Why do donors fund projects that they know are going to
produce the same results? No real impact. Same lessons learned theories.
The donors like to give money to organizations that are
established, have a reputation and can spend the money on time. The
organizations bidding for and winning projects have a readymade budget and
timeline to spend (in my last post I talked about how communication materials
are mostly waste of money and resources). The people involved in the project
have strict deadlines and they work hard to implement and meet the project
deadlines. In a country like ours where anything can happen anytime excluding
the natural disasters that cannot be avoided – well, the projects don’t get the
opportunity to stick to the deadline and the budget gets underspent.
What do the projects do with the underspent budget? It’s
simple. The recipient organization asks for an extension and the donors happily
oblige because no donor wants to take the money back. Most of the projects end
up doing elaborate end line surveys and videos or sometimes produce mass
materials such as key rings and posters or amass moveable assets for their local
partners. Suppose last year, a project was awarded for 2 years from 2015 Jan to
2016 Dec. Since the earthquake in April and then the blockade until now is 8
months and counting of no real implementation at the field level. The project
will end next year which means 1 year has been lost already with no real
impact.
Talking about impact. Most of the development projects fail
because it comes tailor made by the donors and the projects are rigid in
timeline with rigid implementing modules. What the donors and the implementing
agencies don’t understand is that anytime a project has a timeline it will not
yield results because the 2 year project gets wrapped up before the real issues
start emerging. This leaves the implementers no choice but to provide an end report
which of course has the same lessons learned points in bullets which they had
suggested in their many past projects.
So why are we allowed to report the same or similar lessons
learned bullet points in our end reports? Why are we applauded for finding the
lessons we need to learn which we knew already from our past project experience.
Why are we allowed to flaunt the lessons learned in elaborate and expensive
workshops? I am sure we have enough evidence to prove that a project with 24 or
27 months’ timeline doesn’t work – it’s like poking a pig sleeping in its waste
and trying to make a new shed. Well, by the time a new shed has been
constructed the project ends. Who is going to shift the pig to the new shed?
The answer is simple: no one. Because the project has ended. A report is
submitted later which states: lessons learned 1. Need more time to move the pig!
(lol)
One of my past colleague said to me after she had come from
a fundraising workshop in London, “I can’t believe we waste so much money in producing
materials and conducting workshops when I have just seen individuals standing
in public places raising funds – literally where people drop a pound or two.”
When will the donors become creative in terms of funding
projects that are innovative, where private organizations are involved to
create jobs and actually show impact? When will they realize that showing
impact doesn’t happen overnight? Do the math – how long did it take Nepal to
eradicate polio and many more it will take to eradicate chicken pox? Poverty is
a disease. A project will never succeed in eradicating poverty, yes it can
improve the living standards but that will take ages too. A 2 year project that
provides livelihood training isn’t going to improve the farmer’s livelihood.
Natural disasters and manmade disasters will continue, a project cannot take
responsibility for it, nor can the donors. But it is about time implementing
agencies stop learning lessons and actually create projects that are dynamic,
feasible and isn’t time bound. There may not be any donors who will fund
immediately but if more and more implementing agencies actually learn lessons
that will be a new kind of beginning for the development workers.
And here I am with the task to diversify funding for my
organization. In the mean time I am happy to work in an organization where the
trustees have decided to fund and continue the work where the donors left –
simply because it isn’t time to leave.
Comments
Post a Comment