy
formulation and interpretation; project
cycle management; technical skills to
support communities to meet statutory
and quality standards; functioning
logistical support to districts; conflict
resolution; mobilization; project
identification
resource mobilization and management;
project proposal development

Strengthen networking

Establish and maintain provincial
database

Provide adequate resources to support
capacity building at the district level

There should be legally recognized
structures at the sub-district level

Structures should be harmonized with
those already legally existing e.g. with
the Chiefs Act Village Act Local
Government Act Health Reforms Act
etc.)

Provide mechanism for conflict
resolution among all stakeholders
Reconfirm coordination role of
DDCC
Mechanisms for inclusion of
community members in
structures at sub-district level
All line departments at the district
level should be accountable to
the Local Authority
Have an elected coordination
structure alongside the public
service administrative structures
Build consensus within subdistrict structures
Ensure planning
processes/approaches at district
and sub-district level include subdistrict -level structures: Village
Development Committees, Zone
Development Committees
Ward Development Committees,
District Development
Coordination Committees, District
Councils





Fund District Councils directly
Allocate funds using a formula
Adopt one channel for resource flows
Ensure a reliable and dedicated
budgetary allocations to projects
Ensure Constituency and Youth
Development Funds are disbursed to
Local Governments
Support the development of a CDD
policy
Clarify roles and responsibilities of coproducers
Strengthen coordination among NGOs
and donors at district level
Make strategies and plans transparent
to potential funding agencies and
members of committees.
Annex B.2
Enabling Environment: Project Environment: Implementation Challenges of ZAMSIF programme
Stakeholder Group
What do you consider to be the main challenges facing the implementation of the on-going
CDD-related activities?
110
Stakeholder Group
ZAMSIF
Community
Local Authority
What do you consider to be the main challenges facing the implementation of the on-going
CDD-related activities?










CDD may at times be in conflict with line Ministry needs identification and prioritization
mechanisms especially if there is no objective problem identification and prioritization
Difficult to harmonies reporting cycles, procedures and format with line ministries.
Proliferation of development approaches at district/ community.
Inadequate legal framework to back up actions/process and procedures.
Absence of decentralization policy
Lack of adequate capacity in communities to implement projects.
Lack of adequate knowledge about CDD activities within Zambia.
Concentration of CDD projects in education sector
Lack of information on which to base
Poverty makes it difficult for many people to participate in projects

Centralist tendencies in the administration of development activities.
Long-winded bureaucratic procedures.
Unorganized local communities.
Inadequate local knowledge of CDD-related activities.
Lack of information for communities on how to access development funds
Lengthy process of accessing funds by communities
The challenge is to formulate small projects that can address the real problems of the
rural/urban poor.
Mobilizing the communities to actively participate in development
Sector Ministry





Disaggregation of poverty and other information to sub-district levels.
Lacking infrastructure for information dissemination at local level
Lack of gender responsiveness.
Inadequate gender disaggregated data.
Weaknesses in Planning and M&E
NGOs







Insufficient funding from donors.
Insufficient community contribution due to high levels of poverty.
Top-down approaches with pre- set ideas by donors about how their money should be used.
Late receipt of funds for input procurement
Absence of strong CBOs
Limited engagement between communities and locally-elected leaders.
Local authorities have no capacity to provide effective support to CDD.







111
Annex B.3
Table Project Environment
Stakeholder
Group
ZAMSIF-MU
How can Zambia’s successes in CDD be scaled up without waiting for the creation of
strong local governments.













Local
Government









Community
Sector
Ministry
NGOs
To accelerate strategic planning process, simplify preparation of Strategic Planning documents
Employ only qualified technical supervisors and staff who have requisite/relevant skills and training to
support a more efficient implementation of ZAMSIF programme activities.
On capacity building, provide adequate budget to support increased community field facilitation and
monitoring visits by district teams.
Simplify and harmonize capacity building approaches with implementing partners in all districts
Provide further training to district staff in community capacity building
Support community development promoters in the facilitation of community planning processes
Share experiences and sharing best practices (i.e. what works and does not work), by government
involving CDD practitioners in policy formulation and strategic planning, and through capacity building of
district administration.
Support and insist that community/district projects are identified through a common planning process
Pilot CDD activities in a few carefully selected districts where potential to succeed is assessed to be
adequate. Other districts may then follow.
Create partnerships and harmonization of processes and procedures by all development agencies.
On targeting, collaborate with line ministries (e.g. MCDSS), NGOs, church groups, /UN agencies
(UNICEF, WFP) to improve targeting of vulnerable population groups.
Simplify and streamline planning procedures for project planning & budgeting activities (e.g. project
application forms). application and funding. For example, reduce lengthy application forms.
Pre-test and fin-tune these checklists.
Review ZAMSIF log frame
Involve traditional rulers and their communities.
Ensure a holistic participation to community development by line ministry. For example, Agriculture
camp officers could be used to educate the communities about development programmes..
Use development plans and improved community information systems aimed at provision of relevant
information to communities so that they make informed decisions and can plan their own development.
Involve communities actively in decision- making.
In order to strengthen community facilitation, encourage District teams to train large numbers of
Community Facilitators who live in the communities.
Train Facilitators to be aware of full range of CIF fundable portfolio
Use district teams who are well trained in facilitating skills to assist communities (i) identify vulnerable
segment of community population and (ii) find ways and means of meeting their needs using either
ZAMSIF funds or other funding sources.
Consolidate and computerize community project profile information
Ensure that members of district Team going to communities for facilitation/field appraisal and project
implementation are those who have received the required training for these tasks. trained.

Simplify procedures for accessing ZAMSIF funds

Make information available to communities

Simplify procurement to speed up project implementation at community level

Build capacity at local level amongst stakeholders in project development and implementation.

Strengthen district and sub-district structures.

Use traditional leaders such as chiefs and headmen who have great influence in the community

Strengthen existing CBOs.
Strengthen sub districts through workshops

Strengthen local government structures and leadership.

Work more closely with NGOs who can implement some of ZAMSIF programmes.

Provide direct capacity building support to implementing partners involved in CDD.

Build capacity of communities to manage their own projects including financial management and
allocating money directly.

Provide financial support to councils for activities designed to promote CDD

Utilize existing local leadership structure

Engage NGOs (local/international)

Strengthen existing networks of collaborating partners
112
Annex C.1
CDD Vision/Principle: Notes on Elements of CDD Concept
Elements of
CDD Principle
Participation:
Participatory
appraisal and
planning (PA&P);
NGO Participation
Co-financing by
Communities
Technical
assistance &
Facilitation
Decentralization
What this Element of the CDD Principle says




Participatory appraisal and planning (PA&P) by all stakeholders help:

Strengthen decision making at the community level.

It is the starting point for acquisition of citizen information about options, resources, constraints, latent capabilities, and the likely
consequences of each subproject for each stakeholder.

It helps bring about the conditions for optimal social choice;

strengthen or create community development committee and relevant subcommittees; and identify group leaders and
appropriate institutional arrangements...

Communities and local governments need to be involved in: the design, execution, maintenance and operation of projects.
Co-financing by communities promotes local ownership;
To inculcate a sense of local ownership, communities should contribute to:

both capital costs and maintenance costs of projects meant for their benefit. Contributions can be in cash or kind (labor, local
materials).

Requiring community contribution also instills a sense of ownership and responsibility for subprojects and increases
sustainability.

Where communities have no sense of ownership, assets may atrophy for want of motivation in operation and maintenance.

CDD needs to be financed by inter-governmental transfers mandated by a revenue-sharing formula

This gives communities and local governments an assured shared of central revenue.

It also needs to be financed by the own resources of communities, local governments and other co-producers.

Funding for communities should become a fiscal right, not largesse from donors or the central government.
Communities and local governments already have latent capabilities. Empowerment will harness these skills through learning by doing.
This should be supplemented by relevant capacity building.
To assist with participatory appraisal, planning and programme and sub-project design and implementation, communities need:





Sustainability
Real participation aims to involving citizens at every stage and level. This includes the micro or community level, the meso or
intermediate level (local governments, NGOs.) and the macro or national/policy level (central government, World Bank staff).
Real participation implies that: development choices are taken under conditions of full information, full representation of all
interests
Real stakeholder participation is required in:
appraisal, and planning, implementation and M and E.






Local government structures, policies and funding must be in place to support activities of a Social Investment Funds.
Well-designed Decentralization should cover political, administrative ,and fiscal aspects
Decentralization outcomes tend to be poor in all cases where the local councilors: were not elected, were accountable to central
governments rather than the people they served, lacked enough fiscal means to make a real difference.
Decentralization works best in cases where local leaders are committed, serious and provide ample fiscal resources.
Decentralization should give local governments a predictable, transparent share of revenue (including foreign aid), preferably by
a legally-mandated formula. This will empower them with financial viability
Fiscal sustainability, Asset sustainability, and
Social sustainability is all essential.
Participation and real empowerment are the bedrock on which all forms of sustainability must rest. Only through these
processes can fiscal, asset, environmental and social sustainability is ensured.
Government should provide evidence of a real increase in budgetary allocations for non-wage recurring costs to support
maintenance costs.
Matching grants for communities from donor can kick-start CDD, but the process cannot rely forever on donor programmes. It
must be embedded in a permanent institutional framework.
Communities and local governments can be truly empowered only by: giving them an assured flow of funds from the central
government.
113
Selected References
Central Statistical Office (CSO), Living Conditions Monitoring Survey, Lusaka, Zambia 1998.
Dinh, H.T. Abebe Adugna and Bernard Myers, “The Impact of Cash Budgets on Poverty Reduction in
Zambia”, Africa Region Working Paper Series, No. 39, World Bank, November 2002.
Elliot, Charles (ed): Constraints on the Economic Development of Zambia, Nairobi: Oxford University
Press, 1988.
Estrella, Marisol, et al, (Eds.), Learning from Change: Issues and Experiences in Participatory Monitoring
and Evaluation, Intermediate Technologies Publications, London, 2000.
FAI. “Midterm Evaluation of the Microproject Programme.” Zambia,1997.
Gerrnan Technical Co-operation(GTZ), “Stimulating, Implementing and Monitoring Community
Development Projects: Guidelines and Formats”, Republic of Zambia, Ministry of Local Government and
Housing, June 2001.
Government of Republic of Zambia (GRZ), The National Decentralization Policy: Towards Empowering the
People, Office of the President, Cabinet Office, March 2002.
Government of Republic of Zambia (GRZ), The Zambia Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper [PRSP], March
2002.
Kwofie, K.M. and John T. Milimo, “National Poverty Reduction Action Plan for 2000-2004”, A Consultancy
Report prepared for the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services[MCDSS], Lusaka, Zambia,
January, 2000.
Papungwe, A. “Evaluating the Impact of the Study Fund of the Social Recovery Project, 1995-2000, Lusaka,
Zambia, June 2001.
Narayan, Deepa (Ed.), Empowerment and Poverty Reduction: A Sourcebook, The World Bank, Washington
D.C. 2002.
Milimo, J.T. et al.; “Beneficiary Assessment IV: a Report for the Social Recovery Project.” The Participatory
Assessment Group, Zambia,1997.
Paul, Samuel, Holding the State to Account: Citizen Monitoring in Action, Books for Change, Bangalore,
India, 2002.
Rietbergen-McCracken, Jennifer and Deepa Narayan (Eds.)
and Techniques, The World Bank, Washington D.C., 1998
Participation and Social Assessment: Tools
Robb, C. “Beneficiary Assessment Evaluation: A Case Study of the Social Recovery Project.” World Bank,
Washington D.C., 1997.
Social Recovery Project. Annual Report. Microprojects Units, MFED. Zambia,1998.
Social Recovery Project. “Evaluation of the Social Recovery Project I. Finding, Recommendations and
Proposed Plan.” MFED, Zambia, 1997.
Spencer, Laura J.
Winning through Participation: The Group Facilitation Methods of the Institute of
Cultural Affairs, Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, Iowa, 1989
World Vision International (Zambia). “Submission to the Workshop on NGO
100
Participation and Capacity Building in the Context of Social Funds”. Zambia, 1995.
World Bank, “Decentralization in Africa: A Stocktaking Survey”, Africa Region Working Paper Series No.
40, November 2002.
World Bank, Bank Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty, an Overview, Washington D.C.,
September 2000.
World Bank, “Zambia Consultations with the Poor”. Global Synthesis Workshop, Poverty Group, PREM.
World Bank, Washington D.C., 1999.
World Bank. “Implementation Completion Report: Zambia Social Recovery Project”. Report No 18864
World Bank, Washington D.C., 1999.
World Bank, The World Bank Participation Sourcebook, Washington D.C., 1996.
Zamsif, “Zambia Social Investment Fund, Report to the National Steering Committee, July-December 2002”,
Lusaka, Zambia, March 2003.
Zamsif, Civil & Structural Engineering Drawings for Bridges, Culverts, Roads and Infrastructure, January
2003.
Zamsif, “Zambia Social Investment Fund, Report to the National Steering Committee, July-December 2002”,
Lusaka, Zambia, March 2003.
Zamsif, Project Implementation Manual-Technical, Vols. 1 and 2, Ministry of Finance and National Planning,
2002.
Zamsif, District Assessment Guidelines for Development and Poverty Reduction: A Manual for use by
Provincial Assessment Teams and District Teams, Ministry of Finance and National Planning, 2002
Zamsif, Operational Manual, 2000.
101