140 likes | 275 Views
IFAD’S EXPERIENCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS. Introduction Key areas of concern Community-level processes Institutional linkages Financing Critical success factors. IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds. demand decision making/roles of CBOs inclusion/exclusion. A.
E N D
Introduction Key areas of concern Community-level processes Institutional linkages Financing Critical success factors IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds • demand • decision making/roles of CBOs • inclusion/exclusion A • local government • higher-level planning B • community contributions • credit vs grants C
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds Scope Short-term, output focus Community Development Funds Community Driven Development Long-term, empowerment focus
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds Definition “The term 'Community Development Funds (CDFs)' is used to refer to a range of typically demand-driven mechanisms (such as Social Funds, Social Investment Funds, Local Initiatives Funds) which normally channel grant funds to communities or groups for small projects they have identified.”
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds Key areas of concern – Community level processes A • Mobilisation/formulation of demand can be: • Rushed • Uninformed • (Government) short-circuited • (NGO) influenced • Supply-driven • Over-promoted • Ambiguous (consultation vs empowerment)
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds Key areas of concern – Community level processes (cont.) A • Unrealistic assumptions on: • Community cohesiveness • CBO inclusiveness • Inadequate attention to who decides, how and where • Disproportionate benefits to better-off (men) due to: • Prevailing power and gender relations • Lack of capacity and information • Unaffordable contributions • Type of micro-projects
Key areas of concern – Institutionallinkages B IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds • Limited information on: • CDF impact on institutional change • Presumed demonstration effect • Political and/or institutional environment sometimes unsupportive • Tendency to by-pass government • Potential interference with area planning • Conflict public vs private goods and unclear division of responsibilities between public and private sectors • Institutional location of Fund and sustainability unclear
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds Key areas of concern – Financing modalities C • Beneficiary contributions (cash, labor, local material) • Upfront contributions considered as proof of commitment • Actual contributions less than expected • Contributions often unaffordable/unavailable • No time (for labour & participation) • Affected by community size Should communities re-distribute?
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds Key areas of concern – Financing modalities(cont.) C • Credit vs grants • Undermining ‘credit culture’ • Artificial groups forming to access CDF funding • Subsidies are groups-based, benefits are often individual • Productive vs non-productive collective investments • Can production grants be used to “kick start” development?
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS - Community level processes A • Clear empowerment goal • Strong poverty, gender and institutional analysis (before and during implementation) • CBO representativity and democratic decision-making, analysed, supported and monitored • Major up-front investment in information and capacity-building (individuals, organisations, field staff and institutions) • …combined with mobilising entry-point activities
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS - Institutional linkages B • Careful institutional analysis and monitoring • Clarify public/private roles • Develop partnership with local government • Clear CDF institutional location and arrangements • Attention to promotion of CBO clusters & associations
IFAD’s experience with Community Development Funds CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS - Financing modalities C Contributions: • Flexible • Verified through consultation • Deferred, if needed • Sensitive to social/gender differences Credit: • Separate windows • Clarify concept of “group initiative” • Set clear eligibility criteria for “production grants”