ACCESS Phase II Impact Evaluation Page 9
Given the complexity and highly contextualised conditions resulting from decentralisation, ACCESS retains flexibility to be responsive to local contexts and emerging issues including political shifts, new
policy initiatives and local capacities. At the outset, ACCESS supported district level multistakeholder visioning – comprising government, legislative, private sector and community members ‐ to identify
priorities for improving governance and local development, which were then incorporated into a District Citizen Engagement Plan. The Program supports multistakeholder reflections on program
progress including six monthly reviews with partners, citizens and others and on broader governance changes through a District Stakeholder Committee Forum Lintas Aktor or FLA.
1.3 Purpose of the Impact Assessment
6
ACCESS started in May 2008 and works in 20 districts in four provinces in Eastern Indonesia ‐ South Sulawesi, South East Sulawesi, NTT and NTB. Eight districts were carried over from ACCESS Phase I
2002‐2008, eight were approved by AusAID and MOHA in January 2009 and four more were added in July 2011 in response to local government requests.
Given that the program was initially due to end in April 2013 now extended to
2014, ACCESS
tendered for
and contracted an Indonesian research
organisation, AKATIGA Foundation to conduct
a Community
Impact Assessment. This complements other
evaluation studies including: Partner Action Plan Evaluations, Civil Society
Index, Partner Progress Reviews and Case Studies as seen in Figure 1.
The AKATIGA assessment explored two aspects, namely, emerging impacts at
the level of the community and perceptions
of local
governments regarding benefits of the Program. At the
citizen level, it assessed the extent of changes for men and women as citizens and cadres, particularly related to their knowledge, critical
awareness and capacity to organise and take action on their priorities. AKATIGA then looked at the perceptions of government personnel about the value of the program and changes in the broader
enabling environment to support local democratic governance values, engagement with citizens and their organisations and the outcomes of this involvement. Efficiency was considered through the
perceptions of community members about the degree to which their investment of time and resources matched the value of benefits they received. Sustainability was considered by whether
systemic changes were likely to continue and produce benefits after the program ends. The study also considered how ACCESS strategies and contributory factors positive and negative affected end
of project outcomes and what were the lessons learnt see Appendix 1 for Conduct of the Community Impact Assessment.
6
The impact assessment refers to community impacts and local government acceptance of and interaction with ACCESS.
Index Index
Partner Progress
Review
Independent Evaluation :
Community Impact
Assessment Local
Government Survey
Partner Action Plan
Evaluations
Yappika Civil Society
Index
Activity Completion
Report
Partner Progress
Review Partner
Progress Review
Partner Progress
Review
IRE ‐MP3 Case
Studies ACCESS
Change
Stories Figure 1: Evaluation Framework for ACCESS Phase II
ACCESS Phase II Impact Evaluation Page 10
1.4 Report Structure
