Evaluation of the Social Sustainable Development Programme in Angola (PRODESSA)

Background:

Purpose/objective:

The purpose of this evaluation is twofold. First, it is to make an assessment of PRODESSA’s achievements in relation to its objectives, to document the lessons learned and to present recommendations for the future of the programme. Second, the evaluation should assess the methodology of PID and its relevance to similar community development programmes in other contexts.

Methodology:

A participatory approach has been a guiding principle throughout the evaluation. Focus has been upon learning together with core personnel in UMCN and UMCA. A field visit to Angola was carried out in late August 2008. During the field visit the UMCA head office and six communities outside were visited, one without a PRODESSA project and five with. Personnel from UMCN and UMCA participated throughout the field visit, as did the local consultant Mr. João José Peixoto.

Key findings:

The PID concept assures a higher likelihood of supporting relevant projects. All communities visited firmly defended their decisions and their projects. They were convinced that they had chosen the most relevant projects. My consideration is that programme relevance is probably the strongest part of PRODESSA. However, since the “local elite” are often active in the projects there is a risk of being less relevant to the poorer strata, and when it comes to women the results reported in Table 2 clearly illustrates the risk that PRODESSA is not able to support balanced gender efforts. Project coordinators are men, pastors in all the communities are men and most committee members are men. However, interesting to observe is that most treasurers are women. Also interesting is the fact that several of the projects mostly benefit women (e.g., the mill and goat-raising).

Recommendations:

1. PRODESSA should urgently address its lack of good systems. Models to illustrate, methodologies and manuals to guide, and systems to plan and monitor are all required.

2. Communities should still be given the freedom to decide upon what type of project to get involved in. The freedom, however, should be kept within a frame. An example of a frame could be:

a. Projects should be productive and provide the community with demanded goods/services.

b. A considerable part, e.g., minimum 20%, of the community members should potentially benefit from accessing the service. Projects benefiting only a few people should not be prioritised.

c. Aside from schools, projects should be kept relatively small e.g., in most cases below US$10,000.

d. The planned time it takes to make a project profitable should be short, preferable below 12 months.

3. Communities should give a financial contribution of a minimum 5–10% up front before initiating a new project.

4. In order to work along the quality circle, projects should continue to be implemented in phases, and communities should be allowed repeated projects at least twice or three times.

5. More attention should be focused upon making the projects into viable local businesses. The constant measurement of project profits should be prioritised.

6. UMCA should assess whether PRODESSA can be “rolled out” in a more geographically concentrated manner in order to increase cost-efficiency without generating conflicts in the church.

7. The implementation of projects should be more balanced throughout the year. In order to support this idea, a more detailed annual outreach plan is required.

8. PRODESSA should increase its number of staff to at least three in order to avoid dependency upon one person.

9. UMCN should maintain its technical support to PRODESSA and focus upon the transfer of knowledge, especially in the field of good systems.

10. Comprehensive monitoring systems should be installed between communities and PRODESSA, PRODESSA and the Bishop, and the Bishop and UMCN. The monitoring format should be such that the reporter reflects and learns from reporting.

11. PRODESSA and POSOCA should be merged. PRODESSA should have two activity lines, education and productive projects. UMCA should assess the opportunity of becoming a major player in the new educational infrastructure of Angola.

12. The PID projects in Angola and Liberia should continue to learn from each other. However, learning should not only be organised around interchange visits and seminars, but should more be organised around the development and continued improvement of good systems.

13. If possible, PRODESSA and UMCN should team up with an action research partner in order to together develop good systems and make necessary adjustments in PRODESSA’s design as lessons are learned.

14. The PID concept should be relevant also in similar community development programmes in other contexts. However, before introducing it in other contexts BN and UMCN should better document the PID methodologies.

Comments from the organisation, if any: