Community development: evaluating for results

In an effort to meet international and local expectations for corporate responsibility, mining companies have begun to adopt community development initiatives. These are often grounded in corporate policies that emphasize long-term partnerships with the people living in the area of impact of large mining projects — policies put in place in the interests of business success.

Although not a major component of the cost of operating a mine, these corporate policies and the initiatives they generate are increasingly the mechanism of choice for managing the social risk that is inherent in the mining industry, with its history, immobility, perceived deep pockets, and often extensive environmental footprint.

Increasingly, mining companies are being pressured to show their effectiveness in mitigating problems related to social issues. A look through the corporate web sites, policies and company reports reveals a new emphasis on the need to measure the performance of social initiatives.

Three trends are emerging:

— more companies are publicly reporting their community development activities;

— there are more references to a need to develop results-based performance indicators; and

— there is increased use of third parties to conduct performance evaluations.

Community development programs should produce results that are not only positive but sustainable as well. The benefits to local populations should continue long after the mining operation closes. The result is a drive to develop community development programs that are as carefully designed as a mine shaft or a tailings pond.

Evaluation of community development programs helps managers determine how well programs are working; it also helps them identify reasons for success or failure. Lessons learned from such evaluation allow managers and decision-makers to design and implement programs. There are several benefits to doing this approach, as discussed below.

— Filling gaps — Choosing indicators to track resource inputs, activities and outputs of a community development initiative should provide insight into the strategies and processes for achieving objectives. An assessment of these indicators may provide an opportunity for suggesting better programming.

For example, consider a community development program that targets families affected by a mining operation. Among other initiatives, the community development program is promoting income-generating activities (IGAs) for women affected by the mining operation. Management may request that an evaluation be conducted when a diagnostic monitoring report shows that an unusually high number of women’s IGAs are failing for one group (or area) but show high success rates in other areas.

An evaluation could be used to map out the determining or causal factors deemed important to program success, determine how they might interact, recommend strategies for improved performance and replication, and decide on which steps should be monitored as the program develops. Evaluation allows the analyst to identify critical program success factors and highlight the gaps where data show that these factors have not been achieved. Evaluation can indicate deeper programming and strategic issues that may need to be addressed.

— Smoother implementation — Conducting an evaluation during implementation can point to opportunities and explain problems, allowing for adjustments or extensions, for a better outcome.

— Greater flexibility — Community development programs have a way of developing a life of their own. Needs and resources can change. The necessary flexibility comes only if there is enough information to guide the program redesign. Results-based performance indicators and evaluation provide that information.

— Demonstrating responsiveness — Evaluation is a means by which a company is able to respond to the requirements of people affected by projects. This is most true where a community development initiative and its evaluation are both participatory. Affected people who have identified their own goals and objectives join in the evaluation of whether or not these are being achieved. Participatory evaluations extend the partnership and responsibility for community development program implementation beyond a company’s community relations department to the stakeholder group as a whole.

— Transparency and accountability — Local communities, their national and international advocates, and financing agencies increasingly require wide dissemination of evaluation results. They are not prepared to wait years, until the project is finished, to decide whether to support the company’s actions or press for change. If provided with credible results-based performance evaluations, they will feel greater confidence in the company’s actions.

— Building knowledge — Compared with mining, community development is a new field of study, and any knowledge of best practices is precious. Each community development program can provide a wealth of “how-to” information and lessons learned. This is particularly vital for the mining sector, which is still battling largely negative public perceptions regarding environmental and social effects. Smaller companies, which lack the expertise and resources to start from scratch, can benefit the most from the experience of others. Lessons learned from program evaluation can build a knowledge base.

Laying the groundwork for success

Experience in this area has found that successful evaluation of community development programs includes the following elements:

— Independence boosts credibility — The evaluation should be managed and completed by an entity independent of that responsible for achieving the results being evaluated and of affected populations. Credible evaluations are most often done by third parties. The work should be managed and completed by an entity independent of that responsible for achieving the results being evaluated.

— Choose program objectives wisely — Community development planners need to be clear about their objectives. In order to clarify program objectives, a “results chain,” including input, activities, processes, output, outcomes and impacts — needs to be articulated so that the stated program objectives are realistic and achievable. Planning for the evaluation ahead of time allows these conditions to be met.

— Include consultation and participation — Right from the start of the community development program, it is essential to consult with, and obtain participation from, key stakeholders of the community. This is particularly important when the goals include strengthening local institutions that can continue the work at the end of the program funding.

To see how program evaluation can work, consider the hypothetical example of a development program set up to improve education standards in a community close to a mining project. First for planning purposes, it is necessary to determine four aspects of the program:

— Objective: to improve quality of school instruction.

— Indicators: these include the percentage of teachers with a given level of qualification, degree of teacher and student absenteeism, and the percentage of the community completing various levels of education according to age and gender.

— Means of verification — a survey of current teacher qualifications and educational levels in the community, school and educational program monitoring reports.

— Critical assumptions — such assumptions are that teachers with the right qualifications can be attracted to the community, and that increased school quality will encourage attendance and reduce dropout rates.

As the project is implemented, the monitoring results may show that many students are absent from school at some times of the year. When asked during the evaluation, community members have said poverty causes parents to pull their children out of school so that they can help in the fields during planting and harvest. This may mean that the school year needs to be redesigned around the crop cycle.

Results-based performance evaluations are critical to successful and effective community development programs. Evaluation is concerned as much with the lessons of program implementation as it is with the degree to which intended outcomes and objectives have been achieved. Results-based performance evaluation can make a more effective community development program — in terms of meeting real local needs, satisfying intervenors and activist groups, and demonstrating to the public that the company is doing the right thing for people affected by its operations.

— The author has more than 20 years’ agricultural and rural development experience in North America, Asia and Africa. He works in the Calgary office of Golder Associates and can be reached at (403) 299-5600 or by e-mail at jim_hamilton@golder.com