Facilitating Active Civic Engagement: From Consultation To Participation

FACILITATING ACTIVE
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT:
FROM CONSULTATION TO
PARTICIPATION
Learning from local communities through
work with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
(WASH) in South Africa and Zambia
A publication supported by the Australian Department

of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Oxfam Australia, and The
Alliance Centre for HIV, Health and Rights of Key Populations
Traditionally, in development, those
in health focus on health; those
in education focus on education;
those in WASH, on WASH. But as
development workers we need,
instead, to trigger those things that
will stimulate the community to take
action, not only on one narrow issue
but on the many that concern them
David Mwamba, WASH Programme
Manager, Oxfam GB in Zambia
FACILITATING ACTIVE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT:
FROM CONSULTATION TO PARTICIPATION
Learning from local communities through work with Water,
Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in South Africa and Zambia
Published by Oxfam Australia in South Africa
Address: Suite 1B, Strathway Building, Strathmore Office Park, 305 Musgrave Road, Durban, South Africa, 4001.
Tel: 27 31 201 0865
Alternative address: 132 Leicester Street, Carlton 3053, Victoria, Australia. Tel: + 61 39 289 4444
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.oxfam.org.au
ISBN: 978-0-620-71326-9
April 2016
Copyright: Oxfam and the Alliance Centre give permission for excerpts from this book to be photocopied
or reproduced provided that the source is clearly and properly acknowledged.
Disclaimer: The views in this publication are those of the respective authors and do not necessarily rep-
resent those of Oxfam or any funding agency. The interview and review process was participatory and
consent around content and inclusion of personal information was given to Oxfam by participants.
Author: Ricardo Walters

Editor: Caitlin Martin
Cover photograph: Alexia Webster/OxfamAUS
Photographs (South Arica): opening spread and page 69 by Matthew Willman;
page 106 and 113 by Max Bastard.
Photographs (Zambia): page 34 by Matthew Willman; page 22, 55 and 93 by
Alexia Webster; page 12 and 114 by Ricardo Walters.
Design: Design for development, www.d4d.co.za
Printing: Hansa Print
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A shared intention 2
Acknowledgements 3
Acronyms 4
Whats this all about? 5
The Context: A background to AACES and WASH 10
1. THEORY OF CHANGE 14
2. STEPS 26
3. PRACTICES 52
4. PRINCIPLES 66
Concluding thoughts 108
Endnotes 110
Bibliography 112
Whats this all about? / 1

A SHARED INTENTION
A note of support from The Alliance Centre for HIV, Health and Rights of Key Populations.
For a second time, The Alliance Centre is proud to be articulates the fundamental approach we will use as
associated with the content outlined in this book. In we nurture our movement building work with Linking
this next volume, articulation of key learning has grown Organisations of the Alliance in Africa. Though this ini-
both in maturity and in intention, and we are excited tiative is at its inception, we foresee the content in this
about its application in our work. volume significantly steering our strategies as we chart
our engagement.
As a Centre within the International HIV and AIDS Alli-
ance offering thought-leadership on programming for We are looking forward to the development of a third
key populations, the method of engagement described piece to this series, one we will be actively involved in
over the volumes in this series provides an evidence shaping and supporting. Through our collaboration with
base for us to root our process of work in. We are con- Wendy and Urvarshi from the Oxfam Australia team,
fident that these key learnings constitute a framework we are affirmed in our belief to seek partnership, build
for us to shape the argument that resonates with our on comparative advantage, and jointly add value to
core intent: to walk in solidarity with communities as community strengthening, the effect of which will long
they assert themselves to claim their rights and see outlive our direct support.
their health needs met.
Flavian Rhode
The rich content shared in Volume 1: Facilitating Civic
Engagement through Consultation especially the DIRECTOR - Alliance Centre for HIV, Health and Rights
process outlining how to stimulate active participation of Key Populations
has provided a constructive theoretical outline to
underpin how the Alliance Centre aims to approach its
regional influencing work, addressing the HIV, Health
and Rights of Key Populations. The Theory of Change
The Alliance Centre for HIV, Health and Rights of Key Populations is an initiative of The International HIV and AIDS
Alliance, to locate thematic expertise and technical leadership for work with key populations in particular, Com-
mercial Sex Workers, LGBT people, and People Living with HIV within the Global South. The Alliance is a global
partnership of some 40 civil society organisations working on HIV, Health and Human Rights across four continents
who, in turn, support thousands of in-country implementing partners. In its work, The Alliance exercises a bias
towards most vulnerable populations, promoting a human rights programming approach among the marginalised,
socially excluded, and disproportionately vulnerable; its vision is ending AIDS through community action. The
Centre aims to build the capacity of national civil society and regional organisations to promote equality and rights,
to generate intelligence for advocacy, and to facilitate improved access to health services for key populations. It
prioritises learning from good practice in order to develop, promote and popularise transferable methodologies
and principles effective for responsible, high-quality Key Populations Programming.
2 / Whats this all about?

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We hereby acknowledge the following people and organisations for their contributions to this book:
David Nonde Mwamba, Joseph Pupe and Chantry Mweemba, from Oxfam Great Britain in Zambia
Wendy Lubbee, John Nyamayaro and Urvarshi Rajcoomar from Oxfam Australia in South Africa
Through your tremendous support, vision, insight, dedication, commitment and guidance evolved the AACES
program in Zambia and South Africa to be more than just a Water, Sanitation and Hygiene programme. The
heart of the programme was about improving peoples lives by expanding their voice and agency in matters that
affect them.
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to Keepers Zambia Foundation, Village Water Zambia, Young
Womens Christian Association and Peoples Participation Services in Zambia, and Hot Girls Fancy Stitch in South
Africa, for so generously offering your time to share your stories and experiences. Your work, in general, and your
contributions, more specifically, to this book are truly valued and it is hoped that your experiences will be an
inspiration to others who wish to change their lives.
A very special thank you to Chief Ishiwambuto of Lumbo Ward and Chief Imamuna of Imalyo Wardin Zambia who,
through your commitment and strong leadership are focussed on building lives and inspiring people in your ward
to be their own agents of change.
This exciting journey started in 2015 when Ricardo Walters, the author, once again took up the challenge
to produce the next adaptation in the series Facilitating Civic Engagement. We would like to express
our profound gratitude to Ricardo for his guidance, gracious support, and passion, and for producing
another insightful document.
Oxfam Australia in South Africa

ACRONYMS
AACES Australia Africa Community Engagement M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

Scheme MDIC Maputaland Development and Information
ACWSI Access to Clean Water and Sanitation Centre
Initiative MEL Monitoring, evaluation and learning
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome NGO Non-governmental Organisation
APM Area Pump Mender NHI National Health Insurance
AusAID Australian Agency for International OAU Oxfam Australia in South Africa
Development
OGB Oxfam Great Britain in Zambia
CBO Community-based Organisation
PPCR Pilot Project for Climate Resilience
CLTS Community-led Total Sanitation
PPS Peoples Participation Service
CCPC Community Child Protection Committee
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
CREATE Community-based Rehabilitation Educa-
RAPCAN Resources Aimed at the Prevention of
tion and Training for Empowerment
Child Abuse and Neglect
DDP Democracy Development Program
TU Tholulwazi Uzivikele
DFAT Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
VCT Voluntary counselling and testing
(Australia)
VWZ Village Water Zambia
ECD Early Childhood Development
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
GBV Gender-based violence
WATSAN Water and Sanitation
HAPG HIV/AIDS Prevention Group
WDC Ward Development Committee
HBC Home-based care
ZAFOD Zambia Federation of Disability
HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus Organisations
KZF Keepers Zambia Foundation ZAPD Zambia Agency for Persons with
LIMA Lima Rural Development Foundation Disabilities
4 / Acronyms
WHATS THIS ALL ABOUT?
Winding its way through pit latrines and floodplains, through village school clubs and widows
savings groups, past Chinese contractors and bridges, from the World Bank to the seats of rural
local government, stretching between Africa and Australia, the pages below contain stories of
ordinary people, making extraordinary progress, in the places they call home.
That story is viewed through the lens of the Australia WHAT HAS GONE BEFORE?
Africa Community Engagement Scheme (AACES), a
community-led water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) This book is the second volume in a series of publica-
initiative implemented in South Africa and Zambia by tions focussed on identifying principles and practices
Oxfam Australia and Oxfam Great Britain, respectively. for effectively facilitating the active civic engagement of
communities and civil society organisations.
It is not a case study. It is not an evaluation. It is,
instead, a reflection on approaches that stimulate The first volume, Facilitating Civic Engagement through
responsiveness in citizens and communities based Consultation: Learning from local communities through
in their strengths and enable more confident expres- the NHI-Accountability Project in South Africa, pub-
sions of their civic voice and agency. lished by Oxfam Australia in February 2016, draws
directly on the experience of the organisations and
It is offered as an affirmation optimistic, but not ide- communities that participated in Governance and
alistic of the potential of community-driven action to Accountability in the Health Sector: a Peoples Policy
produce change, within and without. It is offered as an for Health in South Africa, an action-research project
encouragement to development workers, policy makers implemented through a partnership between Oxfam
and programmers about the potential of community Australia in South Africa, the Global Health Unit at
and the power of engagement and participation in the Monash University in Melbourne, and the School of
lived experience of others to refresh, revitalise and Health Sciences at Monash South Africa.
inspire.
The research project operated across three provinces
Sustainable change is almost always hard-won. in South Africa between 2011 and 2013, assessing the
Development implementers often paddling upstream degree to which processes for health policy reform are
through unpredictable currents can take the first step generally open to public participation and, in particular,
to cease the striving that too often comes with inter- the provisions made for public participation in the
vention: to climb out of the boat of their own uncertain development and implementation of South Africas
devising, and step into the river where the action is. To National Health Insurance legislation.
risk, and trust the tide. To participate, and find, in that
place, others who have learned to navigate the river Working in partnership with three community-based
through more familiar channels, sufficiently provoked organisations, Oxfam Australia in South Africa and
by their presence to journey new courses together. Monash South Africa explored how democratic

processes for the introduction of the NHI in South Explore the hypothesis that the principles, practices
Africa might be more participatory, inclusive and repre- and steps surfaced in Volume One in relation to
sentative of civil society at its most basic level. Through health policy reform are not context specific, but
the project, community-based partners were supported are in fact transferable, able to be applied across a
to design and implement a process for community range of issues.
consultation, specific and appropriate to their particular
local context, that would make the emerging political Test the applicability of the practices, steps, princi-
discourse on the NHI at national level accessible to ples and theories to a traditional development proj-
their respective communities in ways that promoted ect offering service-delivery and basic commodities
engagement and dialogue. through WASH.
In 2015, two years after the conclusion of that project,

Oxfam commissioned a process for process reflection INTENTION
and concept analysis, seeking to surface from the
It must be emphasised that this publication is not
direct experience of NHI-project implementers and
intended as an evaluation of the Oxfam WASH project
community members, significant learning related to
in South Africa and Zambia. It is not a systematic sum-
approach, ways of thinking and ways of working in order
mary of the results and outcomes of that initiative, nor
to better characterise good consultation. That anal-
a narrative description of activities, or a thematic case
ysis distilled an initial set of practices and principles
study. As is standard practice, the WASH project that
of approach, describing consultation as a first step
offers the lens for this work has been formally evalu-
towards stimulating and strengthening local community
ated for effectiveness and impact through a mid-term
engagement.
review (Roper, 2014) and an end-of-program report
(Roper, 2016).
ADVANCING A STEP: FROM
CONSULTATION TO PARTICIPATION This document, by contrast, explores
Volume Two in the series seeks to build on the foun- along with complementary volumes in
dations laid by the previous book, exploring similar the series, those capacities, qualities
dimensions of approach and response through the and capabilities in people that make
entry-point of a Water, Sanitation and Hygiene project
it possible for them to respond in life;
(WASH) in two Southern African countries.
the mechanism through which that
Applying the same analytical lens and frameworks, response unfolds; and the corresponding
Volume Two aims to: enabling or stimulating practices and
Reinforce the Theory of Change established in behaviours of organisations involved
the first volume, and expand its articulation and with communities in development.
interpretation.

community experience, knowledge and resourceful-
Enabling/stimu- ness?; How do we work with communities to pro-
lating practices mote their leadership and response to issues, and
and behaviours of to learn from them?; How do we better promote
organisations active civic engagement, and build personal agency
for action?
Capacities, qualities In synthesising and analysing experience generat-

and capabilities ed through the WASH experience, this publication
in people - the attempts to contribute towards a better understanding
mechamism through of the mechanics that drive community response, active
which they respond citizenship and broad-based civic engagement. That
discourse is hardly complete or exhaustive. The book
is a tool a second round in the series from which to
build a more robust knowledge asset of principles for
approach, dynamically improving as new experience
is identified and added, reviewed, refined, edited and
adapted.
This publication has been developed with the hope that:
The lessons learned and reflected will contribute to

promoting a more supportive, appreciative, enabling
PROCESS: GENERATING THE
environment within civil society and the public CONTENT
sector for organisations seeking to stimulate and
Content for this volume was generated from several
facilitate authentic community consultation, and for
sources: a desk-based literature review; multiple inter-
local communities seeking to amplify their own voice
views and discussions with Oxfam teammates respon-
on issues material to their own lives.
sible for the administrative, strategic and programmatic
Its content might offer insight to programmers, coordination of the WASH work in South Africa and
development practitioners and policy-makers about Zambia; interaction with the full complement of AACES
practices and principles that stimulate responsive- partners at the final OXFAM-AACES Partners Reflection
ness in citizens and communities, especially among Meeting in Livingstone (February 2016) through a par-
those who are traditionally marginalised, owing to ticipatory workshop; and visits to each implementing
socioeconomic and political statuses. partner and their respective community teams, particu-
larly in Zambia.
The material might provoke discussion among
organisations and governments seeking to con- Throughout, simple story-telling and reflective conver-
tribute to social transformation in the post-2015 sation formed the basis of the approach and experi-
development era: How do we work better to tap into ence, the foundation for reflection and analysis.

STRUCTURE: A FRAMEWORK FOR Components include:
ANALYSIS 1. A THEORY OF CHANGE, recognising consul-
Consistent with Volume One, this document reflects tation as the first in a sequence of stages
on the experiences and strategies of two distinct types that trigger participation, leading progressively
of organisation involved in supporting community con- towards active, mature civic engagement by com-
sultation and public participation through the AACES munities. The Theory of Change can be thought of
WASH project. as What we believe.
It draws on those experiences in order to propose 2. A sequence of STEPS for primarily interme-
effective, legitimate approaches STEPS, PRACTICES diary organisations wishing to support com-
and PRINCIPLES that might be useful to: munities towards engagement, response and action,
based on the presence of certain environmentally
Intermediary organisations who play a enabling preconditions necessary for effective
supporting role to organisations that, in turn, facilitation.
work directly with people in communities.
Intermediaries act in solidarity with commu- 3. A set of common PRACTICES essentially,
nity-based organisations, offering technical assistance, replicable ways of working primarily for CBOs
capacity-building, financial resources, program advice operating at the community level. These practices
or advocacy support to strengthen the ability of local appear commonly among those CBOs reporting
organisations to work properly and deliver on their strong community participation as a result of their
objectives. facilitation approach, despite differences in organi-
sational identity, geography, and social context.
Community-based organisations (CBOs)
that work directly within specific local com- Collectively, the steps and practices can be thought
munities; contributing to transformation by of as What we do.
delivering programs and services that meet
4. Reflecting on the many stories shared, an
the development, health and justice needs of people in
assortment of PRINCIPLES emerges: essen-
the places where they live.
tially, transferable ways of thinking about how the
The document is organised around several components work happens; the character of the approach. The
of practice and response. The components are com- principles describe simple conditional concepts for
plementary; interrelated but not linear or sequential; a response and facilitation of response that achieve
way to think about how response happens within com- predictable outcomes: that if we apply a certain
munities, the impact it produces, and the behaviours of action according to a particular value, then we can
organisations seeking to stimulate and learn from it. anticipate certain results in the way that communi-
ties respond, across a range of issues, topics and
themes. The principles can be thought of as How
we behave and What we value.

THE FOUR COMPONENTS
The components are complementary, interrelated but not linear or sequential,
a way to think about how consultation happens, and what impact it produces.
THEORY OF CHANGE
What we believe
PRINCIPLES
How we behave and What we value
STEPS PRACTICES
What we do as: What we do as:
Intermediary organisations Community-based organisations

THE CONTEXT:
A BACKGROUND TO AACES AND WASH
As Margaret Roper records in her end-of-program report of the Oxfam Australia Africa
Community Engagement Scheme (Roper, 2016):
The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and and increase the opportunity for the Australian public
Trade (DFAT), through the Australia Africa Community to be informed about development issues in Africa. The
Engagement Scheme (AACES), funded the Oxfam Com- Oxfam program goal was to improve the health and
munity Led Access to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene quality of life of the poor and vulnerable in targeted
(WASH) program in South Africa and Zambia. Oxfam areas of Zambia and South Africa. Within this goal,
is a global confederation of 17 affiliates dedicated to there are five Oxfam objectives:
fighting poverty and related injustice around the world,
through working together to achieve greater impact 1. Increased access to and the effective use of
by their collective effort. The Oxfam global program improved, integrated and sustainable water sup-
in South Africa and Zambia is being implemented in plies, sanitation and hygiene services
targeted communities, where common themes present
2. Reduced WASH-related inequalities in the delivery
an opportunity for linked programming and learning
of services to women and vulnerable groups in the
towards positive, sustainable change in the lives of
target areas
people living in poverty.
3. Strengthened capacity of stakeholders to manage
The AACES WASH program was implemented over
and implement WASH programs on a sustained
a five-year period (2011-2016) and aimed to enable
basis
Australian NGOs and their partners to contribute to the
DFAT strategy for Africa, through a partnership program 4. Improved WASH governance and effectiveness
focused on community-based interventions across the
sectors of water, sanitation and hygiene, food security 5. Documenting and sharing the learning that informs
and maternal and child health. policy, public engagement and program develop-
ment and growth
The AACES objectives are threefold: that marginalised
people have sustainable access to the services they Oxfam worked in partnership with a number of organ-
require; Australian aid policy and programs in Africa isations in South Africa and Zambia to implement the
are strengthened, particularly in their ability to target program. These organisations worked directly with
and serve the needs of poor and vulnerable groups; community structures and members in the targeted
10 / The Context
areas. In Zambia, the partners worked with government The focus was not only on the program elements, but
agencies such as the local authorities, Zambia Agency also on empowering processes, developing and mento-
for Persons with Disabilities and the Zambian Police ring strong and well-functioning structures and institu-
Service to deliver the different components of the tions at community level and through its partnerships
program. In addition, organisations and individuals with civil society organisations and relevant government
were contracted over the lifespan of the program to structures. The aim was to establish platforms and
provide technical assistance and or capacity building networks whereby communities could influence govern-
of partners to support and deepen implementation ment structures and duty-bearers.
practice. Organisations such as Community Based
Rehabilitation Education and Training for Empowerment
(CREATE) focussed on disability-inclusion, Training and As stated in the design document:
Resources in Early Education (TREE), Equal Education sustainability, in this program, will be
(EE) (advocacy in South Africa), and Resources Aimed reflected in knowledgeable, skilled and
at Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect (RAPCAN)
confident individuals and communities;
supported the program in South Africa. In Zambia, the
Young Womens Christian Association (YWCA) focussed quality WASH facilities and services;
on anti GBV campaigns, empowering community mem- adequate WASH systems and processes;
bers particularly women to participate effectively in and strong well-coordinated community
decision-making and action to combat gender violence structures and duty-bearers.
and child abuse. The Zambia Federation of Disability
Organisation (ZAFOD) supported a focus on disability,
while the Zambian Police Service contributed expertise
around child protection.
The Context / 11
If people are properly activated,
then they take responsibility for
contributing to and sustaining the
development benefits relevant to
their own lives
Village Water Zambia
12
13
THEORY OF CHANGE
COMPONENT 1
THEORY OF
CHANGE
14 / Theory of Change
The AACES WASH initiative through The Australian own development; not defaulting to duty-bearers in
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) the state, or to development organisations, to simply
enabled Australian NGOs and their partners to contrib- supply or provide; communities would need to find
ute towards strengthening community-based interven- confidence and competence to exercise their voice
tions around water, sanitation and hygiene. The broad and constructively engage with duty-bearers and with
aim of the partnership was that marginalised people the public structures accountable for the delivery of
have sustainable access to the services they require. services; communities would need to engage with their
own localised distribution of power within households,
Oxfam chose to respond to this opportunity in a quite neighbourhoods and districts in order to address
particular way. Instead of delivering WASH services questions of inclusion, equitable access for all, and
and infrastructure, it focussed on strategies to achieve protection of the vulnerable.
sustainable access to water and sanitation by building
the capacity of communities to, themselves, facilitate This was an ambitious vision, and a seemingly indirect
sustainable WASH outcomes. This required that WASH approach to implementing what, on the surface, was a
be seen in an integrated way, an interrelated set of water and sanitation service-delivery project. Substan-
public and relational health issues with long-term tial change would be necessary at the levels of pro-
development implications. Adopting this perspective gramming, local community action and public service in
to community-based WASH interventions rather than order to satisfactorily achieve the goal.
the considerably simpler direct delivery of water and
sanitation infrastructure meant that success of the But, at a fundamental level, development work is all
Oxfam approach rested on the ability of communities to about change.
engage with power relations within all spheres and at all
levels of society. Over the course of a development process, movement
happens so that, by the end of that process, something
To satisfy Oxfams projected vision for change, com- is different better to how it was before. Quality of
munities would need to engage with their internalised life has improved. Attitudes have shifted. Laws have
perception of their own power, rights and responsibil- reformed. Systems have adapted. Some aspect of
ities taking up initiative and leadership around their transformation is always the goal.
If change is the result, a Theory of Change is an idea to explain how that result comes into
effect, and how it might be produced, and what it might lead to.
Theory of Change / 15
Volume One of this series of publications Facilitating (Consultation is extensively described in the first
Civic Engagement through Consultation: Learning from volume of this series, exploring the NHI-Account-
Local communities through the NHI-Accountability ability Project in South Africa). Community-based
Project in South Africa began the work of constructing organisations and Intermediary Organisations can
a simple Theory of Change: an explanation for how be helpful aids to facilitating consultation. Organ-
and why change occurs. Based on analysis of stories isations are not necessary in order for people in
and experiences generated from communities and communities to meet together, think together, talk
community-based organisations over the course of that together, but their appropriate presence may help
project, it suggests that: that process move more smoothly.
1. Civic engagement the active responsiveness of 5. Consultation and participation, although com-
citizens and other community members to issues monly used as interchangeable terms are not the
that concern them is an expression of the innate same thing. Consultation is an action, at its most
strength resident in every community. Every com- authentic practised by those seeking to support,
munity has the capacity to express leadership and to stimulate and to include others who are most
initiative, hopefulness towards the future and will to central to an issue. Participation is an effect, cat-
act or change. alysed by successful consultation, and an indicator
of increasing local ownership and initiative. Good
2. These innate capacities can be suppressed, consultation jumpstarts the process of active civic
oppressed or diverted by a variety of factors, many engagement.
of these related to the unjust or improper exercise
of power by a disabling domestic or socio-political 6. Consultation need not be an end in itself, a discrete,
environment, or by a disabling paradigm (e.g. where isolated, once-off event. Instead, the ultimate goal
communities are accustomed to being passive of good consultation is active civic engagement
beneficiaries of occasional commodities through by members of a community. Achieving this goal
supply-driven development approaches; or comfort- may require a process of ongoing consultation
able with the well-intentioned provision of charitable over time.
organisations; or frustrated and disenfranchised by
the routine disregard for their human and civil rights;
or silenced through lack of access to rights and PPS: Consultation is not an event. It was
services that build dignity and agency). an ongoing process throughout the project,
at every stage of the project. There are different
3. As much as the strength to respond and engage levels of consultation, with deepening effects
can be suppressed, it can also be stimulated. as trust grows. Many aspects of the programme
Engagement the expression of responsiveness evolved naturally, because we were consulta-
can be the fruit of a process at work in people and in tion-based. Activities became demand-driven
communities. - because they were generated by the community
who wanted to respond to issues that surfaced -
4. Consultation can be a first step in that process, if not needs-driven or supply-driven.
appropriately facilitated.
Consultation
Accountability Participation
A SIMPLE
THEORY OF
CHANGE
Monitoring Ownership
7. Consultation and participation are distinct stages

along a sequence of responsiveness by members of PPS: As an organisation, our own M&E
a community, leading towards accountability. expanded to M&E AND Learning (MEL) as we
got closer to the communities. We learned what
8. If consultation is appropriately and effectively facil-
was working best by participating ourselves with
itated, it will lead to greater levels of participation
the people, so we could adapt, but also because
both in quality and in magnitude by communities
they were already looking to see what was working
in framing health priorities and health policy; sub-
and what wasnt. We could not afford both in
sequently, if policies, programmes and initiatives
time and in money to monitor the communities
are framed by local communities themselves and if
in any detail. The community facilitators people
community members have a legitimate opportunity
within the community, members of that commu-
to shape content, they will take ownership of the
nity take responsibility for self-monitoring and
issues most important to them. Once they own their
reporting results that can later be verified. Proper
issues they will take action to monitor progress
consultation creates a road for all parties, the CBO,
around those issues, and grow in confidence, ability
the INGO and the community, to walk together.
and expectation with which to hold duty-bearers to
account for poor public service.
THEORY OF CHANGE:A THEORY OF RESPONSIVENESS
See point 17 on page 20.
IND
IVI
C DU
IVI A
C
Consultation
L
ty
ili P
ab
GEN
ar
UT
nt
O ER
tic
H
ou
ipa
IT
AT
Acc
IN G
tion
POWER

POWER

G
Moni
SIN
C OM
W
S
IT

hip
AL
RE HI
tor
N
MU
E XP
ON
rs
in

N
ne
g
RS
AL
Ow
PE
/
CO
LL
ER
Activ T
EC ation IN
T IVE

9. Consultation leads to participation; participation
builds ownership; ownership promotes monitoring; Activated communities exercise their
monitoring leads to accountability; and account- agency to demand accountability
ability is a high-level demonstration of active civic and services.
engagement.
Village Water: The Ward Development Commit-
The work undertaken through the Oxfam AACES WASH tees (WDCs) were a concept of government to
project goes some way towards expanding on this initial decentralise governance to local level. WDCs were
rudimentary Theory of Change. there, loosely, in theory and on paper, but were not
systematically guided in their work through Ward
Through a variety of engagements conversation Plans.
and joint process analysis, experience-sharing and
story-telling, critical discourse and reflection AACES The WDCs were established in practice and the
partners in Zambia and South Africa have significantly process of developing Ward Plans were intro-
deepened the concepts and themes surrounding what duced through the WASH work under AACES. The
is emerging as a Theory of Responsiveness (see the strategy supported a demand-driven approach
diagram on page 18). to development where communities put pressure
on government for particular service-delivery that
10. On power: Civic Engagement is a manifestation an was relevant to them. This was very different to the
expression of self-governance and self-determin- traditional supply-driven approach, where the state
ism by individuals and communities, as is their local provides what it thinks all communities need, and
choice and action for change. These expressions communities are passive recipients of things they
are possible because of the agency the personal dont really want or need.
power of human beings to think and act in the
places where they live. The WDCs really became a vehicle for their com-
munities to influence the structures. Typically,
11. On approach: In building capacity to achieve health influential people in the community like the com-
or development outcomes, organisations need an munity leaders will call for a community meeting.
approach that is conscious and respectful of this People gather and talk about what they feel they
human agency. Change is not in the hands of the need and what action they need to take. Usually
development workers or organisations. People in public officials with access to government like
their communities individually and collectively the elected Ward Counsellors are invited, and
are responsible for their own change, for their the meeting is officially minuted. Those minutes
personal growth, for achieving health outcomes are then submitted to the Ward Counsellor to
that must belong to them, and not be prescribed or represent the communities interests in local gov-
imposed by an organisation or structure. ernment meetings, generating demand.
12. On approach: If organisations become more con- 16. Good consultation produces constructive out-
scious of power and agency, then their development comes: increased information, increased awareness,
work is ultimately about supporting the deepening increased acknowledgement and recognition of
expression of agency by individuals and communi- vulnerabilities and responsibilities, shifted attitudes
ties, by supporting people to generate power within. and clarified vision. These outcomes of good
consultation are catalysts to the next stage in the
13. On approach: People grow from their own formative process: participation.
experiences and have capacity to think freely, to
make independent choices, to take individual and 17. The expanded Theory of Change a Theory of
collective action. But they need not strive unneces- Responsiveness includes an added dimension:
sarily in isolation; they need not be abandoned and Activation. Individuals and communities may feel
left to their own devices. People are vulnerable, but a deep sense of ownership of an issue (such as
still viable, and this offers organisations the oppor- access to water, or better health through better
tunity to support and accompany communities as sanitation). It may touch them intellectually and
they act on their strengths, provided this can be emotionally. But ownership is not the same as
done in appropriate, non-paternalistic ways. activation. As ownership deepens, engagement with
the issue builds, until the will to act translates into
14. On approach: if appropriately facilitated, consulta- specific action of some kind. The activation stage is
tion, participation and ownership are stages in the evidenced by increased expression of voice, agency
response process that support individuals and com- and initiative; increased demand for services and
munities generate power within, and build agency. rights; and increased utilisation of services.
Activation, Monitoring and Accountability are stages
in the response process where individuals and 18. The AACES experience suggests, most strongly
communities express their will and power to more evidenced in Zambia, that sound facilitation of
response produces not one, but two effects.
actively shape the structures within the society
around them. a. Consultation catalyses the progression of people
through deepening stages of engagement
15. On consultation: Consultation can follow many
towards Accountability and Influencing.
forms but, ultimately, it is about an enabling space:
safe, non-prescriptive, non-directive. It is a space b. At the same time, the process builds social
for communities to surface issues, analyse, priori- cohesion a willingness of members of the
tise, and set their agenda. At the same time, it is a community to work together, even though they
space where CBOs can play a convening role, and may come from different backgrounds and
learn from the community based on what emerges experiences so that engagement, awareness,
in their discussion. Creating enabling space does choice and will to act deepen from individual
not happen automatically; if CBOs are playing a to interpersonal (e.g. household; neighbour),
convening role, it is necessary that they do the work to communal (e.g. neighbourhood; village), to
of relationship-building in order to identify appro- civic (community; district; political). Facilitation,
priate relational entry-points in order to hold the consultation and public participation conspire
space well. to build community, leading to such effects as
inclusion.
19. The Theory of Change is a useful tool for devel- 20. Participation is two-way. It does not only happen
opment programmers and community members by the community that shows signs of greater
to visualise their progress, to recognise stages involvement, or engagement in processes, or uptake
where they may be stuck either in terms of the of services. Organisations facilitating the response
participation level or the social cohesion level to process CBOs and intermediaries, agencies
reflect on the reasons for this blockage, and identify and public servants are also participants in the
strategies to become unstuck. For instance, could process, though in a space that does not belong
it be in one scenario that response is held up at the to them. These organisations are participants in
participation stage, but not progressing to deeper the process of development with people, in the
ownership and action, because cohesion is not spaces those people inhabit in the spaces they
developing beyond discrete interpersonal interac- call home and have to position themselves so as
tion towards broader communal engagement? Could not to impose on the hospitality, relationship and
it be in another scenario that pleasingly good prog- invitation of the community to join in on its process
ress is being made until the response process gets of change and response. For facilitative organisa-
stuck at the accountability stage, because collective tions to presume otherwise is to severely dilute,
action by a community gives up power by defaulting compromise and misrepresent their legitimacy in
to duty-bearers to supply and provide for needs at that community space.
their discretion, instead of continuing to express
power and constructively demand for services to
which they have a right?
The Theory of Change is a useful tool for development programmers and community
members to visualise their progress, to recognise stages where they may be stuck either in
terms of the participation level or the social cohesion level to reflect on the reasons for this
blockage, and identify strategies to become unstuck.
WHAT DOES ACTIVE PARTICIPATION LOOK LIKE?
HOW IS IT RECOGNISED? WHAT ARE THE SIGNS?
Imalyo Ward Representative: People recognised the PPS: People were using local material and adapting
benefits of using toilets for themselves. We see other them for use in construction so that they could do the
communities where toilets have gone to waste because work from their own resources. For instance, people
the right preparation work has not been done, and were using ash, termite mound and clay instead of
people were not given time to really think about the concrete. People changed their behaviour: Lumbo Ward
need to change. And yet, in other communities, where has been declared Open Defecation Free (ODF), the
there have been champions nearby, they are imple- first ward of its kind. We have seen since the WDC was
menting from their own initiative without being directly established, local leaders expecting that civil servants
sensitised. be brought into the community to address issues of
school governance, with an increased expectation of
During the time that the community facilitators were those servants to do their work. The WDC is being used
being trained, the Chiefs were invited to attend that as a weapon for the betterment of the community, and
event to learn what the champions were being trained is leading to better connection between community
on. When we went back, we could realise that the com- members (e.g. action to address the early closure of
munity was getting involved when they started doing schools by teachers).
the construction of their own pit latrines. Every person
covered their own costs for their own latrine, using
local supplies to construct them. Some people who had
never been trained or sensitised were copying their Min. of Health, Luampa: From our perspective in the
neighbours and constructing latrines on their own. Ministry of Health here in the district, we noticed that
there was more curiosity from the communities. It was
Even nearby villages who were not yet sensitised no growing from the end of 2011 and through the PRA
one had visited them yet started implementing the activities. The community had started to realise that
WASH activities. Villages nearby wondered why, for something wasnt okay in their area and that something
instance, a partner organisation vehicle was visiting needed to change. And people were asking all kinds
a particular community. It made them curious: they of questions about this process that was taking place;
wondered about the objectives. Sometimes someone critical questions, not only complying with the project
curious would walk around to that village, and get to or receiving services. They wanted to understand what
see others implementing the activities and begin to was going on, and what this would mean for them.
ask questions.
KZF: High levels of attendance at the community and sanitation issues surfaced and were interrogated,
meetings throughout the process. Even times when people began to erect latrines, paid for from their own
these meetings were convened at short notice, they resources. And a few early adopters people who very
attracted big numbers, and more and more they quickly began to implement these activities at their
included people living with disabilities, who were either household level influenced the behaviour of the many.
brought to the meetings by their own families (who Other neighbours got activated to put up their own
would not do that before), or felt welcome enough to latrines, and drying racks. And even started to innovate
attend on their own. and personalise the latrines different styles, different
looks, different decorations. And as some structures
During the time when boreholes were eroded over time, people monitored how well they were
being dug, the community members joined holding up, and repaired and replaced them to keep
spontaneously to gather sand, and stones, them functional.
to bring local materials. Some didnt bring
anything, they just wanted to be there to
be a part of the events, and to contribute David was a school drop-out. He had the eagerness
to digging the pits. People volunteered to improve his life, but couldnt find direction. He
was taken on by Village Water Zambia in 2005 and
themselves to do it.
trained as a pump mender and well-digger, working
with other trainees to dig between 10 and 20 wells per
year, sub-contracted by Village Water Zambia. As we
PPS: We recognised participation when community developed our own expertise and technology, David
members started to identify local issues based on was introduced with a group of three other diggers to
what was worrying them personally, going beyond just manual well drilling. These were men who had no idea
making lists of things they needed. We recognised what a bank looked like, or what it meant to have an
when people started to analyse their own information account, earning only about 200 kwacha per year.
to interpret what it meant for them, and to plan how to
respond to that data. We recognised ownership when During the training period, group members were
they realised what they needed in order to benefit their encouraged to think about applying their skills to
own lives, and could identify what they could do them- become an enterprise.
selves, and where they needed to lobby duty-bearers
to assist. David always expressed a strong desire to
learn and do more, and by 2013 he decided
he could go it alone. He formed his own
PPS: During the PRA in the communities, part of our company and employed his own staff.
consultation process, people quickly began to partici-
pate. Some very personal stories and experiences were Now, he is drilling wells for private individuals in the
shared, and the communities started to analyse these community as an independent contractor, and doing
issues what was at the root of them. As the hygiene some sub-contracted work for Village Water as well.
He costs all his own jobs and negotiates his own training in manual well-drilling. She took to the process
contracts. Since that time, he has become financially immediately. Since that time, she has become one of
stable. He has built a house for himself. He has created the most reliable well-drillers produced to date by VWZ.
employment for others. He even hired a deep-drilling She formed her own company, on an even bigger scale
rig and paid a technician to operate it so that he could than David, operating four teams of drillers simulta-
have a borehole installed in his own property where neously. She has now negotiated contracts with the
the ground was not suited to drilling with his manual council and government all over the province, and still
drilling technique. sub-contracts for VWZ and others from time to time.
She has built a house for herself on her own property,
and has constructed other homes available for rent in
the community.
Gracious was an ordinary housewife, serving in her
community as a community WASH volunteer and
And shes gone beyond well-digging; shes
promoting good hygiene. She got involved with VWZ in
2004, and we immediately recognised her strength and
developed herself to be a contractor for
determination. We connected her to the opportunity construction, and is now building latrines for
for training in well-digging, and from there to other schools in the area.
If people are properly activated, then they take responsibility for

contributing to and sustaining the development benefits relevant to their
own lives (Village Water Zambia)
COMPONENT 2
STEPS
for intermediary
organisations
26 / Steps
Intermediary Organisations play a supporting role to For those organisations that seek to work with commu-
organisations that, in turn, work directly with people nities through good consultation responsible, respon-
in communities. Intermediaries act in solidarity with sive, respectful, appropriate consultation a balance
community-based organisations, offering technical needs to be struck between sensitivity and discipline,
assistance, capacity-building, financial resources, process-control and process-freedom, anticipation
programme advice or advocacy support to strengthen and surprise. This kind of consultation is best achieved
the ability of local organisations to work properly and through participatory, facilitative approaches.
deliver on their objectives.
Learning from local communities through the NHI-Ac-
For the AACES WASH programme, Oxfam Australia in countability Project in South Africa observed that
South Africa and Oxfam Great Britain in Zambia acted in consultation where active civic engagement and
the capacity of Intermediary Organisations. accountability are the goals is not achieved through
any single, standard, mechanistic, one-size-fits-all
Volume One of this series of publications Facilitating model.
Civic Engagement through Consultation: Learning from
local communities through the NHI-Accountability There may well be, however, a series of systematic
Project in South Africa explored the characteristics of STEPS to guide an Intermediary Organisation seeking
good consultation, and its pivotal role in catalysing and to strengthen community-driven initiative and influ-
strengthening the resolve of community-based organ- encing in ways that are strategic, efficient, responsive
isations and communities themselves to express civic to local capacity, and appropriate. For Intermediary
action for change, development and accountability. Organisations that work to support the efforts of com-
munity-based organisations, these STEPS answer the
question What do we do? in relation to contributing
It became clear through that analysis that the
towards broad-based civic action and influencing.
consultative process the action itself and its
effects is just that: a dynamic process, not a The STEPS have been extracted and synthesised,
discrete event, playing out organically at the illustrated through a variety of practical experiences
throughout the life-cycle of the AACES Project as it
local level in ways that are not always linear
was implemented at Intermediary Organisation level
or easily predictable. by Oxfam Australia in South Africa, and Oxfam Great
Britain in Zambia1. The STEPS are supplemented and
complemented by similar, reinforcing stories in the later
section of this document focussed on PRINCIPLES.
Steps / 27
ASSUMPTIONS AND PRECONDITIONS organisation towards facilitative ways of working:
an interest in learning from local action; a willing-
It follows that, if the sequence of action proposed in the ness to participate with local communities, even
STEPS approach is viable as increasingly suggested in those spaces where the organisation does not
by anecdotal evidence then the process can be lead; a commitment to process-facilitation rather
consciously and systematically applied by Intermediary than direction and instruction; and a value to act in
Organisations across a range of issues, and potentially solidarity with communities without acting on behalf
constitute a logical framework for programme and of those communities.
process design.
Intermediaries need to also be aware and trans-
That assumption, however, should take into account a parent about the role they may adopt relative to
number of considerations. The approach assumes a set communities and community-based organisations:
of enabling pre-conditions for its optimal application: are they direct implementers of programmes and
services? Are they solidarity-organisations simply
1. That Intermediary Organisations have done the
supporting the efforts of communities through
work to develop authentic relationships with local
relationship and capacity-strengthening? Are they
community-based partners, characterised by mutual
trust and respect, and that these relationships have process-facilitators, working through invitation
enjoyed sufficient time to mature. and opportunity to stimulate action by CBOs and
communities?
2. That Intermediary Organisations are committed to,
and capable of, working through a collaborative, 4. That Intermediary Organisations are sufficiently
inclusive, multi-disciplinary and cross-sectoral self-aware of power within the complex system of
approach, that cultivates team-practice. This relationships: between the Intermediary and the
requires high levels of reciprocity and mutualism; CBO; between the Intermediary and other partners;
the ability to recognise the capacity and contribution between the Intermediary, the CBO and the com-
of others; and the capability to efficiently administer munity; within the community itself between, for
the comparative advantage of each partner for the instance, age groups and genders. How is power
benefit of the team. expressed? How is it perceived and experienced?
How it is navigated and negotiated? How is it subtly
3. That Intermediary Organisations are geared inter- exercised to control, limit or promote the freedoms,
nally embedded within the working culture of their equity and participation of others?
28 / Steps
A PRE-CONDITION: A PRECONDITION:
A PRE-CONDITION: We dont work alone; we look We are committed to facilitative
We have developed credible around us to build a team with approaches, believing that when
relationships with local- others, representing a mix of we become too directive, we lose
level partners. skill, experience, common vision the space for SERENDIPITY, for
and shared interest. EMERGENCE and for INTEGRATION.
1
10 Build our
Reflect on our understanding of 2
learning. Feed the context. Generate thinking
insights back into about potential
the process. impacts, and identify
opportunities and
mechanisms for
9 influence.
Synthesise
community input;
use it to inform 3
policy analysis, Produce
practice and accessible,
programmes. relevant materials
STEPS
that expand public
access to the
policy content.
8
Review
consultation
models and
for intermediary organisations 4
approaches Support local
to improve partners (CBOs)
efficacy. to facilitate public
consultation.
7
Monitor the
strength, growth
and solidarity
5
of civil society Expand
6 community
movements.
participation
Support and to include and
build civil society connect CBOs.
alliances.
Steps / 29
A PRECONDITION: We have developed credible relationships with local partners working directly at
community level.
Oxfam Australia in South Africa, through the Joint PPS: We are a local NGO working in Western Province,
Oxfam HIV and AIDS Programme (JOHAP) commencing Zambia, established in 1996. We are the oldest Oxfam
in 1998, made a commitment through its strategic partner in this province. Our focus is on improving the
documents to strengthen civil society to effectively livelihood of the rural disadvantaged.
respond to HIV. The model was to work with local
Oxfam, through the AACES project, was looking at
organisations at a community level, as partners in
working with marginalised populations in a way that
response, as these organisations were already respond-
was a match for our vision: work with children, with
ing through a visible presence in communities, working
women, and with people living with disabilities. We
directly with those most affected by the issue. Oxfam
shared the same values about inclusion. So, we became
respected these partners sound understanding of the
the first partners with Oxfam in the WASH project,
local context that enabled them to design programmes
identified because Oxfam realised we had the capacity
relevant and appropriate to the needs of the communi-
to implement, and to link the community with other
ties they served.
service providers. We had been operating for twenty
From the mid-2000s, Oxfam Australia in South Africa years and were an experienced NGO, known by the
had been working with partners in the Umkhanyakude communities and working closely with them at their
district in the Kwazulu-Natal province on livelihoods level not only through service delivery for a long
programmes, including income-generation, food time. Water and Sanitation were not new ideas to us,
security and skills development. From 2008 onwards, since we had gained experience in previous projects
partners in that district began to raise concerns about in Zambia including WATSAN and ACWSI, and in that
water, both around quality of water and the limitations area as with others we were recognised favourably
of access. The concern around poor water access was by government.
escalating over time as, increasingly, water became a
factor that limited the ability of partners to deliver their
livelihoods programmes. The Oxfam team decided to Village Water Zambia: We did not join the AACES
further interrogate the severity of the water issue in project right away; we were a late entrant, only joining
the district, as it was still unclear where the barriers to in from 2013. But we were an indigenous organisation,
access were. A meeting in 2010, convened with partner working in Zambia from as far back as 2007, and had
organisations working in the district, revealed that the been working in the same communities that the AACES
issues around access to water, primarily, were advo- project was supporting. We had a reputation with these
cacy issues. It appeared as though there were certain communities and brought local knowledge of the area.
political challenges around water access in the district, Our work especially in hygiene promotion and water-
compounded by challenges in the provincial budget point provision was well recognised by communities
around provision of piped water. While Oxfam did not and by public authorities.
originally set out with the intention to engage around
water issues, demand emerging from the experience
of the partners working at community level creat-
ed this opportunity.
30 / Steps
A PRECONDITION: We dont work alone; we look around us to build a team with others, representing
a mix of skill, experience, common vision and shared interest, across a variety of sectors, and a
variety of stakeholders.
Oxfam Australia in South Africa: We were required contributed to conceptualising an approach for WASH.
to integrate disability and child protection into the We also drew on the expertise of Oxfam WASH special-
AACES programme. This was a compliance stipulation ists based in Melbourne to help us they were available
by the project back-donor, a requirement for imple- to us for technical advice on design, and reviewed and
menting AACES. Oxfam recognised that we were not commented on design elements.
child-protection experts, and partnered with RAPCAN,
Laila Smith was a DFAT technical expert based in
a recognised child protection organisation in South
Africa. Similarly, CREATE was identified as a partner Pretoria, the WASH advisor for East and Southern
organisation with expertise in disability-inclusion. These Africa; she was up to date with what was going on in
organisations provided technical support to those the sector, and had a very good understanding of what
partners directly implementing WASH work through governments were and were not doing. She knew who
AACES, for sensitisation, capacity-building, and support the experts in the sector were. She was the one who
to integrate child-protection and disability into their introduced us, for instance, to Mary Galvin. She gave us
existing work. the intelligence for what was going on in South Africa
and regionally. She was, for instance, very aware of
It was important that partners independently acknowl- the policy decisions that governments were making
edge and recognise the value of having policies around in the Southern Africa region around decentralisation
child protection and disability-inclusion, rather than of power and responsibility to local communities,
have these imposed on them as an issue driven by and understood that this was in fact what was being
donor priorities. From this perspective especially, modelled in principle in South Africa. Although it
RAPCAN and CREATE made for good partners to Oxfam wasnt successfully working in practice, there were
because of their shared values around facilitation, lessons to be learned about decentralisation through
responsible consultation, participation, ownership
connecting better with Zambia. She gave us the list of
and accountability in the ways they would work with
which duty-bearers to engage in roundtables, or to have
WASH partners.
included in certain consultations, if we wanted to be
effectively influential.
Oxfam Australia in South Africa: WASH had never

been a core programming area for Oxfam Australia in
Oxfam Australia in South Africa: In South Africa,
South Africa, and experience was limited. A number of
Oxfam Australia responded to the AACES call for
specialists with expertise were drawn into the process
proposals for a multi-country WASH project, based
to better inform an understanding of the context for
on a recognised need among South African partners.
WASH in South Africa, and subsequent decisions on
The initial concept note was not particularly specific in
design and implementation:
detail since Oxfam had no previous experience in WASH
Mary Galvin, an expert on WASH-related issues, programming in South Africa. Oxfam Great Britain in
contributed to contextual analysis and researched Zambia, however, had generated considerable expe-
the effectiveness of CLTS; Mvula Trust and LIMA rience in WASH under its previous ACWSI programme
Steps / 31
that made provision for service delivery and hardware Our experience is showing that persons with disability
installation. Zambia became the second country in the themselves now feel more included in their community,
multi-country proposal to AACES. generally, not only in AACES activities and this is, in
part, due to increased awareness in communities of
In South Africa, we really benefited from the Zambian
the value of those living with disabilities. But more
experience in WASH at the next stage of design for
importantly, theres higher awareness by those with
the project. Zambias mature experience in WASH
disabilities themselves about their rights, about how
through ACWSI really anchored the Design Note. They
to recognise when they feel discriminated against.
had learned what worked well and, importantly, also
Theyll tell you now I know my rights, I know where to
what not to do. Interestingly, Zambia was also feeling
go to report discrimination, the chiefs are more aware
challenged about how to approach this new project and
of inclusion so there isnt as much discrimination from
how to step beyond its previous experience. ACWSI
authorities at the local level. There was also some
had been strongly focussed on service delivery and
demonstration where people with disabilities showed
hardware. AACES made them think about how best to
their ability to their communities: PPS gave some small
be community-led, to do participation, and to integrate
loans to some persons with disabilities, and they start-
gender, disability, and child protection.
ed their own businesses. That sign of competence and
Ultimately, the Design Note looked quite different from independence has helped the community to see these
the original concept note, and this was largely influ- people through a different light.
enced by considering the practical experience of the
As the programme developed, the Partner Management
Zambian partners.
meeting helped all the partners get together more reg-
ularly to coordinate the work together, hosted in a rota-
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam tion by each partner, so everyone has a turn to host.
GB in Zambia: Apart from our implementing partners, Progressively, in 2014, we expanded the management
we also had to draw on technical expertise from part- meeting to include the WDCs. We are now agreed that
ners who could support specific work such as disability. the host of each Partner Management meeting takes
We worked with Zambia Federation of Disability Organ- responsibility to ensure representatives of the WDC are
isations (ZAFOD) an NGO umbrella organisation and invited and participate in each meeting.
Zambia Agency for Persons with Disability (ZAPD), the
latter a government agency. Implementing partners in
the communities held the money and facilitated delivery Village Water Zambia: We were not part of the original
of the programmes by those organisations, jointly group of partners who started with Oxfam on AACES.
planned for how this would happen in communities. We were recommended for inclusion in 2013 because
Our overall approach was that the responsibility for we brought with us certain skills and expertise that
carrying out the community work was on the com- were not there among the existing partners. We were
munity members themselves. The technical partners WASH-specialists, and had worked for years in these
and implementing partners would train the community communities doing hygiene promotion, training Village
facilitators. As the community facilitators carry out Hygiene & Sanitation Committees to coordinate WASH
their work, they are taking on board these messages on activities, training community members to maintain
inclusion, on GBV, on child protection, on human rights, water and sanitation facilities, and delivering hardware
and on advocacy. solutions such as boreholes and latrines. We believed
32 / Steps
in the programming strategy, that providing water alone partnership was important, but needed investment of
was not enough to reduce disease but, combined with time and energy to gain momentum and bear fruit; that
proper hygiene and sanitation, there could be as much participation by the community was the highest level
as 80% decrease in preventable diseases. of partnership; and that decision-making needed to lie
with members of the community themselves.
And, AACES was a good fit for us. We shared many
of the same beliefs and principles: that working in
A PRECONDITION: We are committed to facilitative approaches, believing that when we become too
directive, we lose the space for SERENDIPITY (pleasant surprise), for EMERGENCE (what parts of a
system do together that they would not ordinarily do alone) and for INTEGRATION.
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam the content of their plans. Thats the assurance for
GB in Zambia: We are all so used to traditional devel- achieving desired outcomes in complex social realities.
opment programming, that tries idealistically to plan
five years in advance what will happen and what should
happen. We all become so confident in our logframes Village Water Zambia: Weve learned more and more
that we think we can build assurance in the planning over the years of participating with communities and
through the over-specification of details. And if our especially through AACES of the importance of
plans are not detailed enough at the very beginning, thinking in integrated ways. We are specialists in WASH,
we can be accused of not planning properly or profes- but weve adapted to do things much more holistically
sionally. But, how can we say we are running a commu- in our work. We didnt always work this way; when we
nity-led project when we have already made detailed started, for instance, we focussed only on villages. Then
plans that are prescriptive, predictable, and rely on our we realised that we needed to expand our engagement
organisation to carry out its planning in order to achieve to connect multiple spheres of influence, where people
the results? interact. So we started to think about what it meant to
integrate WASH with churches, or with schools. From
We have been learning more and more about how
there we saw how important it was to think about
to build assurance, not necessarily into the planning
WASH in relation to, for instance, access to education
of detailed content or products, but instead into the
and from there to broader issues of child safety and
process. If we expect that communities will be leading,
childrens rights.
and that they will be responding, then we can plan to
work in ways that are participatory and inclusive and Weve had a history of being technicians and educators,
design our process to allow for that. Im not saying that deliverers. It made us secure and comfortable in what
products and processes are mutually exclusive but we knew. AACES was a disruptor of that paradigm. It
facilitative organisations program for space the unex- made us brave enough to allow the program to avoid
pected, the unanticipated, the unpredicted and give tangible quick-win scenarios too early on; we had,
themselves space in their process to analyse and adapt instead, some freedom, some space for real community
Steps / 33
engagement, just to talk with people, without the pres- Weve learned to embrace a kind of complexity in our
sure of immediately demonstrating real results. approaches, to give proper space and time for real
analysis of issues and situations. This has helped us
avoid superficial responses that cannot achieve real
Village Water Zambia: Because weve been thinking impact, although in the short term they accomplish a
deliberately in more integrated ways, weve realised few activities that feel satisfying to us, but dont really
that it is important to have a multi-strategy approach have any lasting effect in the communities.
to the work, not always just one simple straight line.
34 / Steps
We build our own understanding of the context: the environment for and
experience of engagement around an issue. We review (What do policies say?
1
What actions have already taken place?) and analyse implications (What do those
policies and practices mean?).
OAU: The call for proposals for AACES required the focussed too strongly on service-delivery at the early
Oxfam Australia in South Africa team to implement stages of implementation.
WASH through a multi-country project. We recognised
the opportunity to include Oxfam Great Britain in
Zambia as the second country. They had previous OAU: We built our understanding about water and
experience in WASH work that would help significantly sanitation issues from our partners experience. Prior
strengthen the AACES project implementation. to AACES and a focus on WASH, water kept being
flagged by those partners as an issue that had different
Zambias previous experience through the ACWSI pro- implications for the development work they were doing
gramme was exclusively hardware and service-delivery: with communities. We realised it was an issue, but
borehole rehabilitation, sinking boreholes, and installing didnt know enough to do anything about it. In 2010, we
latrines. In that time, theyd learned many lessons about brought together partners to talk about it and realised
the process of implementing a WASH process with it was a viable and legitimate issue for advocacy,
communities. Zambias prior experience afforded them around access to water and sanitation, and for dealing
a sound understanding of their local context a more with the systemic issues that limited such access to
maturely developed insight than was available to the citizens. In the Umkhanyakude district where many of
South Africa team at the start of the AACES process. our partners worked in South Africa, we recognised that
They had also realised that delivering WASH-hardware there were political challenges contributing to water
was the easiest part of the work, but was rendered access, and issues around the provincial budget and
under-effective if not coupled with matching software: service-delivery of water services.
capacity-building; integration of water, sanitation and
hygiene into broader issues of life; and facilitative
approaches to promote full community participation OAU: AACES required us to think in an integrated way,
and greater community development. across multiple themes, and to not only see WASH as
a single, linear, literal issue. The project requirements
South African partners were only starting out with forced us to think more broadly about the effect of
WASH, and were eager to apply a hardware-approach: water and sanitation, or the implications of limited
rainwater harvesting, boreholes and pumps. The access. We quickly realised that there were intersec-
Zambian experience offered a helpful contrast through tions with issues like disability and child protection, and
which to understand the importance of engagement that if we were serious about working with WASH at
with communities, and the sustainability implications community level, these were necessary intersections to
of working with WASH through an approach that was engage with.
Steps / 35
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam stakeholders in order to better understand the context,
GB in Zambia: When we were ending ACWSI, we and what needed to be done to move forward. We
already had some experience that we were working knew we needed to build an understanding of what was
from. In developing AACES we got together all the needed by everybody who was interested in Water and
partners we were working with under ACWSI the tra- Sanitation programming at that time. In 2012, we used a
ditional leaders, the government departments (Ministry baseline methodology Participatory Rural Appraisal
of Health, Ministry of Education, municipal and district to assist the communities to identify the broader devel-
councils), KZF and PPS to ask what the new program opment challenges in their communities, to analyse
should focus on. In our new project development, them, and start thinking what they might do to address
we had a built-in period between December 2010 to those challenges, of which AACES might only address
March 2011, with a budget, to do consultation with our some parts.
36 / Steps
We generate thinking about potential impacts, and identify (a) opportunities for
2 influence and (b) mechanisms for influence. We review and conduct research to test,
to deepen and to verify our understanding of the issue.
In 2010, an opportunity arose from AusAID through a organisations to deliver programs and services. Col-
request for proposals inviting organisations to submit lectively, these pieces of work provided data on which
concept notes to do work promoting water, sanitation to base a comprehensive Design Document, detailing
and hygiene in Southern Africa. Oxfam Australia in the approach for implementing the five-year project.
South Africa realised this opportunity could strategi- The design document was crafted collaboratively by
cally help address the issue of water that had been a the Oxfam teams, and supported by contributions from
recurring subject emerging among its community-based technical WASH experts and local partners.
partner organisations in their work with livelihoods in
South Africa.
Urvarshi Rajcoomar, OAU: AACES implementation
had begun; the project was underway. South African
OAU: Oxfam Australia in South Africa and Oxfam Great partners were already doing quite a bit of work on
Britain in Zambia worked together through a sequence WASH. Based on their own reflections, it became
of consultative processes to develop intelligence on evident that they needed to do more than installation
which to base our WASH strategy for AACES. We gener- of hardware. They needed to do more influencing
ated a Concept Note to respond to the opportunity for work. Hardware-provision was necessary and useful to
WASH work through the AACES mechanism, focussed communities in the immediate, but the benefits were
around advocacy, implementation of technical WASH ultimately unsustainable beyond the limited life of the
interventions, and community engagement, all delivered project. There was the danger that communities would
through our community-based partner organisations. come to view local partner organisations as substitute
duty-bearers, responsible for the continued provision of
Following the Concept Note, we commissioned a Con-
services that should be the responsibility of the state.
textual Analysis. Mary Galvin conducted a scoping exer-
Partners knew they needed to do this influencing work,
cise to explore the intersections of WASH with other
but were unclear how or where to focus their interven-
sectors like food security, health, HIV and AIDS, and
tions. Likewise, we as Oxfam Australia in South Africa
child protection in South Africa. Stelios Comninos con-
were uncertain how best to approach the advocacy
ducted a Literature Review and field visits with Oxfam
component within AACES, and what kind of support we
GB and partners in Zambia, generating lessons around
needed to provide to partners to enhance their influ-
good practice in WASH implementation, and identi-
encing capacity.
fying broad areas of focus communities and partners
needed to work on in the new program. He found, most Thats when Matthew Phillips (Oxfam Australia, Mel-
notably, that Oxfam should not be a direct implementer bourne) and I decided to visit all AACES partners, and
of WASH in Zambia as they had been in ACWSI a few other organisations within the WASH sector, to
but instead build the capacity of community-level get a better sense of what the advocacy issues within
Steps / 37
WASH might be, and where our partners might best fit commission some research in schools where OneVoice
into this. We did a series of interviews, and it became operated, and expanded the scope to include a few
very clear from partners experience that sanitation was other schools, hoping to generate better intelligence
the dominant concern. Some were talking about sanita- around the most effective services that could be
tion in households; some were talking about sanitation offered to girls that were acceptable, appropriate and
in schools. relevant to their needs. In June 2014, Oxfam Australia in
South Africa contracted Moeti Kgware to do a piece of
We started having conversations with other organi- research on menstrual management.
sations who were doing similar work on sanitation in
the WASH sector to get a sense of where the debates Meanwhile, in Zambia, the government had made a
were, and where the opportunities were to engage gov- policy decision to utilise CLTS as their approach for
ernment and to link up with other national civil society rolling out sanitation in the country. We were advised by
organisations. In 2014, we wrote up an Influencing our DFAT Technical Advisor on WASH that South Africa
Strategy on Sanitation in Schools, presented in draft might be considering a similar approach. There was
form for discussion with partners, who reached agree- a lot of information out there on CLTS, but it was not
ment around where the influencing focus needed to be. particularly critical in its analysis, only promoting the
aspects of CLTS that worked well. We were advised that
Within Oxfam, we operationalised the strategy by if we did some very good research, it could be useful to
identifying three levels of action to address sanitation the sector and be useful to funders who might other-
in schools: providing technical support and capacity wise see CLTS as being the only way to do sanitation.
building to partners to enhance their contextually-driv- For instance, UNICEF and World Bank and other funders
en influencing work; linking up local level partners with seemed to strongly support the CLTS approach, largely
the national debates and thinking around sanitation in because it seemed to be the only approach. We were
schools; and generating thinking within Oxfam through looking for intelligence that would benefit not only
research that included a study on menstrual manage- Oxfams work in sanitation, but also that of similar
ment in schools. intermediary organisations. When Mary Galvin did the
research (May 2013), she connected with program
implementers in, for instance, World Vision, Action Aid,
Wendy Lubbee, OAU: OneVoice, one of the South Water Aid, Concern Universal, and involved other Oxfam
African AACES partners, worked in schools offering life offices implementing WASH. She covered experiences
skills education, and started to get involved in WASH from South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique,
programming at schools. They found that girls were and Malawi. All of these countries were implementing
coming to school without access to feminine hygiene CLTS approaches. Research suggested that where it
products. At the time, there was a lot of publicity worked, CLTS was not being implemented in its purest
circulating almost propaganda around the effects form simply arrive, triggering, leaving without giving
of female sanitation on girls at schools, but not based support. Instead, people were using hybrid approaches
on any real studies. We wanted to generate statistical (triggering, not leaving, helping communities to take
evidence, and to be able to better inform OneVoice next steps, accompanying). That finding significantly
on strategies that answered the most immediate and informed a choice for Oxfam about implementing an
most essential needs in the best ways. We offered to approach to WASH through a hybrid-CLTS strategy.
38 / Steps
We transfer our learning into materials that expand public access to the issue:
3 simplified language and translation that is useful for education and information-
sharing. We test these materials for efficacy and adapt accordingly.
OAU: In South Africa, during the first year of AACES it for their thematic areas. Then, from their own experi-
implementation, 2011, we were building our own ence of integration, to develop curricula that explored
knowledge base around WASH. This involved the devel- the intersection of WASH with other sectors.
opment of a number of materials for use by partners
As a result, materials developed from 2011 included:
in their programming. It was important that these
materials reflect a broader, more integrated approach 1. Mary Galvins Inventory, mapping of other WASH
to WASH that was more than simply water, hygiene materials: Mapping of Existing Water, Sanitation
and sanitation. We also recognised the fact that a lot and Hygiene Materials and Identification of Gaps in
of other materials had been generated in the WASH WASH Messaging for Oxfam Partners, funded by the
sector. We didnt want to duplicate what was already Australia Africa Community Engagement Scheme
out there. We invited Mary Galvin of Umphilo WaManzi (AACES).
to develop an inventory a catalogue of sorts of
2. A WASH and ECD curriculum, developed by TREE.
existing WASH materials that had been developed by
international NGOs, country-based interventions and 3. A WASH and HBC curriculum, developed by TREE
governments. We soon realised that, even though there with support from HAPG and Woza Moya.
were many materials available, they did not reflect
4. A WASH and Youth curriculum, including a focus on
how we were coming to think about an integrated
Menstrual Management in Schools, developed by
approach to WASH. They didnt, for instance, consider
TREE with inputs from OneVoice.
the intersection between water and sanitation and
early childhood development. Or water and hygiene 5. A technical training manual for WASH hardware
and home-based care. These were all thematic areas maintenance - changing filters, repairing pumps,
in which our partners were working before WASH came replacing washers, etc. - developed by Ka-Lethabo.
into the picture.
6. A number of research documents, including a study
We invited partners in these other thematic areas to on Menstrual Management in Schools (Kgware) and
use what was available through the inventory and tailor a critical analysis of CLTS (Galvin).
Steps / 39
We support our LOCAL PARTNERS to facilitate consultation and engagement in their
4 respective communities, applying our materials as appropriate.2
Oxfam Australia in South Africa, through the Joint and co-facilitating Participatory Rural Appraisal pro-
Oxfam HIV and AIDS Program (JOHAP) commencing in cesses with local communities prior to the activation
1998, made a commitment through its strategic docu- of a full WASH process by each community-based
ments to strengthen civil society to effectively respond partner. They collected the data, including a baseline
to HIV. The model was to work with local organisations survey, and together with the local NGOs and com-
at a community level, as partners in response, as these munities, identified priorities and opportunities for
organisations were already responding through a visible WASH-programming.
presence in communities, and working directly with
In Zambia, Participatory Rural Appraisal was used to
those most affected by the issue. Oxfam respected
conduct baseline surveys. PPS facilitated the PRA pro-
these partners sound understanding of the local con-
cess in Mongu District, and worked together with KZF in
text that enabled them to design programmes relevant
Luampa and Kaoma Districts.
and appropriate to the needs of the communities
they served. TREE is an organisation based in Durban working in
ECD. Its core focus is training and development of ECD
From 2008, when partners in South Africa first started
practitioners, and the development of resource mate-
surfacing concerns about water as a development
rials for use in ECD programming. Tree was brought
issue, Oxfam Australia in South Africa did not have suf-
on through Oxfam Australia in South Africa to support
ficient experience or expertise to deliver technical inter-
South African partners to develop their own curricula,
ventions in relation to water or sanitation. The only way
resources and materials for packaging WASH infor-
to respond responsibly around the issue from that early
mation, and for integrating WASH into their respective
stage was to work through local partners, supporting
thematic areas of activity.
them through capacity-building, resourcing, linking and
convening to take steps most appropriate to their com-
munity context, and to bring that new knowledge back
OAU: Equal Education is an advocacy organisation
into the partnership.
operating at national level in South Africa, and focus-
Similarly, in Zambia, based on experience from the sing on the right to education. By 2011, Equal Education
ACWSI project, and the findings of project evaluations, was already spearheading a national campaign on
contextual analyses (Comninos) and research (Galvin), schools norms and standards within the Department
Oxfam GB in Zambia made the strategic choice to work of Education. The campaign focussed on, among other
exclusively through community-based partners, without things, access to basic services such as water, sanita-
taking on a direct service-delivery role as they had tion and hygiene in public schools in order to improve
previously done through ACWSI. the quality of basic education.
In South Africa, in 2011, Oxfam Australia commissioned In 2015, Oxfam Australia in South Africa forged a
LIMA as a technical resource partner. LIMA moved strategic partnership with Equal Education to serve as
between WASH implementing partners, training in a technical resource, assisting AACES partners to build
40 / Steps
their knowledge base about the norms and standards, 2. In 2014, representatives of Save the Children KZN,
and to work with those partners involved in implement- Woza Moya, and a number of Zambia-based CBO
ing advocacy interventions in schools around the issue partners, joined Oxfam in attending the Brisbane
of sanitation. Equal Education also served as a bridge WASH Conference in 2014 in Australia. Members
to link local experience generated by ACCES partners to of this delegation presented a paper on Oxfams
the broader national campaign. experience with AACES and WASH. The full team
participated in a CLTS roundtable side event, pre-
At the same time, Oxfam Australia in South Africa senting their findings in South Africa and Zambia
directly supported the WASH-related advocacy and the conclusions emerging from various research
activities of Equal Education in driving the Norms and pieces with the aim to influence proponents of the
Standards campaign, simultaneously supporting the pure-CLTS approach present at the conference.
organisation to grow its footprint in KZN where many of
3. In 2014, the Democracy Development Program
the other AACES partners conducted their work. This
(DDP), a South African organisation focussing on
contributed to a continuity of relationships and pro-
democracy training and advocacy capacity-building
gramming beyond the lifespan of the AACES project.
hosted a conference. Oxfam supported Woza Moya
Throughout the course of the AACES programme, and OneVoice to participate.
Oxfam consciously supported partners to gain exposure
4. In 2015, representatives of TU, Woza Moya and
and build greater capacity and technical literacy around
select Zambian partners were supported to partici-
WASH. These included:
pate in the Gender and WASH Conference for Africa,
1. In 2013, representatives of Fancy Stitch, Woza in East London, South Africa.
Moya and Tholulwazi Uzivikele (TU) were supported 5. In 2015, Oxfam supported a representative of
to participate in the Durban Toilet Conference CREATE to participate in the M&E Conference for
where they were exposed to a range of alternative WASH in Melbourne, Australia, enabling a special-
sanitation systems. Fancy Stitch Director, Maryna, ist resource partner with technical expertise in
went home after the conference and implemented disability-inclusion to co-present a case study on
the EnviroLoo concept at her centre, establishing it Disability inclusion and monitoring, evaluation and
as a demonstration in her community, and making it learning with partners of Oxfam in South Africa.
available for use by the public in a community with They also attended a Disability workshop with other
no public lavatories. She then set about developing Oxfam funded partners from Asia-Pacific to share
a strategy to influence the municipality to imple- their experience of the integration of disability into
ment EnviroLoos at scale in multiple locations in WASH programming by AACES partners and to learn
Ingwavuma. Woza Moya and TU, similarly, requested from other organisations who were making similar
EnviroLoos for their respective centres. attempts to integrate disability.
Steps / 41
We expand community participation processes to include and connect civil society
5 organisations3 to the issue, and to communities responding around that issue.
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam GB happening with the other programme because theyd
in Zambia: Ward Development Committees (WDCs) are been part of it.
an initiative of the government as part of its strategy to
We also asked them to consider recognising the work
decentralise authority and responsibility to local levels
that had been done through the Participatory Rural
of society. And, while that idea existed on paper, no
WDCs had been implemented because the local councils Appraisals, the Ward Plans and the establishment of
had no resources to do the public participation work the Ward Development Committees. They received the
needed to get people ready to engage4. Oxfam GB in plans, and gave feedback that they were impressed
Zambia approached the Mongu Municipal Council, offer- with the work already done. It seems we were ahead of
ing to support the process with resources to conduct them, as they still had to do specific surveys in line with
pre-election sensitisation, to conduct voter registration, their own government M&E. After they had completed
to conduct WDC elections, and to support the operation- those surveys, I looked at what came out and it was
alisation of a community-elected WDC. The local council exactly what came out in the Ward Plans. The communi-
agreed. As part of the AACES project, these Ward Com- ty showed that it knew things, even before the technical
mittees, as they formed, were responsible for generating people knew things.
with the community Ward Plans that followed on from the During the implementation of the PPCR, Natango
Participatory Rural Appraisal processes. community in Imalyo ward successfully managed its
By 2013, in Imalyo Ward, the World Bank was establish- own community grant of $50000 (US), completing all
ing the Pilot Project for Climate Resilience (PPCR). We activities that included a 20km canal clearing project,
advised the Permanent Secretarys office, particularly the with no audit issues. One of the activities was to clear a
Chief Planner, and the program manager for the PPCR canal, which the community achieved, and it is still the
project to recruit PPS for the implementation of the only canal that is useful out of all the others supported.
project in Imalyo, so as not confuse the community with Imalyo was recognised as outperforming all other
duplication of processes and approaches and organisa- wards. You see that community had elected one of the
tional reference points. Fortunately, they agreed. young ladies trained in construction through AACES to
manage the grant, and she really did very well. She is
You see, we had been recognised and appreciated for the only one who has been invited twice to the World
our planning approach. Even though we were working Bank organised review meetings to share the experi-
with the communities, we were not only thinking about ences of that community.
bottom-up approaches. But, we were deliberately looking
for an intersection between the community priorities and This has now so influenced the World Bank that it
government priorities and we used the provincial plan- has changed the guidelines for the PPCR to insist on
ning unit to advise the communities on the government government processes for establishing WDCs and facil-
priorities during different stages of community consul- itating Ward Development plans as conditions before
tation. Representatives of the Planning Unit participated moving to the next stage where they will access more
directly in the process. This made it easier for me later support. Imalyo can now progress to that next stage
to access that level of government administration. They managing a much bigger grant of $200 000 (US) the
knew me, and more importantly, they knew what was only ward moving to that stage.
42 / Steps
We support and build civil society alliances for engagement with the issue, with
6
policy and with practice.
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam of the state. At this point, South African partners real-
GB in Zambia: In Zambia, Oxfam saw our role to act as ised that service-delivery was not enough. They needed
a link that facilitated connection between communities to locate their work more strongly within a rights-based
and public office bearers. framework.
The meeting agenda gave way to a mapping exercise
with both South African and Zambian partners, each
OAU: At the AACES Partners Reflection Meeting in
identifying their present influencing work, their advo-
Livingstone (2013), part of the process allowed partners cacy footprint, their approach, their activities, and their
to think about the previous years work and to design strategy. Partners seemed more comfortable with the
what the core interest or focus might be for the next light influencing at community level: health-promotion
year. At the meeting, the Zambian team reflected that and education, WASH awareness raising, conscious-
they were very much into the space where they were ness-raising around health and rights (access to
working alongside government. Everything they did water), and building alliances with other civil society
was in collaboration or in consultation with the state. organisations (although these alliances clustered
This was very different to the South African partners, a around thematic program work, not influencing). But, in
fact that became so obvious that it began to dominate particular, South African partners were not doing much
the Livingstone meeting, and switched the focus of the work around policy analysis and engagement. Partners
reflection to the question of sustainability. Partners were not yet at that space.
considered how the gains from AACES would be sus-
tained unless responsibilities for WASH became more A call emerged from the partners for capacity enhance-
embedded in government. ment to be more focussed in terms of influencing work
and to help unpack questions of sustainability in detail.
The Zambian team seemed very focussed at that stage
on their influencing work. The core reason why Zambia
was choosing to work that way was that they knew OAU: South African AACES partners self-organised by
they werent going to be around for a long period of the end of 2012, following the Oxfam Voices Confer-
time. That someone else in their case, government ence, and formalised their partnership through estab-
was going to have to come in afterwards and pick up lishing a peer-based community of practice, supported
the work. through Oxfam with the resources to convene from time
to time as The WASH Group. The forum provided a
The South African partners were caused to reflect that
platform for sharing and learning between the partners,
if they were to shut office and close their doors, there
and led to inter-organisational collaboration, linking
was no one positioned to pick up from them. They real-
service delivery to policy-influence.
ised that something important was missing from their
work and that, by focussing solely on substitutionary One such collaboration took shape between LIMA and
service provision on behalf of government they were Save the Children. LIMA is a technical hardware spe-
setting themselves up as de facto duty-bearers in place cialist in WASH who did not at the time see their role
Steps / 43
as being involved in advocacy. At the same time, Save started looking at what needed to be delivered and we
The Children was concerned about the number of ECD realised that PPS, our first AACES implementing part-
facilities under threat of closure. These facilities were ner, did not have all the capacity to deliver the full range
struggling to adequately modify their infrastructure to of outcomes that we needed from the programme. So
comply with minimum building regulations that would we started exploring partnerships with other NGOs that
qualify them as a safe, enabling environment for child- would strengthen the programme. When we realised
care. Some of these requirements related to access to that we could link with the national campaign on GBV,
sanitation, having a sufficient number of toilets for the we thought that fitted really well with our objective
number of children at the facility. Many of the unsub- on reducing gender inequalities. We had to seek out
sidised ECD facilities found these regulations quite an organisation that had experience in gender, so we
unachievable. Added to this there was a lack of water brought in the YWCA Western Province. Oxfam was
in many of these rural communities and the pit latrines already working with the parent-organisation in Lusaka
had proved fatal to more than one young child. that was leading the national campaign, I Care About
LIMA reviewed its position on advocacy, and recognised Her. On the WASH construction side, we brought in
the opportunity to collaborate with Save the Children, Village Water Zambia. On Child Protection, we realised
other ECD practitioners and parents. LIMA had devel- that PPS had no capacity, but it was also already some-
oped an alternative sanitation solution that it wanted one elses mandate the police already had this unit
to propose to the state, but needed a way to test the so we thought it would be better for PPS to link with
infrastructure to validate and verify it. The WASH Group the Child Protection Unit of the Zambian Police Service
provided a way for LIMA and Save the Children to work to do this work of Child Protection. PPS worked to
together. support the officers of the Zambian Police Service to go
and deliver the process of Child Protection education.
In the period between 2014 and 2015, LIMA and Save
We didnt even have to develop materials. The police
the Children jointly conceptualised a way of working
already had the materials.
where each would tap into the strengths, skills and
expertise of the other. LIMA would focus on design and
infrastructure. Save the Children was positioned to test
the solution for appropriateness and relevance through PPS: For us at PPS, the AACES project really added
its network of associated facilities. It is envisaged value. As an old organisation working for twenty years
that, together, these partners can use their findings to in Western Province, we had experience to network our-
lobby government based on the LIMA model to show selves with many partners and government, but AACES
an approach that satisfies the requirements without connected us to other stakeholders who had skills to
needing to conform to exacting, stringent, unachievable reach populations with a capacity that did not exist
policy standards. By early 2016, this influencing ambi- in PPS. The approach to partnership-building in the
tion is an ongoing work in progress. project itself even helped the organisation to improve
that ability to network. We realised as an organisation
that for us to achieve, we needed to involve others. It
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam enabled us to interact and exchange ideas with other
GB in Zambia: Between 2012 and 2013, after spending international organisations; we gained a lot of experi-
significant time in consultation with communities, we ence that we are using now.
44 / Steps
The project is quite different to other projects where scale of our work, and the depth. It seemed that, before,
there are many partners. Yes, there are a lot of partner we were swimming in familiar streams, but stayed on
organisations, but we are not working in isolation. We the surface. It was like we were only ever aware of small
have been brought together in a way that has encour- fish there on the surface, when there could have been a
aged transparency. One would expect there would be whale underneath.
tension and fireworks, but instead we are working like a Weve found all these other partners, and the commu-
family, even though we are each working within our own nity voices are really coming up strongly, and were now
remits and areas of expertise. able to speak with a greater magnified voice when we
are speaking to decision makers at policy level. Through
AACES, for instance, we are championing the redesign
Village Water Zambia: AACES gave us the opportunity of latrines that are developed and rolled out by govern-
to extend our networks and to expand the scope and ment. This is a big ambition, but I am not scared.
Steps / 45
We monitor the strength and relative growth and solidarity of civil society movements
7
around the issue.
OAU: We knew quite early on that we wanted to make 6. RSS, Refugee Social Services, working in inner city
WASH a more central development issue in civil society, Durban with the refugee community.
since access to water was such a far-reaching issue
We simply asked these partners to share their progress
with many implications in many sectors. This meant
in reports from time to time, and occasionally present
that WASH-thinking needed to reach beyond those
on their work at AACES Learning Events and non-AAC-
partners who were directly connected to the AACES
ES learning events. We acknowledged that WASH work
project. And so we looked to our network of partners
was also happening by non-AACES partners a great
and peer organisations, trying to bring them closer to
deal of work being done and if integration was a core
WASH concepts by facilitating their participation in component of the way we programmed, they needed
opportunities outside of their typical program areas. to be included in various capacity-building and learning
Then we watched, not too much more than informally, opportunities.
to see how any of these concepts might be slowly inte-
grating into non-AACES, non-WASH organisations. While Oxfam cant claim responsibility for the increased
integration of WASH, we have noticed a strengthening
There were many non-AACES partner organisations of the WASH-concepts across multiple sectors repre-
concerned about water issues linked to their core work sented by our partner organisations.
that, over the course of the project, were invited to
participate in AACES Reflection and Learning Events, We noticed that CHOICE expanded from curricu-
including: lum development for HBC work where WASH was
mainstreamed to more assertively taking initiative to
1. CHOICE, an HIV organisation focussing on HBC facilitate community dialogues creating the space for
work, particularly looking at training HBC workers communities to have discussion around developmental
through a specific curriculum. issues, using WASH as an entry point to other issues.
2. TREE, who began incorporating WASH content We noticed that PACSA, working around the issue of
into its own core work, after working with AACES affordability of electricity in the Msunduzi area, formed
partners on curricula and resource material a WASH committee with members of a community look-
development. ing at access to water, affordability issues and linked it
to their analysis of affordability in general.
3. PACSA, a human and civil rights organisation.
We noticed that TREE expanded from being a curric-
4. HAPG, an HIV and AIDS prevention, care and treat-
ulum development and training organisation for ECD
ment organisation.
practitioners to more actively embrace opportunities for
5. KRCC, an organisation working around gender influence. Because of the nature of their work, TREE has
norms, confronting gender stereotypes, and eco- a good relationship with government with potential to
nomic empowerment for women. influence. They recognised that advocacy was actually
46 / Steps
a core component of their work, and started to look at should look like in unsubsidised ECD facilities. They
newly developed policies for ECD. They analysed the even held a workshop where they invited government
policy from a WASH perspective, which theyd never and other peer organisations in the ECD sector, and
done before, making recommendations and proposing used that forum to build alliances to address key gaps
alternatives to government about what WASH facilities in the policy.
Steps / 47
We periodically review consultation models and public participation approaches to
8
improve efficacy, together with partners.
OAU: In the months following the AACES Partners in low-resource environments. For Save the Children,
Reflection meeting in Livingstone (2013), Oxfam Australia it was working to build the capacity of crche forums
commissioned the support of a consultant, Davine Thaw, to engage with public officials around WASH-service
to work with South African AACES partners to reflect on provision to ECD facilities. For LIMA, a service provider
their programming and influencing work, and work with already positioned to deliver WASH infrastructure on
them to get it more focussed at achieving strategic out- behalf of government, it was about influencing govern-
comes. It wasnt that they werent doing anything, it just ment with more cost-effective solutions for WASH.
became evident from the mapping exercise at the Liv-
Partners who submitted advocacy plans and proceeded
ingstone meeting that their influencing work was ad hoc,
with roll-out had the opportunity to test their roll-out and
random, sometimes very broad and non-specific with
influencing approaches, and review it after 6 months at a
the hope that it might hit a target. Davine would support
joint reflection and learning workshop.
the partners to become more strategic around what they
wanted to influence, who they needed to target, and to In 2015, Oxfam Australia in South Africa commissioned
have a written plan for influencing. a small study into its NHI Accountability Project, imple-
mented in three provinces in South Africa between 2011
Davine convened a centralised workshop for all South
African partners in one space over a number of days. and 2013. The study explored the approaches used
During those days, she started to focus very much on by three community-based partner organisations to
people-centred advocacy because it has a stronger sus- facilitate community consultation around the developing
tainability component and links to the issues emerging National Health Insurance legislation. What surfaced was
from the Livingstone meeting, challenging participants an articulated Theory of Change for promoting active
to think about How do you invest in a certain group of civic engagement and accountability through public par-
individuals and communities so that when you leave, ticipation, and a set of provisional steps, practices and
the work continues beyond the life of your project? How principles for intermediary organisations and communi-
do you do work that is local, contextually appropriate, ty-based organisations keen to work with communities
and short-term achievable, aiming for small wins while to stimulate their responsiveness towards achieving their
capacity and confidence is being developed? This reflec- own development outcomes.
tion was really key. Partners went back and had discus- Developed into a publication Facilitating Civic
sions with their program and management teams, and Engagement through Consultation: Learning from local
submitted an influencing strategy and plan embedded communities through the NHI Accountability Project in
in the context of their existing work and core business, South Africa the study is the first in a series of doc-
not new strategies to be more focussed.
uments seeking to learn from the experience of partner
After the workshop, Davine worked on an individual basis organisations and communities. The analysis will con-
with each partner organisation to mentor and support tribute towards a body of evidence around approaches
the construction/design of their advocacy plans. For TU, for strengthening public participation, active citizenship,
this was about influencing around WASH in the context civic engagement and community initiative, and the
of schools and education. For Woza Moya, it was looking disposition needed by organisations who wish to work
at modelling sustainable school infrastructure for WASH closely and responsibly with communities.
48 / Steps
We synthesise community input, and facilitate a way for it to inform our cumulative
9 policy-analysis, practice and programming.
Urvarshi Rajcoomar, OAU: Equal Education is an share and adapt ideas in their programmes. These
advocacy organisation working at national level in have taken the form of annual reflections, training and
South Africa, with a focus on the right to education. exchange and site visits between partners. Partners
They were already working on the issue of sanitation in indicate that these spaces are incredibly valuable
schools and were brought on board to work with AACES and have added enormous benefit to the growth and
partners to mentor them in influencing work, and to be development of themselves, their organisations and the
a reference organisation for advocacy around WASH. programmes. (Roper, 2014)
The partnership offered partners an opportunity for
exposure and to be stimulated by an organisation more
experienced in the issue, and a way to participate in the OAU: We wanted to expose our different partner
national campaign being spearheaded by Equal Educa- organisations to the way participation happens in com-
tion at that time. munities so they could be provoked, could reflect, and
then apply those principles to their own practice. We
But the partnership was not only one-way. It also
didnt simply want to replicate activities; we were inter-
offered Equal Education a bridge into local experience
ested that partners learn about the approach for partic-
and evidence, as this was being generated through
ipation and integration. Our strategy was to always base
the work of the AACES partners in local schools and
various workshops and gatherings in different areas
communities in their respective locations, that was
so that exchange visits and field visits could be easily
useful to inform higher-level advocacy to policy and
tagged on and partners could learn directly from getting
decision-makers.
into a community setting, not only through the theory of
Learning from practice and reflecting on the experience a workshop environment.
generated at organisational and community levels was
an explicit element of the AACES project. Inter-organi-
sational sharing was built into the project design from David Mwamba, WASH Programme Manager, Oxfam
inception and provided for through among other GB in Zambia: In 2014, we began to link strongly with
activities a series of AACES Partner Learning and the NGO-WASH Forum but that was a limited place for
Sharing Events. us to share our experience. People were getting con-
fused by us and our approach. They were specialists,
As described in the AACES mid-term review document:
and struggled to relate to the more broadly integrated
Objective five of the Oxfam AACES WASH programme
approach. They couldnt see the relevance of child pro-
is to document and share learning, and thereby inform
tection, of disability, etc. But, even despite this, we were
policy, public engagement and programme develop-
still seen as legitimate because we could also share
ment and growth. Space has been created for exchang-
stories on the traditional WASH outcomes. And in 2015,
ing ideas, sharing experiences, reflecting on progress
Oxfam was elected the Chair of that Forum.
and practice, and bringing in technical consultants
and innovative practices, in order for partners to learn,
Steps / 49
We felt limited in our ability to relate and influence. have done disability). It didnt help people create a full
Time was too short. We were still generating experience understanding of rights, or what comprehensive dis-
and evidence by the time we found our way into the ability-inclusiveness meant when integrated into WASH.
national level stage. Engagement in robust advocacy It wasnt asking about participation or about inclusion
at this forum level felt premature. We were just getting of communities in the process itself. The process
into a space where we could see concrete outcomes and the product, both, need to be integrated, not only
and verifiable approaches. We couldnt influence the the product.
thinking as much as wed like on the issues of inte-
gration because the evidence was still emerging. For On traditional WASH issues, we could influence some
instance, Water Aid was very strong about disability, things easily and led debate around manual drilling,
but even there we felt their way of thinking was too around more allocation of money to WASH, on decen-
narrow (e.g. if you create a toilet with a ramp, then we tralisation of power and action at the local level.
50 / Steps
We reflect on our learning. Emerging learning the product of our consultation
10 increases the evidence-base for action, advocacy and accountability.
Effectively, we come full-circle. We filter new learning Comninos of Umphilo waManzi.

back into the process to better understand the con-
4. The mid-term and end-term reviews of the Oxfam
text, and deepen analysis by both organisations and
AACES project, prepared by Margaret Roper, in 2014
communities alike.
and 2016, respectively, exploring questions around
AACES has generated a substantial bank of learning effectiveness, sustainability, rights-based program-
around WASH programming in particular, as well as ming, and integration, while surfacing critical learning
broader principles of participatory development and around approach and design.
civic accountability. Much of this learning has been
5. Two Value For Money analyses prepared by Michelle
analysed, interpreted and documented over the course
of the project, captured in a variety of forms available Besley of Pamodzi Consulting as part of an assess-
for use as knowledge products. These, in turn, have ment exercise for DFAT around AACES (2014 and
provided evidence and intelligence that have been 2015, respectively) and to develop a value-for-money
useful for programme, policy and process adaptation model that made sense for Oxfam. Through the
over the course of the project itself, and have continued process, Oxfam has been able to articulate that value
potential benefit to inform future choices for design, needs to be reflected, not only in nominal cost-ben-
approach and influencing work. efit terms based in direct services supplied to a spe-
cific number of beneficiaries, but rather value also
A few examples include: needed to reflect intangible effects, such as empow-
1. Mary Galvins study on CLTS Addressing Southern erment, increased equity, increased social capital of
Africas Sanitation Challenges through Commu- individuals and communities, and improved capacity
nity-led Total Sanitation the findings of which of participating communities and organisations.
were presented jointly with AACES partners at the 6. Most Significant Change (MSC) stories (2016) devel-
Melbourne WASH Conference (2013), and at a CLTS oped directly by community members and commu-
Roundtable event (2013) to delegates drawn from nity-based organisations who were, themselves, the
national and local government, civil society organ- subject of action and implementation taking place
isations and academia across several Southern through AACES.
African countries.
7. Ilse Wilsons report Learning from AACES and Oxfam
2. Moeti Kgares study on Menstrual Management in
WASH approaches in Zambia (2013) reviewed the
Schools (2015), contributing towards, among other
Zambian approaches adopted in planning, imple-
platforms, the campaign around National Norms
menting, monitoring and evaluating the AACES
and Standards in Schools, and access to adequate
programme in that country, reflecting on the comple-
sanitation.
mentary roles of government, NGOs, communities;
3. The contextual analyses of South Africa and on the methodologies that contribute towards
Zambias water, sanitation and hygiene context to empowerment, awareness of vulnerability, participa-
inform the early design stage of Oxfams AACES tion, and change in behaviour; and on sustainability,
program offer, developed by Mary Galvin and Stelios influencing and accountability.
Steps / 51
COMPONENT 3
PRACTICES
for CBOs
52 / Practices
Community-based organisations (CBOs) work their communities, in different provinces across the
directly within specific local communities, country, with activities that were not centrally coordi-
nated. Through comparative analysis of those NHI-im-
contributing to transformation by delivering
plementing partners, eleven PRACTICES were isolated,
programmes and services that meet the suggesting these might be standard behaviours for
development, health and justice needs of community-based organisations seeking to work with
people in the places where they live. communities in participatory, facilitative ways.
For the AACES WASH process, Oxfam in South Africa This second volume of the series extends the explo-
and Zambia supported a large number of CBO partners: ration of PRACTICE, focussing on those common
In South Africa - Fancy Stitch, Woza Moya, Save the behaviours evident in the approach and strategy
Children, LIMA, OneVoice, MDIC, Tholulwazi Uzivikele; In of CBOs.
Zambia - PPS, KZF, Village Water Zambia.
The Zambian CBO partners are the focus for this anal-
In the preceding section of this publication, the work of ysis of PRACTICE through the AACES programme, for a
an intermediary organisation was described through a number of reasons:
series of STEPS that contribute progressively to active
Since Volume One of the series (NHI) examined the
civic engagement by communities and civil society
practice of CBOs in a South African context, this
organisations.
second volume aims to compare practice from a dif-
One such step (STEP 4) is supporting local partners ferent country context in order to compare, contrast
to facilitate consultation and public participation that and identify commonality in practice.
lead to expressions of integrated community response
From the inception of the AACES project, Zambian
across a range of issues at local level.
partners explicitly aimed to use WASH as an entry-
Intermediary organisations and community-based point to promote civic engagement and accountabil-
organisations are different in function. Although they ity of duty-bearers, and to do so in a coordinated
may subscribe to a similar vision and values about ways way between partners. WASH was a lever to stimu-
of working and principles of approach, it is important late broad-based community development, of which
in this complementary development relationship that civic engagement and accountability of duty-bearers
each retains those functions and behaviours that are its was a component. The aim was to make community
distinctive comparative advantage. members more development-orientated, and to
see WASH as a pathway through which to explore
Volume One of this series of publications Facilitating a range of development issues. South African part-
Civic Engagement through Consultation: Learning from ners, by contrast, focussed more on incorporating
local communities through the NHI-Accountability elements of water, sanitation and hygiene program-
Project in South Africa observed evidence of common ming into their existing localised programme and
practices and behaviours demonstrated by local CBO service-delivery work, with less explicit, intent on
partners in the South African NHI-project. Many of strategic influencing work until much later in their
these behaviours seemed consistent across the CBOs, programme. This difference in original intention,
despite the fact that they worked independently with design and practice makes Zambia an ideal point
Practices / 53
of reference from which to extract comparable
practices of approach for facilitating active civic In Zambia, three WASH-partners contributed
engagement. detailed experiences to this analysis of CBO
practice:
Zambian partners, most clearly, employed a Twin
Approach to WASH through AACES: using the Peoples Participation Services (PPS) is
opportunity of infrastructure development to build a local organisation established in 1996,
the capacity of community members, to stimulate operating in Western Province Zambia. It
development enterprises, to sow the seeds for is the oldest Oxfam partner organisation
employment creation, and to develop and retain in the province, working for the development of
substantial capacity in communities. Opportunities poor people, living in rural areas, with a special
for constructing latrines and drilling boreholes, focus on marginalised women. Its responsive
for instance, were used to develop the capacity approach to a range of environmental conditions
of women in construction and manual drilling. As experienced by communities has expanded its
David Nonde Mwamba, WASH Manager for Oxfam scope of work to include development across HIV,
Great Britain in Zambia points out: In a manner of health, agriculture, food security, livelihoods and
speaking, we were killing two birds with one stone:
WASH sectors.
building infrastructure and building people! This is
an important feature of our approach in Zambia.
Zambia and South Africa differ considerably in Keepers Zambia Foundation (KZF)
socio-political and socioeconomic context, and the was established in 1996, responding to
nature of the partner organisations is significantly rising levels of poverty in peri-urban and
different as well. Zambian partners evince a simpler rural households in Zambia. Operating
level of organisational sophistication in terms of sys- at a national level across all provinces in the
tems, technology and infrastructure. At the same time, country, it implements community development
however, they have a considerably longer history of programs in the areas of agriculture, environment
working with the rural poor in the communities where and natural resources, water, sanitation and
AACES was implemented; had learned extensively from hygiene, enterprise development and disaster
past experience how to approach communities from risk reduction.
a more appreciative, collaborative perspective that
went beyond service-delivery; evidenced a cooperative
disposition towards the state without compromising Village Water Zambia was established
their capacity to influence; and showed a keen sense as an indigenous organisation in 2007,
of programmatic and developmental integration when primarily focussing on hygiene promo-
working at the community level. tion, facilitating community action and
behaviour change. Expanding into water-delivery
Much like the STEPS for Intermediary Organisations, work, the organisation complemented its pre-
the PRACTICES for community-based organisations ventative health programming with water and
answer the question What do we do?, and speak to sanitation infrastructure, installing pumps and
components of the approach particular to this level of boreholes, digging wells and constructing latrines.
activity.
54 / Practices
Practices / 55
COMMON PRACTICES
for CBOs facilitating participation and response
In working with local communities to design and facilitate a participatory process for
response, CBOs should:
1. Have a strong, long-standing, quality relationship with the community being stimulated to
participate in the process; invest time in trust-building and relationship-building.
2. Have a mature, current, vibrant practical experience in health programming, service-

delivery, social development or social justice, or in facilitation and participatory approaches
to development.
3. Support leadership of the facilitation process from within the local community, by team
members drawn from that environment, and endorsed by that community.
4. Invest in building relationships and trust to ensure ownership, shared vision and common
intention among communities and community leaders before activities and interventions begin.
5. Engage and involve community members as early as possible, and as broadly as possible in
every aspect of the work, including planning, design, budgeting and influencing work.
6. Meet with traditional community leaders at the beginning of the process, to secure permission
and endorsement, and to jointly plan strategy to engage the community.
7. Ask inclusive questions from the very beginning: who is not here? Who else needs to be here?
Why are these people not here?
8. Work with the community to generate an integrated picture of the physical and social
environment: talk together broadly about life, not immediately limiting to a narrow theme
or issue.
56 / Practices
9. Make after-activity reflection and debriefing a routine behaviour so that the facilitation team
learns with and from the community, and can adapt the approach dynamically.
10. Stimulate reflection and engagement through combination-approaches. Mix consultation

through large public gatherings with consultation through small focus-group discussions, and
with home visits.
11. Consultation and stimulation happened through small focus-group discussion.
12. Facilitate consultation so that the private environment (small group; home) links to the public
environment (neighbourhood gathering).
13. Stimulate depth of consultation through door-to-door visits in the private homes of community
members, before focus-groups or community gatherings.
14. Facilitate dialogue between community members, with each other, not primarily directed
towards the community-based organisation.
15. Stimulate reflection and dialogue from a personal, affective point of reference instead of cold
facts. Let households and communities feel what the issue would mean for them.
16. See their role as being development facilitators, not expert implementers.
17. Work through a facilitative bottom-up approach with communities. Work through a similar
approach at the same time with civic authorities and public duty-bearers. Include duty-
bearers as participants in the response process. Support the linkage between the two levels
of response.
18. Support communities towards demand-driven action and advocacy.
19. Accompany communities through the process of response, through routine visitation and
participation alongside local activities, follow-up and feedback.
20. Form teams at the community level with other stakeholders who share interest and values.
Practices / 57
COMMON CHARACTERISTICS AND BEHAVIOURS:
CHARACTERISTIC PRACTICES KZF PPS VWZ
1. The organisation had a strong, high-quality pre-existing relationship

with the community it was stimulating around WASH and other
WASH-integrated program elements (e.g. disability-inclusion; child
protection)
2. The organisation from which the local implementing team was con-
stituted had a mature, current, vibrant practice, with experience in
health programming, service delivery, social development or social
justice, or in facilitation or participatory approaches to development.
3. Leadership of the facilitation, consultation and participation process

was through a team of local people who are themselves members of
that community.
4. Tangible programme activities and development interventions did

not commence immediately when the programme started. The
organisations committed one to two years at the initial stage of the
project as an investment in relationship-building, trust-building, and
vision-building with communities and community leaders to ensure
ownership, shared vision and common intention.
KZF: We started our work with WASH as early as 2011,
but it was only in 2012 and 2013 that what would look
like real WASH-activities began.
We used 2011 to build relationships with the local community,

starting with the local authorities traditional leaders, teachers,
the local government who then called a community meeting
where the community selected focal people who would be
trained as community facilitators.
58 / Practices
5. The organisation involved the community members themselves

from as early on into the programme as possible, using the relation-
ship-building phase with the community leaders, communities and
public office duty-bearers to identify clearly the beneficiaries of the
process, and to identify the major stakeholders and interest groups
for influencing.
PPS: Involve the people themselves from the very begin-

ning, as early on as practically possible, even when it
seems inconvenient to the project. Involve them. We move together
with them through every step of the process, and they themselves
come up with the decisions about every action.
When we were doing the Savings Groups with the villages, people
were talking about the problem of saving because they had very
little money. As facilitators, we asked them How do we grow the
money, then?. People themselves decided they should meet
biweekly and everyone makes a very small contribution, an amount
agreed by each member. We then asked How do you want to use
this money?. They decided that members could borrow from the
pot, but repay at a small percentage interest that would be moni-
tored by the group.
And by 2014/2015, some groups were able to show that at the end
of each year, from their accumulated interest, they could retain
some money in the central fund their village bank and share
dividends between members.
Practices / 59
6. At the inception of the process, the organisation met with the

traditional community leaders to explain the vision, seek permission
and endorsement, and discuss strategy for engaging the wider
community.
PPS: We were not going to enter the community and

just impose our agenda. That wouldnt work. Instead, we
introduced ourselves to the traditional leaders and explained
the objective of our organisation. After that meeting, it was the
responsibility of the traditional leaders to decide whether to work
with us in the first place, and then to inform the people of our
presence in that place. The leaders called a meeting with all the
community members to talk about the idea of vulnerability in the
community and the thought of addressing it together and people
began to volunteer some, not everyone at first themselves to
begin to work together.
7. Inclusion is an integrated part of the process thinking from the very

beginning, and in conversation with the community leaders: who
else needs to be a part of this conversation? Who is not here that
should be?
PPS: We built into our first engagement with the tradi-

tional leaders and then with the community members a
way to open up the discussion about inclusion, through asking
questions like Who are the types of people we would need to
include in a community discussion? Who would make the best
contribution? Now, who is not represented in that group? Are there
any groups of people in our community who are also vulnerable,
but are not included in our list?
60 / Practices
8. The CBO worked with the community to generate an integrated

understanding of its physical and social environment, not limited to
the narrow, specific issues of WASH: how is life, in general? What
are the concerns about what is happening in this community?
PPS: Before initiating any activities, we worked with each

community to do a baseline exercise. We did this using a
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) methodology that involved a few
different approaches.
We did a transect walk together, looking at the resources and chal-

lenges we could see in the community. We facilitated focus group
discussions to stimulate the community to think and talk together,
but also to help us as the organisation to better understand the
context. People were able to identify concerns, generally, about the
conditions affecting them and their lives.
A community meeting was called to give feedback on the baseline

and to share the findings. This was really stimulating for the com-
munity members who started to analyse the findings and debate
them, and add to them. They then prioritised some issues for
attention and made some plans for action, either by themselves, or
through some other external resource that they identified.
David Mwamba, Oxfam GB: For us, it was important that WASH
was integrated into life, first. Not just into programmes. Commu-
nities dont live in compartments. They live integrated lives. In
Zambia, we started with a blank paper, not with a WASH agenda.
9. After-action reflection and debriefing is an institutionalised

behaviour; team members were not positioned as experts on WASH;
they learned with the community, from the community, and from
their own practice. Facilitation process design was responsive,
adapting to and being informed by, learning from local engagement.
Practices / 61
10. Consultation and stimulation happened by convening large commu-

nity-wide public gatherings, called either by the community leaders
or the community facilitators.
11. Consultation and stimulation happened through small focus-group

discussion.
12. Consultation was designed as a combination of home visits (pri-

vate; intimate) and community conversations (public; shared). The
two environments of home and neighbourhood were dynamically
interconnected through a common narrative emerging from
consultation.
13. The consultation process was first stimulated/provoked through

door-to-door visits. Visits stimulated community members around
the issue through strategic questioning, not primarily through infor-
mation sharing and education about the issue.
14. The consultation process and events created an opportunity for

people to think and speak, not to the local implementing team, pri-
marily, but, instead, to each other. Consultation stimulated, without
defaulting to educating.
15. Consultation processes started from an affective point of refer-

ence, not necessarily an exclusively factual point of reference.
Implementing teams did the work to allow communities to first
think, What does this mean for me? and to personalise the issue,
before introducing factual information.
16. Organisations describe their role as that of development facilita-

tors, not expert implementers, and can articulate the values and
behaviours that characterise that positioning.
62 / Practices
17. Consultation was bottom-up, working directly with the community.

At the same time, organisations worked with civic authorities and
public office-bearers from as early on as possible. Working at
both levels allowed CBOs to be more strategically inclusive, and
facilitate linkage between the two levels. Duty-bearers were not
externalised from the process of development, cast purely as a
target for influencing; they were considered as participants in the
process of change.
Ministry of Education, Luampa: They KZF took the

time to work with us in the Ministry of Education first
before implementing any activities. This gave them a lot of credibil-
ity with the teachers who wanted, then, to work together.
Village Water Zambia: We engaged government from the start. If

we only consult with communities and dont include government,
the work will be unsustainable after the NGO projects conclude.
18. Organisations practiced facilitation as a way of working, stimulating

demand-driven action and advocacy by communities, rather than
passive supply-driven development.
19. Organisations accompanied the communities throughout the pro-

cess, working consistently with each place through routine visits,
feedback and follow-up. Practice was characterised by accompani-
ment and participation by organisations in community life.
20. Organisations did not work alone, but formed teams at the commu-
nity level with other stakeholders who shared interest and values
(e.g. Zambian Police Service on Child Protection, YWCA on Gender,
ZAPD and ZAFOD on disability-inclusion).
Practices / 63
WORKING BY FACILITATION
Development Practitioners Reflect
PPS: We work with marginalised people in rural com- were doing. But through the process of AACES, through
munities. We see our role as being to stir them up so all the conversations and consultations and community
they can change their lives, economically and socially. meetings and home visits, people are feeling much
But, we dont bring change to the people. We are facil- more free to talk about and use these toilets. And are
itators. We use approaches that trigger communities taking pride in constructing them.
to appreciate their need for change, and support them
to find solutions to their problems through working
together.
PPS: We believe that people are vulnerable which is
why we support them but they are still viable which
is why we dont act on their behalf. They have strength
PPS: The development issue doesnt matter much in to do things for themselves.
our experience. In our twenty years of work in this prov-
ince, we have responded to a range of environmental
conditions with communities. Agriculture, HIV, Health,
Village Water Zambia: We believe that when people
WASH, Food security. And that list can keep growing
are properly activated, then they take responsibility for
as communities need to address different issues that
contributing to and sustaining the benefits of develop-
matter to them. Our approach stays the same.
ment in their own lives. For us at Village Water Zambia,
We aim to move the conscience of the proper activation meant a few things: it means we go
about capacity-building in a particular way, blending
community so that they feel their need to act
technical training in drilling with entrepreneurial skills
in their own time. And if they feel it strongly including managerial skills, tendering, contract manage-
enough, they will act urgently enough. ment, and impact assessment to preserve the profes-
sional credibility and reputation of the drillers. From the
beginning of our capacity-building, we sell the idea that
the individuals are capable and can be independent.
KZF: There has been such a dramatic change in atti-
tude in many of these communities towards, especially, They are not being trained so that Village Water Zambia
sanitation. There used to be so much stigma that can implement its project. They can be enterprising if
people could not talk about it. It was an insult to talk they want to be, and successful.
about toilets. They were dirty places where dirty things
happened. It was not appropriate to talk about them. Or
We recognise the strength of the people
to be seen going to them. Thats why it was often pre- we are working with, and their ability as
ferred to just use the bush, so no one knew what you individuals to be self-determining.
64 / Practices
People are capable of leading in their own lives. We see only questions. We let the community decide, because
our role to stimulate a vision in the people. To see the we believe they know best.
future, a distant horizon. Our work is to support them
to feel free to walk, and then to walk in the light, not And now, what do we do about that?
stumbling to find their way in the dark. And who will provide that?
Where will those resources come from?
Where else would we be able to use this solution?
PPS: We cant say we are specialists in anything. But

generally, we are facilitators who want to see that
PPS: We see part of our role in communities to assist
communities are involved in development approaches
them to recognise and identify the most vulnerable in
where they live. Historically, our government has been
their community, and understand the importance of
using a needs-based approach, assuming what people
working together. When you look at the background of
need, a top-to-bottom approach. People were just
our organisation, it was about facilitating access for
given services and facilities they didnt want or didnt rural women to participate in their own development
necessarily need, and without any consultation or par- processes. Traditionally, women were not involved. They
ticipation. And these structures quickly became white had very high levels of illiteracy, and had no permission
elephants. We shifted from a needs-based approach to express themselves in public. So we started to meet
to a rights-based approach, and endeavoured to work and talk with the traditional leaders to stimulate them
inclusive of all who should participate men, women, to recognise that women were on the margins. Then we
children, youth, and people living with disabilities. worked with these women to talk about participation,
and to identify what resources they had among them-
selves and in themselves, and how they might want to
mobilise together for support.
KZF: With our sensitisation in the communities, we
start always with asking questions.
We dont just start talking. Let them Village Water Zambia: We believe that it is the recogni-
share what they know. Encourage them tion of capacity by people themselves that is ultimately
to participate: What do you think? What necessary for social change to happen.
do you know? Do you have experiences
And we see that as our role as an
to share?.
organisation working with people in
Through the questions and the discussion that follows, communities: to facilitate this awakening
community members recognise situations they didnt this self-realisation about social capital
even think were an issue. And we provide no answers, within people, so that they are actualised.
Practices / 65
COMPONENT 4
PRINCIPLES
66 / Principles
The STEPS and PRACTICES, discussed in earlier sec- programme in South Africa and Zambia recounted
tions, speak clearly to practical action. They represent their own stories, and contributed to framing their
a sequence of activity by Intermediary Organisations or own principles.
elements of CBO practice to systematically stimulate,
facilitate, support and strengthen public participation It is especially interesting to observe in this second
towards active civic engagement. volume of the series on facilitating active civic engage-
ment that principles framed in Volume 1: Learning for
Complementing these practices, PRINCIPLES speak to Local Communities through the NHI-Accountability
ways of thinking and ways of working, a certain char- Project in South Africa are validated and reinforced.
acter or value that defines an approach to the work. If Despite the fact that stories and experiences are sub-
STEPS and PRACTICES answer the question What will jective, and geographically and thematically specific,
we do?, PRINCIPLES answer the question In what way they appear to illustrate similar principles. This builds a
will we work?. case for believing these principles may be transferable
and applicable to a range of other contexts beyond
The anecdotal evidence suggests that these this project or subject matter. They are, in fact, pro-
ways of working are a critical dimension gressively stacking, accumulating into a more robust
to effective facilitative behaviour by Knowledge Asset on development practice, irrespective
organisations: to moving communities of the development issue. As experiences continue to
through the continuum from consultation accumulate over time, generated through routine and
disciplined learning, principles will dynamically become
to accountability, and towards building
better refined, and more mature.
social cohesion.
In reviewing the principles below, generated from the
The principles go some way to illuminating the under- AACES WASH programme, the following considerations
lying causal and correlated mechanisms that may drive should be taken into account:
the Theory of Change that is, why certain actions pro-
duce certain effects. As such, they may be useful con- Thirteen broad sets of principles could be defined,
siderations to programme designers in their approach illustrated and reinforced by experiences of the
to certain consultative and participatory development implementing partners across multiple locations.
processes. Each set is organised around a core general princi-
ple, a number of more specific sub-principles, and
But how were they generated? The principles surface illustrative stories, and is articulated and framed
quite simply from stories emerging from implementers by AACES WASH practitioners, and generated from
in different locations as they reflect on their work, and their experience.
share their individual experiences. As experiences
accumulate, common themes, patterns and lessons can While STEPS FOR INTERMEDIARY ORGANISATIONS
be recognised, and organised around a certain simple, draws from the experience of both South Africa and
conditional logic: if this, then that. In the development Zambia, the PRINCIPLES are drawn exclusively from
of this document, implementers of the AACES WASH the Zambian experience.5
Principles / 67
Most of the principle-sets, general principles learn very specifically from each other on particular
and sub-principles are carried over from Volume practice.
1: Learning for Local Communities through the
NHI-Accountability Project in South Africa, as they Ideally, the strongest principles are based on the
are consistently reinforced by the experience of strongest experience, making them much more
AACES, albeit through stories and illustrations that legitimate than opinion or hypothesis. Every prin-
are unique and distinct to AACES. ciple is not equally represented by experience in
this volume. This may simply be because those
The experience does, however, suggest new stories did not emerge as clearly in discussions with
learning. Several new sub-principles have emerged AACES partners, who simply shared their experience
and one new principle-set, Integration, has been without being led to match those stories to any
added. particular analytical framework; certainly, the stories
recorded in this section are only illustrative, not
The N symbol marks new sub-principles.
comprehensive or exhaustive in their depiction of
Some principles are internal, speaking to the values the work of a multi-country project over five years.
and behaviour of organisations. Other principles are
Many of the principles are supported by other expe-
external, speaking to the practice of consultation
and facilitation, and the theory of an approach. riences recorded in Volume 1: Learning for Local
Communities through the NHI-Accountability Project in
Principles link to stories that, in turn, are linked to South Africa, specific to that context, and not repeated
organisations and people whose experience may in this volume.
be helpfully instructive to others. It may, in fact, not
be necessary to collect every piece of information In some areas, the principles are not yet fully conceived
available (the volume of which may actually be coun- or articulated. They are in a formative state, recognising
terproductive). For the best learning, it may be more that the analysis of engagement and civic response is a
efficient and effective to simply contact the person learning work in progress, and leaving room for experi-
who holds that experience. In this way, the princi- ence to be added at a later stage, or for new experience
ples become a way to link people to one another, to to be generated.
Principles are, in this sense, abstractions, indicators of how process progresses. In some
places, a leap of intuition is needed to bridge the interim gap that may appear between
common sense and anecdotal evidence.
68 / Principles
Principles / 69
COMMON PRINCIPLES
emerging from organisations effectively engaged in a facilitative response
process at organisational and community levels
1. If we cultivate integrity within our organisational culture, then how we behave (internally
amongst staff and externally with communities) is consistent, and matches what we say
we believe and value. We learn from communities and each other, and are able to adapt.
2. If we facilitate meaningful links between communities and other civil society

organisations, then public participation is made more effective, legitimate and authentic.
3. If we keep people connected to their own process through routine feedback and follow-
up after consultation, communities sustain and expand their sense of ownership and
investment in the issue, and take more confident decisions for action.
4. If we make the subject matter personal allow communities to think about and feel their
own reality instead of promoting our organisational agenda or educating with facts then
people are better able to access the topic, and feel motivated to actively participate.
5. If consultation is facilitated through a responsible approach, it becomes more than an

isolated event: it is a springboard for greater levels of public participation, ownership,
accountability and citizen-action.
6. If we, as organisations, participate appropriately alongside communities, then their

natural leadership and strength has space to emerge, without inappropriate dependence
on organisations.
7. If a process for participation is designed and facilitated by local people, it is accessible

and relatable to many more people in the community, who feel empowered to integrate
their own experience into that process. The quality and effectiveness of consultation,
participation and response improve dramatically.
70 / Practices
8. If we link consultation in the private space of the home, with the public space of the
community, then everyone becomes involved. Intimacy, responsibility and solidarity come
together through one process.
9. If our facilitation approach engages the emotional before the rational (feelings before
facts), people in community are more likely to engage, participate and respond.
10. If we stimulate communities with good questions, instead of providing information only,
people become engaged in discussion, participation increases, and organisations gain
insight into how to adapt their consultation process.
11. If we have established relationship and trust with communities, they participate
more freely in discussion and dialogue without suspicion or a sense of interrogation.
Consultation is not an event; it is part of an ongoing conversation in the community.
12. If we make provision in our activities to accommodate the needs of people during
public consultation (eg. childcare), then they feel included; inclusion leads to
greater participation.
13. If we work in an integrated way, looking at the broad whole- not only on separate
special parts then complex development outcomes at community level become more
achievable and sustainable.
Practices / 71
1. ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE
If we cultivate integrity within our organisational culture, then how we behave (internally
among staff and externally with communities) is consistent, and matches what we say we
believe and value. We learn from communities and each other, and are able to adapt.
If we are willing to learn, we will learn. If we think we know everything, we wont learn, and well be
left behind.
If we are a learning organisation, then we will have in place systems and mechanisms for effective, informative
capturing, monitoring, reflection, learning and accountability, as well as for application and transfer of our
learning to other thematic areas.
If we apply the same values and ways of working within our organisation as we do with communities listening,
recognition, dialogue, validation then consultation, internally, leads to greater levels of participation, owner-
ship and accountability within the organisation.
If we follow the same Theory of Change within our organisation as we apply outside, then we model a way of
working for our staff that builds their capacity to engage well with communities.
If we utilise consultation to meaningfully learn from local action and experience, then we will become more
responsive in our actions and behaviours. A learning culture makes the organisation more dynamic, more
adaptable, more relevant and more strategic.
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Man- basic understanding of where we wanted to go we

ager, Oxfam GB in Zambia: If you want to had to really lobby our donors for time and trust
define the whole project in advance in 2011 and but were short on the specifics so that we could
have everything planned out in advance, what space stay more open to participation ourselves.
are you leaving for the community leadership that
we claim to be promoting? We opted instead to live Village Water Zambia: We were not always the
with a degree of risk and uncertainty and ambiguity, kind of organisation that we are now. We used to be
trusting that the process itself the way we were experts in hygiene promotion and sanitation hard-
choosing to work with the communities and partners ware. We had knowledge and answers and solutions.
could give us space to reflect and course-correct, AACES presented us with an opportunity and it
and be responsive and adaptive and shaping and gave me an excuse as a Director to move in this
growing, based on community input. This was the direction with my organisation to really promote
case for both Zambia and South Africa. We had the learning and analysis inside our organisation.
72 / Principles
The closer we got to the community, and the way knows how much money is around for particular
people were reacting to various interventions a lot projects and where that money comes from. Its not
of the time we were doing activities, but not seeing a secret. And we can be challenged by the communi-
good uptake the more we started seriously ques- ties they really do hold us to account.
tioning ourselves. We didnt want to keep doing the
And its had a real impact, internally, on us in the
same things the same way and expecting different
organisation. Our personnel have gained so much
results. We worked hard to become more account-
insight, skill and confidence to think and talk about
able to ourselves and to the communities so that we
inclusion, about gender, about disability, and the
could feel challenged by them. And it changed the
ability to unshackle and deconstruct concepts and
way we think about our work. We went from being
represent these ideas to those in power.
traditionally output-driven, so focussed on check-
lists and numbers and what we do, to being more
David Mwamba, OGB: We need to reach a stage
conscious about outcomes, checking whether we
where our community-based partners demonstrate
were achieving the intention of our work, thinking the
the same level of transparency and accountability
so what? questions so that our work became more
they expect from Oxfam, and from the communities.
meaningful.
Its one thing to talk about participation and account-
Now, as a practical example, we are able to design ability when the target is government, but, within our
our latrines so differently, because we are asking network of partners and even from the community
different questions and analysing the process of our we also need to feel answerable and transparent.
work, with our partners in the community. Its helped Also linked to the idea of accountability is the idea
us to think outside the box. of honesty. Part of having an honest relationship is
people admitting when they are wrong, and main-
Village Water Zambia: We have always talked about taining the same memory so that these memories
participation as a value in the way that we work with stay the same even though time moves on. But these
communities, but AACES really pushed us to think memories change over time. For us as Oxfam, weve
much deeper about what participation really means, done a lot of internal cleaning of our organisation
and how we make that possible with the communities over the last few years, but we couldnt do the same
where we work. For us, participation has become on behalf of the partners we were not in control of
the highest level of partnership, and it comes down them. We have had to think together about how to
to giving the citizens the responsibility for making change the culture of our organisations and find the
decisions. best way to see that people were professional and
accountable, and were able to do what they said they
This has not been always easy. But AACES had this
could or would do.
focus on real community engagement, and it made us
braver as an organisation. We feel proud to say that We initiated a Partner Management meeting, held
we are so much more accountable to the communi- monthly with all the partners, and have been trying to
ties now than before. We are transparent with them, use these meetings to coordinate so that the gender
to the point of sharing our budgets so everyone work and construction work and other themes are
Principles / 73
not disparate. And were trying to encourage dis- we were hygiene promoters for the sake of better
closure of budgets so everyone knows the financial health outcomes in communities. But we got dis-
situation of the project. Some are doing better tracted. When we started to add in our drilling pro-
than others. grams and supplement our health promotion work
A big element of this partnership of organisations a with service delivery of safe drinking water, we got
factor in making it successful was the need for carried away. We became very focussed on outputs,
accountability and professionalism that flowed both on numbers, on what we did the activities instead
ways. If that element is lacking, participation really of thinking of the how or the why. Service-delivery
becomes just words that are used for people to do and provision were easier to achieve. And we began
what they want to do. Credible transparent and to use water as a carrot as a condition with which
accountable relationships need to be there, based to control the community behaviour, almost as if
on shared values. Lots of people use those words, we were telling them if you do these things, if you
but dont really know what it means in practice. What change these behaviours, we will give you water. We
they do is not really consistent with what they say didnt intend for it, but it detoured us.
they believe.
AACES was a process that was not heavy on deliv-
ering infrastructure. Instead, it promoted advocacy.
Village Water Zambia: We have helped to establish
At first, we struggled to see how we could activate
sanitation committees in schools. The process
communities without the carrot we had become
undertaken with them is not training or infrastruc-
accustomed to using.
ture, its not about education to increase knowledge
or correct practices and attitudes, as if people dont The programme required us to make space to
know anything. We see our role, rather, as trying to reflect, to think, not only to implement. We had to
ignite what they do know. We curiously ask ques- stop and ask the so what? questions. They became
tions about all kinds of things. We try to stimulate built into our M&E system, and over time we began
conversation that surfaces the gaps between what to institutionalise this kind of reflection. It helped us
people know and how people behave. And we pro- to change, and find our way again. And it changed
vide no answers, only questions. We let the commu- the course of our engagement with the community,
nity decide, because we believe they know best. in the way we implemented the work. We started
This process has enriched us as an organisation. It is measuring different things, not only outputs. We
helping us to stay dynamic, relevant and never static. began to look for change in the way people were
Weve seen ourselves shift from being intervenors responding, not only activities on the surface.
and providers to being facilitators. Before, we used to only monitor numbers of toilets,
or numbers of boreholes. But we adapted our M&E
Village Water Zambia: At some point in our work as systems to also reflect outcomes and impact asking,
an organisation, we had almost lost our way. In ear- for instance, If the facilities are in place, are they
lier days, we used to be very focussed on the impact being used? What is the evidence that they are being
of our work we were not about digging boreholes, properly used? What is changing?
74 / Principles
Village Water Zambia: Before AACES, we were a pregnant woman utilise the latrine? We began to
disability-blind. AACES built in questions within seriously think about the integrity of our mission and
the project reporting requirements that helped us the alignment of our practice with our values.
think about what it meant to be fully inclusive. We
were challenged to think about how truly acces- And then we expanded this reflection with the com-
sible our programmes and services were so that munities. As a result of all those reflections and a
they provided equitable access to all. We started series of consultations with communities, our work
to unpack and reflect on this all. We realised we began to incorporate a more disability-inclusive
were not considering the practical implications of design for water points and latrines (ramps, appro-
that question on the design of our work. Could old priate size of doorways, and hand rails etc.), starting
people utilise stairs? Could the disabled? Could with facilities at schools.
Principles / 75
2. LINKING COMMUNITIES WITH CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS
If we facilitate meaningful links between communities and other civil society organisations,
then public participation is made more effective, legitimate and authentic.
If we facilitate linkage between local communities and civil society organisations, then local communities
can feel better supported and accompanied in their advocacy, consultation and participation work, and be
aided to escalate their influence to higher levels, without being overwhelmed, or distracted from their local
implementation.
If we link local-level engagement with CSO-level engagement, it facilitates solidarity and supports sustainability
the movement can continue independently without us.
If we work with both local-level communities and civil-society organisations and facilitate a linkage between
them then CSOs can act as a channel for locally generated evidence to higher-level policy processes.
If we link local-level engagement to CSO-level engagement, it builds capacity at local level for communities to
increase their literacy around policy-reform, and have greater access to opportunities to participate.
If we link local-level engagement to CSO-level engagement, it makes possible a way for higher-level, technical
advocacy to be more credibly informed by local experience and input.
David Mwamba, WASH Programme Man- council agreed. And as part of the AACES project,
ager, Oxfam GB in Zambia: Ward Devel- these Ward Committees as they formed were
opment Committees (WDCs) are an initiative of the responsible for generating with the community Ward
government as part of its strategy to decentralise Plans that followed on from the Participatory Rural
authority and responsibility to local levels of society. Appraisal processes.
And, while that idea existed on paper, no WDCs had Now by 2013, in Imalyo Ward, the World Bank was
been implemented because the local councils had establishing the Pilot Project for Climate Resilience
no resources to do the public participation work (PPCR). We advised the Permanent Secretarys
needed to get people ready to engage. Oxfam GB in office, particularly the Chief Planner, and the pro-
Zambia approached the council, offering to support gramme manager for the PPCR project to recruit
the process with resources to conduct pre-election PPS for the implementation of the project in Imalyo,
sensitisation, to conduct voter registration, to so as not confuse the community with duplication
conduct WDC elections, and to support the opera- of processes and approaches, and organisational
tionalisation of a community elected WDC. The local reference points. Fortunately, they agreed.
76 / Principles
You see, we had been recognised and appreciated all activities that included a 20km canal clearing
for our planning approach. Even though we were project, with no audit issues. One of the activities
working with the communities, we were not only was to clear a canal, which the community achieved,
thinking about bottom-up approaches, but, we were and it is still the only canal that is useful out of all
deliberately looking for an intersection between the the other supported. Imalyo was recognised as
community priorities and government priorities, and outperforming all other wards. You see, that com-
we used the provincial planning unit to advise the munity had elected one of the young ladies trained
communities on the government priorities during in construction through AACES to manage the grant,
different stages of community consultation. Repre- and she really did very well. She is the only one who
sentatives of the Planning Unit participated directly has been invited twice to the World Bank organised
in the process. This made it easier for me later to review meetings to share the experiences of that
access that level of government administration. They community.
knew me. And more importantly they knew what was
happening with the other programme because theyd This has now so influenced the World Bank that it
been part of it. has changed the guidelines for the PPCR to require
WDC and the Ward Development plans as conditions
We also asked them to consider recognising the before moving to the next stage where they will
work that had been done through the Participatory access more support. Imalyo can now progress
Rural Appraisals, the Ward Plans and the estab- to that next stage managing a much bigger
lishment of the Ward Development Committees. grant of $200 000 (US) the only ward moving to
They received the plans, and gave feedback that that stage.4
they were impressed with the work already done. It
seems we were ahead of them, as they still had to
Luampa District Council: Instead of just intervening
do specific surveys in line with their own government
for us and letting us learn to rely on them, KZF facili-
M&E. And after they had completed those surveys,
tated a meeting in September 2015 to bring together
I looked at what came out and it was exactly what
the community facilitators with local authorities to
came out in the Ward Plans. The community showed
get to know each other and figure out better ways to
that it knew things, even before the technical people
work together, and how to share responsibilities.
knew things.
During the implementation of the PPCR, Natango *NOTE: Further illustrations are recorded else-
community in Imalyo ward successfully managed its where in this publication. See, for example, STEPS
own community grant of $50000 (US), completing 4, 5 and 6 for Intermediary Organisations.
Principles / 77
3. FEEDBACK AND FOLLOW-UP
If we keep people connected to their own process through routine feedback and follow-up
after consultation, communities sustain and expand their sense of ownership and investment
in the issue, and take more confident decisions for action.
Good participation comes with time. If people have the time and space to learn the language of the process
to become familiar and conversant with the philosophy and practice they find comfortable ways to access
the process and increase the quality of their participation.
If we are committed to meaningfully engaging with and respecting communities, then we will be intentional and
systematic about giving feedback to communities about their participation in the process.
If we are consistent, systematic and intentional about feedback to communities, it reinforces trust,
builds relationship and solidarity, and expands and deepens the quality and opportunity and invitation for
continued dialogue.
If people receive feedback on the process in which theyve been involved, then they continue to feel connected
to the process as it progresses; their interest, participation and hopefulness will be sustained.
Luampa District Council: If you dont do and we kept seeing them come back to check that
good follow-up, you dont know if youre we were okay and that we were together.
making progress. KZFs visits were very encouraging
to us as a community. They didnt just drop supplies Imalyo ward representative: AACES started in our
and go. They kept coming back to see how we were place with hygiene promotions, but it seemed not to
progressing, and this kept our people stimulated be too effective. People mostly stayed the same. But
and interested. when CLTS was introduced it seemed to drive the
process forward well. Even then it was not smooth
Area Chief, Imalyo Ward: A long time ago as a sailing. It was a process of trial and experimenta-
young man, when I worked with the Zambian Army, I tion and review and analysis and adjustment and
was idle in the first part of the training. I would easily learning. And we did this together, over time. PPS
turn left when they said turn right. I was confused, kept coming back to support us, to listen, to ask
until I learned the language of that place, and then I questions. The first training took place with PPS in
felt free to really do well. This AACES was like that. 2011, and it took a while to get the community par-
At first we were lost. A lot was foreign to us. But ticipation process underway, but by 2013 and 2014,
these people gave us time; they were patient with us responses could be seen everywhere like flames.
78 / Principles
KZF: At the start of our work, we needed to do a consultations that could open up the discussion
baseline exercise. The baseline happened in two about child safety.
ways: first, through door-to-door household visits,
Through our visits we realised there were many early
especially in areas where homes were scattered;
marriages of girls, leading to an interruption in edu-
second, through community meetings. Trained com-
cation, as well as child labour especially for boys
munity facilitators came up with a work plan so that
which was compromising the childrens rights to
they worked in teams, village-by-village, not alone.
education. We began to discuss these issues with the
And, after the home visits and community meetings,
communities from a rights perspective, and surfaced
they met together as teams to consolidate their
many stories. The community was quite knowledge-
data and analyse their findings. As their partner, KZF
able once the conversations began, sharing many
provided them with flipcharts and markers and some
real life experiences known to them; this opened up
plain paper which they used during their baseline
more opportunities to name the issue more directly
consultation processes to generate discussion with
and publicly. At first some of them didnt even know
the communities.
it was a crime, but they came to realise it and started
After a month or two, KZF with the community holding each other responsible.
facilitators went back to the communities to share
We now hear reports that communities are standing
the findings of the baseline and check the accuracy
against families who are trying to marry off children.
of the data. Facilitators asked community members
And children themselves are realising their rights.
Is this true? Does this reflect our conversation
In a community in Imalyo ward, a girl who was due
accurately? And in those feedback meetings, people
to be married complained to her headmaster and
would be even more stimulated by the findings and
neighbours. The community challenged the wedding
want to add more detail.
and called the police who arrived in that village just
before the wedding took place, in time to prevent
ZPS with PPS: The Zambian Police Service (ZPS) has
it. In Imalyo, Lukweta and Lukakanya communities,
a community services directorate. We were invited
villages formed neighbourhood watch committees
for a meeting with Oxfam to join in as partners with
to monitor that childrens rights are respected and
the AACES project. We have a unit focussed on child
not abused.
protection and child safety, and this seemed a good
match for that objective in the project. We formed And we ourselves, as the police service, learned. We
a team with PPS and began to follow their sanita- realised that we have to follow-up with the commu-
tion-promotion process, visiting the communities nities regularly, despite the distances. When we feel
together to share life experiences and community close to them, it helps them keep up their progress.
concerns, and to discuss, and we gave input to the
Principles / 79
4. RELATING TO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
If we make the subject matter personal allow communities to think about and feel their own
reality instead of promoting our organisational agenda or educating with facts then people
are better able to access the topic, and feel motivated to actively participate.
If you run a consultation process where people can engage from their own experience, then spaces are created
for people to really engage with the content of the process. (Experience is more effective than theory.)
If we package our information/messaging in a way that represents and reflects the lived reality/experience of
people if we start from their experience, not our own agenda then they can better internalise the need for
change and engage with the process.
If people internalise (personalise; identify with) the reason for change, then they are more likely to engage with
the process.
If people internalise (understand) the impact and implications of a policy, then they are more likely to engage
with the process.
If people have a familiar reference point through which to understand an abstract concept (like a policy), then it
becomes easier for them to authentically engage in conversation; consultation becomes more inclusive, more
accessible, and more effective.
If we work with communities, starting from their lived experience first, but going beyond that to make the
personal political, then we stimulate and motivate passive community members towards constructive
active citizenship.
Village Water Zambia: Working in this new own life. Then I feel empowered to take action for
way more deliberately, more with our myself. And with others.
eyes open where we took engagement with the
community much more seriously, and tried to learn Village Water Zambia: Before AACES, we were
from the local people, gave us new ways of thinking disability-blind. AACES built in questions within the
about participation, and the power of participation project reporting requirements that helped us think
when people really get involved in developing their about what it meant to be fully inclusive. We were
own lives. We could see that for many of them it challenged to think about how truly accessible our
became a case of if I participate, I internalise. When programmes and services were so that they provided
I internalise, I start to think about solutions in my equitable access to all. We started to unpack and
80 / Principles
reflect on this all. We realised we were not con- because it provided disabled people with indepen-
sidering the practical implications of that question dence, so they were not a burden on others. Com-
on the design of our work. Could old people utilise munities began asking how to modify their facilities
stairs? Could the disabled? Could a pregnant woman at household level in order to be more accessible to
utilise the latrine? We began to seriously think about people with disabilities who they were now beginning
the integrity of our mission and the alignment of our to publicly acknowledge as being part of their fami-
practice with our values. lies at home, and to other groups with special needs.
Communities applied pressure on schools to be more
And then we expanded this reflection with the com-
generally inclusive, paying attention to how children
munities. At community gatherings, we explored how
with disabilities accessed the classrooms.
access to all meant all, stimulating that conversa-
tion from an emotional point of view, using pictures
and stories and questions. We showed pictures of Imalyo Ward representative: During the sensi-
the elderly, of pregnant women, of disabled people, tisations and consultations, as the community
of obese people. facilitators did their work to sensitise the community,
people could connect the issues about water and
At first, when we asked people what they thought sanitation with diseases they recognised from their
about the water and sanitation facilities in the com- own experience. They could also see the change
munity, and how good they would be for people with happening quickly when fewer people were getting
disabilities, the community responded we dont have sick. Sometimes, the whole community gathered
such people. We recognised that disability-inclusion together to talk about the health hazards that carried
was a new area for us, so we engaged with partners diseases, and identify where those places existed in
in Zambia who specialised in work with disability. the environment of the community. Sometimes, the
They contributed facilitators who were, themselves, whole community walked together to those places
living with disabilities, and joined our team for com- where open defecation happens and would start a
munity visits. discussion about it.
This really changed the impression of the community It ignited them; they wanted to change. People rec-
about people living with disabilities, recognising that ognised the benefits of using toilets for themselves.
they were capable, competent, independent and And its different to what we know from before: we
skilled. One of the facilitators was even a provincial see other communities were toilets have gone to
program coordinator!
waste because the right preparation work has not
Over a series of visits, the community opened up been done, and people were not given time to really
about its own experience of disability and the way think about the need to change. And yet, now during
people are excluded. Community meetings began to AACES, in other communities, they are implementing
address stigma, discussing how everyone is vulner- this toilet-building from their own initiative without
able in some way, and how disability could happen even being directly sensitised through the project,
to anyone. People became more aware and sensitive just because they are close to some of the AAC-
and things changed. They realised that making ES-communities, or there are some WASH-champi-
provisions for access for all was good for everyone ons nearby.
Principles / 81
5. THE EFFECTS OF GOOD CONSULTATION
If consultation is facilitated through a responsible approach, it becomes more than an
isolated event: it is a springboard for greater levels of public participation, ownership,
accountability and citizen action.
If we are responsible in our facilitation, consultation stimulates increasing levels of participation towards local
ownership that drives the accountability process forward; in turn, if local people feel an ownership of the pro-
cess, they will take action to self-organise in order to monitor and to demand accountability.
If we respectfully engage people in consultation, it stimulates hope and expectation; appropriate expectation is
not a bad thing people are provoked towards expecting accountability for action.
If consultation is done the right way (led by local people with local people; generating discussion through
strategic questioning, not only giving information), then the process generates increased demand and invitation
for deeper levels of consultation, for higher degrees of involvement and connection. Participation expands from
organisationally-delivered consultation to community-driven consultation.
If our consultation process allows space for people to dream, to imagine, to envision the future they most wish
to see, it elevates the energy around possibility and co-creation (doesnt stay stuck in negative experiences).
It generates hope, and hope is aspirational, inspirational and motivational.
Responsibility becomes owned not externalised (e.g. change lies not in the policy, but with people, with
response, with local movement).
When people are properly stimulated, they increase their confidence, their will, their agency and leadership,
and apply these strengths to other areas of human and community development.
When local people feel genuinely included and empowered, they take action to maintain, protect, sustain,
and advance development benefits in their environment.
When people are stimulated and strengthened in their ability to self-govern and participate, traditional
health and development outcomes are achieved; at the same time, communities gain confidence and increased
will to act and change.
82 / Principles
Luampa District Council: Before AACES We did not expect that WASH would also have
and the WASH process, people were drink- effects on education. These new conditions really
ing unsafe water, leading to so many diarrhoeal motivated the learners. Previously, attendance at
diseases. Now, people have access to safe water, school was very low, but the WASH process sensi-
and they also recognise how the level of disease tised the communities to the extent that even the
has decreased. People are just not getting sick in school environment was being better looked after
that same way anymore. And they want to keep it and improved, so that it was cleaner. The communi-
that way. ty became very much involved in the construction of
these latrines, and started to take education much
Before, if a borehole was broken down, it would take
more seriously.
years to be repaired. The community would just sit
back and wait for someone to do something. But And the effects spread from there. Although we
now, boreholes break down and they are repaired on started with schools, now every household has a pit
time, very quickly, sometimes in less than a week. latrine of its own, and a dish-rack for drying dishes
Each time a borehole was drilled, local people were up off the ground. Parents took responsibility for
trained as Area Pump Menders, so they know how building their own domestic latrines with their own
to locally assess, advise and repair their equipment resources. As health workers, this is making our
without having to wait on the council. work so much easier, as there is a much smaller
caseload of diarrhoeal diseases.
Ministry of Health, Luampa District: Through the
WASH work, we visited a number of schools where
we were able to do consultations, sensitisations *NOTE: Other stories and experiences that similarly
and conversations with learners and teachers, and illustrate principles of consultation and participa-
this led over time to the construction of latrines and tion are distributed across the various sections of
hand-washing facilities by the community members this book. They are not repeated in this section, but
at the school. In the days before this process, pupils are utilised elsewhere to support a more focussed
would just go from the toilet to their classrooms, but or concentrated analysis of participation. For more
now, they are even collecting water for themselves principles and illustrations on participation, see
so that they can wash their hands. And the high pages 2325.
number of diarrhoeal diseases that used to be there
because of poor sanitation in schools decreased.
Principles / 83
6. APPROPRIATE PARTICIPATION
If we, as organisations, participate appropriately alongside communities, then their
natural leadership and strength has space to emerge, without inappropriate dependence
on organisations.
If you go into the community looking for problems, then youll find them. If you go looking for assets, then
solutions are generated. (Looking for problems raises expectations of externally-provided solutions. Problems
are amplified through that analysis, and people feel hopeless and helpless.)
If we meaningfully participate with communities in their local experience as citizens ourselves, not as techni-
cal experts then open dialogue in a safe space is made possible.
If we want to build power in people, we cannot do that by bringing something some commodity or interven-
tion. We can only build power from within peoples own experiences and personal resources.
In the initial gathering, if both parties are honest about their intentions, about what they can deliver, if they
establish a relationship of radical equality, then expectations are not inappropriately raised, or projected onto
someone else.
If we include ourselves in the process of imagining with people, then we dont raise expectations that we
receive and implement on behalf of others; people feel responsible for their own action, and retain their agency.
If we provoke discussion around needs (What do you need?; What do you believe you want?), we shut down
people from dreaming or imagining their agency for response.
Instead, we redirect towards provision and expectation, instead of towards response.
If we provoke around strengths, then people have space for their own response, to plan and towards change.
If we assume that everyone knows something (everyone can think) people have their own assumptions and
beliefs then we dont approach consultation assuming we are the experts; we work with what people are
saying, not our own expertise.
84 / Principles
Luampa District Council: If organisations trying to address with others in the community, but
projects come to an end, how will the would not confront in ourselves.
community sustain those activities? They will say
the owners have gone. But if people participate, David Mwamba, OGB: Before AACES, the ACWSI
they feel they own the products that are benefiting programme was focussing on community-led water
them and can sustain those even when the donors and sanitation. That same title was carried forward
leave. When people are allowed to do things on their into AACES when it commenced as the project that
own because those things are important to them followed ACWSI. We started to ask questions about
they become very active; they feel they own the how visible this community leadership was in our
project. When organisations impose, it makes it very new project. Where was the evidence of it being truly
hard to work. community-led? Was it strong enough in our previ-
ous programme?
PPS, Community Mobilisation Officer: We start with Our reflections pushed us to think about how we
ourselves. needed to implement seriously and with meaning
reflect real participation, and how best to ensure real
In the Zambian context, we have these District HIV
community leadership throughout, from the begin-
and AIDS Taskforces. At one point, I was the vice-
ning of the project, consistently. AACES recognised
chair in one district when we were preparing for
that the process was as important as the product.
National VCT, planning for rural mass VCT outreach.
We were forced to ask more questions about the
What used to happen in those days was that commit- kind of processes we needed to work through to
tee members would agree on the distance we would meet the aspirations of the overall programme. How
cover to reach far out communities, for example This were we going to meet our objectives around voice,
time we will go up to 80km radius increased demand by marginalised people, increased
In this prep meeting, I stood and said I think we access by marginalised people, and accountability of
want to make a change. Each time we want to do duty-bearers? These questions became instructive
this activity we go far out. I propose that everyone for how we ended up working.
of us here, before we go out, should know our own Participation became our strongest emphasis not
status. We should be tested before we expect others as a means to an end, but as an objective in its own
to respond to that service, so we know the process right with all those elements of empowerment and
of being tested, and we can say we also know our accountability and inclusion. Right from the begin-
status, and we can understand how people feel ning, we wanted to do all the work with the involve-
about the services. And I will be the first. ment of all the interest groups, at as early a stage
as possible. We had a demand on ourselves for a
It was a disaster. People in the taskforce refused,
different way of encouraging participation to ensure
saying they were not ready.
that we were not just using participation as a carrot
So we had to start examining ourselves in that com- to control people so they could get the reward of a
mittee, to address our own stigma, even among us as borehole or some other benefit. For us, participation
the so-called experts. It was the barrier that we kept was an objective in its own right.
Principles / 85
PPS: We have always worked with those who are for communities. And once the community became
poor, with the disadvantaged, and those living in rural activated, we found a much more sustainable way of
areas. At the same time, we have always believed working that even exceeded what we were able to do
that people are vulnerable which is why we support when we looked to ourselves to provide. Now, there
them but they are still viable which is why we are more volunteers than ever in our history, all work-
dont act on their behalf. They have strength to do ing on WASH-issues and other development issues
things for themselves. This is fundamental for us. in their communities, unpaid. And water points in the
community have increased from 30 per year, to over
Village Water Zambia: We didnt always think or 100 per year, without VWZ having to increase staff.
work like we do now. We were more an output-check-
list type organisation when I joined as director. PPS: In our organisation, we have always believed
Expanding our focus from hygiene and health promo- that people have a voice, even though they are vul-
tion to water-delivery distracted us a little. And we nerable or marginalised. They have a voice of their
didnt see government as a partner. Instead of trying own, so it is not necessary for us as organisations
to influence government with our learning and experi- to speak as if we speak for the voiceless. Weve
ence, we just saw them as a competitor. realised that it is important to develop the community
to be self-reliant, to become aware of their rights,
In AACES, I found the leverage I needed to support
and to have the skills for some advocacy. Weve
my instincts that we needed to focus on a deeper
seen that if the communities feel some confidence
process. It gave us a new set of glasses to observe
to advocate and make demands on government,
how work could be process-led, and generate
then those demands are taken more seriously.
lessons we could apply to several other areas of
When organisations in civil society lobby on behalf
social change. It created a tension within our check-
of the marginalised, it is too easy for government to
list-driven organisation. We started to more regularly
dismiss those demands, and accuse NGOs of being
embrace process-work, and reflection, thinking about
anti-government.
implications of our actions and activities. How well
we did what we did was as important as what we
Village Water Zambia: The community in this
were doing. We were not afraid to say we had failed,
area Mulandu village in Kaoma recognised their
and to feel empowered by it: to embrace change
need for toilets, and wanted latrines developed. In
and adaptation.
our first year of community engagement through the
And that process protected our content. We changed AACES project, there was enthusiastic uptake and a
how we did community-entry. Previously, we tended mushrooming of community-constructed latrines. But
to just go into communities, looking at ourselves the terrain here is very sandy and the construction
as experts and providers. Instead, we began to pay of typical latrines is difficult. The construction simply
attention to subtle, salient features of conversations, collapses as the ground caves in. Typically, under
rich in meaning, but often overlooked by us before. these conditions, a latrine would collapse after only
We stopped giving information and started learning. one rainy season. Communities were very frustrated.
We did not want to be the reservoir of knowledge This reconstruction becomes a burden, and the
86 / Principles
behaviour to replace open defecation becomes ownership of the issues in ways that exceeded the
difficult to sustain. Communities give up, and people boundaries of the project. We recognised ownership
return to using the bush to defecate. in the way they realised what they needed in order
to benefit their own lives, and could identify what
We discussed the issue in our office, concerned
they could do themselves, and where they needed
about what to do. We decided to return to the vil-
lages to meet with the community members. They to lobby duty-bearers to assist. As an organisation,
had been happy with their own change they saw even though we always believed in participation, we
the improved health statistics gathered by the local were really challenged. We changed our mentality
clinic, and could recognise improved health and too when we realised how communities were show-
notably fewer diarrhoeal diseases and equally dis- ing ownership. It was not our place to use a carrot-
appointed by the way the latrines had collapsed. and-stick method as an incentive to get the people
to do what we thought they needed to do. People
On our visit, we asked the community how could we assumed their tasks and responsibilities because
make this sustainable? they recognised it was for their own benefit, not for
Community members suggested an innovation the profit of the organisation.
from their own experience, a basket lining, as a way
of protecting the pits from caving in by weaving a Village Water Zambia: Weve learned a lot these few
basket from sticks and leaves. Since implementing years about how to work. We dont lecture commu-
the basket lining strategy, latrines last up to three nities. We stimulate through questions. We are not
years without caving in. Increased contact with these teachers. We are facilitators. We dont pull from the
more reliable latrines sustains and normalises the front. We support from behind. We try and stay con-
sanitation behaviour. scious of power, to not control through knowledge,
through seating arrangements, through separation,
PPS: People in the communities were going deeper or through formal protocol.
than we expected sometimes, and really taking
Principles / 87
7. ENABLING LOCAL LEADERSHIP
If consultation is designed and facilitated by local people, the process is accessible
and relatable to many more people in the community, who feel empowered to integrate
their own experiences into the process. The quality and effectiveness of consultation
improves dramatically.
If we are committed to supporting and promoting full, meaningful participation, leading to local ownership, then
we need to invest in building skills, capacity and confidence in local communities to drive their own process of
consultation and action.
If you run a consultation process designed and facilitated by a group of local people who had been actively
involved in thinking about the process and content, then the process is delivered in the language people can
relate to; it responds to their experience and it means something to them.
Expertise is related to experience that allows us to relate to a policy; it gives us the right to speak to this policy
that is meant to impact on our lived experience.
If local people are adequately capacitated to participate to take the lead, and own their own local process
then the quality of that process increases significantly: in rigour, in enthusiasm, in quantity and in uptake.
(Trust is good, but it isnt always enough; neighbours mean more. Co-creation is possible by organisations who
participate with communities, but leadership is by locals.)
If people are involved in the reporting system responsible for their own measurement then they feel
important and recognised, and take responsibility for monitoring themselves and others.
If you come by force to make people change, they will do it to please you, but once you leave, they will
abandon it. The best thing is to aim to influence the mindset so people recognise and acknowledge their
own need for change. If people see the benefit of change for themselves, they will take action and sustain
the change.
David Mwamba, OGB: The people who are During the baseline processes in 2012, we sat down
benefiting from the project need to have as a big group of stakeholders to ask what kind of
space for meaningful participation in decision-mak- baseline do we want to do? We ultimately agreed
ing so that the leadership of key processes remains that what we needed to do was a broad Participatory
in their hands. Otherwise, how could we call our Rural Appraisal where all the development issues
programme community-led? that people were grappling with could be surfaced.
88 / Principles
We thought it was pointless to just replicate some very good. We were all learning together. And once
kind of survey that would only generate data on the PRA process was done, we engaged an external
water points that already existed at district or person to go through the report and write it up prop-
municipal level. The fear was that this process erly in a technical way. But we absorbed that risk for
would create expectation of communities that the the sake of staying true to our principles.
programme would fix everything. We had to find a
way to explain what the process could do and what KZF: We spent a year in building the relationship
it couldnt do in order to manage these expectations. with local authorities and the communities around
We chose to forego using external consultants Luampa before any practical WASH-activities
to rapidly do assessment and generate a report commenced. The traditional leaders helped us call a
because that would not build the capacity of district community meeting where the community selected
stakeholders and partners. That idea was thrown members to be focal people on WASH and to be
out. There was another idea that staff from our trained as facilitators who would lead the PRA, and
partner organisations could do the baseline, but we the consultations with the community. This was an
were concerned that there would be no community important step for us if we wanted the project to
participation through that approach. be successful.
Ultimately we agreed on the approach where the Its very difficult as a donor to just come and con-
partners and community members would be trained struct a borehole. Without real consultation and
together, and the partners would oversee the sensitisation with these communities, people will not
community members doing the assessment work utilise that thing or maintain it. People from the out-
themselves. We thought it was the best approach side cant just go into a community and think they
because there was capacity building, space for will change the mindset of the people. It was import-
participation, and sustainability of skills within ant that the community itself select facilitators,
people who the community felt confident in. Then,
the community to do it again if they wanted to.
they would respond quickly to the leadership of
Thats the approach we arrived at through a series
those people because they themselves chose them.
of stakeholder discussions and debates, holding
ourselves accountable to what the programme was
David Mwamba, OGB: In 2013, in Imalyo Ward, the
about: participation, decision-making, and consulta-
World Bank was establishing the Pilot Project for
tion. The principles influenced the practice.
Climate Resilience (PPCR). During the implementa-
There were all kinds of questions about efficiency tion of the PPCR, Natango community in Imalyo ward
of time, and the quality being compromised, but successfully managed its own community grant of
we agreed that it was better to have a slightly $50000 (US), completing all activities that included
poorer quality in the report, but achieve higher a 20km canal clearing project, with no audit issues.
levels of capacity and participation. It was better Imalyo was recognised as outperforming all other
to take a little bit longer than to go fast and finish wards, and became eligible to apply for a much
everything but compromise the key principles of the bigger $200000 grant.
programme. The first report was, as expected, not
Principles / 89
Whats special about the story is that the community AACES and WASH have been major components of
had elected a certain young lady to manage the the work of our WDCs, and have encouraged us to
grant, and she really did very well. She was one of set some policies that allow us to be vigilant for any
the young women who had been trained through barrier that would block the advancement of WASH
the AACES project in construction. We could not in our communities. For instance, if people are not
have foreseen when we did that capacity-building complying with the standards set for sanitation,
work that it would have inspired such confidence they are brought to book in front of the Chief and
and leadership in her, and confidence in her by the the WDC. We expect that each household has its
community. She was elected, not appointed. And own toilet, that each home has a dish-rack. We
thats not a small thing. She was elected by the com- want a clean environment with no open defecation.
munity, despite her competitors who were eager to Fortunately, these standards match those developed
manage the grant, and who were seniors, with pre- by local government, but we had a chance to review
vious leadership experience in the community. But them as a community and found them to be suitable
her community wanted her. She beat those previous for us. We have champions in our communities
leaders 48-12. trained facilitators we call Sanitation Action Groups
who collect information to monitor whether our
Imalyo Ward representative: As we were getting WASH vision is progressing.
into AACES, our government had what we called
The process really worked for us, and a lot of it
Decentralisation of Governance. When that was
was because of the way our partners, like PPS,
introduced it gave power back to the people to
worked with us. They didnt just come there, and
declare what they want, rather than have govern-
tell us what to do. Or do their own thing that we just
ment simply decide on services that are irrelevant
had to accept. They started first with chiefs and
to each community. The timing for this strategy
leaders to form a real partnership. Champions were
coincided with AACES.
chosen from the communities, by the communities
The Ward Development Committees were a concept and exposed to trainings that sensitised them and
of government, established to be the entry point equipped them. Those champions moved around in
for the community to interact with government. In the community, and from village to village, making
2015, Oxfam took the responsibility to support the people curious, visiting families and homesteads,
development of our WDC. The Ministry of Local Gov- then zones and community gatherings. In the
ernment was to come in to assist in forming these end, we could say that we were the ones who did
WDCs by bringing in community elections to elect the work.
the WDC Executive. After elections, the committees
were formed, with the duty of Oxfam to ensure that KZF: In 2013, Kanyenzi and Nyambi communities
the committee has a space from which to carry out developed Ward Plans, coming up with the things
its duties. The role of the WDC was to initiate and they would want to see in their communities in the
facilitate the views of the community and forward coming five years. They came up with their vision
them to the municipality, through the support of and plans, and elected members from among the
such organisations as PPS. community to serve on the WDC. Our organisation
90 / Principles
supported these communities through capaci- PPS: In 2014, after we were trained in advocacy
ty-building and solidarity to lobby the government and rights-based approaches through Oxfam, we
to achieve the goals they had set for themselves in realised that communities needed to be sensitised
their plans. to rights and influencing in order to fully take own-
ership of the development in their own places. We
In Katondo Community School there was a need for
organised a 3-day training for members of the WDC
teachers. The community effectively used its Ward
in Lumbo ward, focussing on advocacy: how to iden-
Plans to go to the office of the Ministry of Education,
tify problems, and how to engage the community to
represented by selected members of the WDC. They
analyse the problem.
successfully secured two government-teachers for
their school. In Namandos Ward Plan, they wanted a After this training, the WDC was really inspired.
small classroom. During the planning in the council They went flat-out in the community to conduct
meeting, they were given permission to utilise the their own kind of research, gathering information on
government Community Development Fund to erect issues affecting life in general for members of the
the classroom they needed. community. After this research, they presented their
findings to the community for analysis and found
In Nyambi Ward, there is a Health Centre serving
that 75% of people had a similar problem.
many communities, but far away from many of those
communities and hard to reach. Inkunikola commu- In Tapo community, there was a small stream that
nity was three hours away from the nearest health had been blocked by the construction of a major
facility. Using their Ward Plan, and the minutes of multimillion dollar highway crossing the Zambezi
their community meeting, they made a case to get Plains through a system of 22 bridges. The blockage
a clinic, now under construction, in that community. of this stream caused water to flood the fields of
In Kaoma, these Ward Plans have assisted people to the community. The WDC took it up, starting by
advocate for the integrated, coordinated efforts of engaging the traditional leaders as influencing allies
duty-bearers and development partners to support to discuss the issue and plan together. As a team,
the establishment of clinics, sanitation facilities and they began to use radio to announce community
classroom blocks. meetings where the issue would be more broadly
discussed, and an influencing campaign designed.
At the hospital in Luampa, we used to have a ward
They also secured space on the radio to air their
once used as a leprosy ward, but since that time has
views on the situation and to communicate their
fallen into disrepair after the missionaries left. The
desired aim.
Luampa District Council has managed to rehabilitate
that ward and use it as a childrens ward through Together, the WDC and traditional leaders engaged
funds from the Community Development Fund, stim- the Chinese contractors, asking them to look into
ulated through the use of the Ward Plans to lobby the issue seriously. And it wasnt too long before
local government. Previously, we had no childrens government duty-bearers took up the case. The
ward, and all the children had to share space with campaign yielded a very good result: Chinese con-
the adult women, which was not ideal. tractors agreed to adjust their plans to include an
Principles / 91
extra bridge in the construction of their highway, influence Airtel and the Permanent Secretary in
bearing the cost within their own budgets. government to repair the tower. They engaged the
traditional leaders and ward counsellor, and utilised
Before the process of AACES, these communities
a local radio station to make the issue public.
would have been silent on the issue, but they had
Together, they prepared a position paper to hand
gained confidence to express their voice and influ-
over to the Permanent Secretary, outlining their
ence change by engaging those in power.
expectations.
PPS: Mutondo is a community in a very remote And even while they were waiting for a response,
part of the district, about 200km from Mongu. A they began doing some work of their own, using
bridge constructed in that area a long time ago was local resources maize and indigenous develop-
washed away through excessive rains. As a result, ment funding to engage local communities to
Airtel, the cellular network service provider, could begin work on a basic bridge. After some time, Airtel
not reach one of its cell towers to provide it with joined in the efforts, contributing to the manpower
fuel, or to conduct routine maintenance. People in and resources, to repair the bridge. The network
that area lost access to mobile communication. was restored.
The WDC mobilised to call together people from

either side of the river to debate how they would
92 / Principles
Principles / 93
8. GOOD CONSULTATION LINKS PRIVATE SPACE TO PUBLIC SPACE
If we link consultation in the private space of the home, with the public space of the
community, then everyone becomes involved. Intimacy, responsibility and solidarity come
together through one process.
If we do consultation through mixed methods public consultation and private consultation (groups and home
visits) everyone becomes engaged. In public, people hear common concerns solidarity; in private, it gives
space for people to engage confidently and freely in their intimate space with no interruption.
Home is an important component of a bottom-up approach.
If you create space (allow time; proper process sequencing) for people to listen to each others stories, to test
and analyse those stories, a joint consciousness emerges that builds trust and solidarity, and allows people
to identify, collectively, structural and institutional and systemic roots for their shared concerns. (Energy for
action builds along a progression from individual to collective responsibility.)
PPS: In those days, when we worked with had prior to these visits not been tested to
HIV, it was very difficult to ensure those know their status, because of a number of reasons
people living with the virus could be fully included that prevented them from going to the facilities,
and genuinely participate, especially at the com- most of it having to do with shame and stigma and
munity level when the village talked together about fear and secrecy.
these things. So, even while we continued the
community meetings and sensitisation that was Imalyo Ward representative: When we first start-
more traditional, we recognised we needed a way ed, the community facilitators started first with
to support participation by those who could not be chiefs and leaders, then worked with families at a
free to participate at public level. We needed some- household stage, then multiple households togeth-
thing that reached people at the household level. er by zone, gathered together in a central location.
So we trained community members in counselling
and psychosocial support, and they focussed on KZF: In the early part of our process, we knew we
visiting individuals and families in the homes. They needed to do a baseline. The baseline happened
were there not for education; they just did visits in two ways: first, through door-to-door household
that felt like counselling. And it really reduced visits, especially in areas where homes were
stigma because it somehow made the topic of HIV scattered; second, through community meetings.
common and normal. Community members started Community facilitators came up with a work plan
visiting each other, and that increased the cover- so that they worked in teams, village by village, not
age of our work. People revealed that most of them alone. And, after the home visits and community
94 / Principles
meetings, they met together as teams to consoli- realised were not living in conflict. He realised this
date their data and analyse their findings. After a behaviour was not going to help in any way.
month or two, KZF, with the community facilitators,
He started slowly withdrawing from participating in
went back to the communities to share the findings
beer drinking and increased his participation in com-
of the baseline and check the accuracy of the data.
munity meetings. He found counselling support. And
Facilitators asked community members Is this true?
his relationship with his family improved. He became
Does this reflect our conversation accurately? And
more trusted in his home to handle money, and not
in those feedback meetings, people would be even
spend it recklessly buying alcohol. The relationship
more stimulated by the findings and want to add
with his wife improved: from fear to mutual respect
more detail.
and trust. Responsibilities within the home changed:
the husband started to take on work and contribute
PPS: In Tapo community, there is a lot of traditional
to the costs of the household, taking some pressure
beer brewing. During our community engagement
off his wife.
processes, community members were disturbed by
people coming to these meetings while drunk, and And now, he is a public role model, speaking publicly
disrupting the sessions. In their talks about working in community meetings to share his experience and
together and taking responsibility together, people promote anti-GBV and good marriages. He even
identified the link between GBV and alcohol. volunteers now with a womens group, supported
through a PPS grant that reinforces their work in
During one meeting, a participant spontaneously
agriculture and food security.
disclosed I am one of those who get drunk. I take
beer and make sure that day that my wife is beaten. He has been so transformed through the process
My family has lost confidence in me. Through the that the community trusts him deeply, even electing
meetings, he felt challenged to shift his behaviour him as the chairperson of the WDC.
to be more like other couples and families who he
Principles / 95
9. EMOTIONAL BEFORE RATIONAL
If we design our consultation process to engage the emotional before the rational (feelings
before facts), people in communities are more likely to engage, participate and respond.
If we only give people information, without caring about their feelings, consultation becomes ineffective; com-
munication breaks down.
If people feel genuinely listened to validated, recognised, and respected then they are more likely to gain
confidence to respond and participate. Dialogue creates the space for people to feel listened to.
If people have the opportunity to express themselves not only to listen to our information then the space for
engagement and ownership and participation is opened.
(When we only provide information, then people shut down; they keep to themselves; they dont share; the
information is received, but not digested or applied.)
If we only introduce facts and information, people can resist and feel disengaged, but if we can make that infor-
mation personal (what this means for me, my friends, my family), then people are more receptive and engaged.
ZPS with PPS: The Zambian Police Service boys which was compromising the childrens rights
has a community services directorate. We to education. We began to discuss these issues
were invited for a meeting with Oxfam to join in as with the communities from a rights perspective, and
partners with the AACES project. We have a unit many stories came up. The community was quite
focussed on child protection and child safety, and knowledgeable once the conversations began, shar-
this seemed a good match for that objective in the ing many real life experiences known to them; this
project. We formed a team with PPS and began to opened up more opportunities to name the issue
follow their sanitation-promotion process, visiting more directly and publicly. At first, some of them
the communities together to share life experiences didnt even know it was a crime. But they came to
and community concerns, and to discuss. And we realise it and started holding each other responsible.
gave input to the consultations that could open up its our husbands, said some mothers, giving
the discussion about child safety. our daughters away.
Through our visits we realised there were many No, said some husbands and fathers, its the moth-
early marriages of girls leading to an interruption in ers who look after our daughters. They allow it for
education, as well as child labour especially for our daughters.
96 / Principles
these parents are pulling their children out of before the wedding took place, in time to prevent
school to work, or to get married reported some it. In Imalyo, Lukweta and Lukakanya communities,
teachers. villages formed neighbourhood watch committees
We now hear reports that communities are standing to monitor that childrens rights are respected and
against families who are trying to marry off children. not abused.
And children themselves are realising their rights. And we ourselves, as the police service, learned. We
In a community in Imalyo ward, a girl who was due realised that we have to follow-up with the commu-
to be married complained to her headmaster and nities regularly, despite the distances. When we feel
neighbours. The community challenged the wedding close to them, it helps them keep up their progress.
and called the police who arrived in that village just
Principles / 97
10. QUESTIONS INSTEAD OF INFORMATION; STIMULATION INSTEAD
OF SOLUTIONS
If we stimulate communities with good questions, instead of providing information only,
people become engaged in discussion, participation increases, and organisations gain insight
into how to adapt their consultation process.
If you go to the community with an inquisitive mind not going with answers and information to pour
into their heads then people become more aware of what they have, their social capital, their strengths
and abilities.
If you go to the community with an inquisitive mind, then it increases peoples self-efficacy and sense of
self-worth. They are challenged in their assumptions that expertise is external. They realise they are trusted
and that their local knowledge is respected. They begin to feel equal.
If you go to the community with an inquisitive mind, then people stop depending on outside strengths; they
acknowledge they are endowed within, and generate solutions that reflect their aspiration (hopeful, optimistic,
future-focussed).
If we base our consultation process on asking questions first so as to understand the local context and expe-
rience (not start by giving education and information), then we gain insight that helps inform our strategies for
engagement; questions stimulate their interest in the process, and help us know what people want to know.
If we base our consultation on asking questions first, not giving information, then it stimulates more questions;
people become curious to know more and start inviting information, and are keen to come together.
If consultation starts first with questions, not information, the right questions allow people to explore their own
experiences and identify with the issues in a personal way. Then people begin to engage with and resolve their
own questions.
If we stimulate, rather than simply educate through information, people become more interested in learning
more, and invite consultation.
98 / Principles
Village Water Zambia: Village Water Zambia And we provide no answers, only questions. We let
has helped to establish sanitation commit- the community decide, because we believe they
tees in schools. The process undertaken with them know best.
is not training or infrastructure, its not about edu-
And now, what do we do about that?
cation to increase knowledge or correct practices
and attitudes, as if people dont know anything. We And who will provide that?
see our role, rather, as trying to ignite what they
Where will those resources come from?
do know.
Where else would we be able to use this solution?
In Tuwambwa School, for instance, we walk into
the classroom and begin discussion with teachers Weve seen how this approach takes our structural
and learners. We curiously ask questions about all interventions (like sanitation at school) and expands
kinds of things sanitation behaviours, nutrition, its impact. Because of the simple way we do dis-
hand-washing and walk around the school envi- cussion, learners themselves are carrying those
ronment together thinking about those same things questions back to their homes and influencing their
at some physical locations. We try to stimulate families. If they can experience better sanitation
conversation that surfaces the gaps between what and hygiene at school, they recognise that they can
people know and how people behave. continue that experience at home.
Principles / 99
11. RELATIONSHIP AND TRUST
If we have established a relationship and trust with communities, they participate more freely
in discussion and dialogue without suspicion or a sense of interrogation. Consultation is not
an event; it is part of an ongoing conversation in the community.
If we create space and time to establish real relationships and trust with communities, then development pro-
cesses can become genuinely community-led, and we are able to move together.
If we establish trust with people through relationships, then they are more free and willing to participate in con-
sultation it is part of an ongoing conversation. (Without relationships, people begin to feel interrogated and
suspicious and resistant to conversation.)
If we have an existing programme (relationship, trust, integrity, quality), it facilitates easier implementation of
new processes, and smoother consultation. A good start generates a good ending. It matters how we start.
KZF: Practical interventions and construc- they wanted to represent them to conduct the
tion of latrines in our community only started PRA. We took time to explain that participating in
happening in 2012/2013. But the AACES programme the project was voluntary and for the benefit of the
started in 2011. We used that first year as a year of community. There were no stipends or volunteer
getting ready: an important step for us. allowances.
We needed to conduct a baseline process in the After selection, a training was facilitated jointly by
community as part of doing consultation. We met KZF, Oxfam and the Minister of Health to enable
with the district council as the institution we were facilitators to conduct the PRA. Twenty one facili-
going to work with. We agreed together on how tators were trained, six of these women, and there
the project was going to be implemented. We went was an attempt, from the beginning of the project,
together with members of the council (and Oxfam to be inclusive and conscious of gender. Most of
and the Ministry of Health) to visit traditional leaders the community activities typically leave women out,
and introduce the idea, wanting to hear from them along with people with disability.
if they were willing to accommodate the project in
We saw that through the PRA, the work was not
their community.
going to be completed by that first group of facil-
The chiefs called a community meeting and itators. Looking at the work and distances to be
informed the community that they need to select covered, the facilitators themselves reported feeling
members as focal people for this work. Community overloaded. This created demand for more support.
members then selected from themselves people
100 / Principles
Once again, community members selected new It was a slower way to start than moving straight to
facilitators and a community-based training hap- implementing activities, but we saw the first stage
pened. KZF supported the process with stationery as an important investment in building relationship
and logistics, but this second-round training was with the communities so they trust us, and knew we
co-facilitated by the first round facilitators them- respected them and their choices.
selves who, by now, had experience and skill to
transfer to new facilitators.
Principles / 101
12. INCLUSION
If we make provision in our activities to accommodate the needs of people during public
consultation (e.g. childcare), then they feel included; inclusion leads to greater participation.
If you want to include people, then you have to make provision for the circumstances (logistics, environment
etc.) that enable inclusion.
If people who are themselves the subject of marginalisation are enabled to participate as part of a team, they
express their capabilities and leadership in ways that challenge the attitudes, assumptions and behaviours of
others towards them.
KZF: Before WASH, life was not good for I shared my story of living with disability, of being
those living with disabilities in this district; blind and still gaining an education, and convinced
they were really disadvantaged. As a blind man, I the teachers that it was only a mobility issue for this
was eagerly happy to join KZF. And in 2015, I began girl. KZF assisted to secure a wheelchair, and she is
working with them to sensitise communities. In now attending school.
community meetings wed ask do you have people
Broadly, attitudes are changing. From early 2015,
with disabilities in your homes, and where are they
self-help groups were formed in Namando, Nyambi,
at this meeting? Why are they not here with the rest
Mulwa wards. Community members come together
of the community?. People would tell us even if
in a group of 5-15 people as a savings group, a
they came, what are they going to do here?
village bank, giving each other small loans and
In Namando, we went to conduct a sensitisation, generating interest. These groups also generate
and discovered a number of disabled children in income to allow the community to repair and main-
the villages, not going to school. One parent shared tain WASH facilities. Each of the 36 savings groups
how they wanted to bring their daughter to school, now includes people living with disability who would
but teachers felt they did not know how to handle normally not have participated before because
her. They felt that she could not be educated just people were not seen to have value or a contribution
because of her physical disability. to make.
102 / Principles
13. INTEGRATION
If we work in an integrated way, looking at the broad whole not only on separate special
parts then complex development outcomes at community level become more achievable
and sustainable.
If we integrate rights-awareness and human-rights based approaches into our project work, the people with
whom we work go beyond implementing development activities towards advocating for their rights and the
rights of others, even when it challenges culture and tradition.
If we integrate service-delivery and development with rights work, people gain confidence to engage with
power and disrupt the status quo.
When we think as generalists, not only as specialists, then the process for our work with communities (how
we work) becomes as important as the content of our work (what we work on), if not more important.
When we move as a team with other stakeholders - connected across sectors through an interdisciplinary,
integrated approach we overcome barriers to access, to reach and to uptake.
If we work in an integrated way that focuses on building community cohesion and participation, one issue
(e.g. sanitation) can become the entry-point to achieving multiple outcomes on many issues at home, family,
neighbourhood, civic and institutional levels.
If we simply integrate programs and content without paying careful attention to process, then outcomes are
diluted and difficult to distinguish or attribute.
David Mwamba, OGB: Many of us as use this special focus to look at other components
development workers have very specialist, of development. We must realise that communities
technical skills that sometimes pigeonhole us. dont live their lives in sectors. They live in an inte-
Just because you have specialist training doesnt grated way. Everything matters to them, because all
mean you only have to think in your speciality. Even those things add up in the life they live.
though you are trained as a specialist, and you are
an expert in that area, you have to think in a broad KZF: School Health and Nutrition Clubs (SHN)
integrated way. For example, WASH was thematic were an initiative of the government. The concept
and specific, but we had to also think about how we was well described on paper, but the clubs were
Principles / 103
not functioning well through lack of resources, and school in a wheelchair. In Nooki in 2015, as we
even then only in some areas. When WASH started were doing sensitisation, communities came out
with sensitisation in schools, some teachers were to say there were some children twins from the
selected by their schools to be trained as SHN coor- Chiefs home who, instead of going to school were
dinators, forming SHN clubs in schools to educate being kept in the house for initiation ceremonies to
learners about sanitation. When the clubs started prepare them for marriage. Together with the police
operating in seven schools, the trained APMs and YWCA, the community took action to influence
worked to rehabilitate boreholes at the schools, the the Chief to release the girls to go back to school.
linkage facilitated through KZF.
PPS: In Tapo community, there is a lot of traditional
The SHN Clubs went on to form another committee
beer brewing. During our community engagement
VWASH that was made up of pupils and parents
processes, community members were disturbed
who would travel to villages to stimulate them and
by people coming to these meetings while drunk,
encourage them to build toilets, introduce CLTS and
disrupting the sessions. In their talks about working
hand-washing facilities. The whole idea was that
together and taking responsibility together, people
after learners were educated and changed their
identified the link between GBV and alcohol.
behaviour at school, this should continue at home.
Positive behaviour at school needed to continue at During one meeting, a participant spontaneously
home in order for it to become normal and consis- disclosed I am one of those who get drunk. I take
tent. When we went around the villages for WASH, beer and make sure that day that my wife is beaten.
we heard lots of stories of girls getting pregnant My family has lost confidence in me. Through the
and leaving school, or boys leaving school to start meetings he felt challenged to shift his behaviour
working. We realised that it wasnt enough to only to be more like other couples and families who he
deal with WASH. We partnered with YWCA (working realised were not living in conflict. He realised this
on GBV) and the police (working on child protection) behaviour was not going to help in any way.
to start sensitising the community on other issues.
He started slowly withdrawing from participating
Both parents and children became more aware
in beer drinking and increased his participation in
of the rights of children, and some things began
community meetings. He found counselling support.
to change.
And his relationship with his family improved. He
Before the process, the enrolment in school was became more trusted in his home to handle money,
quite low, due to early marriages. WASH was an and not spend it recklessly buying alcohol. The
entry-point for us to address gender-based violence relationship with his wife improved: from fear to
and child safety which has improved the enrolments mutual respect and trust. Responsibilities within the
in our schools as fewer young girls are being given home changed: the husband started to take on work
into marriage by their families, and fewer young and contribute to the costs of the household, taking
boys are leaving school in order to start working. some pressure off his wife.
In Namando, the school there is one of those And now, he is a public role model, speaking pub-
schools where there is a child who is now attending licly in community meetings to share his experience
104 / Principles
and promote anti-GBV and good marriages. He even sensitisation, the community was much more aware
volunteers now with a womens group, supported of the rights of the girl, and influenced that mother
through a PPS grant that reinforces their work in to reverse her decision and return the girl to school.
agriculture and food security. He has been so trans-
In Matonga, a 13 year old girl was married off to
formed through the process that the community
trusts him deeply, even electing him as the chair- a 27 year old man. The girl, traumatised by the
person of the WDC. demands of her husband, ran back home, but was
threatened with violence from her parents who
PSS: After the communities were becoming more chased her back. She endured the abuse sexually
aware of childrens rights, a man in Lukweta forced abused by night, pressed into demanding domestic
himself on a 13-year old girl. The girl came running work by day until she couldnt continue any longer,
home, crying, and the parents reported the case and ran away a second time. Again, her parents
to the Community Child Protection committee. The threatened to beat her unless she returned to the
CPC with the parents came to Mongu town seeking husband. The girl reported her own case to the
medical care for the child and justice from the traditional leaders in the village who put pressure on
police. The police informed PPS that they wanted the family to return the dowry to the husband so the
to get the culprit but didnt have the fuel to travel girl could be set free.
the 180km to reach there. PPS supported with fuel,
and the police were able to act on the complaint, Zambia Police Service (ZPS), Mongu: If we had
capture the suspect and arrest him, leading to his not worked with PPS and their approach, we would
conviction. Before community consultation through not have worked in this consultative way. We would
the AACES project, such things were happening all have just used a radio and loudspeakers, broad-
the time, but were accepted as normal. The family casting child safety messages to the community as
would not have reported the crime, but would simply we drove through a village. But no one would pay
have negotiated with the defiler to pay a penalty. attention.
They behaved differently in this case because they
had a better understanding of rights. Before, we never really discussed with the com-
munity. We found out from them only after this
Prior to sensitisation, Lukweta school reported six consultative process that our information-only
girls married off in previous years, removed from approach wasnt changing their behaviour. It wasnt
schooling. There was also an increasing number of stimulating them to acknowledge issues or talk
teenage pregnancies. Since the process began in to each other about those issues. Tradition was
the communities, we have been monitoring the situ- more powerful than information. Information didnt
ation, and no more girls have been married off.
change their conscience. And, by reputation alone,
In that same community, a mother gave birth if wed gone in alone as police and law enforcement,
to twins and removed her young daughter from the turnout by the community would be small.
school to assist to care for the babies. Following People would be afraid of us and would avoid us.
Principles / 105
Processes that unlock imagination
about the future, aspiration, dreams
for the future and optimism build
hopefulness. Hope is a factor that
stimulates response in people
and communities.
106
107
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
This publication supports the case made in development process, specifically because human
the first volume of this series on facilitating capacity is being developed.
active civic engagement: that good practice in 4. Public health and community development projects
development is characterised by communities are more effective with higher, longer-lasting impact
taking action, and by organisations when soft human development outcomes are
responsibly and respectfully supporting that achieved as complements to the outcomes of hard
technical interventions.
action through facilitation of both community
response and civil society solidarity. 5. Good consultation drives a more comprehensive
process towards public participation and public
Volume Two expands on this argument, venturing a accountability. It is possible to systematically
number of supplementary observations from which to facilitate consultation so that it catalyses deepening
build a more robust analysis of response, facilitative levels of responsiveness in households and commu-
practice and development results. nities. Ultimately, getting consultation right early on
is a strategic springboard to achieving active civic
1. Human agency the capacity innate in human engagement by ordinary people in the environments
beings to think, to choose, to will, to act from their where they live.
own volition makes it possible for individuals and
communities to respond in life. People and the com- 6. Response spreads a product of deepening partic-
munities of which they are a part have the capacity ipation and growing social cohesion sometimes
to be the subject of their own response, rather than exceeding the pace or anticipated scope and range
the object of some other external force or intention; of planned project activities.6 One successfully
they can be that which acts, rather than the thing responding household or one responding community
acted upon. has the capability to influence movement in others,
transferring vision and energy for action. In as much
2. Human response, especially in difficult conditions as there are vectors for the spread of disease,
and environments, can be made easier - smoother could community-driven participation be a vector
- through facilitation, supportively administered by for the expansion of responses for relational health
organisations at different levels of operation and between multiple communities?
relationship to individuals and communities.
7. The strongest movement was stimulated where
3. Participation, inclusion and agency are not inad- facilitators practiced appreciative approaches in
vertent, secondary outcomes of a development relation to people and communities, resisting the
process. Nor are they only a means to a traditional urge to plan and decide on behalf of the seemingly
or technical health or development outcome. They less informed or under-educated. The facilitators
are, themselves, core indicators and outcomes of a assumption is capacity, that everyone can think, and
108 / Concluding thoughts

it appears to unlock the capability and confidence suggests that development of this nature is, at least
of communities to figure out a way forward. Could it in part, relationally driven. Individual attention and
follow then to suggest that, developmentally speak- interest are captured through consultation, but as
ing, work done to support and strengthen the inter- participation deepens, individuals draw together into
nal locus of control the sense of self-efficacy in a collective, and draw others into their wake. It may
individuals and collectives coupled with increased be considered that the corollary is also true: when
knowledge of rights, leads to increased engagement efforts are made to strengthen the relational health
and better informed choice for the exercise of per- and wellness of a community, isolated individuals
sonal power? find a supportive solidarity to think and act together,
leading to participation, joint ownership and collec-
8. Processes that unlock imagination about the future,
tive action.
aspiration, dreams for the future and optimism
build hopefulness. Hope is a factor that stimulates 11. The principles of response explored in the Theory
response in people and communities. of Change, and the practice of facilitation by organ-
isations arose initially from the NHI-Accountability
9. People and communities respond well to the sup-
Project, described in Volume One of this series as an
port, stimulus and facilitation of organisations that
position themselves as learners alongside commu- exercise in participatory health policy engagement.
nities, not as instructors. Curiosity and an inquisitive Volume Two, however, demonstrates a continuity
mind are useful qualities to cultivate in organisations of many of these principles and practices, suggest-
who are intent on being effective facilitators of coming they are transferable beyond process-driven
munity responses within the development sector. development into more typical service-delivery
paradigms such as the delivery of water, sanitation
10. The correlation between increasing social cohesion and hygiene.
and progress through the cycle of responsiveness
It is a promising consideration that these same principles and practices, the same
mechanisms behind the movement and expansion of human and community responsiveness,
might apply to yet other areas of development: stigma-reduction, treatment access, improved
health facility service utilisation, gender-based violence, post-conflict reconciliation, health
facility and health service revitalisation, or substance abuse.
Concluding thoughts / 109

ENDNOTES
1 The first version of these steps originated in 2015 communities and participatory engagement with
as project implementers of the NHI-Account- community-based partner organisations was
ability Project (discussed in Volume One of this becoming more normal practice for Oxfam GB
series of publications) reflected on their practice, as an intermediary. Consultation was no longer
some two years following its conclusion. Through an initial event, it was an ongoing process. In the
that analysis, a framework emerged reflecting Zambian experience, in several implementing
fundamental elements of their approach as Inter- locations, communities and community-based
mediaries in that specific project. These elements partners were included as early in this sequence
were, in fact, logical and sequential, although of steps as STEP ONE joint analysis of the
they had not been consciously implemented in context and throughout subsequent stages,
that way at the time of the project. naturally, as an ideal situation to optimise active
civic engagement. STEP FOUR, in that case, rep-
For this second volume, literature review and a
resented an expansion, a concentration, an inten-
similar narrative process with representatives of
sification, of themes within the broader context
Oxfam Australia in South Africa and Oxfam Great
Britain in Zambia yielded an abundance of stories of community consultation (e.g. integrating child
about Oxfams role in the project through the protection, disability-inclusion and gender).
AACES programme. These stories clustered sim-
3 Zambias experience extends this STEP FOR
ilarly around the same essential steps distilled in
INTERMEDIARIES by one more level: the Interme-
Volume One, reinforcing that theory of approach.
diary organisation in Zambia (Oxfam GB) sought
2 It must be noted that for instance, in Zambia to work not only to activate local communities
many of these community-based partnerships and civil society or community-based organi-
and relationships were already in place in some sations, or to make government a target. It also
form prior to AACES. Continuity of relationship strategised to, simultaneously, engage early on
and connection extended over time, across with administrative structures and systems in
previous projects, so that consultation with government, offering opportunity to connect
110 / Endnotes
state interests to community interests, and place owing to insufficient resourcing to enable
broker relationship and synergy. them to operate.
4 In 2012, Moeti Kgare undertook two research 5 As has already been stated in the introduction
assignments commissioned through Oxfam to PRACTICES, from the inception of the AACES
Australia in South Africa, linked to the NHI-Ac- project, Zambian partners explicitly aimed to use
countability Project discussed in Volume 1 of this WASH as an entry-point to promote civic engage-
series of publications. He reviewed the National ment and accountability of duty-bearers, and to
Health Act, mapping out any legal provisions do so in a coordinated way between partners.
that were in place for public participation, and South African partners, by contrast, focussed
tried to understand how these were framed, more on incorporating elements of water, sanita-
what the roles and responsibilities were for var- tion and hygiene programming into their existing
ious stakeholders and actors, and whether any localised programme and service-delivery work,
provisions were made in the law for how public with less explicit intent on influencing work until
participation should work. Finding that such much later in the programme. This difference
provision was made, Moeti went on to conduct in original intention, design and practice makes
a study to test the functional operation of these Zambia an ideal point of reference from which
structures (clinic committees and hospital boards to extract principles of approach for facilitating
as provisions for participation) in two health active civic engagement.
districts, exploring whether this legislative frame-
work actually applied in practice. He found that 6 As is evident in communities in Zambia, where
most of these structures had not been formed neighbouring villages began applying CLTS princi-
in health facilities as prescribed in the Health ples and constructing latrines, modifying person-
Act and that, where they were formed, they were al sanitation behaviour, seemingly spontaneously
not functional. Much as in this Zambian scenario without being directly engaged by the project, or
guidelines existed, but the structures were not in being beneficiaries of any implemented activity.
Endnotes / 111
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Walters, R. 2016. Facilitating Civic Engagement through Galvin, M. 2013. Occasional Paper 2: Addressing
Consultation: Learning from Local Communities Southern Africas Sanitation Challenges through
through the NHI-Accountability Project in South Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS)
Africa.
Australia Africa Community Engagement Scheme
Oxfam Australia. 2011. Oxfam AACES Program Design Annual Report 2012-13, Advancing Disability-inclu-
Document (post-peer review) 2011 2016. sive Development
Wilson, I. 2013. Learning from AACES and Oxfam WASH Equal Education Annual Report 2014
approaches in Zambia: Report on the review of the
Zambian approaches being adopted in planning, Lubbee, W., Nyamayaro, J., Judge, D., Mwamba, D.
implementing, monitoring and evaluating the Austra- 2012. Annual Narrative Report Oxfam Community-
lia Africa Community Engagement Scheme (AACES) Led Access to Water Sanitation and Hygiene (1 July
WASH program in Zambia. 2011 30 June 2012)
Besley, M. 2014. Value for Money within the Oxfam Lubbee, W., Nyamayaro, J., Judge, D., Mwamba, D.
Community-Led Access to Water, Sanitation and 2013. Annual Narrative Report Oxfam Communi-
Hygiene Program in South Africa and Zambia: ty-Led Access to Water Sanitation and Hygiene (1
Mid-programme review. July 2012 30 June 2013)
Besley M. 2015. Value for Money Assessment: Lubbee, W., Nyamayaro, J., Pupe, J., Mwamba, D. 2014.
Oxfam South Africa, Australia Africa Community Annual Narrative Report Oxfam Community-Led
Engagement Scheme (AACES) Capacity Building Access to Water Sanitation and Hygiene (1 July
Component. 2013 30 June 2014)
Roper, M., Mukova-Moses, M. 2014. Mid-term Review Lubbee, W., Nyamayaro, J., Pupe, J., Mwamba, D.,
of the Oxfam AACES Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Moses, M. 2015. Annual Narrative Report Oxfam
Program in South Africa and Zambia Community-Led Access to Water Sanitation and
Hygiene (1 July 2014 30 June 2015)
Comninos, S. 2011. Report on the Consultative Engage-
ment in Western Zambia: Contribution to the con- 2014. Sanitation and Hygiene in Underserved Commu-
textual analysis to inform Oxfam AACES programme nities, South Africa WASH Governance Influencing
design workshop (6-12 February 2011) Strategy. (2 March 2014)
Oxfam Australia in South Africa. 2013. Report on the Roper, M. 2016. Oxfam Australia Africa Community
Community-led Total Sanitation Roundtable (28 Engagement Scheme, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
August 2013) Program: End of Programme Evaluation
112 / Bibliography
113
114
When we started, on this giant river of AACES, we battled along in what was
essentially a dug-out canoe. It was too tough. So we had to jump out of that
boat that we were paddling. Imagine that we jumped out of the boat INTO
the river itself! People on the banks kept looking at us in the first two years
of this ambitious project, asking when we were going to start implementing.
But, we HAD started. We had got into the river.
And we were looking for other people in that river who would join us.
David Mwamba, Oxfam WASH Program Manager, Zambia
This publication is the second in a series exploring the principles and practices for
effectively facilitating active civic engagement, focussing on the character and effect of
participation, and the behaviour of facilitation.
It draws directly on the experience of those organisations and communities engaged

in water, sanitation and hygiene work (WASH) in partnership with Oxfam through the
Australia Africa Community Engagement Scheme (AACES), a project implemented in
Zambia and South Africa between 2011 and 2016.
Winding its way through pit latrines and floodplains, through village school clubs
and widows savings groups, past Chinese contractors and bridges, from the World
Bank to the seats of rural local government, stretching between Africa and Australia,
these stories of ordinary people, making extraordinary progress, in the places they
call home, might offer insight to programmers and policy makers about approaches
that stimulate responsiveness in citizens and communities and enable more confident
expressions of their civic voice and agency.
Sustainable change is almost always hard-won. Development implementers often

paddling upstream through unpredictable currents can take the first step to cease
the striving that too often comes with intervention: to climb out of the boat of their
own uncertain devising, and step into the river where the action is. To risk, and trust
the tide. To participate, and find in that place, others who have learned to navigate
the river through more familiar channels, sufficiently provoked by their presence to
journey new courses together.

Facilitating Active Civic Engagement: From Consultation To Participation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Facilitating Active Civic Engagement: From Consultation To Participation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Facilitating Active Civic Engagement: From Consultation To Participation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FACILITATING ACTIVE

A publication supported by the Australian Department

Published by Oxfam Australia in South Africa

Author: Ricardo Walters

Whats this all about? 5

The Context: A background to AACES and WASH 10

Concluding thoughts 108

Whats this all about? / 1

2 / Whats this all about?

Oxfam Australia in South Africa

Whats this all about? / 3

AACES Australia Africa Community Engagement M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

Whats this all about? / 5

In 2015, two years after the conclusion of that project,

6 / Whats this all about?

Capacities, qualities In synthesising and analysing experience generat-

The lessons learned and reflected will contribute to

Whats this all about? / 7

8 / Whats this all about?

Intermediary organisations Community-based organisations

Whats this all about? / 9

7. Consultation and participation are distinct stages

If people are properly activated, then they take responsibility for

Oxfam Australia in South Africa: WASH had never

Effectively, we come full-circle. We filter new learning Comninos of Umphilo waManzi.

for CBOs facilitating participation and response

2. Have a mature, current, vibrant practical experience in health programming, service-

10. Stimulate reflection and engagement through combination-approaches. Mix consultation

11. Consultation and stimulation happened through small focus-group discussion.

18. Support communities towards demand-driven action and advocacy.

CHARACTERISTIC PRACTICES KZF PPS VWZ

1. The organisation had a strong, high-quality pre-existing relationship

3. Leadership of the facilitation, consultation and participation process

4. Tangible programme activities and development interventions did

We used 2011 to build relationships with the local community,

5. The organisation involved the community members themselves

PPS: Involve the people themselves from the very begin-

6. At the inception of the process, the organisation met with the

PPS: We were not going to enter the community and

7. Inclusion is an integrated part of the process thinking from the very

PPS: We built into our first engagement with the tradi-

8. The CBO worked with the community to generate an integrated

PPS: Before initiating any activities, we worked with each

We did a transect walk together, looking at the resources and chal-

A community meeting was called to give feedback on the baseline

9. After-action reflection and debriefing is an institutionalised

10. Consultation and stimulation happened by convening large commu-

11. Consultation and stimulation happened through small focus-group

12. Consultation was designed as a combination of home visits (pri-

13. The consultation process was first stimulated/provoked through

14. The consultation process and events created an opportunity for

15. Consultation processes started from an affective point of refer-

16. Organisations describe their role as that of development facilita-

17. Consultation was bottom-up, working directly with the community.

Ministry of Education, Luampa: They KZF took the

Village Water Zambia: We engaged government from the start. If

18. Organisations practiced facilitation as a way of working, stimulating

19. Organisations accompanied the communities throughout the pro-

PPS: We cant say we are specialists in anything. But