A Single Drop Site Visit

AWWC Site Visit
UCOBAC, Solome Mukisa and Matilda Nabukonde
Mukono, Uganda
January 23-30, 2009
Follow-up conducted by Mariah Klingsmith, A Single Drop

OBJECTIVES:
• Learn more about UCOBAC’s organizational structure and community
• Turn over AWWC seed grant
• Provide technical assistance as needed by the AWWC participants

SITE VISIT:
Community/Organization Information
• UCOBAC has implemented one water project in an area called Kumi. It was part of a program carried out with support from the International Solidarity Foundation, a Finnish organization, through funding from the EU. Nearing the end of the four year project ISF gave UCOBAC $55,000 to identify and implement a project of their choosing and they identified the community in Kumi to be recipients and partners in developing and protecting a local spring which served the communities’ water needs. They engaged the community in the implementation and sought the assistance of the district for technical assistance. Upon recent visits they have observed that the project has been sustainable.
Matilda told me a story about driving past the spring with a district representative when the man stopped abruptly, got out of the vehicle and reprimanded several young boys that were bathing there, yelling at them for their thoughtless behavior in taking actions that might affect the water source that is for the community’s use. She was very impressed that the community members understand the importance of the protected spring and take measures to ensure their fellow community members are educated about the project.
• UCOBAC seems to have an extraordinary capacity for writing proposals, receiving funding and implementing projects effectively and sustainably.
• GROOTS affiliation and international exposure has added to the knowledge and influence of the organization and its staff.
• Matilda oversees the HIV program, children’s program and water program
• The organizational structure of UCOBAC has been well established and allows them to easily mobilize resources and introduce new programs into a community. The national office has four senior staff, an accountant and two volunteers and there is 8 field staff. There is a regional office headed by a regional program coordinator with district coordinators reporting to the regional office. They have future plans to open district offices. The district coordinators work directly with CORPS (community own resource persons) who are in charge of connecting directly with the villages by way of being in charge of a solidarity group, which is composed of 4 homesteads.
• UCOBAC chooses to work in rural, faraway places despite the difficulties, distance and cost because they feel these areas are the most under-represented and poor.
• UCOBAC will be moving into a new office at the end of February. The new building will not only house the UCOBAC secretariat but will be a care center catering to the women and children of the nearby slum area.

Project Implementation
• Ten homes in two villages are to receive RWH technology as a pilot project to precede a larger scale water project implementation. This is their very logical and well thought out approach as to how to use the $1000 AWWC seed grant to affect a larger number of community members and villages than say the construction of one FCT might be able to accomplish. They want the two grandmother’s groups-which have been previously included in UCOBAC programs-to be sensitized about RWH in order to change the behavior of homesteads to practice more RWH. The larger scale implementation of their water program will include targeting schools and community centers where larger RWH systems with FCTs can be installed. They see the pilot as being a necessary first step towards accomplishing this broader spectrum program. They will not complete the planning or the proposal for the larger scale project until this pilot project is under way and/or completed.
• UCOBAC requested that the children dependents of the grandmothers attend the training because they want to encourage the older children to become engaged and productive members of the households, aside from being obedient and doing daily chores.
• The trainings with the grandmothers groups consisted of a 1-2 hour introduction by Matilda, the district coordinator, Ben, the CORPS present, the local chairman and ASD staff followed by demonstration of the technology. Topics covered during the introduction included: importance of RWH, discussion of current water access and usage, community ownership of the project, honoring the training and assistance of UCOBAC by implementing more RWH systems within their groups, needing to show action in order to gain future assistance from UCOBAC and other NGOs, GWAKO WASH activities (namely the cost of soap vs. trip to the hospital and the hand and germ demonstration), review of AWWC and mission of ASD.

OUTCOMES
• 3 households received RWH systems-2 purpose built surfaces constructed from wooden poles and corrugate iron sheet and 1 with plastic sheeting over a thatched roof
• 2 grandmothers groups sensitized about RWH
• 3 CORPS members and 1 district coordinator trained
• 2 water sources visited and tested-both were determined to be high risk for drinking water
• 5 sets of WASH materials provided
• PML training review
• AWWC seed grant distributed

CHALLENGES
• UCOBAC did not visit the communities where the technology was to be implemented ahead of time. It is important to conduct an initial site visit in order to determine the appropriateness of the proposed technology, consider and identify local knowledge and materials. This visit is also crucial for proper and complete budget planning. The budget was constantly being adjusted in the field to account for unplanned/unrealized expenses.
• UCOBAC is fortunate to have their own transportation but they neglected to do very good planning so we left for the field 6 hours later than planned.
• Locating and buying materials was a surprise for Matilda and a stressful experience. Fortunately, she was able to evaluate that aspect at the end of the field visit and recognized the need to allow more time for the preparation and the importance of having the materials prepared in advance of the day when they are to be used. Again I will advocate for the need for the preparation aspect to be included in the technical training during the AWWC.
• Having to use AWW money to assist with fuel/contingencies that were not planned for by the implementers. I struggle with this a bit because I know it’s probably not appropriate and we can’t be setting that standard but when it comes to a small amount for per diem for one of their field staff, or fuel for his motorbike, or snacks for a small group it’s hard to refuse.

GENERAL COMMENTS
• “There is no little money” -what a great attitude from an organization that is used to dealing with large program funding!
• UCOBAC felt the PWX process was useful, but just like MWATF didn’t really understand how the peer review process was helping them. They are anxious to apply for future funding rounds. If there is ever a delay in their responding it is likely due to Matilda having to take the time to figure out the problems herself and she is just starting to become more computer savvy. Her delay during the first round was due to her forgetting her password for several weeks!
• Staying with Matilda was a real joy! She was very nervous about having a mzungu stay with her though and try as I might I could not convince her that I was laid back and easy going. She really spoiled me and she was a wonderful companion to experience Uganda with.
• UCOBAC has not used the PML since the conference because they are waiting to include it in the implementation of their larger scale water project.
• I was informed there are few, if any, known NGOs working on water as major issue.
• Development “speak” of Africa in comparison to the Philippines-people don’t focus on telling you how bad the situation is and how they are so poor and unfortunate but rather state the problems and discuss solutions. I don’t know why this strikes me as being so much in contrast to the Philippines but it’s interesting to consider the cultural and historical differences that no doubt influence this distinction. People here are well versed in every development lingo imaginable-empowerment, grassroots, capacity building-and their experience and history working with NGOs and development agencies is very apparent.
• UCOBAC praised the AWWC as one of the best conferences they have ever attended; mostly attributing its success and impact to the tangible outcomes it created.
• The commercial lifestyle has made many forget traditional ways (i.e. methods of RWH)
• The growth of NGOs and different funding culture has affected peoples’ reactions and attitudes and ownership and expectations of projects brought to them.
• “We have no conflict in Uganda right now so all we do is go the communities and cry with the people”
• Uganda has an abundance of wetland areas that are protected by the government.

FOLLOW-UP AND FUTURE PLANS
• UCOBAC needs to plan for and complete the pilot project (installation of RWH systems for 7 remaining homes).
• Submission of larger proposal, development of water program and implementation of RWH on larger scale. They are planning to invite MWATF to come and assist with FCT trainings when they begin that phase of their project.

ACTIONS FOR AFRICAN WOMEN AND WATER ORGANIZERS
• Monitor the completion of the water project implementation.
• Assist UCOBAC in identifying possible funders for their extended water program proposal.
• Provide guidance and support for the water program implementation strategies.