1Acknowledgements
This evaluation would not have been possible without the help of the staff of the LUPP programme partners, Development Workshop, CARE, Save the Children UK, and One World Action. They showed great patience at a difficult time and I am most grateful to them. Also to the representatives of the Government of Angola and Municipal Administrations who made themselves available and were unfailingly helpful; and to the many representatives of the community-based groups who gave up their time to contribute. I would like to make special mention of Guido de Jesus Siolengue who was an excellent interpreter and to Kate Ashton for contributions, support and coordination.
Janet Gardener
GHK
526 Fulham Road, London, SW6 5NR
Tel: 020 7471 8000. Fax: 020 7736 0784
www.ghkint.com
August 2006
1 Acknowledgements 2
Table of contents 3
acronyms 4
Introduction 5
2 Influencing urban poverty policy and practice 8
2.1 Achievements 8
2.2 Challenges & Constraints 11
2.3 Effectiveness, Inclusiveness and Sustainability 12
3 Engagement and linkages with external partners 13
3.1 Achievements 13
3.2 Challenges & Constraints 13
3.3 Effectiveness, Inclusiveness and Sustainability 14
4 Participatory governance, networks & social dynamics 15
4.1 Achievements 15
4.2 Challenges & Constraints 16
4.3 Effectiveness, Inclusiveness and Sustainability 17
5 Service provision – impact & replicability 18
5.1 Water 18
5.2 Sanitation 19
5.3 Solid Waste Collection 20
5.4 Electricity 20
5.5 Early Childhood Development 20
5.6 Savings, Micro-finance and BDS 21
5.7 Effectiveness, Inclusiveness and Sustainability of LUPP’s service delivery models 24
6 Programme strategy, management arrangements & the consortium 24
6.1 Achievements 24
6.2 Challenges & Constraints for Strategy and Management 26
6.3 Effectiveness and Sustainability 26
7 Overall impact 27
8 conclusions 27
Annex 1: Terms of Reference 29
Annex 2: Itinerary 32
Annex 3: Extract from Output to Purpose Review – June 2005 34
acronyms
ABO Area Based Organisation
ACA Association of Water Committees
BIA Baseline Institutional Appraisal
BDS Business Development Services
CARE International NGO
CBO Community Based Organisation
CSO Civil Society Organisation
CDMG Country Directors Management Group
CU Coordination Unit
DFID Department for International Development
DW Development Workshop
ECD Early Childhood Development
EDEL Empresade Distribuicao de Electricidade (electricity parastatal)
ELISAL Empresade Limpeza e Saneamento de Luanda (solid waste collection parastatal)
EPAL Empres Provincial de Agua de Luanda (water parastatal)
EU European Union
FAS Social Assistance Fund
FONGA Forum for Angolan NGOs
GIS Geographical Information System
GPL Provincial Government of Luanda
GoA Government of Angola
IS Influencing Strategy
IFAL Training Institute for Local Administrators
INGO International NGO
KKDF Kilamba Kiaxi Development Forum
LUCPP Luanda Urban Child Poverty Programme
LUPP Luta Contra Pobreza Urbana / Luanda Urban Poverty Programme
LURE Luanda Urban Rehabilitation and Enterprise Programme
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MAT Ministry of Territorial Administration (Local Adminstration)
MINARS Ministry of Social Reintegration
MINUA Ministry of Urbanism and Environment
NUF National Urban Forum
ODA Area Based Organisation in Kilamba Kiaxi
OWA One World Action
PIC Projectos Infantis Comunitários (Creche)
PMU Policy and Monitoring Unit (supporting DW’s SCSP and SLP)
PRSP Poverty Reduction Paper (known in Angola as ECP)
RASME Angolan Network for the Micro Enterprise Sector
SCSP Sustainable Community Services Programme
SCUK Save the Children UK
SLP Sustainable Livelihoods Programme
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
USAID United States Department of International Aid
WB World Bank
WUF World Urban Forum
Introduction
Like most developing countries, urban poverty in Angola is the result of increasing urbanisation, high levels of inequality, poor macro-economic management and unresponsive government. In Angola, this urbanisation of poverty has been severely exacerbated by 40 years of war causing massive migration and displacement of the rural population to urban areas, widespread destruction of major infrastructure and minimal public investment in urban services.
The capital city, Luanda, has seen its population increase in two decades from approximately 1 million in 1985 to an estimated 5 million in 2006. Planned urban infrastructure is available only in the ‘concrete city’ i.e., the city centre and a small suburban area, which accommodates a population of just 500,000. The vast majority of the population of Luanda, up to 4 million people, thus live in unplanned slums known as ‘musseques’1. These are characterised by a virtual absence of basic urban services2 – neither physical nor social infrastructure, and extreme levels of vulnerability due to poor living conditions, fragmented social cohesion, high levels of dependency3, high levels of crime, and an almost total dependence on the informal economy for household income4.
Angola maybe characterised as a fragile state recovering from recent armed conflict (the latest peace agreement was established in 2002), competition for high-value oil and diamonds, a highly centralised state with weak institutional and technical capacity, poor macro-economic management and low administrative capacity, high levels of corruption, increasing inequality, and a weak, fragmented civil society. In this context, DFID has been one of the few donors supporting Angola’s efforts to move from conflict and humanitarian assistance to post-conflict development and political, economic and social stability5. In the coming year it is expected that there will be presidential and national elections (the machinery for voter registration is being put in place), with local government elections the following year.
The Luanda Urban Poverty Programme (LUPP) was framed during the war. It commenced in 1999 building on the work of the NGOs, Development Workshop and Save the Children UK and CARE. Much of Development Workshop’s interventions in the sector had been funded by DFID since 1994. The first 3-year phase of LUPP had a budget from DFID of £6.5m. Its original purpose was ‘to develop and replicate strategies for sustainable improvements in the access of the urban poor to basic services and livelihood opportunities’. A second 3-year phase (2003-06) began in April 2003 and concludes in December 2006. With a budget of £9.36m, the purpose of Phase 2 was to influence pro-poor policies and best practices for Angola by demonstrating and promoting effective, sustainable and replicable gender- and age-sensitive models and strategies for basic service delivery and poverty reduction in peri-urban Luanda. The 5 programme outputs were based on production of models of basic service provision, livelihood security, community and government capacity, and a strategic plan for influencing.
LUPP has been implemented by three international NGOs (CARE International, Save the Children U.K., and Development Workshop) working in partnership with One World Action in the U.K. It is being implemented in four municipalities of Luanda -- Cazenga, Sambizanga, Kilamba Kiaxi, and Cacuaco. LUPP2 is comprised of four projects:
-
Luanda Urban Rehabilitation and Enterprise Programme (LURE), implemented by CARE International in the municipality of Kilamba Kiaxi;
-
Luanda Urban Child Poverty Programme (LUCPP) implemented by Save the Children UK (SCUK), largely in the bairro of Hoji-ya-Henda in the municipality of Cazenga;
-
Sustainable Livelihoods Programme (SLP), implemented by Development Workshop (DW), which is Luanda-wide;
-
Sustainable Community Services Programme (SCSP), implemented by DW in the municipalities of Cazenga, Sambizanga and Cacuaco;
Two other ‘components’ of the programme are: a Policy and Monitoring Unit (PMU), implemented by DW, supporting SCSP and SLP; and RASME (Rede Angolana de Sector Micro Empresarial), an association of organisations associated with micro-enterprise) which has grown out of the livelihoods work of DW and CARE in LUPP1.
A Coordination Unit was established after the start of LUPP2 in late 2003.
In November 2004, in the second year of the 3-year LUPP2, the strategic framework of the programme was re-aligned with a revision of the log-frame. This was aimed at strengthening the programme focus towards an agenda of policy influencing and upward linkages. With a goal of poverty reduction, the revised purpose was to:
Influence equitable, inclusive, pro-poor policies and best practices for poverty reduction in Luanda.
Outputs were re-aligned to:
-
Best practice models, methods and approaches demonstrated and validated
-
Strategic information available to and acted upon by key stakeholders
-
Strengthened commitment and capacity of local authorities and civil society to promote and implement inclusive and participatory local development
-
Greater engagement, inclusion and accountability between government and civil society on urban issues.
The latest output-to-purpose review (OPR) of LUPP in June 2005 concluded that:
“The achievements of LUPP and the progress over the last year are impressive. There has been a definite shift in the consideration of urban poverty by key partners at many levels. The programme is achieving real impact in terms of policy influencing at a strategic level around urban poverty; in promoting participatory development and opening spaces for state citizen engagement; and making a difference at a practical level for poor women, children and men. LUPP is becoming a ground-breaking example of policy influencing in an extremely difficult working environment in a fragile state.”
The objective of this impact evaluation is to provide an independent assessment of the overall impact of LUPP focusing at purpose and goal level of the log-frame. It will feed into the end-of-project review by DFID in August 2006. The ToRs require the evaluation to focus on five main areas:
-
influencing urban poverty policy and practice at municipal, provincial and national levels
-
engagement and linkages with external partners including other NGOs both local and international, other donors, government institutions and the private sector
-
participatory governance, networks and social dynamics
-
service provision - its impact on poor people in target municipalities and the replicability of approaches
-
programme strategy management arrangements and the effectiveness of the consortium approach.
Within these areas, the evaluation assesses achievements, challenges and constraints, as well as effectiveness, inclusiveness, and sustainability. The ToRs have also asked for recommendations “for the sustainability of project outputs”.
The ToRs are at Annex 1.
The impact evaluation was undertaken through detailed documentation review; presentations by the LUPP team and follow-up discussions with each programme partner; field visits and focus group discussions with community actors and representatives; interviews with civil society representatives, and municipal, provincial and national government stakeholders. A full itinerary is at Annex 2.
This report draws on information provided in the internal impact assessment commissioned by LUPP in July 20066. This has given a detailed assessment of the achievements of each component. The details of these have not been repeated here. Instead this report seeks to draw the more strategic findings. It is structured by an analysis of the five ToR focus areas, a summary of impact at purpose level and overall conclusions on the programme.
| 
Yüklə 0.71 Mb.