Anatomy of Success and Vulnerability
This is a summary table which quickly organizes and shows the strengths and vulnerabilities in a community’s intangible and tangible assets, and in external assets it has access to. Development workers who are familiar with a project, when shown its “Anatomy of Success and Vulnerability”, readily appreciate the value of the tool and the new perspective behind it, for presenting new or additional insights why the project is succeeding and cues where it may fail in the future.
The sample below applies the tool in a bridge financing for education project in Northern Samar, Philippines.
Capitals/Assets and Vulnerabilities before Project Implementation: SHIFT Project
|
- + Access rights – Right of the poor to quality
education;
- + RA 6728 Education Service Contracting, a law
subsidizing poor
students to study in private schools;
- + SHIFT nuns and volunteers are known, accepted and
respected in the
communities, schools, marketplaces in Mondragon and Catarman;
- + SHIFT’s credibility and ability to mobilize local,
national and
international volunteers (ex. German volunteer nurse, Jesuit Volunteers
and youth volunteers);
- + High goodwill of SHIFT allowing it to secure favors
and obtain
benefits from different individuals and groups.
- + RSCJ Congregation’s national and international
network of support;
- + SAA owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese of
Catarman;
- + PEF interested to support the project, Northern
Samar being the
number one PEF priority province
|
- - SHIFT involved in many
programs mostly supported by volunteers; tendency to spread itself too
thinly;
- - SHIFT lacked policies, procedures and systems;
- - Absence of formal MOA between SHIFT and other
project partners like
the University of Eastern Philippines for the agricultural technology
assistance and the Municipal LGU for their “tractor” counterpart;
- - Nominal involvement of the Diocese in SAA affairs.
|
- + Regular subsidy from DepEd under the ESC contract;
- + Some tuition fees collected.
|
- - Economically poor
majority: cannot afford private school’s tuition fees, transportation
and other incidental costs of schooling; high (15%) dropout
rate;
- - ESC subsidy remittance always months late;
- - Teachers not paid in full or on time, had to borrow
from loan sharks
or rediscount their salary slips
|
- + Presence of loosely organized communities assisted
by
SHIFT in other programs
|
- - Community
organizations are weak, lack leaders, not so positive previous
experiences in group processes
|
- + Poor students and their parents value and aspire
for
quality education;
- + Dedicated SAA teachers as proven by their
willingness to work despite
irregular pay in the past;
- + Deeply committed educators: two RSCJ sisters who
teach not only as an
exercise of profession but as a vocation;
- + Many successful SAA alumni within and outside the
community;
- + Presence of agriculturists from the University of
Eastern Philippines
College of Agriculture
- + Resourceful SHIFT Executive Director.
|
- - Communities assisted
by SHIFT lack capable leaders and members;
- - SAA teachers preoccupied with making ends meet,
demoralized and not
very focused on the task of teaching.
|
- + Good relations between SAA administration /
teachers
and the community
|
- - Superstitious, even
some SAA teachers and non-teaching staff believe in superstitious
practices;
- - Absence of bayanihan or community spirit
in farms and
communities
|
- + SAA has an old school building;
- + SHIFT has an old dilapidated jeep that can be
repaired;
- + SHIFT has a 2,000 square meter farm land that can
be made productive;
- + Existence of a good national highway and bridges.
|
- - School buildings,
houses and farms vulnerable to natural disasters;
- - No regular public utility service (jeep or
tricycle) that could bring
students from the different barangays to school.
|
