Manual on Community Based Approach to Local Development Project – Phase 2 (стр. 32 )

Maturity Level of CO

Oblast: ……………. Rayon: ……………. CO:……………………

CO formation date: ............. CO grafting date (if applicable): …………….

SN	Indicator*	Full Score	Acquired Score**
1	Frequency of CO-meeting since formation (>2/m, 1-2/m, 1/m, 1/2month, 1/3 month or less)	5
2	Attendance of CO-members in the meetings (>80%, 70-80%, 60-70%, 50-60%, <50%)	5
3	System of making consensus-based decision as agreed by % of CO-members present in the meeting (>80%, 70-80%, 60-70%, 50-60%, <50%)	5
4	Quality of account maintained in term of hardware e. g. ledgers, calculator, safe box etc. as well as software e. g. quality of financial management (excellent/professionally, very good, good, weak, very weak)	5
5	Number of community initiatives undertaken (from own sources as well as from external support) during last 6 months (> 6, 4-5, 3, 2,1)	5
6	Impact of the community initiatives on the governance of the CO and cohesiveness among the CO-members through lessons learned or conflict management (several changes introduced with strong cohesion; a few changes introduced with strong cohesion; a few changes introduced with medium cohesion; a few changes introduced with weak cohesion; no change introduced and weak cohesion among CO-members)	5
7	Quality of executive members (All members professional in their field; majority are professional; less than half are professional; None professional but capable to manage under guidance; Weak and even not capable to carry out tasks despite training)	5
8	CO is institutionally established considering minimum for criteria - registered, enrolled with VC/CC, has bank account and has established income source to keep the CO financially sustainable ( All 4 criteria holds, only 3 holds, only 2 holds, only one holds, none exists)	5
9	Frequency of conducting PAS (>2 times/year, 2/Yr., 1/Yr., first time just done, planning to do)	5
10	Clarity among general members about value of CO (useful for several purpose and for long period; for several purpose but not sure about long term	5
11	Level of experience in making community plan – in case of CBA-I COs (CDP prepared and sent to VC/CC, CDP prepared, CDP preparation date has been set, will prepare after receiving training, CO-MT has heard about need of planning but no initiation for making plan )	5
12	Level of experience CO has got regarding dealing with various development agencies (in case of CBA-I COs)- out of VC/CC, rayon authority, oblast authority, international donor, NGOs/private businesses (all 5, 4only, 3 only, 2 only, 1only)	5
	Total	60

* Each indicator must be perceived and weighted in perspective of general trend and not by assessing onetime event

** 1-5 score: 1 for worst and 5 for excellent

Conclusion

Maturity Level = (Total of Acquired Score/Total of Full Score)*100

> 80% means excellent (worth supporting by CBA)

70-80% means good (worth supporting by CBA)

60-70% means satisfactory, needs actions to improve (support from CBA could be considered)

50-60% means weak and needs hard work to improve (improvement needed before considering support from CBA)

<50% means serious, needs serious effort to improve (no support could be considered from CBA)

Annex – 24

Reaching the Vulnerable

A community will be empowered if its current situation of ‘inequality’ is gradually changed towards ‘equality’ and ‘equity’, means ‘all should get benefit but those who need more should get more’ – through affirmative actions.

Violation of Equity in community empowerment programmes often takes place in 3 areas: Geographic Coverage, Participation of Households, Benefit Distribution.

§  Geographical Coverage: Tendency of the programmes to work in accessible/semi remote Areas

§  Participation of Household: Programme is there but vulnerable targets get excluded from joining

§  Benefit Distribution: Vulnerable targets join but do not get tangible benefit

Reasons of Violation of Equity – Followings reasons are often attributed for violation of equity in above three areas:

§  Geographical Coverage- Failure of local government to coordinate with social mobilization agencies (due to lack of information, political reasons etc.); Higher cost of programme implementation in remote areas; Attitude of the field staffs (who influence decision of area selection)

§  Participation of Vulnerable Households- is affected by external as well as internal (their own) causes as given below:

External	Internal
-  Poor accountability of the programmes -  Limited sectoral coverage by the Programme mandate -  Poor commitment/ inadequate motivation for the staff	-  Physical inability of the vulnerable (in terms of opportunity cost/time constraint, lack of money for community saving, absenteeism, Age etc. -  Lack of faith on the Program -  Village environment that discourages the vulnerable -  Geographical isolation of their house making it difficult to participate in regular activities of the programmes

§  Non-Participation of Vulnerable Households in Benefit Distribution - is affected by external as well as internal (their own) causes as given below:

External	Internal
-  Assistance policies not pro-vulnerable -  Training (module, cost of participation) not pro-vulnerable -  Credit (purpose, duration etc.) not pro-vulnerable (N. A. for CBA) -  Grant (Technicalities, compensation etc.) not pro-vulnerable -  Insensitive/exploiting nature of the CO-leaders -  Lack of pro-vulnerable monitoring system	-  Lack of capacity §  To raise voice §  To handle cash §  Pay back loan in short duration (N. A. for CBA) §  To cope with training contents §  …………. -  Fear of project failure and indebtedness -  Farming trap -  Low credibility

Ways to Reach Vulnerable

1.  Ensure physical participation of the vulnerable. Bring them in the decision-making row through -

a.  Liberal policies,

b.  Targeted motivation

c.  Separate group (if they cannot be accommodated in current beneficiary groups)

2.  Ensure access in benefit through -

a.  Establish equity norm rigidly

b.  Change policies and procedures of –

§  Training (reservation, module, cost etc.),

§  Grant (totality approach, compensatory approach, housing, education, health etc.)

3.  Introduce disaggregated (pro-vulnerable) MIS.

4.  Introduce Special Package if necessary e. g. insurance (technology, health)

5.  Enhance access to locally available natural resources (land, water, forest)

6.  Divert to non-farm activities (use young generations)

In Summary, Positive discrimination (Human Right Based Approach) is required in terms of -

§  Allocation (of Budget) – provide resources that can be accessed only for the vulnerable

§  Participation (Full inclusion) – Ensure by various ways that the vulnerable participate

§  Preparation (for access to resources) – Create environment to enable them to have access to resources

§  Distribution (in equity term) – Introduce social justice and ensure that they get benefit (on the ground that they have equal share on the grant or natural resources)

Annex – 25

Details on Need Prioritisation

At an appropriate time, call meeting of the general members, ensuring participation of 80% or more participation. Invite the representatives of VC/CC to take part in the meeting as they will provide useful information on problem ranking and will share experience of other communities in the area.

Present the result of the analysis (Section 4.2.2) and seek opinion of the participants on the analysis and invite them to identify genuine problems (i. e. real need) that require immediate attention of the dwellers or to forego those problems which emerge as ‘wants’ and could be addressed by outsiders at some point of time in future.

Expectedly, some of the problems will be dropped out from the list upon full consensus (due to such reasons as not being a common problem, too costly, too complicated etc.). Reaching full consensus about dropping or ranking of the problems may not be easy. Hot debate may arise among the dwellers. RIU-team must remember that they are there to facilitate the process of decision-making and not to impose their own idea or subjective judgment to reach agreement abruptly or by command. To avoid any imposition, the dwellers must be asked to respond on the scientific methodology as given in Table (below). The end result will automatically drive to ranking of the problems.