Download
1 / 21
210 likes | 305 Views
Global review and cataloguing of capacity building organizations in water and sanitation for developing countries. Tommy Ka Kit Ngai, Ph.D . Director , Research Learning, CAWST & Romain de Oliveira, Cherubina Lepore, Marie Mattens, Taru Sibanda, Mark Sweet Cranfield University.
E N D
Global review and cataloguing of capacity building organizations in water and sanitation for developing countries Tommy Ka Kit Ngai, Ph.D. Director, Research Learning, CAWST & Romain de Oliveira, Cherubina Lepore, Marie Mattens, Taru Sibanda, Mark Sweet Cranfield University
CAWST – a new member of SuSanA We are a NGO established in Calgary, Canada in 2001. We provide training and ongoing consulting to governments, community groups, and local and international NGOs of all sizes. Our core expertise is in household water treatment, but we increasingly train on household sanitation, community health promotion, water quality testing, domestic rainwater harvesting, and project planning. Since 2001, we have conducted 400 training workshops in 40+ countries, attended by 7000+ people from 1000+ organizations.
Purpose of this study • To understand who are the capacity building organizations in the WASH sector, what they do, and where. • Identify potential gaps in the global capacity building landscape
Method • Examined 72 networks of WASH organizations(e.g. those associated with Cap-Net). • Reviewed the website of these organizations, and identify those that do capacity building (over 200 found). • Limit the study to those that build capacity of other organizations (104 found), rather than those that build capacity of end-users. • Developed a catalogue of 5 sections: • basic information of the builder (e.g. location, annual budget); • capacity building policy (e.g. top-down or bottom-up approach, themes of capacities targeted); • capacity building targets (e.g. who and where are the beneficiaries); • actions taken (e.g. training, networking, technologies taught); • and how the capacity building efforts are monitored and evaluated • Obtained information from website, questionnaire and phone calls.
Findings - headquarters location Among the 104 capacity builders…
Findings – year of creation Note: some organizations were established long ago, but only recently became capacity builders (e.g. SNV). The original creation date is plotted here.
Findings – annual budget Note: this is the total budget of the overall organization. Not all of the budget is used for capacity building activities.
Findings – capacity building approaches Top-down approach e.g. Change client’s organizational policy Bottom-up approach e.g. Train client staff Partnership approach e.g. Works together with client Community organizing e.g. Form new committee/organizations
Findings – monitoring & evaluation on capacity building activities
Summary and gaps • Capacity builders are mostly European NGOs, providing training on technical subjects. • There seems to be duplication of services in some areas, so better coordination and sharing of information may improve efficiency. • There are few indigenous capacity builders, and more is needed. • Capacity building activities concentrates in capital cities, and lacking in rural or more remote areas, where the capacities of the local organizations are the lowest and needs are the greatest. • Few capacity builders provide full suite of services (e.g. training + mentoring + consulting + networking + partnership). • Capacity building is a long-term process yet few builders build long-term relationship or provide long-term support to their clients. • Few capacity builders track how their clients perform after the capacity building support.
Limitations • Capacity builders that do not have websites are not included. • Website information are not always up-to-date or comprehensive. • Different organizations uses different terms, so it was sometimes difficult to categorize. Your suggestions and feedbacks are highly appreciated. Please let us know if you found any error or omissions. Thank You
