Tilitonse Theory of Change and Expected Results Francis Matita Monitoring and Evaluation Manager

Presentation Layout Tilitonse Approach and Results Our Experience: Governance Projects implemented by Community Based Organization. Our Experience with submission Expectations at concept level.

M&E Approach Tilitonse Approach places importance on Results and this requires projects to do the following: Be clear on Results: What is it that the proposed project intends to achieve: relate to long term and short results of Tilitonse. Propose realistic results and means to achieving the results: Changes or solutions that are workable and achievable within the given time, resources and the expected quality. Demonstrate a clear and coherent connection and interrelationship moving from the lower level results to higher levels and between the results.

Lack of accountability Accountability is a situation or a process in which duty bearers are responsible or answerable to rights holders (citizens). Accountability is absent when: Duty bearers do not provide explanations why certain decisions were made e.g. why approved development projects stalled or not implemented. Duty bearers or service providers providing explanations that are not satisfactory Lack of accountability may be caused by Gaps in laws/rules (or their implementation) governing the issue at hand (eg LDF, CDF guidelines) Influence of cultural orientations e.g. Wamkulu salakwa

Lack of responsiveness Unresponsiveness can take three forms Where duty bearers/service providers DO NOT respond to citizen demands/voices – No feedback on issues raised Where duty bearers respond but do not respond favourably – “when we have resources, we shall repair the bridge, no time given”. Where duty bearers do not show consideration of citizen voices/demands – “will meet you in the streets”/ “ if there is no fuel, try to stand in middle of road and see if you will not be hit by a car”

Social exclusion Processes in which individuals or entire communities of people are systematically blocked from rights, opportunities and resources that are normally available to members of society and are key to social integration. Excluded groups may include the disabled, youth, women, PLWHIV etc Geographical locations can also be structurally excluded eg Likoma district Exclusion may be caused by the way rules are applied in the community. The rules may be based on culture/beliefs or may be influenced by the laws of the country eg witchcraft, FISP guidelines

How to conduct problem Analysis Identify symptoms of the problem Things you see in your community that suggest that there is a problem of either exclusion, accountability or responsiveness – e.g outbreak of cholera (lack of clean water access points) Identify CAUSES of the problem Assess the problem on the elements that cause or lead to problems as explained below

Elements for analysing your problem Distribution of power, wealth and opportunities – people with influence decision-making in their interest eg MPs and LDF/CDF Formal and Informal rules underlie how resources are distributed Formal: rules and procedures that are created and enforced through official channels e.g. LDF, CDF guidelines Informal: rules that are socially shared and usually unwritten eg traditions, cultural practices and norms that are treated as accepted ways of doing things Interests of the various groups including duty bearers and whether they will be for or against more inclusion, accountability and responsiveness.

Steps in conducting problem analysis Step 1: What is the problem to be addressed. Step 2: What are the underlying factors that make this problem exist? This Involves mapping of: relevant structures –VDC, ADC, DEC, COUNCIL, ministerial offices at district level, regulations, guidelines etc How these relate to the challenges identified? Step 3: Why are things this way? Involves assessing the problem on the key elements: Distribution of power, wealth, opportunities around the issue Formal and informal rules Stakeholder analysis (refer slide below) Step 4: What can be done? What actions/interventions can be proposed ?

Our Experience- CBO Governance Thematic AreaaWhere the focus has beenAreas of High Potential Improving youth representation and participation VDC and ADCTown and City Governance Structures Capacity Building for local governance structures Rural Governance Structures – VDC and ADCs Urban Structures Village Health Committees School Management Committees FISP Monitoring structure Improving management of service delivery Health Education, water, waste management School Improvement grant, LDF, CDF, FISP and drug management Exclusion of Women, Girls, disabled in local governance processes VDC/ADCGovernment, Key Decision making positions, Village Health Committees School Management Committees

Lessons from previous submission Lack of clarity of core governance problems: service delivery projects – not marching with Tilitonse Results (construction, CBCC). Use of broad concepts e.g. enhance accountability, responsiveness, inclusivity. Level of ambition was too high Unrealistic projects without considering capacity, time frame and resources available. Not meeting requirements- format, page numbers, Registration, specific sections of the application form. Same concept note submitted by different CBOs – arising from copy paste or using the same consultant. Mere listing of stakeholders- no analysis of role and contribution.

Expected Results from the concepts Long term: Changes in the behavior, policy, practice and service delivery of the "supply side" i.e. at the local level government. Intermediary term: Voice- changes in the behavior of Citizens, grantees, CSOs and other intermediary organizations who are facilitating engagement in governance.

Tilitonse Short terms Results Output One: Change in the capacity of the CBO as an organization / local structures to assist local people claim their rights. Output Two: Citizens access information on their rights: through activities conducted by the CBO-sensitization, workshops, media, website etc. Output Three: CBO undertaking initiatives to monitor implementation of programmes (LDF, CDF, FISP, SMC) and budget commitments made government (budgets for councils and districts). Output Four: Dialogue between citizens and CBOs, on one hand, and the government on the other. in influencing policies, strategies at local and national levels.

M&E Expectations Definition of results Propose process and tools that will be used to monitor the results. Risk- demonstrate having taken into consideration internal and external factors will affect the pro ject.

Thank You