Evaluation Report of Afronet Human Rights Programme in Zambia

Background

The Inter-African Network for Human Rights and Development (AFRONET) is a brainchild of some of Africa's leading human rights defenders. Meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations (UN) World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna, Austria, in 1993, African human rights defenders conceived the idea of establishing an organization principally to act as a network of human rights civic
bodies on the continent. In 1995, this dream came true. AFRONET was registered as a nongovernmental organization under the Society's Act of the Laws of Zambia where it was headquartered and from where it set up an embryonic secretariat. From these humble beginnings, AFRONET has evolved into a powerful institution it is.

Conceptually, AFRONET is a pan-African organization. The original idea was for AFRONET to act as a cobweb of African civic bodies. This was in order to respond to a felt- need among NGOS in Africa who called for some kind of a network between and among them which, unlike their counterparts in other parts of the world, did not exist. African NGOs tended to work in isolation thereby duplicating
their functions and therefore not exploiting their potentials. It was expected that AFRONET would serve as the missing link between and among NGOs in the region. It would maximize the potentials of the African NGO terrain by linking them together thereby enabling easy contact among them and jointly undertaking such things as creating programming, information-sharing as well as activities and
actions. However, in practice, AFRONET: is perceived as a Zambian based NGO which is predominantly operating in Zambia with a few selected instances of work in Southern Africa. The perception of Afronet as a Zambian NGO is based on among other things the fact that all staff is Zambian despite the Constitution stipulating that conditions of service to apply to foreign employees.

In order to increase its effectiveness and to make it more relevant to rapidly changing circumstances, AFRONET underwent a major constitutional reform in 1998.

Purpose/objective

The main objective of the evaluation was to assess progress with respect to the implementation of Hivos funding for the period 2001-2004. It was to assess the extent to which AFRONET has been implementing the recommendation of the 1999 evaluation. The evaluation was to provide input for AFRONET's internal learning and establish whether AFRONET and its funding partners have adhered to the guidelines and activities as outlined in the funding agreement and describe the role and effectiveness of the board.

Hivos has maintained regular contact with AFRONET since 1994 and the first funding was in 1996. In 1999, Hivos commissioned an evaluation of AFRONET. The evaluation concluded that AFRONET was generally meeting its overall objectives, but the evaluators pointed out that the organization could and should improve its performance, address gender and development issues, governance and management (especial financial management). It recommended a three-year grant. In 2001-04, Hivos gave AFRONET Euros 304 033. One of the provisions of this three-year grant was a mid year evaluation by external consultants.

The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the extent to which AFRONET has implemented the planned programmes. The evaluators should most importantly assess:

-the effectiveness of the stated programmes of AFRONET towards creating public awareness among rural and urban people on human rights issues in Zambia

-the effectiveness of AFRONET in influencing changed behavior (positive) on the part of policy makers and parliamentarians regarding how they conduct their functions in a quest to bring about a transparent and accountable governance and government systems.

-Effectiveness of its anti corruption lobby in influencing policy makers and other institutions in dealing with corruption

-The effectiveness of its media programme in influencing media in reporting on human rights, corruption and governance issues

-The way AFRONET has integrated gender issues in its programmes and within the organization.

-And generally the role played by AFRONET in influencing important processes and events within the country e.g. parliamentary and local government elections through the stated programmes.

The evaluation is commissioned by Hivos and is meant to assess the extent to which AFRONET has used Hivos support to effectively influence the public and policy makers regarding issues of human rights. The last evaluation of AFRONET was done in November 1999. While it confirmed the relevancy of AFRONET in the human rights sector in Zambia, it also pointed to the need for AFRONET to
address governance and management issues. These were seen as weaknesses. The issue of gender particularly identifying women's rights issues and financial management were other areas that needed attention. Gender was also critical in view of military abuses of the public.

This evaluation should cover the period 2000 - 2003 and should mainly focus on: accountability and management issues, programme issues, gender, relationships with other Human rights and relevant civil society organizations in Zambia and the region, financial management, relationship with Hivos Foundation and other donors and based on findings, provide conclusions and recommendations on the future of Afronet's work in Zambia and the region.

Methodology

According to the TOR consultants were requested to review literature relating to AFRONET's programmes, interview staff in the different programmes of AFRONET, the Director and Board members (mainly those based in Zambia, contact other Board members through e-mails and telephones. They were further expected to also interview selected beneficiary institutions, members of the public male and female in rural and urban areas as well as relevant institutions ( Non governmental organisations) operating in the field of human rights and gender as well as Media
institutions and Parliamentary organs.

Below is a summary of the principal method/s used by consultants at each stage:

Stage I-Literature review: to get an insight into what was supposed to be done in accordance with the project sent to Hivos on which the current funding is based, what has been done over the project period as recorded in the project documents, work plans and progress reports; publications and review of the evaluation done in 1999, audit report and the constitution. The output from this stage was an understanding of emerging issues, which were validated in the fieldwork. These same issues informed the discussions with AFRONET staff in stage II.

Stage II-Interviews: with AFRONET Structures to cover both programming, financial and OD issues at all levels.
Management level: as the starting point we talked to the Director, who shared his insights into the areas where he felt the organization had done well and where he needed assistance with deeper reflection and analysis; the consultants also shared issues and concerns arising from the desk study during these discussions.

Staff level: involved discussions focused on programme officers who go out to interact with partners or those that work on the design, production and distribution of the materials produced by AFRONET. Two or three members of staff were not engaged as they were new or non-programming or in noncritical
administrative functions.

Board members: face-to-face discussions with one board member were held to review strategic direction and governance issues. Engagement with two other board members including the chairperson was through email.

The principal methods applied in engaging with these various stakeholders include the following:

One-on-one interview and groups discussions with the various department managers/programme officers with the evaluators as one team. This made it possible for us to get the same briefing and have long discussion as a team.

Assessment of quality, strengths, delivery gaps, gender and organisational development sues.

Field visits based on the issues arising from the desk study (stage I) and the discussions with the AFRONET staff (stage II)

Stage III -External stakeholder engagement: We talked to the stakeholders of AFRONET seeking feedback on AFRONET service delivery vis-à-vis results. We met other NGOs (allies and competitors) donors, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Services, Chairperson of the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), MPs etc, ex employees, the general public, to obtain national perspectives on the relevance and effectiveness of the strategies
chosen by AFRONET and its partners as well as feedback on mechanisms for interaction among the various stakeholders. We also wanted to get a donor perspective on funding of AFRONET…their funding experience, who was still on board or who wanted to come on board.

Stage IV - Data Analysis and Reporting: This stage basically involved collation of the information from the previous stages and drafting a preliminary report, which was submitted as a draft. Written comments on this were obtained and based on that feedback, a final report was produced.

Key findings

1. The general perception is that AFRONET is an important need in the Zambian society. Most of the people we talked to including Government and non-Government officials spoke highly of AFRONET.

2. AFRONET'S human rights programme was running very well though more could be done. While it did not engage in litigation, AFRONET did very well in advocacy work. Examples of projects that are successful include the publication of the Zambia Human Rights Report and the anticorruption awareness campaign project.

3. However, Consultants found the Constitution of AFRONET to have a lot of larcunas and loopholes that needed urgent attention.

4. Consultants confirmed the earlier finding that AFRONET has not been convening the board of Directors. Consequently, the board had not met since the last evaluation.

5. The operating frameworks and financial systems in AFRONET are very weak or non-existent. For instance, most staff members, starting from the Executive Director to the lowest employee, do not have valid contracts of service. At the same time, the modus operand of the financial systems in place do not allow for accountability. For instance, only staff members are signatories to the organisation's accounts. Similarly, we discovered a number of payments and transfer of funds from one item to another among AFRONET, Monitor and SAHRINGON, that were only possible due to the weak financial infrastructure.

6. Though in practice, management is taking measures to hive the Monitor off from AFRONET, the same people who are on AFRONET board of DIRECTORS are on the Monitor Board.

Recommendations

1. The management team at AFRONET is slowly beginning to own the organization of ensuring that AFRONET does not sink deeper into debts. The team should continue to take a proactive role and ensure that the ownership of the organization is not left in the hand of one person. The Director himself should see this as a progressive stage and support it. He has invested in the organization and should not allow it to die.

2. Addressing the culture of the organization should be part of the restructuring of the organization. The intangible assets (team work, interpersonal issues etc) of the organization need to be developed with the same enthusiasm as its tangible assets. The core intangible assets should be identified and developed in a planned manner. A human rights organization cannot afford not to pay attention to intangible assets.

3. If AFRONET is to survive, it needs to embark on a restructuring process immediately to address some of the syndromes that continue to haunt the organization. The syndromes include the following: lack of adequate systems and structures, a culture that is not conducive to growth of individuals and the organization, indebtedness, neglect of gender in programmes, lack of reflection…etc. It needs to soul search and renew itself.

Comments from the organisation

The evaluation was conducted in November and December of 2003. The evaluation of AFRONET was commissioned by HIVOS but many donors that supported AFRONET shared the Hivos reports. In the case of NCA-Zambia, interest was taken to ensure that AFRONET reorganises and repositions itself in its Human Rights Work. In November 2004, AFRONET refunded the remaining amount of money to NCA on Human Rights and HIV/AIDS which was granted from the regional office (US$14,971.00). Problems related to reporting between AFRONET and NCA hinged on lack of clarity in the agreement between "basket funding" and "earmarked" funding from NCA. The issue has since been resolved.
NCA has however not resumed the partnership with AFRONET since 2004. No doubt, AFRONET has been influential in promoting a human rights culture, democracy and good governance in Zambia and should be supported through organisational and institutional capacity building. Organisations as
AFRONET are needed in a young democracy as Zambia to put pressure on Government as the many duty bearers in the protection, promotion and fulfilling rights for its citizens.