|
|
| |
Capacity Building Networks (2001 - 03) |
This initiative
was crystallized in Ranga Reddy district in partnership with the
district administration and the NGOs in the district. The approach
emerged out of a research study on Process Evaluation of Watershed
Program conducted by WASSAN for the district administration.
The initiative began with five NGOs. With the support of district
administration later all PIAs became part of this network.
District level pool of resource persons (about 45) were identified
from the NGOs, program implementing agencies, watershed
development teams and community based organizations.
As a network of resource persons, Capacity Building Network (CBN)
entered into an MOU with the district administration. WASSAN
played the role of anchor organisation during the initial years. A
joint account was created with a representative of the CBN,
district administration and WASSAN. Training funds from district
administration were transferred to this joint account.
The themes for various training programs were identified in a
workshop with the PIAs. The CBN developed the required modules
with help from WASSAN. TOTs were organized for the resource
persons. While the resource person’s costs were met from the CBN
account, the expenditure for conducting training programs (such as
venue, board and lodge etc.) were paid by the Project
Implementation Agency. This ensured that the funds are effectively
used for capacity building in the context of watershed development
programs. While the PIA is responsible to organize all the
logistics related to the training programs, the CBN provides
professional capacity building inputs. Every month, a planning and
review meeting was conducted in which all concerned stakeholders
participate to share their experiences and finalize the training
calendar for that month. The accounts were settled in this review
meeting. 15 to 20 programs were organized in a month. This process
was implemented during two successive years.
Though the concept of CBN succeeded in institutionalising the
training programs, linking the training inputs to the actions in
the field was a constraint. Also, dissonance between the training
inputs and field level processes brought in the need for
integrating the training inputs to project activities. It also
brought out that ensuring proper fund-flows, monitoring and
adherence to the participatory processes are crucial for training
to make a significant impact on the projects. Also, this
arrangement is vulnerable to the changes in the district level
leadership.
 Back
to top
|
|
