DESIGN FEATURES OF MASAF 3: UPDATE FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION

1. DESIGN FEATURES OF MASAF 3: UPDATEFORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION IMPROVING THE QUALITY IN SOCIAL FUNDS (SF) AS OPERATIONS WITH A COMMUNITY DRIVEN DEVELOPMENT (CDD) APPROACH: APRIL 11, 2005 N. Mungai Lenneiye, Sr Social Protection Specialist, AFTH1

2. Presentation outline • Beyond words 1. Development challenges in Malawi 2. Management and skills structure of PMU 3. Implementation arrangements 4. Institutional linkages 5. Preparation 6. Sustainability 7. Wrap-up: key lessons/challenges Form follows function

3. Beyond words… approach • Approach… kind of ‘filters’ that can be used to view a project or program. • Primary Health Care (PHC) approach had 8 elements; not a single project had them all. • CDD approach in the Africa region has five ‘features’ and not a single project has all 5. • Framework… a guide to action? e.g. Local Development (LD) Framework, Social Risk Management (SRM) Framework, etc. Form follows function

4. Beyond words… core focus Form follows function

5. Beyond words…empowerment • Information access • Participation and inclusion • Accountability • Local organizational capacity Plug these elements whenever empowerment appears in the approaches and frameworks. Are there operational implications? Form follows function

6. Underlying theme… I have the yam, and I have the knife (an African saying on power relations) Making community empowerment a cornerstone of decentralization: keep the yam, give them the knife! Background materials • Findings no. 233 • Paper on “Who has the yam, and who has the knife?” Form follows function

7. 1. Development Challenges • First generation SFs stimulate/use social capital. • Physical infrastructure is built by communities • Access (health, education, water, etc.) is increased. • Sectoral failures noted (staffing, O&M, technical backstopping, low ownership, etc.). • Little demonstrated evidence of improved outcomes: • New policies (PRSP/MTEF, Decentralization, MDGs, etc.) Form follows function

8. Issues… development challenges • How should SF respond to the MDGs? • What impact do MDGs have on sector-led planning and the CDD approach? • How does SF respond to Local Government Projects Form follows function

9. Design responses… • Selected MDG indicators for community action • (from 8 MDGs, 18 targets, and 48 indicator targets) • Contentious selection of lending instrument. • Bank unhappy about APL, Government very keen. • Need to stimulate community savings and investments • (Use of IDA funds for savings mobilization; community’s own resources for lending) Form follows function

10. 2. Management & skills structure • Management through components creates silos. • Direct funding takes place even without Local Governments (LGs). • Building on success of development communication is urgent and necessary. • Need to extend community accountability upwards. • Monitoring & Evaluation is slow to evolve. • Sectors are not too keen on direct financing. Form follows function

11. Issues… management • What kind of institution is needed? • Are PMU experiences relevant to Government management systems? Form follows function

12. Design responses…management • Operational requirements (deliverable sub-projects, Fiduciary requirements) • External demands (research, training, norms) • Internal needs (monitoring, learning) • Getting the KISS right (Knowledge & Information Sharing System) • Local Government concerns (staff, grants, etc.) • Performance management culture: experience mainly from private sector Form follows function

13. 3. Implementation Arrangements Form follows function

14. Issues…implementation • How can the roles of District Local Governments be expanded? • Can can issues of technical quality be better dealt with? • How can PMCs be made more accountable to elected Local structures and to communities? Form follows function

15. Design responses…implementation • Delivery benchmarks were developed (CSPC) • Roles of PMCs, LGs, CBOs/CBOs re-defined • Graduation criteria for LGs were defined • Measurement of inputs, outputs, and outcomes • Community to community (C2C) learning • Community Monitoring and Statistics Days, Community Score Cards, Citizens Report Cards, and annual poverty reports introduced. Form follows function

16. 4. Institutional Linkages • Resource allocation (to districts) to facilitate predictable planning. • Role of Local Government Ministries (with NLGFC, LGAs Administration) strengthened • Place of NGOs, CBOs, and private sector expanded. • Linking with MOF and MoLG over recurrent costs and MTEF (NTAC and SET) • Fostering broader partnership (NACCEA) Form follows function

17. Issues…institutional linkages • Can the adoption of indicative district resource allocation formulae retain the CDD approach? • Does a SF weaken decentralization or prepare the ground for deepening decentralization? • Are PRA tools used in SF more than ‘planning black boxes’ left to LGs? Form follows function

18. Design responses…institutional • Global IPFs done (whole project) • Intra-district resource targeting, NOT allocation, done. • Open-ended PRAs adopted to strengthen district-level planning • Support of communities with extended PRAs • ‘Planning black boxes’ still in place, unpacking has started (see Safeguards Toolkit) Form follows function

19. 5. Preparation • Human Development sectors (health and education) not fully mobilized. • Other key sectors (water & roads) mobilized • Getting MFI expertise on Board (‘clinics’ held). • Quality at Entry reviews done inside the Bank, but more looking back and less forward-looking. • Strong Government team with outstanding leadership Form follows function

20. Issues…preparation • How would you recruit a multi-sectoral team in a sector-dominated culture (IDA and Borrower)? • How do you respond to strong government ownership (e.g. on MFI issues). Form follows function

21. Design responses… preparation • Strong government team with clear mandates. • Collegial IDA-Borrower team members. • Getting responsive fiduciary expertise. • Integrating safeguards into CSPC. • Cost-effectiveness vs. economic rates of return utilized. • Flexibility retained (e.g. LGSP and LG MIS) Form follows function

22. 6. Sustainability • Malawi health sector losing staff: facilities with 30-35% staffing levels. • Government revenues are dropping, poverty levels are on the increase in Malawi. • Malawi decentralization program moving slowly even by standards of its designers. • Spheres and not levels of Government legally recognized in Tanzania (Village, Local Government, and Central) Form follows function

23. Issues… sustainability • Can capacity building be made demand-driven? • Are projects a sustainable way to provide resources to poor countries? • Can Village Governments be put on equal footing with other levels of government? Form follows function

24. Design responses… sustainability • Need to close service gaps for the poor • Responding to the needs of the vulnerable (market- and group-mediated income support) • Better linkage between investments and recurrent funding (NTAC and SET) • Institutionalized impact monitoring of community investments (NACCEA, the press, and MOF Quarterly PRSP reviews) • Single National Village Fund with CE Form follows function

25. 7. Wrap-up: key lessons • Social Funds as instruments for community empowerment (for improved governance). • Social Funds are not suitable tools to tackle decentralization (fiscal, HRD, fiduciary) • A strong government team is an asset, Bank staff need to be responsive. • Social Funds need to remain flexible and responsive to new policy/program challenges (e.g. MDGs) Form follows function

26. Lessons cont… • Cross-country learning possible (Malawi to Tanzania, to Uganda, to Malawi, to Tanzania). • Inter-country exchange of experiences useful • Consistency in team membership helps • Bank’s readiness to document and disseminate its learning from implementation experiences • Putting political commitment to good use (avoid danger of project being called ‘politicized’) Form follows function

27. Key challenges… existing SFs • Integration of development communication into general accountability mechanisms • Keeping SFs as “Funds” and not turn them into technical agencies. • Move from Social Capital for ‘closing service gaps’ to Economic Capital for ‘sustainability’ • Deal with operational implications of Bank ‘approaches’ and ‘frameworks’? • Is the future of SFs in Bank portfolio certain? Form follows function

28. Key challenges… new SFs • Ring-fencing the most recent tool for SFs:- • Central ministry/LG gets funds for capacity building • Dedicated sector funds given to SF • DfID for Improving Livelihoods • IDA in Malawi for Community Land Reform • IDA in Tanzania for • Marine and Coastal communities • Forest resource utilization • Community AIDS-related treatment in Zanzibar Form follows function

29. SFs give the poor a chance… To be participants, not spectators, in the alleviation of their own poverty Form follows function