(KENYA) The idea of any kind of test leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I dislike the lingering and torturing questions in my mind, the anticipation, the what ifs–and then the thoughts that cloud my overexcited brain trying to process details of the unknown. Taking tests is not something I enjoy!
PCCS staff during an SS awareness session in Kenya
The idea of any kind of test leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I dislike the lingering and torturing questions in my mind, the anticipation, the what ifs–and then the thoughts that cloud my overexcited brain trying to process details of the unknown. Taking tests is not something I enjoy!
Any school student knows what I’m talking about: ask any candidate in the Kenya school system how they feel just before entering an exam room, and they would likely tell you something similar. If only we could measure the stress level of these candidates, we would know the amount of stress and anxiety that these individuals go through.
Most of us have had a similar experience. Have you? Waiting outside a doctor’s office for an uncomfortable procedure…Waiting for lab results… Waiting for the interview panel to deliver the final verdict… The long wait!
There is a similar bitter-sweet feeling when World Renew staff do assessments of development interventions. What were the inputs? What’s the result? Was it worth the investment? The staff time, the finances? How many people have been affected by the intervention? Is the behavior change sustainable? Is the intervention sustainable at community level?
Then, “Experts” come into the process to analyze the results of the projects and interventions. What was the strategy? The methodology? Was any curriculum used? How many groups were formed? How many community participants? What’s the result? Does it show community transformation?
Typically, community development interventions take five to ten years to show viable results. When I take a quick look at the current trends in overall development progress around the world and note that they indicate a shift to short-term, “high results” interventions that may not necessarily lead to sustainable community transformation, it’s a worry.
Some government departments and non-profit agencies outside of World Renew have the end of financial year “projectsand workshops” just so that they can use up their current year’s budget money and secure the next budget year’s funding allocation. The results of these funding-motivated events usually note the “number of people trained, number of supplies purchased, and number of vehicles replaced.” Alas! The behavioral and policy related results may not be accounted for in such interventions. The focus in this approach to development is the financial “burn rate” and not necessarily community transformation.
So, in my renewed quest for results at community level, I wish to see long-term community transformation resulting from good, viable community organization and ownership of interventions. I want to warn other organizations about quick fix solutions that in the long term do not yield sustainable or transformational results.
Quick fix interventions are like bandaids or first aid solutions that only stabilize the “patient” awaiting proper diagnosis and treatment. Such interventions may erode the zeal for community transformation planted in communities by local agencies and community groups. Basically, quick fix solutions yield results for the “sower” and not the community.
The account of the sower in the book of Matthew (13:3-8) can be equated to World Renew’s donors, change agents, and communities. “And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the wayside, and the birds came and ate them up: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them.” (NIV vs 4-7)
I recall a question raised by one of my colleagues some years back during a team meeting as we reflected on this chapter. “Whose fault is it, the sower or the soil?” Similarly, we can ask ourselves, , “Whose fault is it when community interventions do not yield the intended results?” Is it the change agent, or the community members, or the methodology?
I do not intend to point fingers or place blame for “failed” interventions on any group. My concern is for community buy-in and ownership prior to the implementation of projects. It is not my wish to sustain a project, but rather that communities harness locally available resources to address the deeply rooted issues and vulnerabilities through evidence-based methodologies like Stepping Stones HIV and AIDS Training Workshops. Through these more appropriate and effective programs, community members can find their own solutions to their problems. Only then can the results be sustained by local systems.
In my renewed quest for results, one key focus is scaling up “innovative” interventions that are geared toward piloting new ideas and strategies for community dialogue. Strategies that bring deep-seeded issues to the surface so they can be addressed. Strategies that draw families, couples, children, and communities closer to God and each other. Strategies that yeild long-term results long after the initial innovative seed fund is planted. As a church leader I met a few weeks ago in Uganda wrote:
Dear Nema, my sister in Christ, Many thanks to you for authoring the book titled, “Integrating HIV and AIDS Interventions.” Ever since you trained me in a workshop about three years ago and gave me this book, your material has revolutionized my work in development programs in three different organizations…
No matter how long it takes for us to see the desired results, we keep on walking and trusting God to bring His work to completion.
In Him,
Nema Aluku
Program Manager
World Renew Eastern & Southern Africa and Kenya
