Emergency Response Fund Zimbabwe Annex X. This template can be used for site visits by OCHA staff, clusters, or board members participating in a site visit. Project Details Project Title: Masvingo Emergency School Rehabilitation Project Implementation Period: 1 March to 31 August 2012 Cluster: Education Organization: Plan International ERF Ref. Number: ERF-057 Locations Visited: Mapaike, Makovere North and Makovere South schools in Chivi district and Masogwe, Vinga and Shayamabvudzi schools in Mwenezi district Dates Visited: 29 and 30 August 2012 Members of Team Matilda Moyo and Alec Chikwani Visiting: Progress of Activities Review progress per the work plan submitted by the implementing organization with their initial application X Modest delays per plan, but acceptable On pace to succeed Progress is a concern Remarks: The mission visited all six schools, three in Chivi and another three in Mwenezi districts, which are benefiting from the project. The project started in March with community consultations. Actual construction work began in April and was expected to end in June 2012. It involves either rehabilitation or construction of classroom blocks following storms, depending on the extent of damage. The mission visited both schools that were constructing new blocks and those that were rehabilitating damaged ones. Progress on the schools in brief: Masogwe: The new two classroom block was completed at the end of July 2012 and it is already being used for classes. Vinga: The rehabilitated two classroom block combined with a headmaster’s office was completed in mid- July 2012 and it is already being used by pupils. Emergency Response Fund Guidelines Shayamabvudzi: The new two classroom block was complete by end of June 2012. Painting was done in August. Mapaike The new two classroom block is not complete yet. Some of the materials were still being delivered, especially the contribution by parents. The school also faces water problems and the well they were relying on dried up so they had to find another source and parents are ferrying water using scotch carts to ensure that the project is finished. The headmaster pledged that the block would be completed by the time schools reopened for the third term on 10 September. Makovere North School The block is not yet complete with a few finishing touches still outstanding such as beam filling, flooring, window frames and panes. The school also cited the water challenges as a drawback, although they have found an alternative source 3Km away. The headmaster said if work was done on the project daily, it would be complete and usable by the time schools reopen for the third term. Makovere South School The new two classroom block is not yet complete. Flooring, fitting of window panes, airvents and treatment of poles are yet to be done. The project was slowed down by the injury of the school guard during a burglary. He was hospitalized for a month and a half. The school head said the block would be complete by the time schools reopen for the third term. Context: Is the project addressing priority needs? Ensure the intervention is still the right course of action for the given context X The activities are very appropriate for the given context Needs have changed somewhat since the project was funded, but still mostly appropriate Significant reprogramming is required to ensure the projects relevance to the context The project is not at all appropriate for the given context Remarks: Given the nature and severity of the damage to schools caused by the storms, this is the best course of action, hence the project is addressing priority needs. 1 Emergency Response Fund Guidelines Community perspectives: What was the level of involvement of the community in planning and implementing the project? The success of programs frequently depends on the degree to which beneficiaries are engaged and given a voice X Highly involved Partially involved Not at all involved Not able to determine during this visit Remarks: All households within the communities were involved in the project and contributed, regardless of whether or not their children attend the school. Parents contributed materially in terms of bricks, sand and water. Where community members lacked the capacity to mould bricks, they contributed financially to the purchase of bricks or paid those who could produce them. In some cases like Mapaike, each household in the community was required to pay an additional $15 levy to support the project. Parents were grouped according to villages as each school serves a number of villages ranging from six to 18. Members from each village delivered their contribution of materials and provided labour on specific days, mostly once a week. Where the school serves many villages, e.g Masogwe which covers 18, more than one village contributed per day. The idea was to ensure that members from each village visited the benefiting school at least once a week and did some work. Each village had a supervisor, normally the chief or kraalhead, to ensure that every household provided its share of materials and labour on the agreed days. The School Development Committees (SDC), which comprise parents, were supervising the projects, with support from the line ministry and local authority. Parents who were interviewed expressed satisfaction at the level of consultation and also felt their involvement gave the community ownership over the project. Quality of project in adherence to international/national standards and best practice Either SPHERE standards, cluster endorsed local standards, or national standards for the given activity or sector should be the reference point for this section X Fully met the standards Some improvements required Did not meet the expected standards Not able to determine during this visit Remarks: Plan International has been working with the Ministry of Education, Sports, Arts and Culture (MoESAC)’s planning department and the respective town council engineers to 2 Emergency Response Fund Guidelines ensure adherence to national standards. For example, the plans used for the construction of new blocks were provided by the MoESAC and are for a standard primary school classroom block in Zimbabwe, while the ministry also supervised the construction. The council and MoESAC’s contribution to the project was in the form of technical expertise through engineers and other key staff who were supervising the project at every stage. The engineers approved each stage before the builders proceeded to the next. Plan International also provided technical support and supervision. One challenge that emerged but was addressed was the varying quality of materials contributed by households, especially bricks and sand. Communities resolved to either contribute money so these could be purchased from the same source, or to ensure that all households procure materials from the same source. Another issue mentioned was the quality and type of cement. The headmasters at Vinga and Shayamabvudzi schools said they were forced to use more cement because of the quality provided. This increased their costs although it did not compromise the quality of the building. They felt it would have been cheaper to use a better brand. The District Education Inspector from the MoESAC, Kenias Zendera said he was impressed with the community cooperation and coordination between the schools and the SDCs. He expressed satisfaction at the quality of materials and workmanship although he took cognizance of the issue raised by two schools on the quality of cement, which could have cost less in the long-run had it been better quality. He also commended the community’s role in the project, saying often times communities were content to receive, but in this project they contributed meaningfully which enhanced their ownership of the project. He also confirmed that the ministry inspected and monitored the project throughout its duration. The District Accounting Assistant for Chivi, Franco Mbire expressed concern at the slow speed of all three projects in the district. He noted that materials were available and of good quality. He also committed to continue monitoring the project as well as encourage parents to contribute towards ferrying water to the site as that was the major challenge. He was confident that the blocks would be complete by the time schools reopened for the third term. How strong was the synergy and coordination with partners in the project area? Include partnerships with local NGOs, local government, and other international actors X Very strong collaboration and information sharing Adequate collaboration Coordination with partners needs to be improved Not able to determine during this visit 3 Emergency Response Fund Guidelines Remarks: Plan International worked closely with all key stakeholders, including communities, local leaders such as chiefs, the town councils and the MoESAC. There was strong collaboration among all key players, as well as a strong sense of ownership of the project. Consideration of Cross-Cutting Issues A brief assessment of the inclusion or consideration of potential biases and vulnerable groups in the project implementation X Adequate steps were taken to identify and assist especially vulnerable groups, including through detailed and disaggregated beneficiary mapping Some steps were taken, but they could be improved Significant improvements are required Remarks: The beneficiaries, ie, children, by their nature are vulnerable. However, a mapping exercise that disaggregates data by sex was conducted prior to commencement of the project. Overall Comments Overall assessment of the project based on the above review components and additional information learned during the visit Remarks: Summary of key findings - The project was supposed to be completed by the targeted date of 30 June 2012. However, while all schools experienced some delays, those in Mwenezi district managed to complete the project by end of July at the latest. - Schools in Chivi are a concern as none of them were complete. The ministry has committed to supervising the project more closely.