| Village Infrastructure's
Development Process |
| The
Process for improvement is described in tabularize form below
but it will be further improved according to the field experience
and work in partnership.
| No. |
Process |
| 1 |
Identification of collective need by CBO ,through Community
resolution. |
| 2 |
Prioritization
of need by CBO/PCDP Staff |
| 3 |
Social
feasibility according to the format developed by COP |
| |
Technical feasibility by the Infrastructures ,rehabilitation
and Development Sector ,that includes Survey ,design and
estimate |
| 4 |
Environmental/
Conservation feasibility by BDC ( It is optional and needed
in case if BDC need it essential) |
| 5 |
Dialogue
for Cost/Component sharing arrangement with Community
by COP/IRD |
| 6 |
Formation
of Work Committees |
| 7 |
Terms
of partnership/Agreement |
| 8 |
Construction
Supervision by Work Committee/IRD Staff |
| 9 |
Operation
and Maintenance at Completion by CBO |
| 10 |
Capacity
building of Villagers in Infrastructures development and
Management |
|
| Process Stages
Description (Resolution) |
| Community facilitator
attends monthly meetings of community-based organizations.
The community in the meeting chat the issues regarding the
village and search the possible solutions. The issues discussed
in the meetings, which are out of the limitations of the community,
are reported to the PCDP in an already designed format, which
is termed a resolution. The COP analyzes it and send to the
IRD. |
| Prioritization |
| The resolutions
have mostly a wide range of requests enlisted by the community.
COP shortlist those activities which are in the mandate of PCDP
and the short listed needs are referred to the concerned CF
for Social feasibility. |
| Social Feasibility |
| The need identified
by the community, is analyzed through a questionnaire. It includes
the information’s about conflicts, community cost sharing,
mode of sharing, beneficiaries analysis and economical feasibility
as well as the status of Community based Organization and its
contribution to biodiversity conservation. |
| Technical Feasibility |
It is different
for different infrastructures. For irrigation channel, it depends
upon number of beneficiaries, command area, nature of terrain
etc. For suspension footbridge, it depends upon beneficiaries,
span, geological conditions of site etc.
As the basic requirements are fulfilled then Survey, design,
and estimates are Prepared.
|
| Environmental
Impact Assessment |
PCDP has a mandate
of small infrastructures and it has no negative impact on environment
and conservation but even a written commitment is taken through
an article incorporated in terms of Partnership agreement to
ensure Biodiversity conservation and illicit cutting of resources.
Beside it, the PCDP will engage an independent consultant to
conduct EIA of the interventions with an objective to ensure
biodiversity conservation on more scientific way.
|
| Cost Sharing |
Dialogues are
conducted with CBOs to convince them for Cost Sharing. The Community
Share is variable and depends upon the conditions of site, its
location from road head, type, and nature of constructions.
IRD until now experienced the following modes of contributions
but not succeeded in Cash contribution.
· Construction
timber for suspension footbridges and its carriage from Forests
to the site.
· Free labor for excavation ,sand, Gravel
and collection of stones
· Manual carriage of GI
wire crates
· Free construction of watermill houses
· Subsidized labor
· Volunteer laborer
· Carriage from Road head to site
· Materials
store at site
PC-1 mentions that community contribution in Suspension foot
bridges is (15-20)% and in case of other small infrastructures,
it is with in the range of (50-75)%. However, practically the
expected degree of contribution is very high due to the extreme
poverty in the area, PCDP adopted 20% Community contribution,
and that is in form of kind not in cash.
|
| Construction
Management Committee |
| 4 to 6 members
work committee is selected by the CBO for implementation of
the village infrastructure scheme. The basic responsibilities
of the committee are to provide labourer to resolve conflicts,
and to facilitate IRD staff in implementation. |
| Terms of Partnership |
| After the non-formal
agreement with community on Cost Sharing, responsibilities,
a TOP is prepared and signed by the representatives of the Community
Based Organization and PCDP and formally approved by PMU. |
| Implementation
|
IRD is elastic
in the implementation strategy and adopts different options
for implementation, according to the ground realities that includes
community demands and to furnish quick yield.
COP considered and ensures the security of money then in the
case financial as well as construction is conducted through
CBO. PCDP has no clear policy in this regard but as the COP
draft the policy, agreed/approved by PMU will be adopted accordingly.
IRD field staff also conduct construction it self but have supervisory
role of CBO.
IRD can engage Carriage Contractor, Labor Contractor as they
consider it suitable according to the location and nature of
work.
|
| Operation and
Maintenance |
| TOP clearly
indicates that it is the responsibility of community but still
it needs some strategy and COP will work on it to ensure proper
operation and maintenance of the schemes. The IRD will conduct
Trainings in this regard to build the capacity of the Community.
|
