CORE Group Global Health Practitioner Conference 2019

1. Past Participation: Towards Community-Driven Change

2. We are building towards a world where
everyone lives with dignity and defines
their own positive future.
2

4. Imagining : 50 Years
1 Minute imagining
5 minutes sharing with neighbors
10 minutes sharing with room

5. Past Participation

6. Prescriptive: Imposes ideas on
communities

7. Participatory: engages communities in working
towards a specific outcome

9. Community-Driven: Communities make their
own decisions

10. Past Participation, towards community-driven change
Model Organization End User Results
Prescriptive -Chooses project
-Designs
implementation
strategy
-Builds project
Projects with short
term impact
Participatory -Chooses Project
-Co-designs
implementation
strategy
-Co-builds project
-Co-designs
implementation strategy
-Co-builds project
Projects with
increased
sustainability
Community-
driven
-Chooses project
-Designs
implementation strategy
-Builds project
-Develops process for
collective action
Strong project +
resilient
communities

11. Spark’s Community Strengthening Model
Community
Building
Goal Setting
Project Identification &
Proposal Development Technical Review
Implementation Management Support Review & repeat

12. Impact

13. Key Benefits
2x
Impact of
traditional aid
94%
Communities
continue to
meet
½
The cost of
big aid
Inclusive
Spark facilitates weekly
village meetings for inclusive
participation.
Transparent
Every dollar sent to the field is
tracked.

14. 1st FCAP Community Uganda, 9 years later
2010
2019

15. Gakoro Village, Rwanda
Project 1: 4 Motorcycles for moto-business
Project 2: 50 Solar Panels
Project 3: 75 Goats

16. Village #53 of 210: Nasitsapi, Uganda
Bridge Project
54 Households benefited
Women’s group launched businesses

17. Nasitsape
Spark facilitated to Independent Community Meetings

19. Principles for success
• Win at 6 months
• Face to face interaction increases social bonds
• Methodology optimized for inclusive participation
(70% of leaders have never held office, 56%
participants are women)

20. Community of Practice

21. Marketplace

22. Conclusion: “CDD programmes have little or no
impact on social cohesion and
governance”…“few [people] participate in the
meeting and few still speak or participate in
decision-making.”

24. 24
3iE Impact Report 2018
Participates
in selection
of project

25. 25
Low financial
investment in
facilitation
Little
facilitation
Low social &
governmental
impacts
Historical CDD Efforts: Focus on projects
Spark’s FCAP: Focus on process
Investment in
facilitation and
village funds
Strong,
monitored
facilitation
Strong social &
government
returns
Additional Differentiators:
- Grant is not project but village specific
- Pre awarded grant vs. post awarded
- Multi-meeting process
- Text message program for awareness
Key Differentiators

26. Join the community:
www.sparkmicrogrants.org