December 9th 2008

1. EWB Sector Strategy: Ghana Good Governance… or Project Management in Rural Infrastructure December 9th 2008

2. Goals • Bring in-Canada membership up-to-date with sector strategies • Generate some excitement around and connection to our overseas work

3. Outline • Key players in Ghana’s dev’t sector (5 min) • History of work and key lessons (5 min) • Current thoughts on bottlenecks in sector (5 min) • How we will help address them: Current strategy (10 min) • What this looks like on the ground: Nick Jimenez’s placement (10 min) • Questions (30 min)

4. Before we begin I assume you know… • That we partner with local African NGOs, gov’t and private sector players • That we build capacity of these players, as well as learn for our own benefit and to influence decision-makers • That we are now working in sector teams overseas – multiple OVS linked together

5. KEY PLAYERS IN GHANA Part 1

7. GoG Ghana Education Service (GES) Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) Ghana Health Service (GHS) RPCU MOFA GHS GES MOFA GHS GES COMMUNITIES (DOROTHY) DA

8. GoG Ghana Education Service (GES) Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) Ghana Health Service (GHS) DONOR PROJECTS RPCU MOFA GHS GES DPCU MOFA GHS GES COMMUNITIES (DOROTHY)

9. GoG Ghana Education Service (GES) Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) Ghana Health Service (GHS) DONOR PROJECTS RPCU MOFA GHS GES DPCU: Political and Admin Heads CBOs MOFA GHS GES COMMUNITIES (DOROTHY)

10. EWB in the Sector: A brief history Part 2

11. Focus on Wat/San and Agric Lesson 1: MoFA is key to success of rural famers and we can build a strong partnership with them. JFs and long terms OVS with MoFA – has developed into its own sector strategy and team…more on this in future updates! Sarah Grant at a village meeting for one of her Farmer Groups with MoFA

12. Focus on Wat/San and Agric Lesson 2: Wat/San work in Ghana is done through the District. If we want to make changes, need to partner with District Water and Sanitation Team…these report to the DPCU, which is the larger bottleneck. Luke Brown working with the District Water and Sanitation Team

13. Focus on Large Donor Projects Lesson 3: If we want more influence, we need to partner with the big projects, who both have the mandate of development projects on the grounds as well as the mandate of supporting the DPCU and collaborating with each other. What they are missing, though, is the perspective of the DPCU Kristy Minor with one of the field workers for CIFS – a CIDA-funded project for food security

14. Focus on DPCU Capacity Building • All development efforts go through this body • All planning is made by this body • They are one of the closest to the ground (of government structures) • Seems to be the biggest bottleneck in the overall development scheme

15. Key bottlenecks in the sector Part 3

16. Challenges on different levels GROUP OF ACTORS CHALLENGES • Don’t understand what the realities are at the DPCU (levels of capacity, number of staff, working resources) • Have dual mandate: on-the-ground results and capacity-building and often tension between the two • Have most of the power and least of the information Development Partners (large donor projects – UNICEF, CIFS, REP) Regional government (RPCU) • Very few staff (basically 2) and a lot of projects to coordinate, and are meant to be support 20 DPCUs • Large donor projects work through them, not consulting them • Very little resources, leading to underpaid and undermotivated staff • Difficult relationships with RPCU and donors – where they work under different constraints • Poor project and information management perpetuates poor decisions and planning District government (DPCU)

17. Challenges in overall system • Very poor flow of information between different levels • Very poor trust relationships between different levels • Decisions at many levels being made on inaccurate data or without realities of communities and DPCUs taken into account • VERY highly political environment – many different interest

18. Current Strategy: 3 Objectives Part 4

19. OBJECTIVE 1: For DPCUs to have current and accurate information on the status of the districts through regular Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). In other words, for DPCUs to KNOW what is going on in the district and to be able to improve their operations based on field experiences DISTRICT ASSEMBLIES M&E COMMUNITIES

20. OBJECTIVE 2: For DPCUs to make consistent and transparent decisions based on information, in planning for the development of the district In other words for DAs to base all their decisions off of what is happening on the ground. To use evidence in planning and thus getting the needs of the communities driving development DISTRICT ASSEMBLIES Transparent and evidenced based decision making M&E COMMUNITIES

21. OBJECTIVE 3: For the RPCU to be making decisions based on reliable information from DAs, and to use that information to drive development partners In other words, the RPCU to be coordinating and supporting DAs with accurate field realities, and DAs needs in mind. RPCU Government driving development Development Partners Using DA field information in decision making Field realities Then to use that to direct development partners in the development of Ghana, instead of following and supporting development partners. DISTRICT ASSEMBLIES Transparent and evidenced based decision making M&E COMMUNITIES

22. Summary So essentially what we are working for is that communities are going to drive DPCU in their decision making. • 1) Through more M&E, DPCU will know more about what is actually happening on the ground. • 2) then they will use that information to make decisions and plans and develop their districts. They will also communicate that upwards to the RPCU. • 3) The RPCU will use all the field realities from the DPCUs to make their plans and decisions, and use that information to drive donor projects to the beat of what the government wants for its people. GOVERNMENT WILL DRIVE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, AND COMMUNITIES WILL DRIVE THE GOVERNMENT

23. Strategy in a nutshell Focus on information and project management

24. DPCU – level change • At the district level, we will build a set of planning tools and behaviour change approaches that will allow us to effectively change the way districts undergo their (as per the framework above): • Field monitoring activities • Data gathering analysis • Planning and siting of infrastructure development

25. RPCU – level change • At the regional level, we will build a set of planning tools and implement a behaviour change approach that allows the RPCU to: • Use their field visits to gather data on the situation of the region as well as build their capacity to plan and analyse data. • Analyse their own data such that they have a clear picture of the region’s situation and needs and can advise policies accordingly. • Vet the districts projects in relation to their MTDP and their district’s current data.

26. Donor Project – level change • At the donor level, we will document the impact of their program’s design on the district’s ability to plan and influence their policies and practices. Specifically: • Change the way they impose their priorities on the districts, namely by giving them more time to plan, more resources to monitor and by valuing the existing MTDP. • Change the way they perceive the RPCU and increase its decision making power. • Change the content and the way they attempt to build district capacity (workshops).

27. Team (plus Dan Olsen) • Nick Jimenez (middle) • Partner: Saboba District Assembly • Work: objective 2 Jen Hiscock Partner: Regional Planning and Coordinating Unit Work: objective 3 Louis Dorval Team Leader Work: Keeping us in order, and communicating to higher players (no better picture available) (sorry Louis)

28. So…who’s doing Objective 1? We are holding off work on this area, because: • DPCU needs to learn how to use information before focusing on getting good information • DPCU needs an incentive to get good information • EWB team needs to focus instead of spreading thin ISN’T THAT DANGEROUS?!?!?! Getting DPCUs to make evidence based decisions when the evidence is imperfect?!?! Could that potentially be worst for Dorothy than decisions made on best hunches?!?

29. Part 5 ONE OVS’s STORY: Nick Jimenez at Saboba District

30. Partner: Saboba District Assembly • Three main workstreams 1 – meet immediate needs of DPCU 2 – work with department heads to store, analyze and use information • Build necessary skills to make this possible • Build the necessary tools to make such large analysis possible • Gather and organize necessary data to make these decisions 3 – work with DPCU heads to make decisions based on this information • Build the necessary skills to make evidence-based decisions possible • Show enough success to convince them that it is easy, and the best way to site infrastructure

31. Mutually reinforcing behavior changes needed! HEAD OFFICERS - DECISION MAKERS DECENTRALISED DEPARTMENTS – KNOWLEDGEABLE FIELD STAFF

32. Questions we are still struggling with… • Are we letting go of hygiene and sanitation promotion… because now a Ministry of Health focus? • Will donors ever let go of the control of their funds? • How much time does it take to ‘graduate’ a district? Do we have the resources to reach our goals? • Do we need to do all sectors (watsan, clinics, roads, dams, schools, etc.) for districts to adopt the behavior change? • What are the tipping points at the districts when creating a behavior change? How can we be effective at pushing districts over the tipping point? • What comes first: donor/MLGRDE policies or DPCU/RPCU capacity? • Is there a way to go ‘national’? • How do we grasp the ‘CIDA opportunity’… how do we make CIDA a leader within donors?