[UgaBYTES] Rural Communication Development Policy-II 2009/14| Draft for feedback

Sarah mpagi sarah at ugabytes.org
Wed Aug 12 12:11:27 GMT 2009


Hullo all,

Thanks Sulah for bringing this up for our review of the policy, to enable us
contribute to it in time, before it is finalized. This would enable us
promote information and communication access and use of telecentres by
magnalized groups in the country. Going through the draft policy document, i
found out that some important issues were not clearly brought up to be
addressed in the RCDP II.


   1.

   What experiences were gained in management of such telecentres and the
   new ones established by RCDP I, so that we draw from them sustainability
   models and to establish whether yes or not there was a mission drift from
   those established by RCDP I? i.e. targeting the marginalized groups
   (disadvantaged), was the objective realized or not OR they were turned into
   business information centres after the private partnership deal?

   2.

   How will the underserved access and use such information; at what cost
   that would be affordable to them? Is there a provision for that? It was
   highlighted as experiences from RCDP I, but there is no provision to
   mitigate that problem, because the cost of the services was not affordable
   to the marginalized communities. Still those centres would end up being idol
   places that are under utilized.

   3.

   The policy has no provision for creating awareness for the rural
   communities to effectively access and use information technologies in those
   telecentres/centres? Even to date, it still requires a lot of awareness
   programs to emphasize the importance of information access centres for the
   development of rural communities because the centres are still under
   utilized however good they are.

   4.

   Quality of service providers was low; what provision by the policy is
   there to provide trainings and continuous trainings to the service providers
   in those centres? Networks are one way to provide such trainings but, they
   are not mentioned anywhere in the policy document. The provision to provide
   such ICT trainings and other trainings to the service providers is non
   existent but, majority of the service providers and “marginalized
   communities” are ICT illiterates. How will they make good use of the centres
   for Information and communication access without that knowledge?

   5.

   Energy, Sustainability, and Quality of services. o:) The three components
   which are to be added by RCDP II to the efforts of RCDP I are the major
   challenges faced by existing telecentres or other information centres.
   However, like others mentioned earlier, there is nothing said about
   sustainability and improving the quality of services. How would they be
   ensured for the long term sustainability and increased access and use by the
   rural marginalized groups without trainings and that provision for
   continuous trainings to attain sustainability?

   6.

   The policy should look into the existing telecentres (Information access
   centres) and work together to improve the services and the coverage of the
   community radios, to enable them cover the entire Sub Counties. It should
   strive to improve on the performance of existing institutions. The policy is
   as well targeting LCIII level however, the intervention level should be
   reduced to lower the distance the rural communities (marginalized groups)
   travel to access information and communication from those centres. The plan
   should be there to reduce the distance communities move to access
   information, at least to LC II level. Taking the an example of Nigeria where
   the distance is reduced to 5kms apart. The policy should highlight strongly
   the importance of such telecentres to the development of rural communities.

   7.

   The SWOT analysis was not done extensively to also look through the human
   resource and other resources available, whether they would lead to
   successful implementation of the project or NOT. This component would be a
   waste of resources at that material time if it is not earlier detected that
   the resources available would not be enough or it would require out sourcing
   to implement the same. (monitoring and assessment of implementation :-
   This component shall address the following evaluation issues: - Whether
   there is sufficient capacity within RCDPII and partners to effectively
   deliver on the proposed service )?? I guess impact and outcome should be
   outsourced to the same people/group for objectivity purposes but not
   separated OR outcome should not be done internally. Formative evaluation is
   very ok but they should avoid putting more emphasis and resources on
   evaluating things which would have been majorly sorted out earlier before
   implementation.

We all look forward to seeing vibrant telecentres and other information
access centres reach out to the real marginalized groups i.e women, youths,
children, disabled and elderly in the rural communities in the country.



Best,
Sarah




On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Sandra Nassali <snassali at ugabytes.org>wrote:

> Hello Theo, please find the draft policy attached
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Theo van der Weide <tvdw at cs.ru.nl>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Sulah,
> >
> > The url does not seem to work:
> >
> >> For the full draft policy visit http://www.ucc.co.ug/index.php under
> >> policies driving the sector <Draft Rural communication Policy
> >> (2009-2014)>. For executive readers see pages 12 -25.
> >>
> >>
> > Is the url correct?
> > Kind regards, Theo
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ugabytes mailing list
> > ugabytes at lists.ugabytes.org
> > http://lists.ugabytes.org/mailman/listinfo/ugabytes_lists.ugabytes.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Join the telecentre.org BLOG Contest for a chance to win recognition and
> prizes. For more info, check out http://www.telecentre.org
>
> Sandra Nassali
> Community Facilitator
> UgaBYTES Initiative (www.ugabytes.org)
> Telecentre.org  (www.telecentrecommunity.ning.com)
> Plot 2218 Ggaba Road,
> 2nd Floor Kangave House
> P.O. Box 6081 K'la
> Email  snassali at ugabytes.org
> chat    (skype)- n.sandra.
> Tel      +256-414-370163
>
> _______________________________________________
> ugabytes mailing list
> ugabytes at lists.ugabytes.org
> http://lists.ugabytes.org/mailman/listinfo/ugabytes_lists.ugabytes.org
>
>


-- 
Nalwoga Sarah Mpagi
Program Officer
Knowledge Management & Research
UgaBYTES Initiative
Plot 2218 Ggaba Road, Kabalagala
2nd Floor, Kangave House
P.O. Box 6081 Kampala, Uganda
Mobl: +256 772 433 158
Off:    +256 414 370 163
Check our web: www.ugabytes.org
skype: sarah.nalwoga.mpagi


More information about the ugabytes mailing list