Final Report

Summative evaluation of

MS Country Programme Strategies and Programme Support

within the “Democracy Focus”

Tanzania

May 2011

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and abbreviations .....................................................................................3-4

Executive summary ....................................................................................... 5

Introduction ....................................................................................... 6

Programme strategy and design ....................................................................................7

Achievements ......................................................................................11

Key lessons learnt ......................................................................................19

List of recommendations ..................................................................................... 20

Annexes ..................................................................................... 21

Annex 1 Terms of Reference

Annex 2 Itinerary

Annex 3 List of people met and interviewed

Annex 4 Good Practice: PCM sequence for partner selection

3

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AA/IGT ActionAid International Governance Team

AADK ActionAid Denmark

AATZ ActionAid Tanzania

AP 2000 Agenda Participation 2000

ASDP Agricultural Sector Development Programme

BA Bachelor of Arts

BLD Building Local Democracy

CCM Chama Cha Mapinduzi

CDF Constituency Development Fund

CDF Community Development Facilitators

CORDS Community Research and Development Services

CPS Country Programme Strategy

CSP Country Strategy Paper

CSO Civil Society Organisation

DADPS District Agricultural Development Plans

DANIDA Danish International Development Assistance

DW Development Worker

IADO Isangati Agriculture Development Organisation

ICSO International Civil Society Organisation

ILFS Integrated Labour Force Survey

KINNAPA A local CBO whose name is an acronym of six villages in the Kibaya

Kiteto region of Tanzania

LFA Logical Framework Analysis

LGA Local Government Authority

LHRC Land and Human Rights Centre

MKUKUTA Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza Umaskini

MoEVT Ministry of Education and Vocational Training

MPLC Morogoro Paralegal Centre

MS Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke

MS-TCDC Mellemfolkeligt Samvire Training Centre for Technical Cooperation

NEC National Electoral Commission

NGO Non-governmental Organisation

NSGPR National Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction

NYDP National Youth Development Policy

O&OD Opportunities and Obstacles for Development

OD Organisational Development

P4C People for Change

PET Public Expenditure Tracking

PMOR-RALG Prime Minister‟s Office, Regional Administration, and Local

Government

PCCB Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau

4

SC School Committee

SHIVIWAKA Shirikisho la Vikundi vya Wakulima wa Kahawa Mbeya

TACSEO Tanzania Civil Society Election Observers

TAYODEA Tanga Youth Development Association

TOR Terms Of Reference

TRC Teachers Resource Centre

TTU Tanzania Teachers Union

URT United Republic of Tanzania

USAID United Stated Agency for International Development

VADP Village Agricultural Development Plans

VDP Village Development Plans

VLC Village Land Committees

VNRC Village Natural Resources Committee

VVT Vijana Vision Tanzania

WADT Ward Agriculture Development Team

WEC Ward Executive Committee

WSDPs Whole School Development Plans

YPC Youth Partnership Countrywide

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PROGRAMME STRATEGY AND DESIGN

The former MS Tanzania programme increased the capacity of Tanzanians (with a

specific emphasis on women and youth) to enable them to participate effectively in

democratic governance processes, with the aim of ensuring improved service delivery in

the education and agriculture sectors, as well as ensure increased access and ownership of

land, especially among women. The programme, which is built around the three themes

of Building Local Democracy (BLD), Youth for Development, and Land Rights, has the

following immediate objectives:

To ensure that Local Government Authorities (LGAs) provide improved primary

education and agriculture development projects.

To help LGAs and School Committees (SCs) provide services responding to the

needs identified by ordinary women and men.

To ensure that politically empowered young women and men are influencing

local government.

To ensure that more women have secure access to land.

To ensure that ordinary women and men in 10 villages have safe and sustainable

access to forest resources

The Evaluation Team(ET) found that the programme is relevant to the context because

promoting citizen participation in governance, ensuring access and ownership to land, as

well as guaranteeing space for the active participation of women and youth continue to be

issues that affect development in Tanzania.

The former MS Tanzania programme worked with two types of partners: direct

implementers and strategic partners. A key contribution of strategic partners to the

programme is that they provide a linkage between initiatives at local level to national

policy level. It follows that choice of an appropriate strategic partner is instrumental in

enabling the programme to elevate the policy agenda from local or regional to national

levels.

ACHIEVEMENTS

The MS Tanzania programme had a late start with the actual implementation only

beginning in May 2009.1 It should also be noted that the start of implementation also

coincided with the process of the merger between MS and AATZ, and the transition that

followed. These processes caused some delays in implementation. Yet the former MS

Tanzania partners mentioned that they did not feel the effects of the transition since their

1 This was a result of a number of factors that required a review and overhaul of the programme starting in

2008

6

activities continued to be supported, and former MS staff were continually available to

them. Nonetheless, the result of these delays is that whilst there have been a number of

activities initiated by the programme, the actual change, particularly with the situation of

rights holders is rather limited. It must however be pointed out that a significant number

of building blocks that should steer partners towards attaining programme objectives

have been put in place.

Building Local Democracy

The programme has created awareness amongst communities about the need for them to

actively participate in the development of District and Village Agriculture Development

Plans (DADPs and VADPs respectively). Furthermore, in order to improve access to

information about village plans, budget and expenditure records, the former MS Tanzania

programme has secured commitment and facilitated the use of public notice boards for

posting related information in a number of communities. However, most of the activities

are recent and it is too early to gauge their impact.

In the education sector, the former MS Tanzania programme supported the Teachers

Resource Centre (TRC) to facilitate the formation of school committees (SCs) for

primary schools in accordance with government guidelines. The TRC has also created

awareness amongst community members about their rights, roles, and responsibilities as

custodians of primary education in Tanzania, including the responsibility to hold SCs

accountable. As a result there is an increased level of interest amongst women and men to

participate actively in the management and governance of schools. These have in turn led

to significant improvements in the performance of the SCs. As a result of the

effectiveness of some of the committees that TRC Coalition has worked with, the

Minister of Local Government in charge of primary education has publically promoted

the formation and operationalisation of these committees in other districts.

The former MS Tanzania programme is also working with its partners to provide training

on the use of Public Expenditure Tracking (PET) within the government framework. It is

expected that the effective use of PET will empower communities, and result in increased

accountability. In this regard therefore, the key building blocks - to promote

accountability and hence improved service delivery - are in place. Youth for Development

The former MS Tanzania programme provided support to youth organisations

TAYODEA and YPC to conduct civic education, and support the formation of youth

forums. These will eventually be supported to carry out PET in relation to issues of

concern to the youth. Both organisations have also received support for internal capacity

development, information and documentation, programme and financial management.

YPC and TAYODEA with support from the former MS Tanzania programme provided

training to a total 2,325 youth in Kibaha and Kilindi districts in the period from July 2009

to October 2010, and also mobilised some of their members to work as election observers

7

who contributed to a report by Tanzania Civil Society Election Observers (TACSEO).

Whilst it was not possible to concretely determine how this voter education directly

influenced the participation of youth, a study commissioned by AATZ states that as a

result of the interventions supported by AATZ, both YPC and TAYODEA have

experienced, since commencement of the projects, a steady increase in the number of

youth requesting advice and support to engage in the political process - both as voters and

candidates.

As part of the effort to facilitate youth engagement and influence local government, both

TAYODEA and YPC have established structures that create space for youth to mobilise

and discuss issues that affect them. These structures are at the village (youth embassies

and parliaments), ward (ward youth committees) and district (district forums) levels. The

youth forums, although still in their nascent stages, represent a promising platform from

which youth - both male and female - can discuss issues affecting them and serve as a

mechanism for disseminating information.

Land Rights

Under objective one, former MS Tanzania partners have been supported to carry out a

number of awareness and sensitisation activities for women on land rights. The impact of

this awareness raising and training was said to be increased participation by women in

discussions to deal with land.

In order for women to obtain titles to their land, the structures and institutions responsible

for land management need to be in place and operational. These structures and

institutions in the areas that former MS Tanzania‟s partners operate in are not in place.

Therefore, Community Research and Development Services (CORDS) and Morogoro

Paralegal Centre (MPLC) have trained village councils, village land councils, and land

use committees on their roles and responsibilities, in order to ensure that they work

effectively. Furthermore, as part of their efforts to ensure greater access to land for

women, MPLC has provided legal aid on land matters to 165 clients so far (139 women

and 26 men), however, due to budget constraints, they have been unable to follow

through on this support, it is therefore not possible to establish the actual impact of this

support.

The former MS Tanzania partners have also been instrumental in supporting community

members make border agreements, survey and demarcate some villages, as well as ensure

that land use plans and certificates have been submitted for approval. All these steps are

necessary in ensuring legal ownership of land. Acquiring these land use plans and

certificates is a prerequisite for the future individual allocation of land to women.

Significant progress has been made by Vijana Vision Tanzania (VVT) towards the

attainment of objective two. VVT has been able to support the formulation of land use

plans designate village forestland, and also supported the establishment and training of

Village Natural Resource Committees (VNRCs) in participatory forest management, as

8

well as their other roles and responsibilities. It now remains to be seen if these

committees will perform their functions in a manner that will ensure that ordinary women

and men have safe and sustainable access to forest resources.

Capacity Development

Capacity-building support is provided in both programme areas, as well as organisational

development. It is worth noting that the capacity support is intense. Some organisations

receive funds for training of their staff through independently contracted service

providers, institutional support components in the budget, support for staff to attend

courses at the MS Training Centre (MS-TCDC), and the support given through the

People for Change Programme through advisors and inspirators.

Partners pointed out that capacity building support is determined through a consultative

process, which ensures ownership and commitment, and that the capacity building

support is relevant to each organisation. They also highlighted the coaching and

mentoring support provided by former MS staff. The partners were of the view that the

coaching and mentoring provides more individual- or organisation-focused support, and

allows them to have more practical and hands on support. It also supplements the training

workshops very well.

The ET noted that due to the various capacity-building activities, the need to plan and

coordinate these activities effectively within the supporting institution is paramount to

avoid duplication and confusion. It was also noted that whilst it was apparent that the

partners have received a lot of capacity-building support, all the partners have not yet

provided a similar investment to the rights holders. This is a challenge that the

programme has also identified, and is largely attributed to the initial emphasis on

strengthening the capacity of partners. The programme will use the remaining period of

implementation to ensure that partners lay more emphasis on their work with rights

holders. One area of capacity building that remains is that of monitoring and evaluation.

The People for Change programme was found to be relevant, however, the relevant

Terms of Reference (TORs) and outputs should be clearly formulated, and realistically

attainable in the time frame provided for inspirators. The Tanzania programme had 28

Development Workers (DW) over the strategic period (both short and long term) i.e.

those whose assignments ended between 2008 and 2010. The role of the DWs was to

provide technical support to the partners, and they were all allocated partners to work

with. Whilst the DWs reports all indicate that the support was provided, it was interesting

that no mention of the support by DWs was made during the interviews held for the

evaluation. This could partly be a result of the various changes that have taken place as a

result of the merger, it is however still surprising.

RECOMMENDATIONS

(i) The programme is still relevant in Tanzania. The significant building blocks are in

place, and heavy investment has been made with the partners, which is why AATZ

9

should consider continuing with the programme over the next two years, or absorbing the

partners that fit in their new strategy.

(ii) The partnership and capacity-building approaches are useful, and intense capacity-

building is required with regard to the community-based partners. In particular, the

partners favour capacity support that is demand-driven and adopts more of coaching than

formal training approach. In their words, “mentoring and coaching are far better and

helpful than conducting workshops”. AATZ should consider the use of similar

approaches in its future programmes.

(iii) Having a thematic approach to the CPS i.e. BLD, Land Rights and Youth for

Development, provided focus and direction for management of the partner portfolio. It

also gave focus to the partners. It is a useful approach that could be replicated in future

AATZ programmes.

(iv) Monitoring and evaluation is an area that needs a lot more attention to ensure that

results are captured. Monitoring and evaluation should also be a way of ensuring that the

support being provided actually results in concrete changes for rights holders.

(v) Outcome mapping is an approach that can better enable the measurement of changes

in attitude and behaviour. It has been used to develop a recent Land Rights project

proposal and found to be useful. It is recommended that AATZ consider using this

approach in future planning with its partners, as part of strengthening capacity in

monitoring and evaluation.

10

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Programme

At the beginning of 2007 Danish organisation Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke (MS) adopted a

new Democracy Focus Policy (DFP), which entailed adopting a thematic approach

focused on five thematic areas. MS also decided to investigate the possibility of

affiliating with ActionAid International. The combined agendas represented wide-ranging

changes for MS, including the development of new five-year Country Programme

Strategy (CPS) documents. The development of the CPS was largely a participatory

process that built on lessons learnt. It also involved MS partner organisations and other

Community-based Organisation (CSO) representatives, as well as programme staff,

Development Workers (DWs), Policy Advisory Committees (PACs), and consultants. In

Tanzania, the process of developing the 2008-2012 CPS was started in 2008 and

completed in May 2009. This CPS focuses on three thematic areas: (i) Building Local

Democracy (ii) Youth for Development (iii) Land Rights.

In September 2008, the MS General Assembly decided that MS should become an

affiliate of ActionAid International. In 2010, ActionAid International gave MS the

overall responsibility for the leadership and management of the ActionAid‟s “Right to

Just and Democratic Governance” theme. In June 2010, ActionAid International‟s

General Assembly approved the affiliation with MS. Thus, MS became a fully-fledged

member of the ActionAid family, and changed its name (in English) to ActionAid

Denmark (but maintained Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke or MS in Danish).

1.2 The Evaluation

As a consequence of the affiliation between MS and ActionAid International, the MS

offices in Nepal, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Guatemala were

merged with those of ActionAid, in 2010. The MS office in Southern Sudan was closed.

The MS programme portfolio in these countries was then taken over by ActionAid.

ActionAid Denmark (AADK) and the national ActionAid organisations have signed

cooperation agreements, which specify that ActionAid is responsible for fulfilling the

objectives of the CPS until December 2011.

The evaluation in Tanzania was carried out between14th and 26th

February 2011, and had

four specific objectives: (i) to provide strategic learning points that will inform

programme development for ActionAid International Governance Team (AA/IGT)

overall as well as the national ActionAid programmes in the countries covered (ii) to

provide a platform for the appraisal of programmes proposed for future MS/AADK

funding (iii) to feed into the overall evaluation of all AADK activities scheduled for the

last quarter of 2011, and (iv) to serve as documentation to DANIDA.

The methodology applied included review of comprehensive and pertinent programme

documents, and meetings and interviews with resource persons and institutions, MS

Tanzania staff, AATZ and local government officials. One workshop was held with all

11

implementing partners, followed by bilateral meetings with selected partner

organisations. Focus group discussions were held with representative target groups of

rights holders. The itinerary is appended as Annex 2 and a List of Persons met is

appended as Annex 3.

A number of national ActionAid offices are currently in the process of reviewing their

Country Strategy Paper (CSP) with the purpose of developing new five-year strategies

and programmes. ActionAid International has been developing a new global strategy in

2011 that will come into effect from 2012. It is assumed that governance will be a focal

theme of the strategy. It is preferable that the lessons learnt through this evaluation from

previous and ongoing AADK-supported governance programmes will feed into the

various strategy development processes, and that the summative evaluation will serve as

an important contribution to both upwards and downwards accountability.

The Evaluation Team (ET) was comprised of: Ashanut Okille (team leader), Kitakaya

Loisa (consultant), and Vince Martino (of AADK, who accompanied the ET). The ET

thanks ActionAid Tanzania (AATZ) and all persons who met the Team for their valuable

contributions and assistance, which highly facilitated the work. This report expresses the

ET‟s views, which are not necessarily shared by MS/AADK or any of the parties

consulted.

2. PROGRAMME STRATEGY AND DESIGN

2.1 Country Programme Strategy

The former MS Tanzania programme sought to respond to the key challenges of limited

awareness amongst Tanzanian citizens about key Government policies in the Education

and Agriculture sectors, and to support activities aimed at empowering communities to

participate effectively in determining priorities and ensuring accountability for use of

resources in these sectors. Support to ensure access and ownership of land, especially for

women, is also an area of focus. The programme also had a specific focus on promoting

participation of youth in democratic governance. With three thematic areas: Building

Local Democracy (BLD), Youth for Development and Land Rights, the specific

objectives are:

Building Local Democracy

o Local Government Authorities (LGAs) provide

improved primary education and agriculture

development projects.

o LGAs and School Committees (SCs) provide

services responding to the needs identified by

ordinary women and men.

Youth for Development o Politically empowered young women and men

influencing Local Government.

Land Rights o More women have secure access to land

o Ordinary women and men in 10 villages have

safe and sustainable access to forest resources

12

The analysis of the context provided in the CPS and the intervention areas identified by

the programme are still relevant today. More recent studies attest to the need to

strengthen civil society participation in democratic governance, using the existing policy

and legal framework.

Effective participation of citizens in the development and implementation of national

policies (a key ingredient of ownership), requires that citizens possess a certain level of

civic competence including skills to mobilise and organise. In addition, they need to

understand their own interests and opportunities within the wider policy framework, and

to possess the necessary information, knowledge and skills on how to engage with

governance structures at the different levels, and the opportunities to apply these. In order

to achieve effective participation, the former MS Tanzania programme supported the

following diverse activities carried out by partners all aimed at ensuring effective citizen

participation in democratic governance in Tanzania. These activities include:

o Raising awareness on various rights and governance issues

o Training of CSOs in the use of Public Expenditure Tracking (PET) and social

auditing

o Training of CSOs, Ward Executive Committees (WECs) and SCs in participatory

budgeting and planning

o Lobbying and advocacy activities, networking and linkages of CSOs

o Organisational capacity building of CSOs

The supported activities sensitise target groups about their rights and responsibilities as

citizens, and encourage confidence of their own legitimacy. Efforts are also being made

to provide skills in advocacy, and to encourage citizens and CSOs to build alliances and

obtain evidence to support their arguments. There is also a deliberate effort to create

opportunities for linkages between the partners operating at both local and at national

levels, mainly on policy issues. It is thus the conclusion of the ET that the supported

activities are in line with the CPS and should contribute to the realisation of the

objectives if effectively implemented.

The former MS Tanzania programme worked with two types of partners: direct

implementers and strategic partners. The direct implementers are primary, grassroots-

based partners. The strategic partners are usually national CSOs that have experience

working on specific issues that are relevant to the programme, and have attracted a

reputation as serious actors and advocates on various issues on the national platform.

They serve the dual purpose of providing a national platform for the primary partners and

also supporting specific capacity building interventions for the primary partners. Below is

the list of partners for the different themes:

13

Building Local

Democracy Youth for

Development Land Rights

Primary

partners

Agricultural Council of

Tanzania (ACT)

KINNAPA (Acronym

for CBOs in 6 districts

in Kibaha)

SHIVIWAKA(an

umbrella organization

representing coffee

farmers in Mbeya)

IADO (Isangati

Agriculture

Development

Organisation)

Kiteto CSO Forum

TAWLAE

UVIMTA

Teachers‟ Resource

Centre (TRC)

Youth Partnership

Countrywide (YPC)

Tanga Youth

Development

Association

(TAYODEA)

TYC

Community

Research and

Development

Services (CORDS)

Mjumita

Morogoro Paralegal

Centre (MPLC)

NARAMATISHO

TAPHGO

Vijana Vision

Tanzania(VVT)

Strategic

partners

HakiKazi

Legal and Human

Rights Centre (LHRC)

Tanzania National

Association of NGOs

(TANGO)

National Policy Forum

(NPF)

Agenda

Participation

2000(AP 2000)

Haki Ardhi

A key contribution of strategic partners to the programme is that they provide a linkage

between initiatives at local level to national policy level. It follows that the choice of an

appropriate strategic partner is instrumental in enabling the programme to elevate the

policy agenda from local/regional to national level. Below is a diagrammatic

representation of the partners and their way of interacting.

Level Actor Activity

National

Parliament, Government

Ministries, ICSOs,

National CSOs, MS

Tanzania

Policy formulation

Policy Influencing

Lobbying & advocacy

Monitoring

National National CSOs

National NGOs

Strategic Partners

Policy influencing

Policy monitoring

Lobbying & advocacy

14

Monitoring

Local

(village,ward or district)

Local communities

District councils

Village councils,

Implementing partners

Policy implementation:

training, lobbying,

advocacy, monitoring

Implementation

A key strategic focus of the programme has been to encourage partners to focus their

interventions in similar districts to ensure coherence, create an opportunity to concentrate

efforts in one location. By working in similar districts, the programme also offers an

opportunity for cross learning, and eventually mutual reinforcement.

The CPS clearly identified gender inequalities as a key source of poverty, and emphasizes

the greater vulnerability of women and marginalised groups to rights violations and

denial. In particular the emphasis on women‟s access to land, which is largely curtailed

by social, cultural, and economic factors. The logical framework of the CPS provides

gender sensitive indicators. The programme also strives to always include women in its

implementation, and has thus far been able to ensure a 50% plus one ratio in comparison

to men in trainings, workshops, associations, and other forums intended for civic

engagement.

2.2 Partnership Approach

The CPS states that MS Tanzania‟s partnership approach places “emphasis on

organisational capacity-building and empowerment, which enables partners to initiate,

plan and implement their programmes within a framework of mutual recognition, linking

practical and strategic intervention…it is fundamental that the partner relation is

equitable and based on mutual trust and respect….”

All the programme partners are relevant in relation to the themes. Anti-corruption is

mainstreamed mainly in the work of BLD partners through the introduction of PET.

There is a deliberate effort to mainstream gender and ensure that the rights of women and

marginalised groups are addressed. All together, the partners are therefore a good fit to

the themes, which can largely be attributed to the significant investment in time and

resources in applying the MS thematic guidelines for selection of partners. A thorough

process that involved 15 steps (see Annex 4) was implemented over about six months.

There is also a good mix of partners i.e. community, national, mid-level, rights,

education, agriculture, land, also specific attention to marginalised groups. They were

carefully selected to ensure value towards attainment of CPS objectives. The selection of

strategic partners has been done carefully, with the former MS Tanzania programme not

only looking for expertise and national linkages for its district-based partners, but also

looking for strategic partners to whom they could add value. For instance, a key value

added with Haki Ardhi is the expansion of their district-based network for purposes of

research, capacity-building, as well as the opportunity to work together with AATZ to

establish the Tanzania Land Alliance.

15

In terms of implementation of the partnerships, the former MS Tanzania programme has

invested a significant amount of time and resources in developing and building

relationships of trust and mutual respect with the partners. In particular, partners

mentioned that their opinions are respected and that they determine the nature of support

and capacity-building effort. Of particular importance to the partners is the fact that the

former MS Tanzania programme sought to include them in the programme, as opposed to

asking them to change their plans and strategies to fit within the overall MS Tanzania

framework. It should also be pointed out that most of the partners started out as very

small organisations with limited capacity, but have grown, developed, and increased

influence and voice within their areas of operation and the wider civil society through the

partnership with MS Tanzania. For instance YPC is now able to demand for the election

register from the district, which was not possible only two years ago because of lack of

clout. Furthermore, the Teachers Resource Centre (TRC) - which was once not a very

well known organisation - is now being sought after by key national CSOs for advice in

the education sector.

Some Key Lessons from the Partnership Approach of former MS Tanzania Programme

(i) Clarity of guidelines for selection of partners is important, and in Tanzania, strict adherence

thereto largely enabled them to select relevant partners.

(ii) Need to have a long-term planning framework and regular reviews to ensure that all partners

are on track. Focusing on activities per se can make an actor forget the bigger picture. In

particular, the quarterly and annual reviews, both as a monitoring mechanism and a platform for

cross learning, were deemed very useful in this regard.

(iii) MS Tanzania staff „walked the talk‟, which means actually listening to the partners,

communicating regularly, being available for the partners, consulting them on their needs and

required support, and following through on commitments.

(iv) The working of partners in the same location (e.g. same district) albeit on different issues

(e.g. one could be on land rights while another is on women‟s rights) has a reinforcing effect

leading to effective action.

(v) The challenge with this approach to partnership is the need for openness, trust, sharing, etc on

both sides.

3. ACHIEVEMENTS

The MS Tanzania programme had a late start with the actual implementation only

beginning in May 2009. It should also be noted that the start of implementation also

coincided with the process of the merger between MS and AATZ, and the transition that

followed. These processes caused some delays in implementation. Yet the former MS

Tanzania partners mentioned that they did not feel the effects of the transition since their

activities continued to be supported, and former MS staff were continually available to

16

them. Nonetheless, the result of these delays is that whilst there have been a number of

activities initiated by the programme, the actual change, particularly with the situation of

rights holders is rather limited. It must however be pointed out, that a significant number

of building blocks that should steer partners towards attaining programme objectives

have been put in place. Below is an analysis of achievements per theme.

3.1 Building Local Democracy

The BLD programme in Tanzania had two main objectives: (i) to provide improved

primary education and agriculture development projects through LGAs (ii) to provide

services responding to the needs identified by ordinary women and men through LGAs

and SCs.

Tanzania has comprehensive policies in agriculture and education. The challenge has

been implementation for instance by ensuring community participation in and

development of DADPs, full constitution and operationalisation of school committees,

and the ability of citizens to hold their leaders accountable for implementation. These are

all areas in which the programme has supported partner interventions at local level.

Under objective one, the programme has created awareness amongst communities about

the importance of their participation in developing District and Village Agriculture

Development Plans (DADPs and VADPs). Specifically, the programme in collaboration

with HakiKazi Catalysts developed a popular version of the DADPs guidelines that are

available in Kiswahili. HakiKazi Catalysts then trained eight Ward Agriculture

Development Teams (WADTs), 65 Village Facilitation Teams and communities on their

rights, roles, and responsibilities in terms of developing and ensuring incorporation of

VADPs into DAPDs. However, the outcome of the training is yet to be seen as the local

government planning cycle is still in process, and establishing the extent to which the

stakeholders and former MS Tanzania partners are able to improve the quality of the

agriculture projects will only be possible at a later stage.

In order to improve access to information about village plans, budget and expenditure

records, the former MS Tanzania programme has secured commitment and facilitated the

use of public notice boards for posting of Whole School Development Plans (WSDPs),

Village Development Plans, budgets and expenditure records in 244 communities in nine

districts. This in turn should lead to increased awareness and focus of ordinary citizens on

ensuring the functioning of local government institutions. To enhance the uptake of

information made available on public notice boards AATZ (and the former MS Tanzania

programme) in collaboration with HakiKazi has trained more than 100 facilitators and

begun the process of establishing PETs committees, to track budgets and expenditures

within the education and agriculture sectors, in 370 villages within BLD and 23 wards

under the Youth for Development programme.

With regard to the education sector the programme has supported the formation of school

committees for primary schools in seven districts by working with the TRC Coalition

who are engaged with Tanzania Teachers Union (TTU) and Ministry of Education and

17

Vocational Training (MoEVT). The key intervention so far has been working within the

existing legal framework to ensure the full constitution and operationalisation of 193 SCs

in accordance with laid down guidelines. Specific manuals were developed for this

purpose. Efforts have also been made to create awareness amongst community members

about their rights, roles and responsibilities as custodians of primary education in

Tanzania, including the responsibility to hold SCs accountable. As a result, there is an

increased level of interest amongst women and men to be active in the management and

governance of schools which has been demonstrated through increased competition and

participation during elections for membership of school committees and in Village

Assemblies on issues to do with education. All this has had the effect of significant

improvements in the performance of the school committees.

Empowered by knowledge of their roles, and understanding the power they have to

influence the quality of education, the school committees have been actively playing their

role by formulating school development plans, monitoring school activities and

encouraging parents to respect and promote the right to education by all children. The

SCs have also been made aware of the working of the relevant structures at different

levels. The working relationships developed between the SCs and the ward education

office has also enabled the locals school committees have their plans factored into the

district and ward development plans. This has since translated into increased resource

allocation to some schools leading to improvements in facilities and learning.

Regarding objective two, the former MS Tanzania programme and its partners have

trained 65 Community Development Facilitators (CDFs) on how to conduct PET within

the government framework. It is assumed that the effective use of PET will empower

communities and result in increased accountability. In this regard therefore the key

building blocks to promote accountability and hence improved service delivery are in

place. Regarding work in the education sector, a central part of TRC Coalition‟s training

has been to empower school committees to develop and demand funding, via the citizens,

for implementation of WSDPs. To this end, the programme aims to influence the 2011

planning cycle, thus the impact in terms of better plans, more funding, better governance

and better quality education was not available at the time of the evaluation. However, it

should be noted that the SCs involve ward leaders, respected members of the community

(selected by the community), and therefore provide a link between the local government

and the school committee. The committee provides its plan to the village assembly for

approval, which is a way of ensuring broader community participation and ownership of

the process of developing education in the region. As a result of the effectiveness of some

of the committees that TRC Coalition has worked with, the Minister of local government

in charge of primary education has publicly promoted the formation and

operationalisation of these committees in other districts.

3.1.2 Concrete outcomes for rights holders

Concrete outcomes have been realised mainly in the education sector. Examples include

the following:

18

o With improved performance of the school committees, the level of commitment

of school leadership has increased. There have also been instances where the

committees have been able to influence the operation of the school.

o As a result of resuming their oversight function two school committees in Kiteto

have filed cases with the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau

(PCCB) against the school management and the village council for

misappropriating funds earmarked for furniture.

o The management of three schools has attempted to dissolve the school committee

as a result of demands for access to records of budgets and expenditure. The

reinstatement of the three school committees is being pursued by KINNAPA with

the district authorities.

3.1.3 Programme design

The partners selected for this programme are getting stronger with increased capacity

building support. Whilst most of the results and efforts so far have mainly been in the

education sector at local level, the potential to link and influence national policies,

especially in the education sector exist. Furthermore, the school committees appear to be

a good model of accountability with proven success i.e. a way of getting citizens at the

grassroots involved in aspects of governance and service delivery.

3.2 Youth for Development

The main intervention in this area has been through support to youth organisations -

TAYODEA and YPC - to conduct civic education, support the formation of youth

forums, which will eventually be supported to carry out PETs in relation to issues of

concern to the youth. Both organisations have also received support for internal capacity

development, information and documentation, and programme and financial

management. The objective of the youth for development component of the programme

is “Politically empowered young women and men influencing local government.”

YPC and TAYODEA with support from the former MS Tanzania programme provided

training to a total 2,325 youth in Kibaha and Kilindi districts in the period from July 2009

to October 2010. Thus, approximately 5% of the 59,300 voters in the two districts

benefitted from public voters‟ education meetings supported by the former MS Tanzania

programme. Furthermore, during the 2010 national elections youth in Kibaha and Kilindi

districts, via their membership of YPC and TAYODEA respectively, were mobilised as

election observers and contributed to the national report produced and delivered to the

National Electoral Commission (NEC) and Parliament by Tanzania Civil Society

Election Observers (TACSEO) - an initiative spearheaded by Legal Human Rights Centre

(LHRC). Whilst it was not possible to concretely determine how this voter education

directly influenced the participation of youth, a study commissioned by AATZ states that

as a result of the interventions supported by AATZ, both YPC and TAYODEA have

experienced, since commencement of the projects, a steady increase in the number of

youth requesting advice and support to engage in the political process – both as voters

and candidates.

19

As part of the effort to facilitate youth engagement and influence of local government,

both TAYODEA and YPC have established structures that create space for youth to

mobilise and discuss issues that affect them. These structures are at the village (youth

embassies and parliaments), ward (ward youth committees) and district (district forums)

levels. The youth forums, although still in their nascent stages, represent a promising

platform from which youth - both male and female - can discuss issues affecting them

and serve as a mechanism for disseminating information to youth, who have been hard to

reach because of exclusion from many a formal structure. The presence of female youth

in the forums is also an attempt to incorporate young women in governance processes.

It should also be noted that the 23 ward youth committees have been recognised by the

local government authorities and representatives have been formally allowed to

participate in the ward development committees (which are usually a closed space for

technocrats). As a result of the sub-district structures put in place it is estimated that

youth in 100 villages in Kilindi and Kibaha districts have started attending village

assemblies, which provides them with an opportunity to influence the planning and

approval of VDPs and budgets.

3.2.2 Concrete outcomes for rights holders

During meetings with the partners and rights holders, it was pointed out that there had

been an increase in youth participation in village assemblies, and during the past

elections. However, there is no data or evidence to back up this information. Even the

number of youth councillors in the 8 wards of operation of YPC could not be verified.

This points to a challenge (both YPC and AATz acknowledge this) of establishing a

monitoring and evaluation system that will enable them captures information related to

these changes. Nonetheless, there were two experiences that were narrated to the

consultant.

o Following the voters‟ education by TAYODEA, 280 pupils at Seuta Secondary

School in Kilindi District overcame an illegal ban preventing them from

registering as voters.

o Two District Youth Forums that were established by YPC and TAYODEA, have

both achieved formal commitments from the District Government Authorities to

fulfill their commitments to put aside 10% of their own source collection to meet

the special needs of women and youth (National Youth Development Policy

NYDP 1996).

3.2.3 Programme design

The foundation set with YPC and TAYODEA can be a good basis for further work on

youth and governance for AATZ.

20

3.3 Land Rights

Support for activities under this objective has been through four partners, namely:

(i)Community Research and Development Services (CORDS), a women‟s land rights

CSO, (ii) Ms Naramatisho, a cooperative organisation for pastoralists and Vijana Vision

Tanzania (VVT). (iii) Morogoro Paralegal Centre (MPLC) that provides legal aid

services, with a focus on supporting women have greater access to land, and (iv) Haki

Ardhi, a strategic partner that joined in early 2011 with the main aim of conducting

research, as well as supporting the capacity, especially knowledge, of partners on the

content and procedures of land ownership and acquisition as stipulated in the law.

Under objective one, CORDS has conducted a number of awareness and sensitisation

activities for women on land rights. These include the use of adult literacy classes,

branded publicity materials including bags, T-shirts and fliers promoting women‟s land

rights and right to education. CORDS has also trained and established anti-corruption

forums in 10 districts (six people trained from each forum) whose role among others, is to

spot, document and report to the group issues to deal with corruption in sale and

allocation of land. The impact of this awareness raising and training was said to be

increased participation by women in discussions to deal with land. MPLC has also been

involved in creating awareness about land rights. However, a meeting with rights holders

indicated that the awareness had not trickled down effectively.

The structures and institutions responsible for land management need to be in place and

operational so that women can obtain titles to their land. These structures and institutions

in the areas that former MS Tanzania‟s partners operate in are not in place, therefore

CORDS and MPLC have trained village councils, village land councils, and land use

committees on their roles and responsibilities, in order to ensure that they work

effectively. MPLC has also trained 75 people in similar structures and is providing 10

VLCs with stationery. MPLC has also gone one step further to encourage communities to

use their own resources to construct land registries, where the files will be kept and the

land titles issued. So far, nine registries have been constructed.

As part of their efforts to ensure greater access to land for women, MPLC has provided

legal aid on land matters to 165 clients so far (139 women and 26 men). However, due to

budget constraints, MPLC have been unable to follow through on this support. It is

therefore not possible to establish the actual impact of this support. Furthermore, CORDS

and MPLC have been instrumental in supporting community members in four villages to

make border agreements, the survey and demarcation of two villages, approval to land

use plans for two villages and have submitted seven village land certificates for approval

by the Commissioner of Land. And in 2010, CORDS was able to attain five village land

certificates for the communities that it works with. MPLC has also been able to develop

five land use plans. Naramatisho has also supported the development of land use plans in

two villages, and VVT has done the same in another 10 districts. Acquiring these land

use plans and certificates is a prerequisite for the future individual allocation of land to

women.

21

Significant progress has been made by VVT towards the attainment of objective two.

VVT has been able to support the formulation of land use plans in 10 districts that all

designate village forestland. VVT has also supported the establishment and training of 10

Village Natural Resource Committees (VNRCs) in participatory forest management, as

well as their other roles and responsibilities. It now remains to be seen if these

committees will perform their functions in a manner that will ensure that ordinary women

and men have safe and sustainable access to forest resources.

3.3.2 Concrete outcomes for rights holders

As mentioned in the findings above increased awareness of land rights has largely been

attained. The partners have been able to support rights holders make informed decisions

about land. For example, through support from Naramatisho, village residents voted out a

village land committee in Bagamoyo district for underhand dealings relating to village

land. An interim committee was in place at the time of the evaluation. Naramatisho is

now working to ensure that communities are able to make informed decisions without

help, and resist unlawful sale of their land.

The other concrete outcome has been the establishment of structures responsible for land

management, and training. The other anticipated outcome will be the acquisition of

certificates of customary ownership by women and more importantly real access to land

by women. Although this has not been attained as yet it should be noted that MPLC has

written notes for approval of customary certificates of ownership for 50 women.

3.3.3 Programme design

Land rights, especially the rights of women to access and own land are considered a key

part of Action Aid International‟s future strategy to ensure respect for women‟s rights,

participation and ultimately as a way of ensuring that more women are lifted out of

poverty. The former MS Tanzania‟s work under the land rights theme with its

combination of awareness, participation, accountability and ensuring access and

ownership of land by women could therefore provide lessons and input to the new AATZ

national strategy.

There is some evidence, as indicated in the sections above, that some of the local

structures of governance are embracing a culture of transparency and accountability.

Furthermore, the former MS Tanzania programme and its partners have been able to put

in place key building blocks like development of training manual, PET frameworks,

carried out initial training, formation of committees, support to information and

documentation and other capacity building activities. The challenge remains for the

partners to use the foundation set, and ensure the attainment of the objectives on their

own. It is expected that the existing capacity, though improved, may not be sufficient.

Inadequate funding may also hamper this effort.

22

3.4 Capacity Development

Capacity building support is provided in both programme areas, as well as organisational

development. It is worth noting that the capacity support is intense. Some organisations

receive funds for training of their staff through independently contracted service

providers, institutional support components in the budget, support for staff to attend

courses at the MS Training Centre (MS-TCDC), and the support given through the

People for Change Programme through advisors and inspirators.

The former MS Tanzania partners were keen to point out that capacity building support is

determined through a consultative process, which ensures ownership and commitment,

and that the capacity building support is relevant to each organization. They also

highlighted the coaching and mentoring support provided by former MS staff. The

partners were of the view that the coaching and mentoring provides more individual-or-

organization-focused support, and allows them to have more practical and hands on

support. It also supplements the training workshops very well.

Working with strategic partners also provides capacity building support and fosters both

horizontal and vertical linkages. However, there is need for caution about how the

relationship will be construed by both partners- a top-down approach would not be

effective. There also has to be full commitment by the strategic partner to the

relationship, and a clear understanding of what the specific value added is, to both

partners from the relationship. This has been addressed through clear formulation of

expectations in the partnership contracts, as well as the plan to follow up on this through

the quarterly and annual reviews.

The ET notes that due to the various capacity building activities, the need to plan and

coordinate these activities effectively is paramount in order to avoid duplication and

confusion. It was also noted that whilst it was apparent that the partners have received a

lot of capacity building support, all the partners have not yet provided a similar

investment in support to the rights holders. This is a challenge that the programme has

also identified, and its largely attributed to the initial emphasis on strengthening the

capacity of partners. The programme will use the remaining period of implementation to

ensure that partners lay more emphasis on their work with rights holders.

One area of capacity of the partners that a remains a challenge is monitoring and

evaluation, at both programme and organisational levels. During the workshop for

partners, it was pointed out that whilst they have been implementing a number of

activities, their capacity to document and record the changes is limited. This could also be

partly attributed to the use of the traditional LFA in planning. AATz (with the former MS

programme) recently applied outcome mapping in its process of developing a proposal on

land rights and found the approach relevant in terms of helping them identify the changes

and actors at various levels. This is an approach that could be relevant for future

interventions in democratic governance.

The ET found that Advisors play an important role in providing capacity-building support

23

to the partners. The partners considered the inspirator programme to be very useful. The

inspirators that the consultants met were clear about their role and were working with

specific staff to ensure that their support would be retained in the organisation after their

departure. However, it was clear in one instance that the scope of work, whilst very clear,

was too extensive for the given timeframe. The existing capacity of the organisation

would require more investment in time by the inspirator in order to attain the required

outputs. Furthermore, on a practical level, positing inspirators in December during a

month of celebration and holidays meant that they could not get to work immediately,

and in addition to the time required for them to acclimatise, this took off at least one

month of work from the planned three or six months periods.

Under the Training for Change programme MS-TCDC has provided intensive training

and technical support to 15 civil society partners and unions in Tanzania to engage on

evidence based accountability as a means to bring about just and democratic governance

(the Empowerment and Accountability course). The use of Tanzania based trainers, with

a good knowledge and understanding of key issues was seen as very positive. Partners

who attended these trainings found them very useful. However, the challenge is that

whilst there is a lot of theoretical underpinning, creation of awareness, as well as change

in attitudes, the course does not go far enough in providing more practical and hands-on

advice and/or follow-up support.

The Tanzania programme had 28 Development Workers (DW) over the strategic period

i.e. those whose assignments ended between 2008 and 2010.2 The role of the DWs was to

provide technical support to the partners, and they were all allocated partners to work

with. Whilst the DWs reports all indicate that support was provided, it was interesting

that no mention of the support by DWs was made during the interviews held for the

evaluation. This could partly be a result of the various changes that have taken place as a

result of the merger, it is however still surprising.

4. KEY LESSONS LEARNT

(i)The approach of working through the key sectors i.e. education, agriculture and land

rights, which are of great interest and of direct importance to communities, is key to

ensuring mobilisation, ownership, and participation of communities. Furthermore,

working with existing structures in these sectors is likely to yield quicker, more

immediate results.

(ii) Whilst the fast pace at which AATZ (and the former MS Tanzania programme) is

working to ensure that CPS activities are implemented will guarantee that key outputs are

attained, there is a risk that doing too much too soon will not be sustainable. Furthermore,

AATZ will need to be careful in managing the relationships with such partners, as letting

go of them too quickly may have the effect of throwing them into the deep, from where

they may find it difficult to keep up.

(iii) Whilst the partnership approach yields dividends in terms of relationships, as well as

2 Some of these were short-term

24

capacity building, it requires a significant investment in time and resources. The regular

reviews, coaching sessions, availability to follow-up on specific issues, and the patience

required to work and support the partners requires a lot of time.

(iv) As efforts are being made to incorporate citizens in the various legally established

governance structures, there is need for caution to ensure that the citizens are not

absorbed into the way of doing things and get compromised. The idea of having active

citizens‟ groups outside of the structures who monitor and support their representatives is

therefore paramount.

(v) The different types of capacity building need to be well coordinated within AATZ in

order to ensure effectiveness and avoid confusion.

(vi) Clear ToRs and realistic outputs are essential for the successful implementation of

the People for Change programme.

5. LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS

(i) The programme is still relevant in Tanzania. The significant building blocks are in

place, and heavy investment has been made with the partners, which is why AATZ

should consider continuing with the programme over the next two years, or absorbing the

partners that fit in their new strategy.

(ii) The partnership and capacity-building approaches are useful, and intense capacity-

building is required with regard to the community-based partners. In particular, the

partners favour capacity support that is demand-driven and adopts more of coaching than

formal training. In their words, “mentoring and coaching are far better and helpful than

conducting workshops”. AATZ should consider the use of similar approaches in its future

programmes.

(iii) Having a thematic approach to the CPS i.e. BLD, Land Rights and Youth for

Development, provided focus and direction for management of the partner portfolio. It

also gave focus to the partners. It is a useful approach that could be replicated in future

AATZ programmes.

(iv) Monitoring and evaluation is an area that needs a lot more attention to ensure that

results are captured. Monitoring and evaluation should also be a way of ensuring that the

support being provided actually results in concrete changes for rights holders.

(v) Outcome mapping is an approach that can better enable the measurement of changes

in attitude and behaviour. It has been used to develop a recent Land Rights project

proposal and found to be useful. It is recommended that AATZ consider using this

approach in future planning with its partners, as part of strengthening capacity in

monitoring and evaluation.

25

Annex 1. Terms of Reference

Terms of Reference

Summative evaluation of MS Country Programme Strategies and

programme support within the “Democracy Focus” 1. Background

In 2006, MS (now ActionAid Denmark in English) decided to focus all its programme

activities on democracy, which was considered an important strategic means for poverty

reduction. The „Democracy Focus‟ was developed within the framework of „Partnership

Against Poverty‟ as the guiding strategy for all MS‟ programme work in the South. The

Democracy Focus consisted of five themes: Building Local Democracy, which was made

a key feature in all programmes; Land Rights; Anti-Corruption; Conflict Management,

and Trade Justice (please refer to the respective Thematic Concept Papers). This strategic

change was negotiated with and accepted by MS‟ main back donor, the Danish Ministry

of Foreign Affairs (Danida). MS and Danida have a Framework Agreement, through

which MS receives app. DKK 156 million per year to carry out programmes based on its

own strategic framework and organisational capacity. It is a four-year rolling agreement,

which is negotiated in annual consultations.

Following the decision about the Democracy Focus, a Country Programme Strategy

(CPS) was developed in all the then MS programme countries/regions – i.e. Zimbabwe,

Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Nepal and Central

America. Each CPS, which initially covered the period 2008-2012, outlined the overall

thinking in relation to MS‟ involvement in the country/region in question. It defined the

themes and strategies to be pursued by MS as well as the geographical focus areas. It was

made mandatory for each country programme to allocate 50% of its resources to the

Building Local Democracy theme, while 30% could be allocated to a maximum of two

other themes and 20% could be used for innovative and country-specific activities.

The development of the CPS‟s was largely a participatory process, which built on lessons

learned and involved MS partner organisations and other CSO representatives as well as

programme staff, Development Workers, Policy Advisory Committees, consultants, etc.

Each CPS was subjected to an external appraisal, and an appraisal report with

recommendations for each country programme was elaborated. In some countries, the

existing partner portfolio was more or less maintained, while in others, a large number of

partners were phased out and new ones selected as a consequence of the new CPS.

During the first half of 2008, MS signed Partnership Agreements with app. 15-25 partner

organisations – all working within the Democracy Focus – in each of the above-

26

mentioned countries. External thematic reviews of the programmes within Building Local

Democracy, Land Rights, and Trade Justice were undertaken in 2008 and 2009. In 2010,

Danida carried out an external review of MS, which included country studies in Kenya,

Tanzania, and Nicaragua.

In September 2008, the General Assembly of MS decided that MS should proceed with

the process towards becoming an affiliate of ActionAid International. From 2010 MS was

appointed by ActionAid International to take the overall responsibility for the leadership

and management of the ActionAid theme The Right to Just and Democratic Governance.

In June 2010, the affiliation of MS was finally approved by ActionAid International‟s

General Assembly, and MS became a fully-fledged member of the ActionAid family and

changed its name (in English) to ActionAid Denmark (but maintaining Mellemfolkeligt

Samvirke or MS in Danish).

As a consequence of the affiliation, the MS offices in Nepal, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda,

Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Guatemala were merged with ActionAid in 2010 (and the South

Sudan office was closed). The programme portfolio of MS was taken over by ActionAid

in the respective countries, and the previous MS partner organisations became ActionAid

partners. In all countries, AADK and the national ActionAid organisations have signed

Cooperation Agreements, which specify that ActionAid is responsible for fulfilling the

objectives of the CPS‟s (which have been shortened to four years and hence will run out

in December 2011 concurrently with the individual Partnership Agreements).

From January 2012, MS – or rather AADK – will thus have no formal commitments to

individual partner organisations from the time before the merger with ActionAid

International. In future AADK will support national AAI organisations and their local

partners, programmes, and projects in line with Danida‟s Civil Society Strategy

(“Strategy for Danish Support to Civil Society in Developing Countries”) and with the

framework agreement between Danida and AADK that sets out the specific governance

focus, which is part of AADK‟s own global programme strategy.

A number of national ActionAid offices are currently in the process of reviewing their

Country Strategy Papers with the purpose of developing new 5-year strategies and

programmes. During 2011, ActionAid International is developing a new global strategy,

which will take effect from 2012. It is assumed that Governance will continue to be a

focal theme in the new global strategy as well as in many new country strategies

including AADK‟s own. Lessons learned from previous and ongoing AADK supported

governance programmes should preferably feed into the various strategy development

processes. It is therefore the intention of AADK – to the extent possible – to carry out the

evaluation in parallel with the CSP Reviews undertaken by the national ActionAid

offices. At the same time, the summative evaluation will serve as an important

contribution to both upwards and downwards accountability.

2. Objective

The main objective of the evaluation is to ensure that the lessons learned from the

27

implementation of the MS Country Programme Strategies in Zimbabwe, Zambia,

Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Nepal and Guatemala are collected and

analysed. The information will serve as documentation to the back donor Danida and as

strategic learning points for AAI/IGT as well as for the individual ActionAid

organisations in the countries of cooperation. The evaluation will also be used as an input

in the appraisal of new programmes proposed for AADK funding and contribute to the

overall evaluation of all AADK activities scheduled for the last quarter of 2011.

3. Scope of Work

The evaluation will include, but not necessarily be limited to, an assessment of the

following issues in each country:

The relevance of the strategic objectives and the themes selected to the national context

The relevance of the partner organisations selected in relation to the themes

The value and effectiveness of the partnership approach applied by MS

The commitment of the partner organisations in achieving the CPS objectives

The coherence between the CPS and the supported activities

The overall coherence of the strategy and the selected partner portfolio in relation to

the context – including the opportunities to link local programme activities to

national (or international) advocacy initiatives

The extent to which immediate CPS objectives have been achieved

The contribution of the programme activities to changes at policy level

The concrete outcomes for rights-holders (women, men, youth)

The long-term sustainability of the outcomes

The extent to which gender analysis has been applied and gender mainstreaming

sufficiently incorporated into programme strategies and activities

The extent to which capacity building of partner organisations has been sufficiently

incorporated into programme strategies and activities and the effectiveness of this

The contribution of the People for Change programme to achieving CPS objectives

The contribution of the Training for Change programme

Preliminary assessment of how the programmes may influence the new ActionAid

national strategies

4. Methodology

The evaluation team will use a participatory methodology with an emphasis on collecting

lessons learned, gathering best practices, and documenting illustrative cases.

The evaluation will consist of the following main parts:

Desk study

Kick-off seminar in Denmark

Country studies in Nepal and Tanzania, where the evaluation methodology for the

remaining country studies will be developed

Country studies in Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique, Kenya, Uganda, and Guatemala

28

Debriefing workshop in Denmark

The first step will be a desk review to analyse key documents (Country Programmes

Strategies, CPS Appraisal reports, thematic review reports, annual reports, Partnership

Agreements, etc.). This will be followed by a kick-off seminar in Denmark to establish a

common ground for the assignment through discussing the methodology to be applied

during the first two country studies (Nepal and Tanzania) and the key issues to be

explored in all countries. This seminar will be attended by the respective Team Leaders

for the Nepal and Tanzania country studies, by key staff in AADK and – if possible – by

former MS Country Directors.

The outcome of the seminar will be a preliminary inception note, which describes the

approach and methodology to be tested in Nepal and Tanzania respectively as well as the

main areas of focus in each country. The specific evaluation methodology for each

country will thus be developed during the first two country studies, but it is expected that

all country studies will include at least the following activities:

Review of Country Programme Strategy, reports from previous reviews and

evaluations of the country programme, quarterly and annual reports, and other

relevant documents

Individual interviews with former MS programme staff (where possible) and current

AAI programme staff and SMT

A workshop with all former MS partner organisations

Meetings with representatives of selected partner organisations

Field visits to selected communities and focus group discussions with selected rights-

holders

Meeting with Royal Danish Embassy representatives

Debriefing meeting with SMT of AAI in each country

When the two first country studies are completed, the respective Team Leaders will share

experiences, assess the usefulness of the methodology that has been tested, and decide on

the methodology to be applied in the remaining country studies.

When all country studies have been completed, the Team Leader for the country studies

in Africa will summarise the findings in a synthesis report.

A reference group consisting of experienced resource persons within governance will be

established in Denmark. The role of the reference group will be to give feedback on the

methodology to be applied and on preliminary findings and conclusions. Two external

consultants, two AADK Board members and one (non-Danish) ActionAid International

Governance Team member will be invited to participate in the reference group.

Before submitting the final synthesis report, the Team Leader will hold a debriefing

workshop with the SMT and International Programme Support Team of MS in

Copenhagen. The reference group and the former MS Country Directors will also be

invited to participate.

29

5. Outputs

For each country, the team will produce a country specific report in English of max. 30

pages (excl. annexes) based on a standard outline as presented in the inception note (see

section 4 above) including:

Observations, findings, best practice examples and major lessons learned

Recommendations related to AADK‟s strategy development, including issues to be

pursued through the planned overall evaluation of all AADK activities

Recommendations related to ActionAid national strategy and programme development

Recommendations related to possible AADK support to ActionAid partners beyond

2011

The deadline for the country specific evaluation reports is two weeks after each visit.

The preliminary inception note will be finalised based on the methodology developed

during the Nepal and Tanzania country studies.

In addition, the Team Leader will produce a synthesis report in English of max. 20 pages

describing the main findings, best practices and lessons learned as well as the key

strategic recommendations for the future.

The deadline for submitting the final synthesis report is 13th

June 2011.

6. Composition of teams

The team will be headed by a Team Leader (international consultant) who (in dialogue

with AADK) will compose country specific teams. Each country specific team will

consist of an international consultant and a national consultant specialised in democracy

and governance (except the Guatemala and Mozambique evaluations, which will be

conducted by one national consultant in each country).

As some of the county studies will run in parallel, three international consultants have

been assigned. One will cover Nepal, another Zambia and Kenya, while the third person

(Team Leader) will be responsible for the evaluation in Tanzania, Uganda, Sudan, and

Zimbabwe.

The following resource persons will join the team:

An AAI Programme Officer from another country

The AADK Programme Support Coordinator (country focal point)

A representative of ActionAid International IGT and/or Regional Offices

7. Timing

The evaluation will take place from February to May 2011. A maximum of 20 working

30

days is allocated for each country study (including report writing) – except Nepal and

Tanzania, which will have some extra days for methodology development.

To the extent possible, the evaluation will run in parallel with the CSP Reviews carried

out by the national ActionAid offices. Please refer to the attached tentative time schedule.

8. Background information

Partnership Against Poverty – MSiS Policy Paper 2005

Democracy Focus in MS 2006

MS Gender Policy 2007

Thematic Concept Paper for each theme

Country Programme Strategy for each country

CPS Appraisal reports for each country

Partnership Agreements & Project Documents

MS Guidelines for Thematic Programming

A MS Review of BLD Theme Strategies 2008 (synthesis and country reports)

Review of Personnel Assistance in MS 2008

MS Trade Justice Reviews 2009 (synthesis and country reports)

Land Rights Thematic Review 2009 (synthesis and country reports)

MS in transition 2009

MS ActionAid Thematic Review 2010

ActionAid’s Strategic Plan “Just and Democratic Governance 2006 – 2010” – the

Review Report

Strategic Concept Paper: The Right to Just and Democratic Governance (draft, Nov.

2010)

31

Annex 2. Itinerary

Draft Programme for AADK Evaluation in Tanzania: 14 February – 25 February,

2011

DAY TIME SUBEJCT

Arrivals:

Kitakaya Loisa

Sunday

13.02.11

Arrivals:

Ashanut Okille

Vince Martino

09.00 Team Meeting – getting organized

11.00 Meeting at AAI Tanzania with Country director

and head of programmes, SMT

12.00

Meetings at AAI Tanzania with relevant staff in

areas of democratic governance and the People

for Change coordinator- Albert, Wambura, Elias,

Safina and Sandra

14.00

Meeting with former MS staff: Kristian, Deo,

Scholastica and Martha

ALSO more in-depth meeting with People for

Change Advisor – Kristian, Kmani and Manja

08.00-

16.00

Meeting at the Danish Embassy

Meetings with Key resource persons and/or

organisations in governance in Tanzania

a)Yefred Myenzi, Director of Haki Ardhi

b) Geir Sunder, Land Rights expert and Director

of Accountability programme, DFIDKPMG

c) Policy Forum ( strategic partner) Semkae

Kilonzo

9.00-15.00

Workshop with partners ( 2 representatives from

each organization)- Land Rights thematic area (

CORDS, Naramatisho, MPLC,HAKIARDI )

NOTE- People for Change formats for partners

will be shared at the workshop

32

9.00-15.00

Workshop with partners (2 representatives from

each organization)- BLD thematic area ( YPC,

AP2000, IADA, SHIVAWAK,HKC, TRC

Coalition)

NOTE- People for Change formats for partners

will be shared at the workshop

09.00-11.00

11.00-12.00

Team meeting to discuss outcomes of the

workshops with partners

Discuss preparations for the field work

14.00-16.00

Meetings with other CSOs involved in

governance in Tanzania

a) Tanzania Human Rights Centre

TWAWEZA

b) TNRF

c) HAKIELIMU

d) TGNP

Report writing

Report writing

Arrival of Lea ( who will focus on People for

Change)

7.30

09.00-11.00

Travel to Kibaha

Meeting with Rights holders- (YPC)

People for Change sub-team to have more in-

depth discussion with YPC

11.00-12.00

Meeting with District/local government officials

12.00-13.00 Meeting with Partner- YPC

14.00-15.00

Travel to Bagamoyo Chalinze

15.00-16.00

Meeting with Partner- Naramatisho

People for Change sub-team to have more in-

depth discussion with Naramatisho

17.30 Travel to Morogoro

09.00-11.00

Meeting with Rights holders – MPLC

People for Change sub-team to have more in-

depth discussion with MPLC

33

11.00-12.00 Meeting with District leaders/Local council

officials

12.00-13.00 Meeting with partner- MPLC

14.00 Travel back to Dar

9.00-10.00 Team Meeting to reflect/discuss field visits

11.00-12.00

Meeting with strategic partner TRC Coalition

People for Change sub-team to have more in-

depth discussion with TRC Coalition

14.00-15.00 Meeting with strategic partner- AP 2000

10.0-12.00 Team meeting to prepare for the debrief

14.00-15.00 Meeting with CSP review team( if available)

15.00-16.00 Any pending meetings

9.00-13.00 Consultations with key stakeholders and writing

up document

14.00 Debrief

Saturday

26.02.11

Departure of Team

34

Annex 3. Lists of persons met and interviewed

Former MS Tanzania and Action Aid TZ staff

Aida Kiangi – Country Director, AA Tanzania

Yitna Tekalingne - Programme Coordinator

Albert Jimwaga – Just and Democratic Governance Advisor

Andrew Mhina – Former Manager BLD & Youth Programme, MS Tanzania

Deo Ngass – Program Accountant

Elias Mtinda – Agriculture and food security advisor

Joram Massesa – Accountability advisor

Kimani Njoroge – Organisation capacity building advisor

Kristian Andersen – Governance advisor (People for Change)

Manja Kamwi - Communication Advisor

Martha Jerom – Building local democracy advisor

Safina Hassan – Women rights advisor

Sandra sakala – People for Change

Scholastic Haule – Land rights advisor

Stanley Kachecheba -Education advisor

Partners Workshop participants

Amani Mwaipaja – Morogoro paralegal centre

Cathbert Tomitho – Hakiardhi

Davide chanjeghea – TAYODEA

Edward Massawe – SHIVIWAKA Mbeya

Evance Abdallah – HKC Arusha

Hezekiah Mwakasungula – SHIVIWAKA Mbeya

Israel Ilunde – YPC Kibaha Coast

Jimmy ongollo – law graduate

Jonathan Mwazembe – IADO Mbeya

Mary Mrosso – Hakiardhi

Matthew maguluko – Naramatisho

Nalogwa Shani – TRC Coalition

Samwelly Stanley – YPC Kibaha

Seela j. Sainyeya – CORDS

Sylvester Massawe – Morogoro Paralegal Centre

Focus group discussion at YPC

Abdallah Gurumu – Ilala

Baby mwidowe – Chairperson Kibaha Youth Forum

Grace Karashani – Member, country entrepreneurship

Israel Ilunde – Executive Director, YPC

Peter Emanuel – Secretary, Youth Forum

Samwely Stanley – Programme manager, YPC

Shauri Yombaomba – Member, Youth Forum

35

Upendo John Mbuji – Member, Youth Forum Committee

Focus Group Discussion: Kiziwa Village, Morogoro District

Rajabu Mvumiza – Member, Village Government

Juma M. Kibwana – „‟ „‟

Kasim I. Bogas – „‟ „‟

Ayubu Segumba – Chair, Hamlet

Kasim S. Kiwamba – „‟

Kiango M. Omari – „‟

Moshi M. Sanze – member, village government

Mwanzani M. Sanze – „‟

Abdallah O. Mgaya – chairperson, Hamlet

Saidi A. Mbano – member, hamlet

Asha M. Hamisi – member, village government

Shabani Mhando – member, village land government

Ramadhani Mohamed – Secretary, village land government

Hyasinta B. Kumbulu – member, village land council

Amina J. Zewe – member, village land council

Maimna Rajabu – member, village land council

Rahim K. Kigwa – member, village land council

Msomba A. Liwawa – hamlet representative

Mohamed Salum – member, village land council

Albogast E. Mabwe - ,, ,,

Sikitu Saidi – „‟ „‟

Amina S. Mlwale – ,, ,,

Asha Ahmad – member, village government

Rehema Shabani - ,, ,,

Fadhili M. Sanze - ,, ,,

Ally S. Mjengwa – chairman, Kiziwa village

Tamim A. Mkunize – Member, village land council

Others

Geir Sundet – Accountability Tanzania Programme

Rose Aoko - Twaweza

36

Annex 4. Good Practice: PCM Sequence for partner selection

1 Identification of possible partner & Reassessing Partner Portfolio

2 Invitation Letter

3 Partner Financial assessment

workshop (Followed by verbal

debriefing)

(1day)

Partner Organizational Assessment

workshop

(Followed by verbal debriefing)

(3days)

4 Written Organizational and Financial Assessment (Description of Results)

sent to potential partner for comments

5 Partner Recommendation Form completed by program and financial staff

6 Program Management Decision Point: Red light or Green Light by program

& finance unit based on Partner Recommendation Form

7 Letter from Country Director to Partner formulated providing background for

decision

Green light: Program Management Response letter

Red light: Program Management Response letter

8 Partner Workshop conducted (2 to 3 days):

Revision of LFA,

Budget linked to LFA,

Project Implementation plan formulated,

zero draft of Partnership Agreement formulated

Zero draft of Project Document formulated

9 Further Development of Partnership Agreements and Project Documents via

email with quality assurance discussion at program meetings

10 Partnership Agreement and Project Document sent to DK for approval

11 Formal Signing Ceremony of new partner at Program Office

12 Partner Baseline Workshop conducted

13 Quarterly Reflection and Learning Workshops conducted

14 Annual adjustment of partner project documents based on annual project

review workshop

15 Annual Thematic Countrywide Review Workshop based on - Thematic

results in relation to the CPS indicators