Brldglng THE

BRIDGING THE GAP The role of local churches in fostering local-level social accountability and governance BRIDGING THE GAP The role of local churches in fostering local-level social accountability and governance Author: Charlotte Flowers Design: Wingfinger Graphics Cover image: Community members from Owii, Uganda, have benefited from CCM advocacy. Andrew Philip/Tearfund This report was made possible by the enthusiasm, resourcefulness and helpfulness of the Pentecostal Assemblies of God (PAG) staff in Soroti, particularly Samuel Emenyu and Patrick Onaga. The senior leadership of PAG and the advocacy programme team members, including the local facilitators and pastors, played a key role in the planning of the research activities and in providing the logistical support for their implementation. It was a pleasure to work with the project team in this evaluation. The research was enriched by conversations with decision-makers in different levels of government who willingly took the time to meet with our researchers and share their views. Thanks go to Jacklyn Makaaru Arinaitwe, who completed phase one of the research. The report also owes much to support from Tearfund staff, particularly Joanna Watson, Melissa Lawson, Lucie Woolley and Sarah Onduko. Special thanks go to the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) and the support of Dr Cathérine Müller throughout the course of the research. Above all, we would like to thank the individuals and communities who welcomed us, allowed us to use their valuable time, shared many crucial insights and gave us the opportunity to learn from them. We are extremely grateful to them for allowing us to share their learning with others wishing to integrate advocacy into CCM. This research has been produced with the financial support of Making All Voices Count. Making All Voices Count is a programme working towards a world in which open, effective and participatory governance is the norm and not the exception. This Grand Challenge focuses global attention on creative and cutting-edge solutions to transform the relationship between citizens and their governments. Making All Voices Count is supported by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), US Agency for International Development (USAID), Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, and Omidyar Network (ON), and is implemented by a consortium consisting of Hivos, the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) and Ushahidi. The programme is inspired by and supports the goals of the Open Government Partnership. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the official policies of Making All Voices Count or our funders. www.makingallvoicescount.org [email protected] @allvoicescount © Tearfund 2016 Tearfund is a Christian relief and development agency building a global network of local churches to help eradicate poverty. FC2 BRIDGING THE GAP CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................3 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................8 1.1 Project ..........................................................................................8 1.2 Purpose of the report ............................................................................8 2 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................9 2.1 Approach ........................................................................................9 2.2 Limitations .....................................................................................10 3 PROGRAMME OVERVIEW ........................................................................ 11 3.1 Context ........................................................................................ 11 3.2 Church and community mobilisation .............................................................12 3.3 CCM advocacy process ..........................................................................12 4 KEY CROSS-CUTTING FINDINGS .................................................................13 4.1 Key strengths ...................................................................................13 4.1.1 Local churches are trusted ..................................................................13 4.1.2 Individual and collective confidence .........................................................14 4.1.3 Advocacy training improving knowledge. .15 4.1.4 Communities mobilising their own resources .................................................16 4.1.5 Unity within the community ................................................................ 17 4.1.6 Strengthened relationships between the community and government ........................... 17 4.1.7 Strategic planning .........................................................................19 4.2 Key challenges ..................................................................................21 4.2.1 Plans not linked to the constitution or policies ................................................21 4.2.2 Lack of monitoring of government performance ...............................................22 4.2.3 Need for more engagement. 22 4.2.4 Quality of the training .....................................................................22 5 THE FIVE RESEARCH PARAMETERS ..............................................................23 5.1 Transparency ...................................................................................23 5.2 Citizen empowerment ...........................................................................24 5.3 Inclusion/exclusion .............................................................................25 5.4 Government responsiveness .....................................................................26 5.5 Power dynamics ................................................................................31 6 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................33 7 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................35 7.1 Recommendations specific to CCM ...............................................................35 7.2 Recommendations specific to the CCM advocacy programme .....................................35 ANNEX 1 LOCATIONS VISITED AND PEOPLe interviewed – fieLD WORK PHASE ONE ....................................37 ANNEX 2 LOCATIONS VISITED AND PEOPLe interviewed – fieLD WORK PHASE TWO. 38 ANNEX 3 INFORMATION ON CCM AND CCM ADVOCACY. 39 © TEARFUND 2016 1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CCM Church and community mobilisation CDC Community Development Committee FGD Focus group discussion GBV Gender-based violence IGT Information-gathering team LC Local council NGO Non-governmental organisation NUSAF Northern Uganda Social Action Fund OWC Operation Wealth Creation (Government of Uganda) PAG Pentecostal Assemblies of God PEP Participatory Evaluation Process PWD Person with disability TBA Traditional birth attendant 2 BRIDGING THE GAP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Tearfund is a faith-based organisation which envisions and empowers local churches in more than 50 countries – to see communities developed, disasters responded to and governments held accountable. As a key part of its government accountability work, Tearfund has been supporting local churches to mobilise their communities to engage in local-level advocacy for some years now. In Uganda, Tearfund partner Pentecostal Assemblies of God (PAG) recently completed a pilot programme to introduce advocacy into the church and community mobilisation (CCM)1 process. Through CCM, churches inspire and build the capacity of citizens to identify issues in their community and, importantly, mobilise their own resources to address issues such as health, water and education. The PAG pilot programme aims to empower communities to engage in local-level advocacy so that they draw down local government resources to address issues, hold local government accountable and help bring about improved service delivery. This research aimed to identify and better understand the strengths and distinctive characteristics of local churches in catalysing citizens to engage with their local governments, as well as the challenges they faced in so doing. It also aimed to provide learning to strengthen Tearfund’s local governance and accountability work across the world. The research focused on the role that local CCM churches in Uganda play in five key parameters: n transparency n citizen empowerment n exclusion and inclusion n government responsiveness n power dynamics Community members from Owii, Uganda, have benefited from CCM advocacy. Andrew Philip/Tearfund 1 CCM is a method used globally, but in Uganda it is called the Participatory Evaluation Process (PEP). For more information on CCM and CCM advocacy, see Annex 3 on page 39. © TEARFUND 2016 3 Findings Strengths and weaknesses of conducting local-level advocacy through the church in Uganda across the five key parameters: STRENGTHS • There is an official transparency process through political decentralisation in Uganda. • Access is given to information on planned government programmes. • The local church is a good example of a transparent organisation. • CCM advocacy training leads to people and groups going to government to seek out the information they need in TRANSPARENCY order to advocate. WEAKNESSES • There is a lack of simplified

Load more