Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [holistichelping] Kenya Citizens Assembly Launch/Fantastic Andrius!!!/Tegi: Plz take note!

Expand Messages
  • Janet Feldman
    Dear Andrius, Tegi, Rachel, and All, Wonderful, Andrius, and Tegi, here are more signatories! Please add Minciu Sodas Laboratory for Independent Thinkers
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Andrius, Tegi, Rachel, and All,

      Wonderful, Andrius, and Tegi, here are more signatories! Please add "Minciu
      Sodas Laboratory for Independent Thinkers (Lithuania and Global)" and
      "Pyramid of Peace Initiative (Kenya)" to the list of signatories. Thanks and
      greatest blessings, Janet


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Andrius Kulikauskas" <ms@...>
      To: <holistichelping@yahoogroups.com>
      Cc: <tegi.obanda@...>; <ccr-kenya@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:17 AM
      Subject: Re: [holistichelping] Kenya Citizens Assembly Launch/Tegi:
      Voluntary Youth Philanthropists wants to add their signature


      > Janet and/or Rachel, I have not read the statement, but if it is not too
      > late, I authorize you to speak on behalf of Minciu Sodas and the Pyramid
      > of Peace so that we might be included as signatories. Peace, Andrius
      > Kulikauskas
      > Janet Feldman wrote:
      >>
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> *From:* Rachel Kungu <mailto:rachel.kungu@...>
      >> *To:* holistichelping@yahoogroups.com
      >> <mailto:holistichelping@yahoogroups.com>
      >> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:53 AM
      >> *Subject:* Re: [holistichelping] Kenya Citizens Assembly Launch:
      >> Memorandum of Collaboration (signatures needed by APRIL 1st)
      >>
      >> Dear all,
      >>
      >> I would like Voluntary Youth Philanthropists to be a signatory.
      >> P.O.Box 19705-00202
      >> Nairobi Kenya
      >> +254 721 626389
      >>
      >> Director: Rachel Wambui Kung'u
      >> rachel.kungu@... <mailto:rachel.kungu@...>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > http://www.worknets.org/wiki.cgi?HolisticHelping
      >
      > Please note our rule: Each letter sent to the Holistic Helping group
      > enters the PUBLIC DOMAIN unless it explicitly states otherwise. Thank
      > you! http://www.ethicalpublicdomain.org
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • charles kilel
      Hi Rachel, Noted. I will notify youth out here so that they can sign, because it is important to for youth to own and be part of this process. Thanks Charles.
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Rachel,
        Noted. I will notify youth out here so that they can sign, because it is important to for youth to own and be part of this process.
         
        Thanks
         
        Charles.


        Rachel Kungu <rachel.kungu@...> wrote:
        Dear all,
         
        I would like Voluntary Youth Philanthropists to be a signatory.
        P.O.Box 19705-00202
        Nairobi Kenya
        +254 721 626389


         
        On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Janet Feldman <kaippg@earthlink. net> wrote:
                   
        Dear Colleague: The date for the launch of the Citizens Assembly in Kenya has been set. The Memorandum of Collaboration among participating individuals and partnering organizations (both inside and outside Kenya) has been drafted. Please read the outline below, and let us know if you want to be included among the signatories of the initial announcement of Memorandum of Collaboration, which will go out to press April 2, 2008. If you want to include your organization or your own individual name, please reply before end of Business day April 1, 2008.
          
          ============
        Working Together for Genuine Democratic Reforms in Kenya: A Framework for Collaboration Among Community Partnerships and Support Organizations
                
         Main Section
         Contributed by Tegi Obanda (for CCR-kenya)

         A focus on people-driven constitutional reforms
         What makes it work-the process determines the content: Ten-Point Roadmap Towards Enactment and Implementation of a New Democratic Constitution in Kenya, January-December 2008
         
        Who is involved?
          
          A proposed "Memorandum of Collaboration"
          
          To bring forth a people-driven constitution -- to make Kenya a country where people are healthy, safe, and cared for, there has to be a governance structure in place that is transparent, accountable, participatory and devolved to the grassroots.. To achieve genuine democratic governance in Kenya, the preset constitution needs to be overhauled through a process that involves the entire populace, representing all sections and regions of the country.
          
          As democratic reformers, we know all too well that we can't do it alone. The ability to partner effectively with other individuals and organizations -- both inside and outside the Kenya-- is absolutely essential to effectively empower Kenyan citizens to become effective and equal participants in the process of reconstituting their country.
          
          However, these partnerships don't materialize out of thin air. And once they do occur, the players involved aren't always sure of their roles, or how those roles can come together in a manner that meets everyone's needs and interests. In short, there's often a knowledge gap, even when everyone wants to work together for the same outcomes.
          In this section, we'll try to address that gap. We outline a modest proposal for how three key groups -- community partnerships, support and intermediary organizations -- might work together to make the most of everyone's involvement in the democratic reform process.
          
          We'll start with a brief look at why we focus on process and what we believe are ten key elements in a people-driven process of constitutional reforms. We hypothesize that Kenya's democratic transition ground to a halt because there was no well-laid down process that delineated the step-by-step actions that would lead the people from point A, when they start the reform process to point B, when they had the new constitution enacted and implemented. Nearly all the focus of the now defunct Constitutional of Kenya Review Commission was on the content. They captured the people's views, deliberated on them and made a very fine draft, popularly known as the Bomas draft.
          
          Then they handed the draft to parliament.
          
          For reasons only known to themselves, the commission told parliament that they had to either "accept the constitutional draft in Toto or reject it in Toto". They never explained what was to happen in case they rejected it. Yet, any casual observer of the Kenyan political scene could have known that parliamentarians were not keen on constitutional reforms. As members of the elite class that benefits from lack of accountability, transparency and participatory governance, they would fight with all their might to block any attempt to whittle down their powers.
          
          To hand over the constitutional draft to parliamentarians to pass would be like asking a thief to return all the goods he has stolen and the telling him to then walk into a police station that is unguarded lock himself up, take himself to court, try himself and sentence himself to seven years in prison, drive himself to prison and lock the gates.
          
          There were numerous warnings to the commission to never give parliament the power to decide the fate of the constitution. It Is All About Power: An Open Letter to the delegates of the National Constitutional Conference (NCC), June 2003, Kenya http://www.ccr- kenya.com/ Resources/ 10.html.
           But more importantly, the people of Kenya had as early as 1992 resolved that they did not want parliament to reform the constitution for them. Confirming  Kenya's prescient fears, the parliamentarians did not disappoint. They did all they could to disrupt and derail the National Constitutional Conference of 2003-4, as each group saw the constitutional reform process a chance to create power traps for themselves.
          
          They boycotted, derided, delayed, filibuster, insulted and disrupted the conference, turning the most important and historic event in Kenya into a cynically well-planned comedic fiasco.
          
          This understanding, although laid out in detail in background documents, forms the basis for ideas in this section. Then, we will explain who the key players in constitutional reforms are, and follow up with an understanding of how they can best work together to make the most of everyone's efforts.
          
          Our hope is that, when adapted in local dialogue, this "memorandum of collaboration" will help guide the next major actions towards constitutional reforms in Kenya..
          
          A focus on people-driven constitutional reforms
          
          When we talk about people-driven constitutional reform we mean the process of people working together to address what matters to them -they meet in local caucuses and discuss the constitutional draft. Whatever people bring forward as contentious issues are recorded, tallied and weighted for consideration for inclusion in the referendum questions..  whether that is reducing violence, revitalizing an urban neighborhood, or promoting child health. Civic engagement is promoted among all of the members of the community.
          
          By community, we mean people who share a common place, such as a rural community or urban neighborhood, or experience, including being an adolescent, female or a member of an ethnic minority group.
          
          To address what matters to community members, we need to change the conditions in which we live. To change the conditions in which people live, there is a need to change the power structures that centralizes decision-making power in the hands of the president, the executive, and legislature. Local governments need to be empowered with full powers to collect and disburse resources as they see fit.
          
          We believe that collaborative partnerships should focus on environmental changes -- bringing about those community and systems changes that modify local conditions. That's because we believe these changes are an intermediate outcome in the long process of community socio-economic improvement. Community and systems changes fall in to one of three categories, all of which should relate back to community-determine d goals:
           
           New or modified programs -- for example, better schooling, community-based policing, disease-prevention services. 
           New or modified policies -- for example, people taking control of their natural resource management or family-friendly policies in businesses  
           New or modified practices -- for example, healthcare for all or increased opportunities for economic advancement.
          What makes it work: Seven key factors in citizen involvement
          There are seven essential ingredients that contribute to successful community involvement.
           
           Clear vision and mission -- those initiatives with a clear and specific focus, such as increasing rates of childhood immunization or lowering the rate of unemployment, bring about much higher rates of change than broad efforts which lack a targeted mission and objectives. The vision and mission may reflect a continuum of outcomes, including: a) categorical issues, b) broader interrelated concerns (e.g., youth development) , and/or c ) more fundamental social determinants of health and development (e.g., children living in poverty).  
           Action planning -- Identifying specific community changes (that is, new or modified programs, policies, and practices) to be sought may be the single, most important practice that can be implemented. The action plan should be quite precise, specifying with whom, by whom, how and by when each action step should be carried out.  
           Leadership -- A change in leadership can dramatically affect the rate of change brought about by a community group. The loss of visionary competent leadership can be particularly difficult for an organization. There has to be a holistic view of grooming and maintaining visionary leadership for your group.  
           Resources for community mobilizers -- Hiring community mobilizers or organizers can aid in following up on action plans. It can be very difficult to maintain an organization without some paid staff. Paid organizers can help fan the flames and keep the level of excitement about the organization and its goals at a consistently high level.  
           Documentation and feedback on the changes brought about by the organization -- It's also very important that people keep a record of what they have done and how they have done it. Having this history can be an invaluable guide for the organization's work. Looking regularly (at least quarterly) at what the group has done, how quickly it has occurred, and outside events that affect the group's work has been shown to spur groups onto even greater heights. 
           Technical assistance -- Outside help with specific actions, such as action planning or securing resources, is also a way to support a group's efforts to transform its community.  
           Making outcome matter -- Finally, grantmakers also have the ability to increase rates of community and systems change through offering incentives or disincentives to their grantees. For example, the annual renewal of multi-year awards or the offering of bonus grants could be based on evidence of progress or accomplishment by the community group.
          Who is involved?
          Transforming the conditions that affect the community civic engagement requires a broad collaborative partnership among several key players. Three distinct groups emerge as playing vital, interdependent roles:
           
           National and community partnerships  
           Support and intermediary organizations
          Let's look at each of these groups one by one.
          
          National and community partnerships -- those doing the work of community and systems change -- link together people and organizations that have the same goals. For example, a citizen assembly partnership might bring together representatives from regions and sectors. Together, they might work to make changes throughout the community that would affect community's civic engagement capability. Specific changes might be made in local community-based organizations, health organizations, businesses, schools, the government, financial institutions, and the faith community -- all with the overall goal of access to health care for all.
          
          Support and intermediary organizations -- such as university-based research centers, professional bodies and community-based organizations, help community partners develop the skills they need to be effective. Often, these groups concentrate on improving community members' understanding of the core competencies necessary to do this work. Examples of these competencies include community assessment, strategic planning, community action and advocacy, community evaluation, and securing resources to sustain the effort.
          
          A proposed "Memorandum of Collaboration"
          
          Our question in this section is, how can these three groups work together most effectively? What are the roles and responsibilities of each that, taken together, will help make our communities healthier places to live?
          
          On the next few sections, we'll look again at each of the seven key elements for effective community work that we discussed above. For each point, we will offer a timeline for how long the action should take to complete, and the specific role that each of the three partners can have in completing that step. These roles and responsibilities are summarized in a table in APPENDIX A Tool #1. A model "Memorandum of Collaboration" is outlined in APPENDIX BTool #2.
          The total time-frame for constitutional reforms is one year:
            Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation AGREEMENTS by Kofi Annan.

        LONGER-TERM ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS:

        1. CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW

        Background

        Recalling the 1 February 2008 agreement by the Parties to deal with longterm
        issues and solutions that may have constituted the underlying causes of
        the prevailing social tensions, instability and cycle of violence, and recalling
        the substantial discussions that have been held concerning constitutional
        reform over recent years, the Parties to the Kenyan National Dialogue and
        Reconciliation agree to the following general parameters and principles for the
        establishment of a constitutional review processes.

        General principles and stages of the process

        The parties accept that the constitution belongs to the people of Kenya who
        must be consulted appropriately at all key stages of the process, including the
        formation of the process itself, the draft, the parliamentary process and any
        final enactment.

        There will be five stages in the review of the Constitution and there will be
        consultation with stakeholders in each stage:

        1 An inclusive process will be initiated and completed within 8 weeks to
        establish a statutory Constitutional Review including a timetable. It is
        envisaged that the review process will be completed within 12 months from
        the initiation in Parliament.
        2 Parliament will enact a special 'constitutional referendum law' which will
        establish the powers and enactment processes for approval by the people in a referendum.
        3 The statutory process will provide for the preparation of a comprehensive
        draft by stakeholders and with the assistance of expert advisers.
        4 Parliament will consider and approve the resulting proposals for a new
        constitution.
        5. The new constitution will be put to the people for their consideration and
        enactment in a referendum.

          
          Ten-Point Roadmap Towards Enactment and Implementation of a New Democratic Constitution in Kenya, January-December 2008  Drafted by Tegi Obanda for the Coalition for Constitutional Reforms, Kenya (CCR-K) in December 2007
          1. Establishment of a representative Citizens Assembly: Amendment of Section 47 (ties parliament's and the president's hands - they cannot reject the draft after referendum); national discussion of contentious issues and reform process by March 31, 2008; and preliminary discussion goes up to June 30, 2008
          2. Civic Education Workshops - To discuss the Bomas draft and bring up contentious issues (July 1-September 30, 2008)
          3. Contentious issues drawn from Civic Education Workshops (July 1 - September 30, 2008)
          4. Referendum Questions drawn from contentious issues (Oct 1-31, 2008)
          5. Referendum on contentious issues only (November 18, 2008)
          6. Final Constitution redraft based on referendum results (November 19-30, 2008)
          7. Final copy presented to parliament (December 1, 2008)
          8. Parliament automatically passes (enacts) the new constitution into law - has no power to discuss or reject (see stage 1 above), by December 1, 2008
          9. President automatically assents to the new constitution - has no power to refuse to assent (see stage 1 above), by December 5, 2008
          10.  The new constitution replaces the old constitution, and is implemented immediately (as of December 12, 2008)
          
          
           1. Refining and targeting the partnership's vision, mission, and objectives
          How long? This step should take approximately three to six months..
           
           Community partnership: The community partnership is responsible for selecting a workable (i.e., fairly modest) number of broad goals, in this case, to go through the draft constitution and pinpoint areas which need improvement, and offer those improvements.
          Support organizations: Support organizations can assist the community partnerships in developing a broad-based vision, and then in framing their objectives in a manner that is both specific and workable.
          Support organizations will also work with the community partnership to identify community-level indicators that are most likely to give an accurate and sensitive picture of how effective the partnership's efforts have been. Community-level indicators are discussed in APPENDIX  3 Gathering and Using Community-Level Indicators.
          
          Roadmap Details:
          1. Establishment of a representative Citizens Assembly: Amendment of Section 47 (ties parliament's and the president's hands - they cannot reject the draft after referendum); national discussion of contentious issues and reform process by March 31, 2008; and preliminary discussion goes up to June 30, 2008
          
          2. Developing an action plan for bringing about community civic engagement in citizen caucuses with the goal of developing grassroots participation in constitutional reform process.
          How long? This step takes approximately six to eight months for the original development, and will then be ongoing through the life of the initiative.
           
           Community partnership: Building on earlier efforts, collaborating partners should identify specific changes to be brought about. These changes in programs, policies, and practices will be sought throughout the. Specific action plans that complement one another should be developed for each objective the community partnership has chosen.
          It's very important that the planning process is inclusive, involving people who have significant influence in the community (for example, elected officials), as well as the people who are most affected by the concern (such as residents of low-income neighborhoods) .APPENDIX 4  Identifying Targets and Agents of Change: Who Can Benefit and Who Can Help, offers additional insight on this topic. Finally, it is often helpful to organize members in working committees for each specific objective, such as creating a Task Force on Student Assembly, Workers, Assembly or Women Assembly. This coordinates and focuses efforts so they will have the greatest possible impact.
           
           Support organizations: Support organizations can assist with action planning by suggesting possible actions, and making members of community partnerships aware of "best practices" (successful actions taken by other community groups) for each objective. They can also be very helpful in supporting the early stages of action planning. For example, they might organize and run planning retreats for the community group.
          Roadmap Details:
          2. Civic Education Workshops - To discuss the Bomas draft and bring up contentious issues (July 1-September 30, 2008)
          3. Contentious issues drawn from Civic Education Workshops (July 1 - September 30, 2008)
          
          3. Developing and supporting leadership within communities
          How long? This is an ongoing task.
           
           Community partnership: Members of the partnership can enhance and support existing leadership through mechanisms such as meetings and retreats. They will also seek to develop new generations of leadership by creating opportunities for new leadership to develop, through mentoring newer leaders, and by supporting local youth in leadership roles.  
            
           Support organizations: Support organizations can use direct personal assistance, support groups, and print and web-based resources to support local leadership in their efforts. They can also help to develop formal (e.g. courses) and informal learning communities (e.g., support networks).
          4. Documenting the process of community change and improvement, and using feedback to improve and celebrate efforts
          How long? This is an ongoing task that should occur on a monthly basis.
           
           Community partnership: Using a documentation and evaluation system, members of the partnership will gather information on changes facilitated by the partnership. This task is described in APPENDIX 5  Gathering Information: Monitoring Your Progress. They will also assist in obtaining other information to help understand and be accountable for their work, including success stories and community-level indicators related to their objectives.
          Finally, they will review data on intermediate outcomes (community and systems change) at least quarterly, and data on more distant outcomes (community-level indicators) at least annually. This will help guide improvements and promote the celebration of accomplishments.
           
           Support organizations: Support organizations can facilitate a conversation about what are important markers of success. They will establish and maintain a system for documenting community and systems changes. Finally, they will help local documenters in clarifying and interpreting information, and in communicating important news to funders and the broader community.
          
          5. Securing and providing technical assistance for local groups' efforts
          How long? This is an ongoing task.
           
           Community partnership: Members of the partnership should look for help from organizations with specialized knowledge, such as those which specialize in an issue that the partnership is interested in (i.e. youth organizations or women group). In addition, the partnerships should develop their own capacity to provide technical assistance, such as in action planning or documentation, for other communities working on similar issues.  
           Support organizations: Support organizations can provide technical assistance to community partnerships, in implementing and documenting their work. This might include providing training materials and/or workshops in skills such as community assessment, action planning, leadership development, and evaluation.
          
          6. Securing and providing financial resources for work in local communities
          How long? We recommend an initial three-year commitment that is potentially renewable; further, we suggest multi-year grants with their renewal based on evidence of progress.
           
           Community partnership: As appropriate, partners will hire and support community organizers responsible for helping bring about the community and systems changes identified in the group's action plan. In applications for grant funding, the partners should provide evidence of the need for (and value of) community investment. This includes using quantitative information on community and systems change and improvement through community-level indicators, and qualitative information such as success stories.  
           Support organizations: Support organizations can assist local documenters in analyzing, interpreting, and communicating data for use in grant status reports and "progress to date" sections of grant applications. This and related qualitative information such as success stories can be used to help leverage resources as the community's accomplishments are marketed to prospective funders.
          7. Making outcome matter in working with local communities
          How long? This is an ongoing task.
           
           Community partnership: The partnership should agree to submit annual status reports that include information on evidence of community and systems change as well as progress towards affecting the bottom line. To be fully accountable, they should agree to share evidence of accomplishments (and needed changes) with funders and the broader community.  
           Support organizations: Support organizations should assist the community partnership in documenting, analyzing, and communicating data on the process of community change and improvement for grant status reports.
          
          First, annual renewal of multi-year awards can be based on the evidence of progress. Initially, progress should be judged largely on community involvement and on the rate and kind of community and systems change facilitated by the community partnership. In later years, improvement on community-level indicators will serve as additional evidence of success.
          
          Second, bonus grants (up to one-third of the grant award) may be earned for outstanding accomplishments, such as high rates of changes on issues that are important to community members. For example, the community might show a markedly decreased rate of teen pregnancy that can be traced back to the partnership's efforts.
          
          Third, outcome dividends could be made available to enhance accountability for longer-term community-level outcomes, such as a lowered rate of substance abuse or improved school performance. The "outcome dividend" is a cash bonus that is calculated based on cost-benefit estimates associated with improvements. The outcome dividend will be deposited in a local "Community Trust Account" and reinvested by the community partnership for work on community-determine d goals.
          
          To sum it up
          
          Community civic engagement- the ability of the community to interrogate the way it is governed and suggests methods that they find suits the best of their dreams and struggles, and  to entrench that in the constitution during the constitution- making period-- requires changes in both the behaviors of large numbers of individuals and in the conditions that affect their thinking.
          
          Although community members are best positioned to determine their concerns and strategies, other partners are needed to help with technical support, and in obtaining financial and other needed resources. In this section, we recommend adjusting the related roles and responsibilities of community partnerships, support organizations, and grantmakers. The aim is to build the capacity of community members to address what matters to them. The hope is that these ideas for a new "social contract" will stimulate dialogue and enhance collaboration among those committed to building democratic communities.

              







        You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.

      • Peter Burgess
        Dear Colleagues I may be too late ... but for the record ... I want to be supportive of this. Peter Burgess //////////////////////////////////
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 6, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Colleagues

          I may be too late ... but for the record ... I want to be supportive of this.

          Peter Burgess
          //////////////////////////////////
          On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Janet Feldman <kaippg@...> wrote:
          >
          > Dear Colleague: The date for the launch of the Citizens Assembly in Kenya
          > has been set. The Memorandum of Collaboration among participating
          > individuals and partnering organizations (both inside and outside Kenya) has
          > been drafted. Please read the outline below, and let us know if you want to
          > be included among the signatories of the initial announcement of Memorandum
          > of Collaboration, which will go out to press April 2, 2008. If you want to
          > include your organization or your own individual name, please reply before
          > end of Business day April 1, 2008.
          >
          > ============
          > Working Together for Genuine Democratic Reforms in Kenya: A Framework for
          > Collaboration Among Community Partnerships and Support Organizations
          >
          > Main Section
          > Contributed by Tegi Obanda (for CCR-kenya)
          >
          > A focus on people-driven constitutional reforms
          > What makes it work-the process determines the content: Ten-Point Roadmap
          > Towards Enactment and Implementation of a New Democratic Constitution in
          > Kenya, January-December 2008
          > http://ccr-kenya.blogspot.com/2008/03/ten-point-roadmap-towards-enactment-and.html
          >
          >
          > Who is involved?
          >
          > A proposed "Memorandum of Collaboration"
          >
          > To bring forth a people-driven constitution -- to make Kenya a country
          > where people are healthy, safe, and cared for, there has to be a governance
          > structure in place that is transparent, accountable, participatory and
          > devolved to the grassroots.. To achieve genuine democratic governance in
          > Kenya, the preset constitution needs to be overhauled through a process that
          > involves the entire populace, representing all sections and regions of the
          > country.
          >
          > As democratic reformers, we know all too well that we can't do it alone.
          > The ability to partner effectively with other individuals and organizations
          > -- both inside and outside the Kenya-- is absolutely essential to
          > effectively empower Kenyan citizens to become effective and equal
          > participants in the process of reconstituting their country.
          >
          > However, these partnerships don't materialize out of thin air. And once
          > they do occur, the players involved aren't always sure of their roles, or
          > how those roles can come together in a manner that meets everyone's needs
          > and interests. In short, there's often a knowledge gap, even when everyone
          > wants to work together for the same outcomes.
          > In this section, we'll try to address that gap. We outline a modest
          > proposal for how three key groups -- community partnerships, support and
          > intermediary organizations -- might work together to make the most of
          > everyone's involvement in the democratic reform process.
          >
          > We'll start with a brief look at why we focus on process and what we
          > believe are ten key elements in a people-driven process of constitutional
          > reforms. We hypothesize that Kenya's democratic transition ground to a halt
          > because there was no well-laid down process that delineated the step-by-step
          > actions that would lead the people from point A, when they start the reform
          > process to point B, when they had the new constitution enacted and
          > implemented. Nearly all the focus of the now defunct Constitutional of Kenya
          > Review Commission was on the content. They captured the people's views,
          > deliberated on them and made a very fine draft, popularly known as the Bomas
          > draft.
          >
          > Then they handed the draft to parliament.
          >
          > For reasons only known to themselves, the commission told parliament that
          > they had to either "accept the constitutional draft in Toto or reject it in
          > Toto". They never explained what was to happen in case they rejected it.
          > Yet, any casual observer of the Kenyan political scene could have known that
          > parliamentarians were not keen on constitutional reforms. As members of the
          > elite class that benefits from lack of accountability, transparency and
          > participatory governance, they would fight with all their might to block any
          > attempt to whittle down their powers.
          >
          > To hand over the constitutional draft to parliamentarians to pass would be
          > like asking a thief to return all the goods he has stolen and the telling
          > him to then walk into a police station that is unguarded lock himself up,
          > take himself to court, try himself and sentence himself to seven years in
          > prison, drive himself to prison and lock the gates.
          >
          > There were numerous warnings to the commission to never give parliament
          > the power to decide the fate of the constitution. It Is All About Power: An
          > Open Letter to the delegates of the National Constitutional Conference
          > (NCC), June 2003, Kenya http://www.ccr-kenya.com/Resources/10.html.
          > But more importantly, the people of Kenya had as early as 1992 resolved
          > that they did not want parliament to reform the constitution for them.
          > Confirming Kenya's prescient fears, the parliamentarians did not
          > disappoint. They did all they could to disrupt and derail the National
          > Constitutional Conference of 2003-4, as each group saw the constitutional
          > reform process a chance to create power traps for themselves.
          >
          > They boycotted, derided, delayed, filibuster, insulted and disrupted the
          > conference, turning the most important and historic event in Kenya into a
          > cynically well-planned comedic fiasco.
          >
          > This understanding, although laid out in detail in background documents,
          > forms the basis for ideas in this section. Then, we will explain who the key
          > players in constitutional reforms are, and follow up with an understanding
          > of how they can best work together to make the most of everyone's efforts.
          >
          > Our hope is that, when adapted in local dialogue, this "memorandum of
          > collaboration" will help guide the next major actions towards constitutional
          > reforms in Kenya..
          >
          > A focus on people-driven constitutional reforms
          >
          > When we talk about people-driven constitutional reform we mean the process
          > of people working together to address what matters to them -they meet in
          > local caucuses and discuss the constitutional draft. Whatever people bring
          > forward as contentious issues are recorded, tallied and weighted for
          > consideration for inclusion in the referendum questions.. whether that is
          > reducing violence, revitalizing an urban neighborhood, or promoting child
          > health. Civic engagement is promoted among all of the members of the
          > community.
          >
          > By community, we mean people who share a common place, such as a rural
          > community or urban neighborhood, or experience, including being an
          > adolescent, female or a member of an ethnic minority group.
          >
          > To address what matters to community members, we need to change the
          > conditions in which we live. To change the conditions in which people live,
          > there is a need to change the power structures that centralizes
          > decision-making power in the hands of the president, the executive, and
          > legislature. Local governments need to be empowered with full powers to
          > collect and disburse resources as they see fit.
          >
          > We believe that collaborative partnerships should focus on environmental
          > changes -- bringing about those community and systems changes that modify
          > local conditions. That's because we believe these changes are an
          > intermediate outcome in the long process of community socio-economic
          > improvement. Community and systems changes fall in to one of three
          > categories, all of which should relate back to community-determined goals:
          >
          > New or modified programs -- for example, better schooling,
          > community-based policing, disease-prevention services.
          > New or modified policies -- for example, people taking control of their
          > natural resource management or family-friendly policies in businesses
          > New or modified practices -- for example, healthcare for all or increased
          > opportunities for economic advancement.
          > What makes it work: Seven key factors in citizen involvement
          > There are seven essential ingredients that contribute to successful
          > community involvement.
          >
          > Clear vision and mission -- those initiatives with a clear and specific
          > focus, such as increasing rates of childhood immunization or lowering the
          > rate of unemployment, bring about much higher rates of change than broad
          > efforts which lack a targeted mission and objectives. The vision and mission
          > may reflect a continuum of outcomes, including: a) categorical issues, b)
          > broader interrelated concerns (e.g., youth development), and/or c ) more
          > fundamental social determinants of health and development (e.g., children
          > living in poverty).
          > Action planning -- Identifying specific community changes (that is, new
          > or modified programs, policies, and practices) to be sought may be the
          > single, most important practice that can be implemented. The action plan
          > should be quite precise, specifying with whom, by whom, how and by when each
          > action step should be carried out.
          > Leadership -- A change in leadership can dramatically affect the rate of
          > change brought about by a community group. The loss of visionary competent
          > leadership can be particularly difficult for an organization. There has to
          > be a holistic view of grooming and maintaining visionary leadership for your
          > group.
          > Resources for community mobilizers -- Hiring community mobilizers or
          > organizers can aid in following up on action plans. It can be very difficult
          > to maintain an organization without some paid staff. Paid organizers can
          > help fan the flames and keep the level of excitement about the organization
          > and its goals at a consistently high level.
          > Documentation and feedback on the changes brought about by the
          > organization -- It's also very important that people keep a record of what
          > they have done and how they have done it. Having this history can be an
          > invaluable guide for the organization's work. Looking regularly (at least
          > quarterly) at what the group has done, how quickly it has occurred, and
          > outside events that affect the group's work has been shown to spur groups
          > onto even greater heights.
          > Technical assistance -- Outside help with specific actions, such as
          > action planning or securing resources, is also a way to support a group's
          > efforts to transform its community.
          > Making outcome matter -- Finally, grantmakers also have the ability to
          > increase rates of community and systems change through offering incentives
          > or disincentives to their grantees. For example, the annual renewal of
          > multi-year awards or the offering of bonus grants could be based on evidence
          > of progress or accomplishment by the community group.
          > Who is involved?
          > Transforming the conditions that affect the community civic engagement
          > requires a broad collaborative partnership among several key players. Three
          > distinct groups emerge as playing vital, interdependent roles:
          >
          > National and community partnerships
          > Support and intermediary organizations
          > Let's look at each of these groups one by one.
          >
          > National and community partnerships -- those doing the work of community
          > and systems change -- link together people and organizations that have the
          > same goals. For example, a citizen assembly partnership might bring together
          > representatives from regions and sectors. Together, they might work to make
          > changes throughout the community that would affect community's civic
          > engagement capability. Specific changes might be made in local
          > community-based organizations, health organizations, businesses, schools,
          > the government, financial institutions, and the faith community -- all with
          > the overall goal of access to health care for all.
          >
          > Support and intermediary organizations -- such as university-based
          > research centers, professional bodies and community-based organizations,
          > help community partners develop the skills they need to be effective. Often,
          > these groups concentrate on improving community members' understanding of
          > the core competencies necessary to do this work. Examples of these
          > competencies include community assessment, strategic planning, community
          > action and advocacy, community evaluation, and securing resources to sustain
          > the effort.
          >
          > A proposed "Memorandum of Collaboration"
          >
          > Our question in this section is, how can these three groups work together
          > most effectively? What are the roles and responsibilities of each that,
          > taken together, will help make our communities healthier places to live?
          >
          > On the next few sections, we'll look again at each of the seven key
          > elements for effective community work that we discussed above. For each
          > point, we will offer a timeline for how long the action should take to
          > complete, and the specific role that each of the three partners can have in
          > completing that step. These roles and responsibilities are summarized in a
          > table in APPENDIX A Tool #1. A model "Memorandum of Collaboration" is
          > outlined in APPENDIX BTool #2.
          > The total time-frame for constitutional reforms is one year:
          > Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation AGREEMENTS by Kofi Annan.
          >
          > LONGER-TERM ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS:
          >
          > 1. CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
          >
          > Background
          >
          > Recalling the 1 February 2008 agreement by the Parties to deal with longterm
          > issues and solutions that may have constituted the underlying causes of
          > the prevailing social tensions, instability and cycle of violence, and
          > recalling
          > the substantial discussions that have been held concerning constitutional
          > reform over recent years, the Parties to the Kenyan National Dialogue and
          > Reconciliation agree to the following general parameters and principles for
          > the
          > establishment of a constitutional review processes.
          >
          > General principles and stages of the process
          >
          > The parties accept that the constitution belongs to the people of Kenya who
          > must be consulted appropriately at all key stages of the process, including
          > the
          > formation of the process itself, the draft, the parliamentary process and
          > any
          > final enactment.
          >
          > There will be five stages in the review of the Constitution and there will
          > be
          > consultation with stakeholders in each stage:
          >
          > 1 An inclusive process will be initiated and completed within 8 weeks to
          > establish a statutory Constitutional Review including a timetable. It is
          > envisaged that the review process will be completed within 12 months from
          > the initiation in Parliament.
          > 2 Parliament will enact a special 'constitutional referendum law' which will
          > establish the powers and enactment processes for approval by the people in a
          > referendum.
          > 3 The statutory process will provide for the preparation of a comprehensive
          > draft by stakeholders and with the assistance of expert advisers.
          > 4 Parliament will consider and approve the resulting proposals for a new
          > constitution.
          > 5. The new constitution will be put to the people for their consideration
          > and
          > enactment in a referendum.
          >
          >
          > Ten-Point Roadmap Towards Enactment and Implementation of a New Democratic
          > Constitution in Kenya, January-December 2008 Drafted by Tegi Obanda for the
          > Coalition for Constitutional Reforms, Kenya (CCR-K) in December 2007
          > 1. Establishment of a representative Citizens Assembly: Amendment of
          > Section 47 (ties parliament's and the president's hands - they cannot reject
          > the draft after referendum); national discussion of contentious issues and
          > reform process by March 31, 2008; and preliminary discussion goes up to June
          > 30, 2008
          > 2. Civic Education Workshops - To discuss the Bomas draft and bring up
          > contentious issues (July 1-September 30, 2008)
          > 3. Contentious issues drawn from Civic Education Workshops (July 1 -
          > September 30, 2008)
          > 4. Referendum Questions drawn from contentious issues (Oct 1-31, 2008)
          > 5. Referendum on contentious issues only (November 18, 2008)
          > 6. Final Constitution redraft based on referendum results (November 19-30,
          > 2008)
          > 7. Final copy presented to parliament (December 1, 2008)
          > 8. Parliament automatically passes (enacts) the new constitution into law
          > - has no power to discuss or reject (see stage 1 above), by December 1, 2008
          > 9. President automatically assents to the new constitution - has no power
          > to refuse to assent (see stage 1 above), by December 5, 2008
          > 10. The new constitution replaces the old constitution, and is
          > implemented immediately (as of December 12, 2008)
          >
          >
          > 1. Refining and targeting the partnership's vision, mission, and
          > objectives
          > How long? This step should take approximately three to six months..
          >
          > Community partnership: The community partnership is responsible for
          > selecting a workable (i.e., fairly modest) number of broad goals, in this
          > case, to go through the draft constitution and pinpoint areas which need
          > improvement, and offer those improvements.
          > Support organizations: Support organizations can assist the community
          > partnerships in developing a broad-based vision, and then in framing their
          > objectives in a manner that is both specific and workable.
          > Support organizations will also work with the community partnership to
          > identify community-level indicators that are most likely to give an accurate
          > and sensitive picture of how effective the partnership's efforts have been.
          > Community-level indicators are discussed in APPENDIX 3 Gathering and Using
          > Community-Level Indicators.
          >
          > Roadmap Details:
          > 1. Establishment of a representative Citizens Assembly: Amendment of
          > Section 47 (ties parliament's and the president's hands - they cannot reject
          > the draft after referendum); national discussion of contentious issues and
          > reform process by March 31, 2008; and preliminary discussion goes up to June
          > 30, 2008
          >
          > 2. Developing an action plan for bringing about community civic engagement
          > in citizen caucuses with the goal of developing grassroots participation in
          > constitutional reform process.
          > How long? This step takes approximately six to eight months for the
          > original development, and will then be ongoing through the life of the
          > initiative.
          >
          > Community partnership: Building on earlier efforts, collaborating
          > partners should identify specific changes to be brought about. These changes
          > in programs, policies, and practices will be sought throughout the. Specific
          > action plans that complement one another should be developed for each
          > objective the community partnership has chosen.
          > It's very important that the planning process is inclusive, involving
          > people who have significant influence in the community (for example, elected
          > officials), as well as the people who are most affected by the concern (such
          > as residents of low-income neighborhoods).APPENDIX 4 Identifying Targets
          > and Agents of Change: Who Can Benefit and Who Can Help, offers additional
          > insight on this topic. Finally, it is often helpful to organize members in
          > working committees for each specific objective, such as creating a Task
          > Force on Student Assembly, Workers, Assembly or Women Assembly. This
          > coordinates and focuses efforts so they will have the greatest possible
          > impact.
          >
          > Support organizations: Support organizations can assist with action
          > planning by suggesting possible actions, and making members of community
          > partnerships aware of "best practices" (successful actions taken by other
          > community groups) for each objective. They can also be very helpful in
          > supporting the early stages of action planning. For example, they might
          > organize and run planning retreats for the community group.
          > Roadmap Details:
          > 2. Civic Education Workshops - To discuss the Bomas draft and bring up
          > contentious issues (July 1-September 30, 2008)
          > 3. Contentious issues drawn from Civic Education Workshops (July 1 -
          > September 30, 2008)
          >
          > 3. Developing and supporting leadership within communities
          > How long? This is an ongoing task.
          >
          > Community partnership: Members of the partnership can enhance and support
          > existing leadership through mechanisms such as meetings and retreats. They
          > will also seek to develop new generations of leadership by creating
          > opportunities for new leadership to develop, through mentoring newer
          > leaders, and by supporting local youth in leadership roles.
          >
          > Support organizations: Support organizations can use direct personal
          > assistance, support groups, and print and web-based resources to support
          > local leadership in their efforts. They can also help to develop formal
          > (e.g. courses) and informal learning communities (e.g., support networks).
          > 4. Documenting the process of community change and improvement, and using
          > feedback to improve and celebrate efforts
          > How long? This is an ongoing task that should occur on a monthly basis.
          >
          > Community partnership: Using a documentation and evaluation system,
          > members of the partnership will gather information on changes facilitated by
          > the partnership. This task is described in APPENDIX 5 Gathering
          > Information: Monitoring Your Progress. They will also assist in obtaining
          > other information to help understand and be accountable for their work,
          > including success stories and community-level indicators related to their
          > objectives.
          > Finally, they will review data on intermediate outcomes (community and
          > systems change) at least quarterly, and data on more distant outcomes
          > (community-level indicators) at least annually. This will help guide
          > improvements and promote the celebration of accomplishments.
          >
          > Support organizations: Support organizations can facilitate a
          > conversation about what are important markers of success. They will
          > establish and maintain a system for documenting community and systems
          > changes. Finally, they will help local documenters in clarifying and
          > interpreting information, and in communicating important news to funders and
          > the broader community.
          >
          > 5. Securing and providing technical assistance for local groups' efforts
          > How long? This is an ongoing task.
          >
          > Community partnership: Members of the partnership should look for help
          > from organizations with specialized knowledge, such as those which
          > specialize in an issue that the partnership is interested in (i.e. youth
          > organizations or women group). In addition, the partnerships should develop
          > their own capacity to provide technical assistance, such as in action
          > planning or documentation, for other communities working on similar issues.
          > Support organizations: Support organizations can provide technical
          > assistance to community partnerships, in implementing and documenting their
          > work. This might include providing training materials and/or workshops in
          > skills such as community assessment, action planning, leadership
          > development, and evaluation.
          >
          > 6. Securing and providing financial resources for work in local
          > communities
          > How long? We recommend an initial three-year commitment that is
          > potentially renewable; further, we suggest multi-year grants with their
          > renewal based on evidence of progress.
          >
          > Community partnership: As appropriate, partners will hire and support
          > community organizers responsible for helping bring about the community and
          > systems changes identified in the group's action plan. In applications for
          > grant funding, the partners should provide evidence of the need for (and
          > value of) community investment. This includes using quantitative information
          > on community and systems change and improvement through community-level
          > indicators, and qualitative information such as success stories.
          > Support organizations: Support organizations can assist local documenters
          > in analyzing, interpreting, and communicating data for use in grant status
          > reports and "progress to date" sections of grant applications. This and
          > related qualitative information such as success stories can be used to help
          > leverage resources as the community's accomplishments are marketed to
          > prospective funders.
          > 7. Making outcome matter in working with local communities
          > How long? This is an ongoing task.
          >
          > Community partnership: The partnership should agree to submit annual
          > status reports that include information on evidence of community and systems
          > change as well as progress towards affecting the bottom line. To be fully
          > accountable, they should agree to share evidence of accomplishments (and
          > needed changes) with funders and the broader community.
          > Support organizations: Support organizations should assist the community
          > partnership in documenting, analyzing, and communicating data on the process
          > of community change and improvement for grant status reports.
          >
          > First, annual renewal of multi-year awards can be based on the evidence of
          > progress. Initially, progress should be judged largely on community
          > involvement and on the rate and kind of community and systems change
          > facilitated by the community partnership. In later years, improvement on
          > community-level indicators will serve as additional evidence of success.
          >
          > Second, bonus grants (up to one-third of the grant award) may be earned
          > for outstanding accomplishments, such as high rates of changes on issues
          > that are important to community members. For example, the community might
          > show a markedly decreased rate of teen pregnancy that can be traced back to
          > the partnership's efforts.
          >
          > Third, outcome dividends could be made available to enhance accountability
          > for longer-term community-level outcomes, such as a lowered rate of
          > substance abuse or improved school performance. The "outcome dividend" is a
          > cash bonus that is calculated based on cost-benefit estimates associated
          > with improvements. The outcome dividend will be deposited in a local
          > "Community Trust Account" and reinvested by the community partnership for
          > work on community-determined goals.
          >
          > To sum it up
          >
          > Community civic engagement- the ability of the community to interrogate
          > the way it is governed and suggests methods that they find suits the best of
          > their dreams and struggles, and to entrench that in the constitution during
          > the constitution-making period-- requires changes in both the behaviors of
          > large numbers of individuals and in the conditions that affect their
          > thinking.
          >
          > Although community members are best positioned to determine their concerns
          > and strategies, other partners are needed to help with technical support,
          > and in obtaining financial and other needed resources. In this section, we
          > recommend adjusting the related roles and responsibilities of community
          > partnerships, support organizations, and grantmakers. The aim is to build
          > the capacity of community members to address what matters to them. The hope
          > is that these ideas for a new "social contract" will stimulate dialogue and
          > enhance collaboration among those committed to building democratic
          > communities.

          > http://www.worknets.org/wiki.cgi?HolisticHelping
          >
          > Please note our rule: Each letter sent to the Holistic Helping group enters
          > the PUBLIC DOMAIN unless it explicitly states otherwise. Thank you!
          > http://www.ethicalpublicdomain.org
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.