December 2017
Dear Donor,
Apologies for the delay since my last communication. Following my site inspection in September 2016 (more on this below) I have been reviewing our programmes to-date prior to addressing a drilling programme for 2018. There has been some good news, some very disappointing news and more recently some very promising news.
The good news is that 19 of the 20 boreholes in Project 2016 were successfully completed, as budgeted.
The disappointing news arises from my unannounced visits on Wednesday, September 14, 2016, to three schools which were provided with boreholes and pumps in recent years. I found each of the three schools were closed event though it was the second week of the new term. Two schools said this was due to a government election being held the previous day?! No attempt had been made by the communities to develop a vegetable garden or orchard, as agreed. Nor had the community made any attempt to set up a sinking fund to provide for maintenance and repairs, as agreed. I also found that teachers were paid more inadequately and more irregularly than previously.
As a result of these revelations I put a hold on all expenditure and only very recently agreed to proceed with the successful installation of pumps at 9 of the 19 boreholes drilled in “Project 2016”. Before committing to further expenditure I intend to commission an inspection and monitoring report covering a significant selection of the c.100 installations over the last 10 years. In view of the above revelations I see such a report as absolutely essential so to evaluate and where necessary amend our selection process.
Mu unannounced visits on September 14, 2016 and the timing of the same were prompted by -
The realisation that it was four years since we had formally monitored a sample of installations.
The disturbing co-incidence of my previous three visits clashing with “School Holidays”.
The monitoring we carried out in 2012 extended to “10 installations in Central Province” and “30 installations in Eastern Province”. I led the first eight assessments so as to ensure clarity as to the format I wanted our local researchers to follow. The results of these monitoring exercises were most encouraging. This makes the discoveries in September 2016 all the more surprising.
I do not yet fully understand the causes and implications of the problems I uncovered however there are elements of each of the following involved —
Our conscious decision to assist smaller communities than those we helped in previous years. We felt the smaller communities had no hope of ever qualifying for government support and therefore were in greater need.
The comparative weakness in the structure of the smaller communities e.g.
inability to pay teachers either adequately or regularly
inability of elected community representatives to hold on to community support / respect and as a result being dumped out of office. In one case this appears to have happened because representatives were deemed to have lost the run of themselves — by trying to make progress too quickly.
An even greater absence of “can do” attitude in smaller communities.
The most disappointing of the three schools was Kabbanana where 12 months previously the elected committee and the entire community appeared to Brían MacManus and myself to be highly motivated, enthusiastic and well organised.
The very promising news is that Stuart McGovern has thankfully agreed to carry out the Monitoring Report which I see as essential (commencing in April). I should explain Stuart spend months in Zambia in 2009, 2010 and 2011 project managing our projects in those years. This is very good news indeed as I firmly believe there is nobody in as good a position to give us the management information necessary to ensure that our programmes continue to deliver adequate benefits to the communities we serve and secure good value for our donor’s contributions.
Best wishes
Sincerely
Derek Mulligan
