|
|
|
Monitoring the implementation of the PRSP: the Uganda experience
|
|
| 7. The CBMES Pilot in Kamuli District |
| |
A pilot project to test the feasibility of the Community Based Monitoring and Evaluation System (CBMES), was carried out in Kamuli district between 11th 23rd April 2002. The goal of this pilot was to establish a Community Based Monitoring & Evaluation System (CBMES) to enhance participation of local communities in decision-making and policy influence. Its main purpose was to empower grassroots communities to monitor poverty and other development-related programmes, and influence policy at the local and national levels.
During the pilot, local communities were introduced to participatory monitoring and evaluation skills, developing a tool for monitoring and evaluating community poverty programmes, and establishing a community based information management system.
At the end of this pilot local communities had come up a community-monitoring model on how communities can be involved right from village to the sub county level.
At the end of this pilot exercise members of the local communities came up with a community-based model of monitoring the implementation of poverty related programmes.
A pilot monitoring exercise was also carried out and findings of this exercise discussed at feed back meetings at sub-county and district level.
The local communities also developed community based monitoring indicators which they presented to Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development on 7th June 2002, as alternative indicators to government indicators.
Achievements from monitoring the PAF
- Through the various tarinings and information sharing, the Local communities (PAFMCs) are now empowered carry out the monitoring of PAF on their own. PAFMCs can now ably conduct monitoring in their reas of jurisdiction, compile a report of findings on their own and present such findings to Local Governmnet Officails and at meetings organised at national level, by Ministry of Finance Planning and Ecomic development to review the perfomance of the PAF and other public expenditure.
- In some districts, PAFMCs, with the assistance from UDN secreatriat, have caused the publication of their own reports of findings. Kamuli district Committee was was able to publish their report of monitoring in August 2001. The report was widely circulated at local, national and international level. Findings from this report attracted has attracted the attention of many stakeholders both at local and International including the World in Washington that sent a delegation of two people who visited the Kamuli Committee on 10th November 2001 to dicuss how they are monitoring PAF.
- The PAFMCs have mobilised civil society in their districts to support the programs and develope actions against corruption. They have also committed themselves to disseminating PAF and pertinent information in their areas of jurisdiction as a way of increasing awareness of the programs. This is likely to increase transparency and accountability and in turn effective service delivery. It has also raised curiosity of other people to partcipat in the monitoring.
- The PAFMCs have taken the initiative to organize district dialogue meetings. These meetings bring together the PAF implementers and PAF beneficiaries together and discuss not only PAF implementation process but also poverty issues in general. In some instances decisions and actions to ameliorate the situation have been jointly taken at such meetings. Such opportunities have increased the grassroots participation and influencing public policy process at local and national levels as well as increasing ownership of the programmes.
- The development of a community based monitoring model by the local communities themselves is a sign of sustainability of the process.
- After the pilot on CBMES, local communities now feel empowered have started monitoring on their own on continuous basis and holding dialogues with public officials on gaps in service delivery in their own villages. A case in question is where the local communities monitored the delivery of health services in their locality and found out that health workers were giving them half doses because the medical Assistant in charge of the Centre never resided at the Centre and was never there when required. A meeting was organized between the community people and the medical assistant and resolved the problem amicably. The medical officer agreed to shift to the health Centre and commit more of his time to his work, lest the community people ask for his transfer.
Challenges that still exist
Although a lot has been achieved as seen above, the following challenges still exist and thus have to be addressed in order to realise the best out of monitoring the PAF.
- Ensuring the sustainability of these processes. The CBMES presents a model that is quite empowering since it ensures continuous monitoring by the local communities themselves. Ensuring continuity of these processes in the districts requires a increased human and financial capacity.
- With decentralization policy in Uganda, a lot of resources are being remitted to the districts in bid to improve the quality of life of the poor through social service delivery. This calls for more vigilance at the local government level given the level of awareness among the grassroots people of their rights and entitlements.
- There is need to involve heavily the local communities to monitor the PAF. More sensitization needs to be done targeting specifically the grassroots people. This calls for electronic and print media advocacy to increase information dissemination. Increased knowledge of the PAF will eventually increase participation of the local communities in monitoring its implementation.
|
|
Related documents