Rwanda en Progrès

This is actually a sequel to the previous blog I had posted about my participation in Umuganda last month. I was disappointed about the turn out and the actual work. I felt that it did not reach its maximum potential impact.

However, I was able to accompany an evaluation team to the Southern Province in order to assess the impact and sustainability of projects initiated by Umuganda. The following text is the report I submitted to the Minister of State and at the evaluation team meeting following the trip.

Note: Akarere is the Kinyarwanda name for district. Umurenge is the Kinyarwanda name for sector (neighborhood). Umuganda is mandatory community service on the last Saturday of each month.

Umuganda Project Evaluations

Abstract

On June 15th and 16th of 2010, an evaluation team comprised of representatives from MINALOC and MINIYOUTH traveled to four districts in the Southern Province to meet with the local leadership to view and discuss project activities initiated for Umuganda. On the first day, the team visited two sites. In Akarere ka Muhanga, there was constructed a fresh water well for the citizens in Umerenge wa Mushishiro. Akarere ka Kamonyi was constructing classrooms and toilets for a primary school offering 9 years basic education for children living in Umerenge wa Runda. The second day, the team visited two more sites in the Southern Province. Akarere ka Nyanza cultivated a cassava and sweet potato plantation in Umerenge wa Busasamana, and Akarere ka Ruhango built a housing project for vulnerable people in Umerenge wa Ruhango. All projects were said to be part of Umuganda initiative without any assistance for NGOs or other charitable contributions. Upon complete evaluation of all Umuganda projects in the districts, a winner will be selected and recognized to receive points.

Muhanga

Akarere ka Muhanga had completed a water project in Umerenge wa Mushishiro as an Umuganda intitiative. The project resulted in providing the citizens with fresh water from the hills. Previously, the people would have to rise very early in order to fetch water from the spring nearly four kilometers away. Often times, children would be too fatigued from the journey to the spring to attend school. The shortened distance to fresh water has been greatly appreciated among the citizens in the Umerenge.

The project was funded by the contributions of the citizens and constructed solely on their participation, which was approximately 70 percent. For maintenance purposes, the citizens are charged 50 RwF per month. No profits will be collected.

The local leaders were very organized in their presentation. They submitted all of the necessary documentation for the project, including reports, recorded contributions from the citizens, maintenance plans, etc.

Kamonyi

In Akarere ka Kamonyi, four new classrooms and two dozen toilets were under construction at a primary school in Umerenge wa Runda. Three of the four classrooms were complete, but the toilets were still a ways from finished. It was evident that there was a significant need for more space and more toilets. The part of the school that was government funded was highly inadequate. There were only six toilets for approximately 1,600 students, and each classroom was packed with about 60 or 70 children and one teacher.

While the visiting of the site went well, the sit-down evaluation with the head teacher and local officials was slightly less than satisfactory. They were unable to provide adequate reports on the construction plans or source of the funds for building materials. No copies were able to be obtained, but partial blame could be given to the fact that the school lacked electricity and computer equipment, even for the administrators. However, perhaps a hand written copy would have sufficed, as the leadership of Muhanga was able to provide.

Nyanza

Akarere ka Nyanza plowed a cassava and sweet potato plantation over 25 hectares of land in Umerenge wa Busasamana. The produce was sold and profits were used to fund necessary improvements for the administration and the Umerenge. With the money acquired, the administrative office was able to purchase computers and printers in order to facilitate efficiency; provide electricity to a number of buildings; as well as provide numbers for houses and name streets. It is evident that the project contributed immensely to infrastructure development and sustainability.

Overall, the evaluation meeting went well. They expressed long term commitments toward the maintenance of the plantation, as well as the commitment to use the profits to facilitate the development of the Umerenge and help resolve issues affecting the efficiency of the administration and promote.

Ruhango

In Akarere ka Ruhango, a housing project was constructed for the vulnerable people in Umerenge wa Ruhango. The local administrative officials emphasized that over 30 houses were built in the akagari. The houses were of adequate size and seemed to be constructed of sturdy materials. In addition, they were also landscape in the front.

The evaluation meeting went well, and the local administration stressed their commitment to assist vulnerable citizens in the Umerenge. However, while the houses seemed complete, few were occupied. Most seemed vacant. Nonetheless, the local officials provided reports and documentation of their efforts.

Concluding Remarks

Bearing those remarks in mind, it is important to understand the core elements involved in Umuganda project evaluations. The projects must be funded and initiated by the citizens of the Umerenge. It must be recognized as a need and improvement to the lives of the citizens in the area. It also must exemplify sustainability by being able to continuously contribute to the well being and improvement of the lives of the citizens. And most importantly, the implementation of the project must be transparent.

With all this stated, I nominate the cassava plantation in Busasamana for the Umuganda project winner the following reasons:
• The project was complete and finalized. Results were able to be seen and evaluated;
• The project provides a sustainable source of revenue to the Busasamana that allows for the allocation of funds to promote infrastructure developments and increased administrative efficiency;
• The project was constructed solely by the participation and contributions of the citizens; and
• Transparency was guaranteed by the submitted reports.

In all, the projects seemed to be legitimate in the sense that they were enacted because the Umerenge saw the need for such improvements. The water project definitely was an improvement to the quality of life of the citizens of Mushishiro and sustainable, but the cassava plantation went further as to generate a continual source of revenue, which could fund other development initiatives in the Busasamana.

With regards to the classrooms and toilet being constructed in Runda, they would be an improvement if they were finished. However, since they are not complete, it would be speculation to say that the project was successful and had deep impact. In addition, since the project is not finished, it might also be speculative to assume that adequate funding and participation will continue on the level that it has in the past. These factors make it difficult to award high marks, since it is the mission to evaluate the project as it is currently and not what it will be or what it is supposed to be.

Concerning the housing development in Ruhango, it is true that the initiative is sincere in its essence. A project that assists the vulnerable citizens of the Umerenge in a sustainable manner (such as constructing houses or generating income) is a desirable endeavor, especially for Umuganda. However, if the project is not followed through, i.e. vulnerable people actually move into the houses that were constructed, then one is left with a slew of empty houses and the same number of impoverished vulnerable people. In addition, proper documentation of funding contributions as well as the breakdown of allocation would be necessary in order to insure transparency of the project. To construct more than 30 houses of the quality seen in Ruhango, such a project would be rather costly. For the purposes of Umuganda evaluation, numbers would have to be checked.

Just to reiterate, all the projects were incredible efforts regardless of how they were implemented or documented. They all sought to improve the quality of life of the citizens in the Umerenge, which is exactly what Umuganda is about. However, for the purposes of awarding points and recognition, the projects had to meet certain criteria in order to be considered for nomination. And, in my opinion, the cassava plantation in Busasamana met and exceeded the standards and requirements.

As I have mentioned in previous posts, Rwanda is undergoing the decentralization process. As part of this initiative, the Ministry of Local Government launched the Ubudehe system as an avenue for development at the sector level, know as the umurenge. It is part of the Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP) that aims to improve the lives of citizens and promote community development from the bottom up instead of the top down.

Ubudehe is a community based system that assesses the financial situations of citizens living in villages throughout Rwanda. The community evaluates each household’s or citizen’s financial/asset situation and places it in one of six categories: Umutindi nyakujya, Umitindi, Umekene, Umukene wifashije, Umukungu, and Umukire.

The first category, Umutindi nyakujya, is for those in abject poverty. These individuals have no land, livestock, or shelter, and they rely on begging for survival. They are unable to work, usually due to some degree of disability. Due to poor living conditions, individuals in this category fall sick often and have no access to medical care. In addition, they cannot afford to send their children to school or feed them properly.
The second category, Umitindi, refers to the very poor. The main difference between the first and second categories is that the second group is physically able to work. Like the Umutindi nyakujya, the second group does not own land or livestock. As a result, their children often suffer similar consequences of poverty as the first group.
The Umekene is the third category and are referred to as poor. These households typically have some land and shelter, but no means to save. They are self-sufficient in the sense that they live from their own labor and produce enough to survive from day to day. Their children do not always attend school, and they usually do not have access to health care.
Individuals in Umukene wifashije category share the same characteristics as the Umukene category, except that they can usually afford to send their children to primary school.
The last two categories refer to the food and money rich. These households are well-off, have land, livestock, and plenty to eat. They often move to urban areas and enjoy the luxuries of city life.

The households/individuals that belong to the Umutindi nyakujya and Umitindi are considered to be in need of assistance, and Ubudehe allows the community to come to consensus and identify these citizens.The data gathered as a result of Ubudehe has contributed to the drafting of social maps for all 15000 villages across the country. It enables the government to understand the social situation of the country and create programs to better benefit those vulnerable and impoverished individuals.

However, there is a short coming of the Ubudehe system in that it cannot account for the income disparity across the different communities. For example, two households, one in an urban umurenge and the other in a rural umurenge, could have exactly the same living conditions, but one could be classified as poor and the other classified as non poor. This is because not all umurenge have the same standard of living.
Nonetheless, the Ubudehe system has provided the GoR with valuable data concerning the social climate of Rwanda.

In Rwanda, the last Saturday of every month is Umuganda, which is designed to be a day of contribution. All able bodied persons age 18 and over are expected by law to participate in Umuganda as an act of community service. This includes activities such as trash pick up, ditch digging, sweeping of roads, etc. It goes from 8 to 11:30 in the morning, and no one is allowed to leave the Umudugudu (neighborhood) until Umuganda is officially over at 12pm. If any person is out and about, they will be sent back their Umudugudu by authorities and possible fined.

Some people get out of Umuganda by staying out all night on Friday and sleeping in until the afternoon on Saturday. As long as you don’t go outside, authorities cannot force you to participate.

I had just heard about this policy the Wednesday before Umuganda and became rather intrigued and curious. I decided to participate on Saturday morning in order to gain better understanding of the initiative. It sounded like a great idea. Once a month, the people would gather together and labor in a communal effort to make their neighborhood a nicer place to live. I had to see how this would turn out so that maybe the US could take a few notes.

There weren’t too many people that participated. We were supposed to meet at 8am in front of Papyrus (a restaurant/bar in the Umudugudu). I was the first one there at 8:15. Two others came around 8:30. Others came outside around 9, but only tidied up their own flats.

The day guard and I picked up trash on the sidewalk and in the grass. It was mainly paper, used airtime cards, and bottles. Others swept the driveways and raked leaves and branches in the grass. People started to mosey back into their houses after about an hour.

I have to say that I was pretty disappointed. I was expecting the whole mass of people to congregate and organize something with direction and purpose; then the Umudugudu would be transformed! Once again, I let the idealist in me get too excited (it happens too often).

However, I like to consider myself a problem solver. That is, of course, what my professors are trying make of me through a public policy degree. I thought to myself, “What would make this kind of program more successful and effective?”

I think the problem with Umuganda is two fold. First, it is mandatory and enforced using disincentives. This means that some individuals will either do this against their will or would find loop holes to avoid participating. Second, it only picks up the mess instead of building a path for improvement. For example, picking up trash once a month will not cause people to litter less, but actually might create less individual responsibility to dispose of waste properly if it is known that someone will pick it up for Umuganda.

Therefore, any recommendation for Umuganda would ideally a) be voluntary in essence in order to achieve the maximum level of enthusiasm, b) be incentivized in order to achieve the maximum level of participation and positive attitude of the public, c) be more than one day a month, and d) provide a service that not only restores the community, but also improves it in the long run.

With this set of criteria, solutions available could be a variety of community service initiatives that include more than just picking up trash. Ideas have been presented to motivate college students to participate. Students could provide tutoring to children once or twice a week at the local primary or secondary school, or perhaps they could offer basic English and Math classes to the public once a week. In addition, the local population could be motivated to participate in construction projects: fixing roofs and other maintenance to houses in poor districts.

Implementation of these recommendations would be facilitated by an incentive mechanism. Students could receive a discount on tuition; building materials for the construction projects would be purchased by the government; or perhaps a competition could be made of it, for example, the Umudugudu with the most participation could receive a tax-free shopping day.

These are just a few suggestions. More would be appreciated!

Although I have been with the Ministry of Local Government for 3 weeks, I began officially working with the Department for Community Development and Social Affairs last Thursday. My first assignment was to sit in on a stakeholders meeting that was held to review and revise the proposed National Social Protection Strategy. There were representatives from numerous organizations and administrative sects, including United Nations Development Programme, World Bank, European Union, Care International, Swedish Delegation, Social Security Fund for Rwanda, Ministry of Economics and Finance, Ministry of Youth, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Gender and Family Planning, the Provinces, and many others. The meeting was hosted by the Ministry of Local Government (MINALOC) in order that these stakeholders would have the opportunity to voice any concerns their organization had with the Strategy before it was to be reviewed by the Cabinet. Some of the representatives had questions about implementation, but there was an overall satisfaction with the cooperative and collaborative efforts involved in the drafting of the document. All of the representatives from the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Provinces were pleased with the Strategy as a whole.

All who attended the meeting agreed that a new direction was needed in the field of social protection in Rwanda. While the country is experiencing an average annual growth in real GDP of about 8.6%, the number of people living in poverty is increasing. In 2006, about 5.4 million of the nearly 10 million Rwandans lived in poverty. The government is committed to protecting and assisting poor and vulnerable groups of the population through government sponsored social protection programs. Some programs include education scholarships for genocide survivors; Ubudehe agricultural programs, such as “One Cow One Family;” Community-based health insurance, known as Mutuelle de Santé; and social security pensions for the working population. These programs are monitored and established by various ministries and administrative offices within Rwandan government.

The proposed Social Protection Strategy seeks to build upon and extend these programs that are currently in place, as well as consolidated the social protection efforts into one unified sector that would be monitored and evaluated by MINALOC. The idea is that a unified Social Protection Sector would insure that all programs operated on the same standard as well as guarantee that programs do not overlap. The Ministries that have social protection programs already in place will continue to run them, but MINALOC will evaluate their progress every 6 months.

There are also two new programs being proposed: The Old Age Grants and a Public Works Program. Both are efforts to reduce poverty and mobilize the workforce.

The Old Age Grant will become part of the Social Security Fund for Rwanda that will offer a monthly pension to the elderly 70 years and older. This is unique in the sense that the monthly benefit will be provided to all elderly persons even if they did not contribute to the fund during their working life. The program was suggested as an effort to reduce poverty because approximately 80 percent of households with an elderly person are living in poverty. The monthly benefit will not be much; only 5, 200 RwF, which is about 9 USD. However, it is more than the monthly earnings of approximately a third of the population.

The other program is the Public Works Program, which is an extension of the Vision 2020 Umurenge Program that is intended to mobilize the workforce. The program will offer those living in poverty guaranteed employment of 100 days for one year. Those that are still living in poverty after one year of participation in the program will be guaranteed 100 days of employment per year at a wage below minimum compensation. The reason for the lower wage is to make it a program of last resort. The government does not want individuals to rely on those 100 days of work, but instead make enough in wages the first year to invest in a sustainable income, most likely in the agriculture since the majority of the poor and population live in rural villages.

It is estimated that these programs will cost less than 1 percent of the annual GDP. The government expects economic growth to continue, thereby making the initiatives of the Strategy affordable. The Cabinet is reviewing the Strategy today, May 29th, 2010.

During our first week at the Ministry of Local Government, our supervisor introduced us to a public service quality assessment method used by the Rwandan Government known as the Citizens’ Report and Community Score Cards. This method has been used in the past by many developed and developing nations that reaches out to the citizens to rate the quality of services available in a variety of public sectors- from health to justice to water. Such a method is unique in the sense that it reaches out to the citizens for their input and voice, rather than relying solely on centralized decision making. By placing a legitimate value on the issues presented by its citizens, the Rwandan Government is demonstrating its commitment towards democratization and decentralization.

The Citizens’ Report Card (CRC) and the Community Score Card (CSC) are studies carried out by a research team that record the proportion of households satisfied (CRC) and the level of satisfaction (CSC), as well as key issues raised by the citizens concerning many different public service sectors. In 2009, survey studies were conducted on 8 public service sectors: administrative, agriculture, education, heath, hygiene and sanitation, justice, infrastructure, and water. In the study, citizens were asked to give scores to the quality of service provided for each sector based on a number of indicators, such as access to safe water, availability of teaching aids in schools, access to agricultural inputs, work relationship between top and local levels, etc. In addition, the citizens reported the reasons why they gave such scores. While the scoring of the indicators and sectors is important, the Rwandan Government is particularly interested in why the scores were given; as the reasons provide direction for the government to improve upon the services it offers to its people.

The citizens expressed a variety of concerns and modes for improvement among the various sectors. For example, there is a high student to teacher ratio, which leads to an insufficient number of classrooms as well as low motivation of teachers. In addition, Rwandan schools have insufficient availability of teaching aids and materials, which also contributes to the low motivation of teachers. In other sectors such as water, there is limited access to safe water and hygienic latrines.

While there are a number of issues raised for each of these sectors, it is important to note that the study also broke down the scores and issues of the citizens living in Kigali city, other urban areas, and rural areas. This is extremely relevant when analyzing the quality of public service sectors because there is such a disparity among the three areas.   This is mainly due to the underdeveloped infrastructure of the rural communities.

While the disparity is apparent, there have been significant improvements made in the past decade. The overall level of citizens’ satisfaction is increasing every year, but the same observations are identified throughout consecutive studies. The citizens are still expressing that there is limited access to agricultural credits (loans) and agricultural inputs (chemical fertilizers, improved seeds, technologies). Citizens still give low levels of satisfaction to the national road and transportation network, explaining that this also leads to limited and insufficient access to markets.

But Rwanda has made progress in all of the evaluated sectors. The citizens recognize these improvements. They remember the kingship and the previous regime and note the changes that have been made. President Kagame is very popular among the citizens, and they support the decentralization directives of the current government. The Republic of Rwanda continues to experience improvements all around from year to year. By listening to the voice of the citizens and heeding their input, the government is truly becoming an entity dedicated to serving its people rather than itself.

Before arriving in Kigali Airport on Thursday, May 6th, my thoughts were occupied by what life was to be like in Rwanda:

“What kind of food would be available?”

“How much do things cost there?”

“Was there still a lurking presence of bitterness among the ethnic tribes?”

“Would I have electricity or water?”

“I hope I don’t get sick”

I had no idea what to expect. Americans seem to only know about the genocide in Rwanda; however, the truth is that the “1994 Rwanda” is very different than the “2010 Rwanda.” President Paul Kagame and his government have done so much to heal the wounds that festered the horrible events of the early 1990′s. A national unifying language has been implemented; there is a strong focus on decentralization and the voice of the citizens; the country is moving forward in the direction established by Vision 2020. Rwanda is a country that has no where to go but forward. There is an overwhelming sense of patriotism that has nearly broken ethnic rifts, allowing the citizens to embrace each other as fellow Rwandans. This country can truly be viewed as a template for future development of other African countries seeking to mend the severed ties among its citizens caused by ethnic tensions.

Throughout my time in Kigali, I plan to write about my experiences in Kigali and inform the world of what life is like here, as well as highlight the tremendous progress that Rwanda has made in the past sixteen years. It is my hope that readers will become enlightened and inspired to come see for themselves the beauty and development of this unique country.