International Journal of Arts, Culture and Creative Studies
DOI: 10.64823/ijacc.2601007
The Department of Theatre Arts (DTA) was established as a Unit under the Department of Music Education on September 03, 2007, to commence the Bachelor of Arts in Theatre Arts programme. The programme was designed to train and equip students with relevant skills in the fields of Theatre and Dance for community development. In September 2009, the Department was fully established as one of the departments within the School of Creative Arts, University of Education, Winneba.
Currently, the DTA is fully mandated to train and equip students and is also poised to advance the accumulated knowledge and skills in Ghanaian traditional culture and the development of Ghanaian contemporary arts and culture.
Since the establishment of the Department in 2007, the DTA has been implementing several community development projects on different subject matters within Winneba and its environs as its corporate social responsibility to achieve Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Six (6) Clean Water and Sanitation and Four (4) Quality Education for both national and global development agenda. For ten (10) good academic years now, many Theatre for Development (TfD) facilitators have also embarked on many sanitation and educational projects in the fight against poor sanitation and ensuring that both children and parents pay much attention to their wards’ education in Winneba. These facilitators impact knowledge and effect community change initiatives via thought-provoking dramatic performance projects to ensure a healthy environment or communities and quality education.
Embarking on community projects is one thing, and monitoring the sustainability as well as the impacts of these projects is another thing as far as evaluation is concerned. The DTA has done enough in this regard, as in the number of projects carried out, but there is one key factor missing out. Thus, evaluation of some of these vital projects, especially sanitation and education-related. An evaluation study would help the DTA to measure its influence in this selected community and determine its impact, as well as associated challenges, if there are any affecting its beneficiaries. The evaluation will help propose new theatrical perspectives for handling such community initiatives in the future, which will serve as a reference point.
The researcher believed that the response and reactions of the audience and community after witnessing/watching a TfD project/drama, together with the discussion after the performance, are not enough indications that the project's objectives have been achieved or the developmental social issue has been addressed. For that matter, one cannot use the responses and reactions of an audience at a given time to judge whether awareness has been created or not. To fill the gap renders Follow-up Evaluation, which is an essential component of TfD methodological tautology.
The reaction and response of the audience are indeed important because the discussions form a bridge between the presentation of the problems and community action to address them. But it is also equally important to find out whether the message has reached the targeted audience or community through frequent visits to the lab site to find out how they are tackling these issues with the given suggestions in a communal effort. This is very crucial in any TfD operation. Without follow-up and evaluation, one cannot claim the objectives for which a TfD project was conducted have been achieved.
Hence, an evaluation study was needed to find out the impacts these projects have made on the people of the community and the way forward. It is possible that at the end of each performance and discussion, a lot of questions remain unanswered; there may be some interest in addressing them by the community, but they need to be supported. Hence, a follow-up programme is needed to help the people or community organise themselves and take action.
An evaluation is crucial in the same vein as finding out how successful or otherwise these projects were in reaching all sensibilities of the target group. The findings of the evaluation were used to reconsider the effectiveness of the methods chosen; beyond this, the findings also provided valuable information for a review and possible modification of other steps in the development process.
Therefore, the purpose of carrying out this evaluation study was for learning and accountability. Capturing the impact of the TfD projects helped advance the field through the development of vetted best practices in pushing the TfD programme to the next stage. The evaluation enabled the researcher to learn about the bigger picture of what worked and what did not work beyond the immediacy of the performance space and towards the longer-term impacts. The evaluation provided evidence of the great work participatory TfD did as a nuanced, emotionally connected, and transformative approach to communication for development. Improved TfD programme design, monitoring, and evaluation of projects and activities would enable the formation of best practices that will help promote effective impact for the communities being served with these projects.
The drive behind this study was to contribute to the development of TfD evaluation research and practice in ways that contribute meaningfully to ensuring better performance of community theatre projects designed and implemented to improve the living conditions of the rural communities.
The TfD projects undertaken by students of the DTA, almost all or many, are those that have not been evaluated. These projects that are left hanging in the communities need to be evaluated. This will give the communities that have had the taste of TfD and are relaxed or struggling to do something about their plight, or feel they have not been neglected or tricked by students for the sake of being used as some guinea pigs in an experiment for grades.
Due to this conception, together with the findings of the study, the researcher is of the view that sometimes these communities will no longer wish to receive other facilitators wishing to do projects in their area. This calls for a closer look at the evaluation of TfD projects.
Given the above, the researcher conducted an impact evaluation study on two (2) TfD projects conducted in Osubon City. The first project highlighted parents’ role towards their wards’ education, and the latter, on proper waste disposal practices through theatre education. But much attention was paid to the sanitation project. Because it is the current project in the community, a pilot study conducted in the community revealed from the preliminary data that the state of sanitation remained the same or worse. Therefore, the pilot study gave baseline information for a further evaluation, probe, or investigation into the previous projects to establish why and how some issues remained the same and their impacts.
Osubonpanyin community is referred to in this paper as Osubon City; it is a suburb located in the South-Eastern part of Winneba, the Effutu Municipality of the Central Region of Ghana. It is about five kilometres away from Winneba township. The community shares borders with Sankro and Ateitu in the East, and also Gyahadze and Ensuekyire in the South. It has a population of approximately 1000, with the majority being farmers, traders, and others as small-scale sand miners.
Osubon City witnessed two (2) different TfD projects since the inception of the DTA. The first project was conducted in 2015, titled “Attitude of Parents towards their Wards' Education: The Osubonpanyin Theatre for Development (TfD) Project”. This project discussed the pivotal role parents play in the advancement of their wards’ education for the betterment of the individuals and the community at large. The last and most recent one was also conducted in 2019, dubbed “Using Theatre for Development as a tool to Encourage Proper Waste Disposal at Osubonpanyin”.
This study evaluated the above-named two particular community projects because they focused on education and sanitation, which are very critical for human development. Good sanitation and quality education are some of the key Millennium Development Goals as far as human resources and national development are concerned. To ensure a healthy environment or good sanitation, we need education; a community with many elites will easily and better understand the side effects of improper waste disposal from a scientific point of view, and vice versa. With the elites, decision-making will be much easier, and the participation level too will be higher than in a community with many illiterates. Therefore, one can confidently say the two factors go together because one needs a healthy mind, body, and environment to enable him or her to study well, and that cannot be achieved without proper sanitation practices. One also needs the education to maintain or sustain one's environment from a scientific point of view.
In light of the aforementioned, some interventions were put in place by some TfD facilitators to re-emphasize the need for parents to pay much attention to the pivotal role they play in ensuring that their wards get a good or quality education. Thus, the parents must provide certain basic needs or support for their wards to sail higher on the educational ladder. And the other facilitators, on the other hand, also kept some measures in place to help ensure a clean, safe, and disease-free environment or community.
This study did a rigorous analysis of the goals, objectives, and activities of these two (2) previous projects and determined whether they produced results, delivered expected benefits, and ascertained their impact on Osubon City or not.
Because Herrington (2016 p37) contends that, in Participatory Theatre for Change (PTC), it is important to remember that:
“Theatre is only a tool, an external intervention that plays a part in the process of communities striving for self-reliance. Theatre in itself cannot solve the problem; it can only illustrate and expose them. It is up to the participants to take up the challenge and use their indigenous ways of communication and decision-making to shape their development.”
In sum, the study looked at how effectively the facilitators and community stakeholders used this tool and how the community is sustaining these projects; the researcher believed the community members and participants ably gave a true reflection of an effective evaluation process.
Herrington's (2016) 3Rs conceptual framework module for evaluating PTC projects was used to underpin this study. This module lens helped convey important aspects of these TfD projects. The ‘three Rs’ module stands for: Reach, Resonance, and Response.
Firstly, Reach looked at ‘the who’; whether the projects had been presented to a suitable audience, and also captured the inclusiveness of the theatre and participation of key stakeholders.
Resonance focused on how the participants connected with the projects. How much they perceived these projects reflected real situations and problems in the community. This helped establish whether participants’ engagement with these projects had caused new awareness and change in perceptions, feelings, and values or not.
Where the last R, thus, Response, further looked at the intermediate and long-term impacts of these TfD projects. As in whether these projects were relevant, reached the right target people, and provided some opportunities for the target audience to think about education and sanitation issues from new perspectives. And thereby helped change attitudes, behaviours, and then social change that impacted their lives as a community. Response tracked the new awareness created that led to action; a change from the individual level to community advocacy through the projects’ initiatives.
Therefore, measuring the Reach, Resonance, and Response helped suggest adaptive project management that would increase the effectiveness and sustainability of future community theatre initiatives.
She further noted that the Theories of Change underpinning PTC programmes are multi-dimensional and move from individual emotional engagement and response towards attitudinal, behavioural, and social change that culminate in larger social and institutional changes. She outlined six core interrelated working definitions of Theories of Change underpinning the PTC process, but for this study, only four (4) of them, stated below, were deemed fit for the study:
This module has been tried and tested by Search for Common Ground in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2005 to reach millions of Congolese. They also completed another project in partnership with the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission, supported by USAID under Conflict Management and Mitigation funding in Rwanda in 2014.
The respondents from the qualitative survey at the national and district level unanimously agreed that theatre provided an excellent starting point to move forward with the NURC strategy for reconciliation
Therefore, the four (4) theories in the 3Rs module stated above helped determine in the evaluation process whether the issues presented in the community in the previous projects were accurately identified in a collective and participatory manner or not. Also, checked whether the issues presented in the community were real and expressed through an interactive safe space, and clarified whether the theatre participants provided access to new information and knowledge, and were empowered to speak about policy issues that influenced their community. Lastly, it helped determine whether the practices and behaviours were rehearsed in safe spaces and were valued, accepted, and taken up in real life by a critical mass of the people in a society.
A study conducted by Herrington (2016) revealed that the goal of PTC is to improve the quality of life, achieve the fulfilment of rights, and facilitate social transformation towards just and peaceful societies. Although these programmes are designed to impact individuals, communities, and institutions, Schalkwyk (2019) contends that implementing these programmes is not enough to demonstrate that change in a specific individual, community, or society has been achieved. Therefore, to establish whether development or change has indeed taken place, Schalkwyk (2019) suggests determining whether the programme has achieved the intended impact or change through an evaluation exercise.
Many studies have indicated that evaluation provides a systematic method to study a programme, practice, intervention, or initiative to understand how well it achieves its goals. Thus, evaluations help determine what works well and what could be improved in a programme or initiative (Akanbang, 2012; Bobinac, 2011; & Lomeña-Gellis, 2015). Over the past decade, studies on evaluation have attracted scholarship from different authors in different disciplines and jurisdictions (Akanbang, 2012; Bobinac, 2011; & Lomeña-Gellis, 2015). For example, Lomeña-Gelis (2015) confirms the usefulness of monitoring and evaluation to guide critical reflection about real-world evaluations, surpassing the narrow conception of evaluation quality. It also allows the opening of a debate about evaluation capacities understood as the faculty to choose what, when, and how interventions are evaluated.
While it is important to measure some basic information for reports, it is essential to focus on measuring the outcomes of the activities to gather lessons learned, effectiveness, and their contribution to supporting evidence of the use of TfD more broadly. Therefore, in planning and executing a TfD project for change, empowerment, or transformation, the question of evaluating the impact is a very crucial issue.
Although there have been some studies on evaluation, when it comes to evaluating TfD projects within the Ghanaian context, there appear to be minimal studies in that regard. Over ten (10) years down the line, it appears to be a minimal evaluation study on TfD projects from a Ghanaian perspective, especially the DTA, UEW.
Hence, the need to fill the gap by evaluating two (2) TfD studies conducted by Ansah and Adamah (2015) and Borzah, Mensah, Bediako, and Aryeetey (2019) in a suburb in Winneba called Osubonpanyin, respectively.
This study did a synchronic evaluation of the TfD studies conducted by Ansah and Adamah (2015) and Borzah, Mensah, Bediako, and Aryeetey (2019) and provided two (2) separate illuminative reports on them as one dissertation. The former highlighted the pivotal role of parents in the advancement of their wards’ education, while the latter dealt with proper ways of waste disposal. This study did a rigorous analysis and gave a clear picture of the goals, objectives, and activities of these completed projects and brought to light the results produced (the impacts), the expected benefits delivered, and their associated issues.
The study sought to achieve the following:
The study sought to find answers to the following research questions:
The study added to the knowledge or provided literature in addition to the studies that have been conducted on the TfD project evaluation. It served as reference material for the teaching and learning of the TfD course since it made scholarly attempts at contributing to the documentation of community theatre projects. It also contributed to increasing the knowledge base of academia on community-based projects. The study provided the project facilitators, practitioners, evaluators, and other stakeholders associated with these projects with a clear picture of the projects’ objectives and ensured that the projects or future projects are on the right track.
The study further paved the way for further evaluation studies on other TfD projects conducted by the DTA to improve the TfD programme with best practices for future project execution and implementation to better the lives in communities.
The study would help effect the needed change in the community and not just as an academic requirement for a certificate. This study served as a springboard to better the lives of the community members, myself, and people around me because of the passion the researcher has for community development initiatives. Besides, the study proposed guidelines for NGOs for effective future collaborations and further suggested directives for effective implementation of community initiatives by the Government in the community. Lastly, the study explored how the success of the previous studies could be replicated in new projects in different localities and how some avoidable errors or windows created could also be avoided in the execution of future projects, and provided new perspectives for tackling such community-related issues.
The study is limited to Osubon City and focuses only on the stakeholders who were directly or indirectly involved in the two (2) TfD studies conducted by Ansah and Adamah (2015) and Borzah, Mensah, Bediako, and Aryeetey (2019), respectively.
Scriven (1991: 1) defines evaluation as the “process of determining the merit, worth and value of things” and evaluations as the “product of that process”. Pittaway and Swan (2009: 285) add that it is a “systematic determination” of the value or merit of a programme. Patton (2010: 4) describes it as an “applied inquiry process for collecting and synthesising evidence that culminates in a conclusion about the state of affairs”. UNESCO’s (2009:10) guide on community development programmes outlines evaluation as the process whereby project data is systematically gathered to judge its effectiveness by comparing actual outcomes with anticipated outcomes.
Shaw, Green, and Mark (2006: 2) further argue that all individual informal evaluations of programmes are coloured by the expectations, beliefs, and preferences of those who conducted them and that it is seldom clear what such conclusions are based on. A biased evaluation does not yield realistic, honest, and, in consequence, usable data that may not accurately mirror the impact, advantages, success, and disadvantages of a programme. This, in turn, results in a programme with an inability to grow, improve, or serve the needs of the stakeholders, which, apart from the dire impact on the programme, further implies that the resources and time invested in the evaluation were wasted.
Pittaway and Swan (2009: 284) conclude that evaluation should not be a one-time occurrence, but a continuous process throughout a programme. An effective evaluation should thus be incorruptible, formal, systematic, ongoing, and useful. Milstein, Wetterhall, & CDC Evaluation Working Group (1988; 2000; 2017) identify four standards for a good evaluation as part of their evaluation framework. This framework consists of two dimensions: the first dimension is concerned with drawing up an evaluation design, and the second dimension is concerned with the standard of the evaluation. They identify four standards, namely utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy, that must all be present to present a well-balanced evaluation. An example of an imbalanced evaluation would be one that would be useful, but too difficult to carry out. The utility is concerned with the usefulness of the evaluation; feasibility ensures that the evaluation is logical and pragmatic; propriety is concerned with the ethics of the evaluation; and accuracy refers to the precision of findings.
Evaluation, therefore, can be defined as a logical measurement or judgment of how well a project or programme was initiated, implemented, and performed based on certain criteria and evidence. Evaluation should be continuous, systematic, transparent, objective, valid, and reliable to be useful. A good evaluation design should have utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy. Etherton and Prentki (2006: 154) argue that the evaluation of programmes is beneficial for the practitioner to prove that “what was claimed was done” and that practitioners measure impact only to “fit requirements for funders”. Khutan (2014: 19-20) broadens and equalises the definitions of evaluation, stating that monitoring is concerned with programme development, while evaluation is concerned with the assessment of “what has been achieved and how any changes have come about as a result”. In this light, the study looked at impact assessment, which helped determine whether these projects have brought about the needed change in the target population, whereas outcome evaluation measured whether these projects or interventions have made a difference in the community. Thus, this study established the impact of these projects on Osubon City.
Eisner (2007: 424) clarifies the term objectives as the “targets at which one aims” and the term outcomes as “what one secures as a result of action”, with outcomes being a broader term as it includes positives and negatives as well as anticipated and unanticipated outcomes. The objectives of a project are significant, as they will determine the process and methodology of the programme to achieve them. If the objectives are not clearly defined or incorrectly identified, the programme may not have enough drive or direction to achieve the intended effect. Thompson (2009: 6) argues that the “intentions of applied theatre are frequently poorly articulated”, which implies that many programmes fail to achieve their intended potential as practitioners were unable to communicate intentions at the inception thereof.
A study conducted by Khutan (2014: 141) on the evaluation of applied theatre programmes from various applied theatre companies operating in prisons cites the following reasons given by the companies for not evaluating programmes: “some projects are short-term and do not require evaluation”, time as a preventative factor, and “more interested in doing good work with offenders than evaluating everything we do”. The time restraints to do a comprehensive evaluation, as well as a lack of money to pay for it, can therefore be seen as a recurring theme in applied theatre assessment. Many practitioners would also rather continue with their work than put time aside to do programme evaluation, whether for donors or for their potential improvement. Evaluation is something that can help TfD practitioners to justify the money spent on funding organisations, as well as to be eligible for more funding.
This study adapted Pittaway and Swan’s classification of evaluation into participatory, empowerment, and ethical evaluations, which is more concerned with the participants of the evaluations, who partake, how they partake, and how they are characterised, than with the mechanics of the evaluation itself. They assert that with a participatory evaluation, stakeholders are involved in all aspects of the evaluation; they give and receive feedback, give input and help with the evaluation activities (Pittaway & Swan 2012: 21). The four pillars on which a participatory evaluation rests are participation, negotiation, learning, and flexibility (UNESCO 2009: 62). Participation refers to the inclusion of all stakeholders in the evaluation process, and negotiation to the consensus of the methodologies to gather, interpret and use the data collected, as well as on what to be evaluated. Learning is the agreement as to how the information will be utilised, and flexibility is concerned with the changeable nature of community projects, which demands certain changeability in terms of evaluation methodology (UNESCO 2009: 61-62). If any evaluation is not ethical, Pittaway and Swan (2012:23 - 27) argue that the actions might lead to trauma or harm to the participants or those evaluated and, as such, identify four principles guiding ethical evaluations: informed consent, confidentiality, reciprocal behaviour, and participation. Informed consent implies that all participants are aware and fully comprehend that they are participating in an evaluation and that they have agreed to participate. Consent can be verbal in informal evaluations or written in formal evaluations. Confidentiality refers to the use of the information to ensure the anonymity of participants. Reciprocal behaviour is concerned with the benefits of partaking in the evaluation, and evaluators should be able to identify how the evaluation process is beneficial to all stakeholders involved before the inception of the evaluation process. Participation centres on the empowerment of all participants to have equal power and opportunities to voice opinions, but is also concerned with ownership of the evaluation process by all involved.
Pittaway and Swan (2012: 22) explain that an empowerment evaluation “emphasises self-evaluation”, “community participation” and “open discourse”. Fetterman (1996: 4-5) defines this type of evaluation as one “designed to help people help themselves and improve their programme using a form of self-evaluation and reflections” through the use of “evaluation concepts, techniques, and findings to foster improvement and self-determination”. Put simply, this means that evaluation(s) is/are undertaken by the programme stakeholders themselves, often with an outside evaluator serving as a “coach or additional facilitator” (Fetterman 2004: 585). Pittaway and Swan (2012: 22) list ten principles or steps that guide an empowerment evaluation, namely improvement of the programme, community ownership, inclusion, democratic participation, social justice, community knowledge, evidence-based strategy, capacity building, organisational learning, and internal accountability. Fetterman (2004: 585) simplifies by listing only three steps: “establish a mission or vision statement regarding the programme”, “taking stock” and “charting a course for the future”. Rogers and Williams (2006: 86) explain taking stock as “identifying and prioritising the most significant programme activities,” which are rated by stakeholders as to how well the programme is doing in each. They clarify that the third step is one where goals and strategies are set; goals referring to that which stakeholders want to see happening and strategies referring to plans on how to achieve these goals (Rogers & Williams 2006: 86).
Although empowerment evaluation underwrites the inclusive nature of applied theatre projects, it will not be a suitable methodology to adapt to all programmes, as it does not dictate how or why the change occurred (Rogers and Williams 2006: 86-87).
Pittaway and Swan (2012: 28) differentiate between a further three types of evaluations, namely a process evaluation which assesses whether programme actions were appropriate and contributed to programme objectives, an outcomes evaluation which assesses programme outcomes to see if objectives have been achieved, and an impact assessment which evaluates whether the project brought about sustained and noteworthy changes to the target community. Hagger-Forde (2012: 09) defines a process evaluation as the progress of a project, i.e., its activities and the evidence thereof. Outcome, impact, and summative evaluations are described as determining whether the programme did what it intended and the efficiency thereof. Outcome and summative evaluations measure long-term change, with impact assessments measuring short- and medium-term change (Hagger-Forde 2012: 09). Successful evaluation methodology should combine all these processes to accurately measure the achievement of objectives of a project.
At the heart of TfD is the desire to bring about some sort of social change in individuals, groups, communities, or societies, situations, attitudes, circumstances, and behaviours. As Snyder-Young (2013: 2) remarks, “artists doing Applied Theatre want to make change”. Many practitioners claim that something does change but cannot provide qualitative proof to justify their claims. Practitioners thus have various reasons for assessing and evaluating programmes: from trying to prove the success of projects, to programme improvement, to satisfying donors’ requirements. The need for change evaluation or impact assessment should be self-evident because of practitioners of applied theatres’ desire for a change to occur in their audience (Somers 2008: 66, Taylor 2006: 93, Dinesh 2005: 34). Whether it is a change in attitude, behaviour, knowledge, awareness, understanding, or education, without proper evaluation, it is however difficult to confirm that the desired change occurred.
A growing number of academics and practitioners are canvassing that not only the outcomes of planned social change should be measured, but the entire range of positive and negative, intended and unintended outcomes of applied theatre programmes (Ackroyd 2000: 2, Dalrymple 2006: 214). It should also be noted that unintended outcomes are not necessarily positive and can be to the detriment of participants or the projects.
Evaluation of applied theatre programmes is important to all stakeholders involved, and it is necessary to keep all stakeholders in mind when developing both the project and the project assessment. Practitioners need to know which areas of their programmes are successful and which areas need to improve to better serve the community in which they work or the organisations that fund them. Lennie, Skuse, Tacchi, and Wilmore (2008: 2) argue that programmes need a “rigorous assessment of the impacts that meet the need for programme improvements in response to community feedback”. Sponsors need measurable outcomes to justify the money spent, as they are not actively involved in the projects and quite often only receive written reports on which to build opinions. Communities need to evaluate applied theatre projects to judge whether an intervention is working or not. Eskamp (2006: 32) argues that true community development can only occur when the target community develops a critical consciousness about intervention programmes.
For some authors, like Dale Byam, Theatre for Development (TfD) represents an evolution concerning the ‘less interactive styles of popular theatre’. She characterizes TfD by the increase of people’s participation in the theatrical process: ‘Theatre for Development aims to encourage the spectator in an analysis of the social environment through dialogue’ (Byam, 1999, p. 12); while for others, like Zakes Mda, Theatre for Development is also identified with scripted plays performed to live audiences or broadcast over the radio, lacking people participation in the creation and the performance. That is ‘modes of theatre whose objective is to disseminate development messages or to conscientise communities about their objective social-political situation’ (Mda, 1983, p. 48). Theatre for Development is often presented in the literature as a kind of counterpoint to Popular Theatre. Some authors, such as Byam, understand the former as the most participatory, while others, like Penina Mlama, identify Popular Theatre as a reaction against the development process, which is based on people’s genuine participation.
A popular theatre movement has emerged in Africa as a conscious effort to assert the culture of the dominated classes. …It aims to make the people not only aware of but also active participants in the development process by expressing their viewpoints and acting to better their conditions. Popular Theatre is intended to empower the common man with a critical consciousness crucial to the struggles against the forces responsible for his poverty. (Mlama, 1991, p. 67)
The stages of Theatre for Development presented by Ross Kidd are very similar to those of Popular Theatre presented by Crow and Etherton (1980), that is: starting from two less interactive approaches: the rural development campaigns, and the democratization of the access to theatre production, ‘bringing theatre to the people’; both practices evolved to a more dialogical approach, where theatre is practiced by the people as a way of empowering communities, listening to their concerns, and encouraging them to voice and solve their problems. Theatre for Development (TfD) has become widely accepted in Africa and other parts of the developing world as a theatre of ordinary people used to address their problems, in their terms, from their perspectives, and from within their art forms. The people are seen as the protagonists, generating the themes and infusing the drama with conflicts from their daily lives (Kidd, 1980; Mda, 1993). The power, authority, responsibility, and ownership will be in the hands of the community. TfD has deliberately moved away from the mainstream Western theatre, which separates the audience from actors, talks for and not with the community, and, in its preoccupation with a finished product meant for consumption, rather than allowing for a process of creating together. In other words, TfD is concerned with and derives its strength from local participation (Abah 2002).
Kershaw (1994) asserts that community theatre has the potential to create an immediate and lasting impact on the evolution of wider cultural, social, and political realities. Yet Nicholson (2005) contends that such modes of Applied Theatre can be viewed as both a gift and a poison. Apart from the ambiguous meanings that may be attached to the metaphor of a gift, such as dependency, patronage, and surveillance, Nicholson (2005) argues that the practice of making theatre in community settings creates spaces that enable participants’ voices to be heard. If people are left out of the early stages of development programmes, they are less likely to appreciate the initiative. In theatre-initiated projects, community participation allows people the freedom to shape their destiny by harnessing their cultural resources to achieve the goals of community development
Monitoring and evaluation are very critical, although often belittled in many aspects of field activities. Theatre is an activity that has hardly received any attention when it comes to this phase, and in such a situation, its impact cannot be properly assessed. Perhaps this is where the difficulty with securing funding for theatre activities lies. There must be sufficient proof that the activity is succeeding or is likely to succeed. This can be shown only in a well-designed and well-implemented programme of monitoring and evaluation, which must clearly define what is to be monitored or evaluated. Margoluis and Salafsky (1998) recommend that the specific indicators to monitor and the appropriate methods of monitoring projects should be purposefully selected. To determine what these specific indicators are required to revisit the objectives of the community theatre programme. For example, should we be monitoring, firstly, community interest in terms of attendance only, or should this interest be linked with the willingness of community members to support the activity? And secondly, should we be monitoring the number of projects that TfD practitioners have put on independently only, or should this effort be matched with the overall impacts on the communities?
The answers to the above questions would be evaluation exercise should be carried out after the theatre programme to establish the baseline and then re-measured after each theatre activity to determine the changes that are occurring. Bertolt Brecht advocated the type of theatre that propels the spectators into action, to bring about the desired change in society, rather than that which plays on their emotions and finally leaves them to take things as they are. Community theatre is an effective way of communicating sensitive issues without the attendant antagonism that would normally occur in direct, realistic situations, a point earlier observed (Eyoh). It is therefore very pertinent to evaluate the TfD projects conducted at Osubon City.
Theatre presents community members with situations that engage them not only intellectually and aesthetically but also emotionally (Bentley 1965). This type of emotion is best described as “empathy”, which Augusto Boal, in his Theatre of the Oppressed, defines as the emotional relationship established between the character and the spectator, which makes the latter feel the impact of what has happened, is happening, or may happen, to the former.
Theatre is also a powerful way of putting across messages to stimulate community action to address identified problems and issues. The theatre activities helped to generate positive conservation actions in the targeted communities. However, for any theatre piece to achieve its action-inspiring objective, the performance must not take the audience to its ‘final’ conclusion but should end at a junction of suggesting pathways towards expected conclusions. This is summed up by Boal in Theatre of the Oppressed (106), who observed that contrary to the views held by Hegel and Aristotle, who advocate “a quiet somnolence at the end of the spectacle (…) Bertolt Brecht wants the theatrical spectacle to be the beginning of action” by the spectator, who should seek to transform society to bring about the needed equilibrium. When the audience expects, for instance, a riot to break out during a performance but does not, the performance has a long-term efficacy as “the ‘possible worlds’ encountered in the performance are carried back by the audience into the ‘real’ socio-political world in ways which may influence subsequent action” (Kershaw, 2016, p 28). In other words, the audience is motivated to complete the performance by doing what they feel the performance has left undone. This is similar to Boal’s ideology in Legislative Theatre (1998), that the spectators in Forum Theatre should transgress, break conventions, enter into the mirror of a theatrical fiction, rehearse forms of struggle, and then return to reality with the images of their desires.
Theatre can break through language and cultural barriers, ask its audience to think about what they have seen, challenge them to face up to aspects of their lives that they try to ignore, challenge societal beliefs and forces, and shape their mind while still entertaining, which makes it such a vital medium for conscientization, mobilisation, and communication.
The social sciences display the same need to evaluate intervention programmes as Applied Theatre practitioners, varying from the desire to improve, for transparency and accountability, to programme impact. Evaluation forms part of the project cycle and should be designed and structured during the planning phase of the project. It aids in mapping the appropriate activities for each outcome to ensure success and also ensure change. Evaluation design and planning must be part of project conception to help save time, money, and resources later on in the project.
This paper dealt with evaluation taken into account, a lot of scholarly works on how TfD practitioners have used theatre to positively or negatively change the minds of individuals and communities, and therefore postulates that TfD should not be taken for granted as an art form because of its potent role in both national and global development.
This details the roadmap employed to establish reliable data about the TfD projects conducted in the community as a way of contributing to the development of ‘Osubon City’ and, by extension, Ghana. It contained the various methods employed by the researcher to conduct the study. This included how both primary and secondary data were gathered to address the research questions. The primary source included data obtained through observations, interviews, focus group discussions, field studies, videos, and pictures. While the secondary data was also gathered from previous PRs submitted to the DTA.
The qualitative research approach is itself akin to telling the story of the projects: the lived experiences and the impact on the participants’ lives. This evaluation gave a voice to the participants’ perspectives as they provided their experiences on the projects’ narrative. A qualitative research approach was applied in this study to provide a vivid narration of data gathered and concentrated on stakeholders’ experiences on the projects’ activities, placed their experiences into context, and conducted the study such that there existed a rapport between the researcher and the participants (Hinchman & Hinchman, 1997). This approach not only looked for themes that emerged from the narratives but also concentrated on the sequential unfolding of the participants' experiences that assisted in reaching an understanding. Therefore, the construction of reality in the activities of the two (2) TfD previous projects investigated was geared toward the development of Osubon City. This research tool was generally associated with how people experienced and how circumstances were uncoiled or changed. Commonly, qualitative research probes into human behaviour and how meanings are read into the circumstances or situations and the meaning that people assign to issues in their lives (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007). In corroboration, Denzin and Lincoln (2005) advocate that qualitative researchers strive to make meaning of or interpret phenomena in terms of the meaning people convey/provide to them.
Substantially, the researcher engaged the experience contained in the lived experiences and untold stories of both the community and the research participants obtained from the researcher’s observations in the community; it was analysed via narrative analysis in recounting the experiences of the stakeholders in a chronological approach with a social, individual, and community turn. The study concentrated on the central themes in the lived experience of the stakeholders (participants) that were fundamentally one of the ways the researcher addressed the narrative research (Creswell, 2007). The capability of narrative inquiry to transform fragments of data gathered into a well-planned artistic form that employs conventions of fictional literature to present is not just a mere ordered way of life but a rich artistic one that helps to interpret information. Clandinin and Connelly (2000) postulate that human experiences are fragments of narratives about their daily lives and experiences that, when thought about, could be understood in narratives unities or otherwise. This kind of inquiry has the tendencies of concentrating on specific context jurisdictions (Creswell, 2018).
The data gathered from the participants were arranged and consolidated with existing field texts or documents, and pictures. All in all, the narrative inquiry tool ensured further clarification, interpretation, exploration of explanations, and deduction of ideas from mannerisms in the unfolding story (Ting, 2005).
A case study was used in the study. The intent to adopt a case study design for the study was settled upon because it was deemed appropriate for the aims of this study. The researcher did an in-depth noninterventionist evaluation of both projects and produced an illuminative report on them. The researcher observed and meticulously recorded the projects’ impacts and their associated issues or challenges in their natural settings. He further analysed and described the two (2) projects as fully as possible.
The researcher obtained and reviewed documents, interviewed principal stakeholders involved in the two (2) projects, shared insights about the projects, and gathered pertinent pictorial evidence on them as backing for this study.
The researcher further examined the projects’ contexts, goals, impacts, and problems associated with the projects. The focus was placed on the projects and the individuals involved in the implementation and direction of the projects by taking vital information from the stakeholders for a better understanding of the projects’ impacts and suggesting the needed measures for better improvement in the future.
The researcher finally prepared and produced an in-depth report on the projects, with descriptive and judgmental information and perceptions held by the different stakeholders.
The relevance of the case study is that it offers the researcher the opportunity to observe the experiences of the stakeholders in the community, and it further investigates the factors that cause the behavioural patterns of the stakeholders and their relationship within the environment (Yin, 2005). The data for the study in this context were gathered to trace the activities and impacts of the projects on the community and its social or sanitation-related issues in the community. In this case, the study evaluated the two (2) TfD projects and their impacts on the community, which brought to light how these results or outcomes contributed to Osubon City’s development. This study evaluated the two (2) projects as a single study, clarifying the significant role that theatre initiatives played in Osubon City. Also, attention was drawn to the extent to which the projects have achieved their core objectives, the problems created, and the new perspectives needed to inform future development initiatives.
The study accessed four (4) Opinion Leaders (OL), three (3) Previous Participants (PP), and two (2) Any Other Witnesses (AOW), which constituted nine (9) participants. Seven (7) participants participated in each project. Logically, if seven (7) participants were interviewed in each project, then it is expected that the total should be fourteen (14) and not nine (9) as captured. Thus, five (5) of the participants participated in both projects (OL1, OL2, PP2, AOW1, and AOW2), two (2) participated in the education project only (OL3 and PP1), and two (2) participated in the sanitation project only (OL4 and PP3). Therefore, the total number of participants was nine (9).
The table below illustrates the number of the population interviewed:
Table 1: Sampled Participants
Category of people | Education Project | Sanitation Project |
Opinion Leaders (OL) | ||
OL1 | 1 | Same |
OL2 | 1 | |
OL3 | 1 | OL4 |
Previous Participants (PP) | ||
PP1 | 1 | PP3 |
PP2 | 1 | Same |
Any Other Witness (AOW) | ||
AOW1 | 1 | Same |
AOW2 | 1 | |
Sub Total | 7 | 7 |
Total | 9 | |
The sampled population consisted of nine (9) participants, as shown in Table 1 above, for this study.
Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used in selecting participants for the study. Five (5) participants were purposively sampled because the study focused on specific or targeted participants who experienced, participated in, witnessed, or had knowledge about the projects and whose names were captured in the PRs submitted to the DTA by each of the facilitators. Based on this, the researcher selected participants whose names were captured in the PRs and who willingly provided the needed or vital information for the study. These participants provided impact information as well as the challenges these projects created in the community and equally recommended possible strategies for the implementation of future TfD projects. This helped secure many responses from the interview, which aided in obtaining relevant and adequate information about the projects as they tackled sanitation and education-related issues in the community.
On the other hand, four (4) of the participants were sampled through the snowball technique. This technique helped the researcher reach other referred participants who had more insight or knowledge of the previous projects but were not captured in the PRs. Therefore, they were not known to the researcher but were able to be reached with the help of other participants.
The study adopted interviews, Observation, Focus Group Discussions, Documents Analysis (PRs and Pictures) submitted to the DTA to compile primary and secondary data. These instruments effectively aided the researcher in obtaining accurate and relevant information on the issues as well as an understanding of the chronological order of events, and the researcher applied the same in the analysis of the interrelated events.
Qualitative research demanded that the study guarantee the quality of work and reliability through the gathering of data in the form of rich content, based on descriptions of people, events, and situations, by using different, especially non-structured, techniques to discover the stakeholders’ points of view. Moreover, to orally analyse the data collected and ultimately to interpret the findings in the most efficient contextual way.
For this study, the researcher applied multiple sources of data to arrive at the findings. This included interviewing community OLs, PPs, and AOW who witnessed the projects. The researcher engaged all three (3) categories of participants in the community during and after the data gathering processing which helped reach a sound conclusion. These sources enabled the study to triangulate the emerging data gathered. Furthermore, the study provided detailed and vital information to confirm the findings.
To foster the reliability of the data, a good rapport was established among participants. They were briefed on the importance of the study to them. Again, the stakeholders were informed of the common professional interest shared by the researcher. Peer debriefing was employed at all stages, throughout the data analysis process, by trusted colleague students for feedback. This was informed by Creswell’s (2018) suggestion that peer debriefing improves the accuracy of the account.
The ethical dimension is of importance to this study; Goddard and Melville (2007: 49) articulate this as follows: “collecting data from people raises ethical concerns”. They assert that the researcher should guard research subjects from both “psychological and physical harm” and that all information collected should remain confidential so as not to infringe on an individual’s right to privacy. To keep data confidential, the researcher should take care that no individual can be identified through the reading of the study (Goddard & Melville, 2007: 49).
The study did not describe or name any individual or refer specifically to any individual. Information from interviews was transcribed and changed into themes without identifying individual contributions.
The study made participants fully aware of the reasons for which information was being sought from them. Participants were not tricked into providing any information. Enough notice was given to the participants by way of introductory letters, which were served ahead of time before the beginning of the data collection process. Consent forms were also administered to them for their perusal and acceptance before they were engaged. This study was mindful of the fact that most of the issues raised were the community’s secret and assured participants of full confidentiality on issues that were addressed on that point, since the study was based on their community. The issues presented in this study are a true reflection of what was gathered in the field. Though there may be some forms of deliberate attempts to hide, skew, or alter any findings presented by the participants. The study did well to avoid all forms of bias concerning the information, especially those about sanitation and education, which happened to be the focus of the study. In conclusion, the study avoided plagiarism by guaranteeing that works of people that were used to buttress the analysis of data, findings, and the literature review were accordingly acknowledged in-text and check-listed in the reference section.
Data analysis is a process of reducing large amounts of collected data from different sources and trying to make meaning out of them (Elo & Kyngas, 2008). In analysing the data, contextual and thematic analytical procedures were considered. Critically, in doing so, there were three (3) stages the study considered: the data was organised, reduced via summarisation, and themes and patterns in the data were identified and linked. At this stage, the study created meaningful implications for the data compiled. Put differently, the analysis of the data was focused on the identification, selection, and analysis that helped eliminate or reduce and make sense of the vast information from different sources and people, which requires interpretation by the researcher so that impressions that cast light on the research questions emerge.
The researcher used thematic analysis to identify the themes, thus patterns in the data that were important to address the research questions of the study. This study did not simply summarise the data collected but interpreted and made sense of it.
Braun & Clarke (2006) distinguish between two levels of themes: semantic and latent. Semantic themes ‘…within the explicit or surface meanings of the data and the analyst is not looking for anything beyond what a participant has said or what has been written.’ (p.84).
The analysis in this study identified themes at the semantic level and the latent level that looked beyond what has been said by the various participants.
The researcher immersed himself in the data. Merriam (1998) defines this immersion process as familiarising oneself with the data. The familiarisation of the data was done through reviewing observational notes taken in the field, listening to recorded interviews, reviewing PRs and images, and carefully reading all the field note documents. Particularly, tape-recorded data was later transcribed into text formats, while pictures were further developed into picture charts.
The focus of the study was Osubon City. Subsequently, the data collected were categorised according to the related focus per the research questions. In this study, the researcher looked at some of the emerging ideas, such as historical facts, sanitation, experiences, education, and development or impacts. The emerging ideas and established trends were put under themes with the research questions. These identified themes permitted the researcher to extract all the data for simple understanding and analysis.
Some of the data gathered was in photographic form. Therefore, the researcher employed these pictures as a procedure for communicating pictorial evidence of what was happening in Osubon City. This process made it pretty quick and less time-consuming. Because the pictures about Osubon City TfD Projects effectively communicated and gave a sense of their current state, impacts, and any other associated matters were well captured and classified.
Since the study is about experiences, it was essential for the study to also adopt the narrative analysis method to analyse the various narrative experiences of the participants because they were in line with narrative or thematic analysis. In the end, the study presented the data in an orderly manner that gave a sense of what had taken place or what was believed to have existed or happened. To this end, the narrative analysis enabled the study to simply identify the themes or the recurring phrases, emerging ideas, and parts of the experience accounts being replicated by all or most of the participants.
This paper outlined the research methodology, including the research method, research design, participants, data collection methods, analysis methods, and data credibility issues. The research design for this study was a case study and descriptive research approach, which are all within the framework of the qualitative research method.
The study presents and discusses logically and cogently the outcome of the study gathered with both the research questions and existing knowledge, thereby contributing to knowledge in the general field of study. Hence, the outcomes were obtained from the transcription of the interviews of the participants per the administered interview schedules. The paper, therefore, analyses, unifies, and interprets data gathered to suit each of the four (4) research objectives.
This section of the study dealt with only the issues related to the education project. The impacts and the challenges associated with the project were brought to light in this section.
The paper looked at how the participants in this project perceived the issues addressed in the project to be relevant to their lives and the community as a whole.
Almost all the participants agreed that the project was relevant at the time because the level of illiteracy and ignorance in the community was very high. Because parents did not have any educational knowledge, they were ignorant of the value of education. It was a major factor accounting for why most parents did not bother about their wards' education in the community.
Below were the responses of participants PP1, OL3, OL2, and OL1:
[PP1] Because this is a rural community, most of the parents did not go to school, and so they did not understand or see the need to educate their children. So, when they made the parents understand the benefits of education and their contributions to their wards' education.
[OL3] … the parents were not all that educated to also educate their children about school or education. So, they didn’t see the need to educate their wards to a higher level. Therefore, the highest you can get is from JHS; then they enter into business. They were not educated enough. Only a few, even within the few “Kuraa no”, eerrhh, they don’t have any higher education; the educational level “no” was very low. Are you getting my point? So, mhmmm, they know or think that something is going on, but they do not think of it deeply. Are you getting me? Because the same problem is there, though there has been a little change. Still, we have a problem there.
[OL2] Before your brothers came here, we were already working on a project like that, so it helped the parents a lot. Yes, the drama reflected our lives. All the issues raised in the drama were happening here. For instance, if you ask me, the one sitting in front of you holding this discussion with you, when I completed school, my parents did not understand school well. Me myself it happened to me. In the beginning, my parents said I should not go to school. But my twin sister was sent to school, and I was asked to go to the farm with my father. What I realised was that my parents did not understand what education was about and its value. Because I was academically good, I believe that by now I would have been a big person in this community.
We still have a few people who need the teachings. They still do not understand this education issue. Some send their children but still do not understand what they are doing. If you understand what you are doing well, even if it is your property that you will have to sell for your child, you will do that. Some are sending their wards to school because it is now like by force you must take them to school. So, they are also doing exactly that, but they still do not understand what is involved in educating your child. If you are forced to do something, you do it, but still, you don’t understand it – you do it anyhow.
[OL1] The project was relevant to the community because, even though the community was made aware of the challenges, that challenge has not been eradicated yet, so it is relevant.
Some of the participants believed that the few parents who send their children to school did not involve themselves in their wards' education to know what they need for schooling. They opined that the involvement of parents, which is an integral part of education and cannot be taken for granted, was missing in the community these days.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, AOW1, and PP1:
[OL2] Those days, the parents did not care to buy notebooks, pencils, pens, and uniforms for their children, not to mention textbooks. When the children came home after school, too, they did not ask them whether they had done their assignment or not. They would not bother to guide them to do their assignments or find someone to help them at home. Some even completed school without their parents knowing where they went to school.
[AOW1] Some parents did not know their wards’ teachers and had never gone to the child’s school before. So, the project made them realise that it is good for them to know their ward’s teacher and even go to the school to see if their ward is in school and enquire whether he/she is serious in class or not.
[PP1] Some even fight their children when they ask for school fees. They don’t want to know or hear anything about their wards' fees or education.
This issue raised by [PP1] is a confirmation of an encounter of Owusu Ansah (2015) captured in his PR submitted to the DTA that, “… We almost fought with a certain man who was annoyed because we were talking to his wife about his son’s education”.
Duncan's (1969) studies compared the attendance, achievements, and dropout rate of two (2) Junior High classes. It was confirmed that in one class, students’ parents had individual meetings with counsellors before their children entered Junior High School. In the other class, the students’ parents did not meet with counsellors. After three (3) years, it was confirmed that students whose parents had met individually with school counsellors had significantly higher attendance, better grade point averages, and a lower dropout rate than those whose parents did not bother meeting school counsellors concerning their children’s educational level.
All the participants agreed that the project was relevant at the time it was conducted because the economic situation of the parents at the time did not permit them to send their wards to school, not to talk of providing for their needs that it comes with.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, OL3, PP2, and AOW2:
[OL2] After completion, I successfully passed to go to the Secondary School Examination, but my parents said they don’t have money. I, therefore, did everything possible to go to school, but at that time too, I was not all that grown and strong to labour for money to further my education. So, I could not go.
[OL3] The main occupation there was sand winning for the men and stone cracking for the women. If a child refuses to go to school today and prefers going to the sand winning, the parent feels okay. Because at the end of the day, the child will bring something home. So, the boys in the community always prefer going to sand winning because it gives them quick money. To them, they were wasting their time on education. That was their reasoning. Because at the end of the day they make money for themselves and their parents, and the job was very lucrative, … the chief once beat a gong after a project that if any child is seen going to the sand winning grounds so … so and so. One parent got up and went to the chief and asked him, “Do you feed me? Do you feed my family and me? Mɛ ka saa asem no ℇ ma meeti, wo ni woyirenum didi waa ma mi bi aa ma di? Do you know what I get from my son? ℇba sukuula? En den wo ko sukuula mna ɛkyina wan ko na wͻ se weyi ba. Adze kyiaa wͻ bo tum wͻ ko sukuul? Wo ba nyɛ?” You see! That is the issue. ℇnti no it isn’t everybody na bɛ gyi atum saa. No, there are some; that problem still exists, but they are very few compared to some years ago. The issue still exists but is very limited, because some are fed by their wards. Yes, some are fed by their wards!
Participant [PP1] agreed with [OL3] that the major occupations in Osubon City were sand winning, stone quarrying, and farming before the project. Therefore, most of the parents take their wards to the farm. If you don’t pass your final year exams well, or even if you pass and your placement is far away, … your parents would not have money to support your education. So, mostly our education ends at the JHS level because our parents did not have the strength to push our education. … We are at the moment fighting for a scholarship for a brother who gained admission to the university. Because his admission came earlier, and before the admission came, we were asked to do part payment of Ghȼ1,000.00. So, I had to sacrifice and pay that amount of money for the boy to get admission, as his parents didn’t want to pay, on the reasoning that, in case the boy does not get admission, it means that their money is wasted.
[PP2] You see, the government school was doing the School Feeding Programme, so they shared food with the students. Therefore, what that parent would say is, if you go, they would give you food to eat. This food does not come on time. If it happens this way, that child cannot learn or concentrate. Because when he/she was going to school, they didn’t give him/her money for food. Buy books too; they will not. When I was attending school in those days, I was in class four (4). Whenever I was going to school, I was given only twenty pesewas (Ghȼ0.20) by my grandmother. I only bought water with that, not food. Right now, as I am talking to you, I have dropped out of SHS. I was a Day Student at Postin Senior High School and could not bear my school and rent fees.
[AOW2] You will see a child going to school, but the uniform is torn, and this requires the parents to buy him/her a new uniform, but they will not. And you see, as a child too, if you go to school and you are not well dressed, you cannot go close to your colleagues. So, they were attending school, but it was not encouraging at all. Hmmm! Many cannot go to SHS because of money issues. Some parents do not have money at all, and SHS involves a lot of money than JHS. Sometimes, some parents will not have the money to push their children, and that is why they sometimes advise their children to go into an apprenticeship.
However, two of the participants were of the view that the abysmal performance of the children after school was a factor inhibiting the parents from sending their brothers and sisters to school. Hence, there was a need to educate the schoolchildren as well because they were not taking their studies seriously as students.
The responses of participants PP1, AOW1, and OL1 were as follow below:
[PP1] … and even we, the children, too, play a part by not taking our studies seriously or studying hard.
[AOW1] Some were attending school, and others were not. Those who were attending school, their parents did not have a serious eye on them. So, in the end, they didn’t perform well. Our chief was once a DCE for the Efuttu Municipal Assembly; within that period, he announced that if any child in the community wanted to go to Winneba Senior High School, he/she should come to him for a scholarship. By then, we did not have anybody who could benefit from that scholarship.
The testimonies stated above by the participants were still as fresh as it was captured in the PRs submitted to the DTA by the project facilitators in the year 2015.
However, OL1 clarified that he was not the one offering such an opportunity, but rather it was Plan Ghana’s initiative to help the community.
[OL1] Some time ago, Plan Ghana came here with an opportunity to send a few children from this community to Winneba Senior High School on scholarships, but we only got one child to take up the opportunity. He completed college training, and he is currently at UEW reading a degree programme.
It was Plan Ghana that came with the scholarship, not me. I have never promised this community any form of scholarship, not even when I was the MCE (Municipal Chief Executive) for Effutu. I had only stayed in the office for just seven (7) months. How could I have promised them a scholarship? It wasn’t me, but rather Plan Ghana.
The study probed the participants further on how this project was able to meet their needs as individuals and the community at large. The arguments of the participants are established below:
All the participants agreed that the project created some kind of awareness among the parents in the community by raising issues that kept on echoing in their ears and minds. So, the project helped raise the parents' awareness to a certain point.
Below were the responses of participants OL1, OL2, OL3, PP1, and AOW1:
[OL1] The issues discussed in the drama or project were very, very relevant in the sense that they brought to the fore, to the open, some of the shortcomings of parents, for that matter, the community. Things that we have relaxed, that we were not taking seriously, that were contributing to the downward trend of education in the community. So, it was generally relevant. Therefore, the project met the needs of the community. When you become aware of something and you accept it, it means you have been enlightened. Or you have been made to … erh, erh … I don’t want to use religious terms enhannn!!! … But it means it makes you become awakened.
[OL2] Let me say, some years back, our parents here did not understand education well. But when your people came here in 2015, and after their project, many parents here understood the word education and pushed their children into schooling very well. Previously, the people of this community did not understand what education was all about.
[OL3] So, as this programme was organised, some parents within the community had a little change in them. So, it got to a point where the parents followed some of their children to school when they refused to come to school.
[PP1] It has helped improve the rate at which children go to school. Now, we realise that parents believe in education, and many children are now in school. During the facilitators' stay in the community, they came very early in the morning and then picked up some of the children for their various schools. For those who didn’t have their names written in the schools, the facilitators assisted the parents in writing the names of their wards in the schools. This move prompted most of the parents to personally take their children to school. They helped us a lot.
The project met the needs of the community, specifically the durbar held in this community. This brought the elders, community members, the youth, and the lecturers together with the students of the Department of Theatre Arts to the community. That was the time we got all community members and stakeholders in a common place to talk to them. Both the parents and the lecturers had interactions. After that, we saw that the children had a change in the rate at which they went to school. As time went on, we saw that at least, if not 100%, 60, 70, or 80% change had been achieved. For the first time, it was good.
[AOW1] The benefit I got from the project is that after educating us on the need to provide some basic needs to our wards in school. It is always in my mind that it is not only about sending the child to school. We, the parents, too, realised that we need to support and provide our children with their basic needs and also take good care of them. It is not just about putting the child in school, but you have to keep an eye on the child. Some parents did not know their wards’ teachers and had never gone to their child’s school before. So, the project made them realise that it is good for them to know their wards’ teacher and even go to the school to see if their ward is in school and enquire whether he/she is serious in class or not.
The participants agreed that all the issues raised in the drama happened in the community and were not imported ideas for just being drama. That was what touched the hearts and minds of the community members to easily relate to the project. The scenes in the drama mirrored their lives or the happenings in Osubon City.
The responses of participants OL1, OL2, OL3, PP1, and PP2 were as follow below:
[OL1] It was something that was happening; it was not important; the idea was not important at all. It was exactly what was happening in the community. So, because of that, the community-related, I mean, they liked the drama so much. It just displayed exactly what was happening.
[OL2] Let me say this: they divided the drama into two (2). One sold her clothes and everything to take care of their child. The child became a doctor. But the second one, the parent did not take care of their child; there were no books, school fees, or food, and the child should not go to school; let us go to the farm. They later realised their daughter had become pregnant, and because she was a teenager at the time, it brought them more hardship. When they compare these two families, they conclude that when you take care of your child's school for him/her to go higher in terms of education, it helps. He/she would bring something important home. The drama reflected our lives. All the issues raised in the drama were happening here. For instance, if you ask me, the one sitting in front of you holding this discussion with you, when I completed school, my parents did not understand school well. Me myself it happened to me. My parents agreed that my twin sister should go to school and I should go to the farm at the beginning. So, I grew up for about 10 years, then I asked my mother that why are we twice and, but you asked my sister to go to school while I was sitting at home? She then revealed to me that my father said I should go to the farm with him. That issue pained me a lot. I realised it would not help me in the future. So, I said to myself, " This school I must go to. But the idea that came to my mind was that we are two, and if my parents are taking one to school, then they must take both and not one and leave the other one behind and tell the male one to go to the farm. No, I was very mad. I was mad at my father for about two (2) weeks, during which I did not eat from the house. This made my father say that if that is what I am saying, then I should go to school. So, I went to class one (1) at the age of ten (10).
[OL3] Yeah, the project was a true picture of what was happening. As I told you, they were not educated enough. Some parents are like that over there. They always turned to drinking and all that. That was the lifestyle within the community before. Even now it is, but it has been limited.
[PP1] Oh yes! It reflected our lives, and it was a big problem. It was a big problem in the sense that there were a few children who attended school, and when they completed JHS, that was all. Their education had ended because they didn’t go any further. So, if a parent was able to see his or her ward through the basic education successfully, that was all. Going to SHS was a problem.
[PP2] At the time they did the project was very important. Because those days, if you came here, you would have seen that most of the children were not going to school. When you came, if today was a school day and it was a Friday too, you would have found those going to school here roaming about. Now, you would not find children walking about anymore without any justifiable reason. The facilitators did well. It was very necessary paaaa!!! Yeah, the issues raised in the drama reflected our community. It was indeed true that some of the few parents who sent their wards to school were not taking care of their needs. Because if the child was going to school, they would not give him/her money. When he/she was going to school, they didn’t give him/her money, food, or buy books, they will not. It was a worrying issue, paaaa! Exactly, that was what was happening in this community.
The parents are now helping their wards in school, which was not the case in those days. When I was attending school in those days, I was in class four (4). Whenever I was going to school, I was given only twenty pesewas (Ghȼ0.20) by my grandmother. But after the project was carried out, the money that was given to me was increased to one Ghana cedis (Ghȼ1.00) by my brother. Their involving me in the drama was what opened the door for me, for my brother to increase the amount given to me to go to school. I played the exact role of what was happening to me in reality. The facilitators themselves were not aware of that. I believed my brother had a change of mind when he saw me play that out in the drama.
Wilson (2004) confirmed that by contending that Theatre is an art and, as such, it mirrors or reflects life. It does not try to encompass the whole of life at once; rather, it selects and focuses on the part of the total picture.
Moreover, three of the participants think the project was a wake-up call to the community. The project called on the opinion leaders, parents, and children to pay particular attention to educational issues.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, OL3, and PP2:
[OL2] … when your brothers (facilitators) also came in, it encouraged me to do more. So, I made sure all my children got access to education, and I always gave them their basic needs.
[OL3] … like I indicated earlier, this time round some parents followed their wards to the school whenever they refused to come to school after the project was conducted.
[PP2] The coming of the facilitators in the community motivated me to study hard, and I took a lot of inspiration from them.
A study conducted by Herrington (2016) confirmed that the goal of PTC is to improve the quality of life, achieve the fulfilment of rights, and facilitate social transformation towards just and peaceful societies.
The researcher looked at the sustenance of this project at two (2) different levels in the community. Thus, what the individuals are doing to sustain the project at their level and the community measures as well.
At the individual level, the participants did a very impressive job in sustaining this project. The sustainability of the project at this level has achieved a significant improvement, as attested by the participants.
The responses of participants OL1, OL2, OL3, PP1, and PP2 were as follow below:
[OL1] This one, I am not saying it to praise myself. I counsel them always to send their wards to school at any opportunity I get and also give them financial assistance. Even the day before yesterday, somebody had just gained admission to Atta Mills Senior High School at Ekumfi; she came to me seeking my assistance. So, occasionally, at my level, individual or personal level, I assist them. But I think what the community has to do is to have some kind of a scheme, a scholarship scheme, to support the bright but needy ones. Because of our very weak financial position, we have not been able to do that. I have the intention of establishing that, to establish a scheme to sponsor some of the children.
[OL2] Personally, if not more than 5, I have enrolled four (4) or five (5) children in school. There is one guy here, a young boy; every morning he comes to me for money before going to school, but his mother is there. Sometimes, if it is about money, I give them; sometimes just Gh₵1.00, and the child is happy. I buy books for some and, to the extent of going to some school teachers to request that they give reading materials out to them so I could pay on credit.
[OL3] Sometimes, when a child comes and reports someone to me, I would just get them at once and give it to them. Sometimes I will go to the extent of insulting them rough, … rough, and you will see them laughing. Hahahaha … they know madam “diɛr saa na wͻ tieɛ” mhmmm. I also based it on what happens within the community to advise and educate them. We did so much, and some parents were very pleased with that. So, it got to a point when they get problems, they come right to me at the school and say Madam, … “mi bai yie” … madam something like that. So, it is my duty as a mother and as the head of the school to do all that by correcting them.
[PP1] I took one of our brothers to Kwame Nkrumah Circle in Accra, and we picked up a car to Sunyani for his interview. Now he is in school. Recently, for the students who just completed SHS, I checked their results on my phone for them. Their fathers said they did not pass, so they would put them in an apprenticeship, but I advised that even if you put them in an apprenticeship, SHS is free, so allow them to go. After completion, and if they still do not do well, then you can put them into an apprenticeship. The guy I said earlier is studying at the university to become a physician “nu” in the last two (2) years; that was in 2018. I took him to Kintampo Health College for an interview, but he was not admitted. In 2019, I gave him Ghȼ200.00 to buy the Pentecost University application form, and he too was teaching in a private school, so he also bought an application form from Nyanful. I took him to both Pentecost University and Nyanful in Accra and Sunyani, respectively, for his interviews. Also, Ato (Philip Ackom), the one I indicated he is in UEW early on, initially, his father felt the school fee was very high for him to pay. So, I sat his father down and explained to him that these educational programmes at UEW, if the fees cost much, it will be Ghc1,100.00 to Ghc1,200.00; the highest will be Ghc1,500.00 a year. Even when his son was attending a private SHS, he was paying fees termly. So, if he should assume paying Ghc400.00 a term, the child will always pick up a car to school every day, and he will eat as well. And will pay for the first, second, and third terms; putting those three (3) terms' money together can pay a year's school fees. So, he got the understanding that he can pay that amount of money for his son to attend UEW.
So, personally, when I see any child who is pushing hard to go to school, I help him/her with my little knowledge and strength as a graduate in the community.
[PP2] I have brothers and sisters who are younger, so I help them do their assignments because I completed JHS. I also teach them what I know or have learned. Those who go to school and then run back home, I do ask them what brought them home. Even just yesterday, I was home here when one of my young brothers came home, so I asked him, “Were you not the one I saw going to school this morning?” He responded Yes, but I am sick, and that is why I came back home. And a careful look at him proved he was indeed sick. He could not even stand well on his feet. So, if I see them, and maybe that child is sick and has not taken any drugs, I go with the child to a chemist's shop and get him/her drugs if I have money on me. Sometimes, I do buy for them those I can afford.
Even though the community has not done much to sustain the project, it kept one potent mechanism, thus the Community Child Protection Committee (CCPC), which was very helpful for the sustenance of the project until the committee’s job was undermined. Hence, they are now relaxed.
Below were the responses of participants OL1, OL2, AOW2, PP2, PP1, and AOW1:
[OL1] A small committee was formed to take over from where the students left off. Unfortunately, I must be honest and say that the committee is not living up to expectations. We formed a committee known as CCPC. Initially, they were doing well, but their activities have relaxed. I must admit that it needs to be revived. When they were doing it, it was perfect. You wouldn’t see the children outside or in town at the expense of their studies and rest for some time, at least for one year. They came in 2015, 2016, and 2017; it was okay, but from 2017 to date, the committee has not been strong. So, I think we need to revive that committee.
[OL2] After they (the facilitators) completed their mission and left this community, we, the members of CCPC, were monitoring and making sure that the children go to school under the authority of the chief. This point was supported by AOW2, who clearly stated this as a member of the committee.
[AOW2] The community formed a committee and enacted a by-law that by 9:30 pm, every child should be indoors learning. This law was strictly enforced and monitored by the community and CCPC, such that when you were caught, the committee would send you before the chief for a punitive measure to be sanctioned. So, when they brought the educational project, it helped make the school go fine.
[PP2] If you go to Osubonpanyin government school, there is a library, and in the community, here and there is one. This is the only thing I can say that the community has helped with.
However, Participants PP1 and AOW1 are of the view that the leadership has failed the students in the community to actualise their dreams in terms of financial assistance.
[PP1] Maybe the chief and the elders who sell the lands for developmental projects here should use some of the money from the royalties to support these children in furthering their education. They will not do it, but if someone dies, they would levy us to perform the funeral. Do you see? That is my big problem. Right now, as I am seated here, I have some connection “bi”, and that is why I am walking around like this. The community does not give support.
[AOW1] Our community does not give scholarships to students; if there are, then I am not aware of that.
The researcher looked at the impacts of this project on the people of Osubon City and as well established its associated challenges.
In this section, the researcher probed the participants on the benefits of this project to them as a community, which, in their view, positively contributed to the development of Osubon City.
The participants believed that parents now involve themselves in their wards' education. Hence, they now know what their wards need for schooling. They opined that parents’ involvement is an integral part of education that cannot be taken for granted at all costs.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, OL3, PP1, and AOW1:
[OL2] The project drew the attention of most parents to their wards. Enrolling your child in a school is not enough; you must provide them with their basic needs. The parents had a change of mind and realised that if their children did not go, it would be very difficult for them to get work.
[OL3] The project has helped improve the lives of parents and schoolchildren in the community a lot, in terms of “saaa” “sand” winning issues. Now the community does not want their school-going children to be involved in sand mining anymore. The school-going rate has improved. So, as this programme was organised, some parents within the community had a little change in them. So, it got a point: the parents followed some of their children to school when they refused to come to school after the project was conducted.
[PP1] Now, we realised that parents believe in education and provide their children with their basic needs. Some even walk their wards to school; they know their teachers and the head of the school. That wasn’t so in those days.
[AOW1] It is always in my mind that it is only about sending the child to school. We, the parents, too, realise that we need support to provide the children with their basic needs and take good care of them. It is not just about putting the child in school, but you have to keep an eye on the child. Some parents did not know their wards’ teachers and had never gone to the child’s school before. So, the project made them realise that it is good for them to know their wards’ teacher and even go to the school to see if their ward is in school and enquire whether he/she is serious in class or not.
All the participants agreed that the project brought about the increment of the school-going rate in the community.
The responses of participants OL1, OL2, PP1, and AOW1 were as follow below:
[OL1] Through the project, those who accepted the educative aspect of the project have benefited. I can mention a few guys who are from JHS and are now at the SHS. Some of them were even part of the drama group. Three (3) of them: one at Akyen Senior High School and the other two are at the Postin Amahadiya Senior High School. I followed it closely.
[OL2] The rate at which children go to school has increased, and they have improved their studies. After their project, four (4) years later, my son graduated from the university; one of my brother’s sons is in the university, the chief (Nana) one of his children completed polytechnic, and we now have many SHS graduates. The children now understand what they are doing, so after completion, they want to further as soon as possible.
[PP1] As we are talking now, I can pinpoint almost five (5) or four (4) people who were part of this project and are now in higher education. There is one guy called Jonathan Mankoh; during the project period, he was attending Ateitu/Osubonpanyin government school here, and he was very brilliant. The project made us take him to a certain private school in Winneba. The competition here was very low, so we took him to that private school in town, and he passed well. After completion, he got a scholarship to study at Winneba Senior High School. He has completed and is currently in the university studying Physics at Nyanful in Sunyani.
There is another guy called Philip Ackom who was also a participant in the project, now at the University of Education, Winneba, specifically at the Department of Art Education. He is currently in his second year. It is now like a competition: if your child is still at home at the age of 2 or 3 years, the parents who took their wards to school tease parents who did not put their children in school. They would be saying “fa akwala no ko sukuul” … fa akwala no ko sukuul” literally means " take the child to school. For now, it is good. I strongly believe the project is still ongoing. Because it still lingers in the minds of some of the community members.
[AOW1] After the project, the school-going rate increased and improved significantly. The facilitators who come to the community also inspired our children and us, the parents, a lot. Some of them that we see are just young children who have not even reached 20 years old in their final year or have not even completed university. When I see them like that, I become happy and motivated, and it encourages me that, as I have not been able to get there, then I must make sure my child gets there, aanhamm! If I see them, then I become happy. All the time I tell my daughter that, if one happens to come here, I point to him/her, “se waa hͻ?” … (Have you seen?), he or she is in the university. That is exactly what I want you to do or become. Because I could not get there, I want you to get there. That is why I am doing my best to take care of you and spend on you. So, they encourage me whenever I see them, and I always wish my child were like that.
4.1.4.2 Factors that Accounted for the Change or Increase in School-going Rate
The participants argued that the change or improvement in the school-going rate, though one could attribute it to the project as a major contributing factor, it could not have been the project alone, but other factors also accounted for the improvement.
All the participants believed the project was a major contributor to the rise in the school-going rate, but also opined that other factors accounted for the rise.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, PP1, PP2, and AOW1:
[OL2] After the training, they held a durbar at our durbar ground, where we hold our funerals and everything. After the durbar, I saw some improvement in our children’s education. Let me say, some years back, our parents here did not understand education well. So, if a child was in school… his/her parents did not help the child attend school well. Therefore, when your people came here in 2015, and after their project, many parents here understood the word education and pushed their children into schooling very well. After the durbar, some parents did well by pushing their children to universities and other higher institutions.
[PP1] The project has also helped to change the mentality of some of the parents who were not taking their wards to school before. Most of them had a change of mind.
[PP2] The first impact of this project is that almost all or most of the children are in school today. The parents too are now helping their wards in school, which was not the case in those days.
[AOW1] After the project, the school-going rate increased and improved significantly. The parents nowadays are trying their best to provide the needed support to their wards.
However, one of the participants contends that the rise might be a result of a New Crop of parents that emerged in the community. Participant [PP1] referred to this “New Crop of Parents” as those with a little educational background. These parents had a taste of education and will do whatever it takes to have their wards educated. This assertion was supported by all seven (7) participants in the study.
The responses of participants PP1 and AOW1 were as follows:
[PP1] For now, the education issue is better in this community. The children now like schooling. I can also say that the young ones who have started giving birth at least around 20, 22, or 25 years old had the opportunity to go through basic education. Therefore, they want to push their children to also go further in education. So, they now send their children to school at a tender age, around 2 to 3 years.
[AOW1] I check on my daughter. If I cannot go to the school in person, I have my daughter’s teacher's contact; I call her and ask about my daughter’s whereabouts and how she is taking her studies in class. Now she is in class four (4), and in any class she moves to, I make sure I get that class teacher’s contact, and I do the same so that if my daughter’s learning strength is weak, we can together help her improve upon it. This helps me know the kind of support to give her at home.
Therefore, there was a need to conduct a variable verification survey by taking the demographic information of the seven (7) participants to confirm or disconfirm this assertion. The result of the survey is stated below:
Table 2: Findings of the Demographic Data
Participant | Age | Occupation | Educational Background | № of Children | № in School | № not in School |
OL1 | 66 | Retired Public Servant | Diploma | 5 | 5 | 0 |
OL2 | 50 | Carpenter | BECE | 7 | 7 | 0 |
OL3 | 60 | Retired Teacher | Post-Diploma | 5 | 5 | 0 |
PP1 | 29 | Student | Degree | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PP2 | 20 | Apprentice | SHS Leaver | 0 | 0 | 0 |
AOW1 | 38 | Trader | SSS Leaver | 3 | 2 | 1 under age |
AOW2 | 34 | Seamstress | BECE | 3 | 2 | 1 under age |
Total | 23 | 21 | 2 | |||
Percentage | 100% | 91.3% | 8.7% |
4.1.4.2.1 Findings of the Demographic Data
The findings of the survey are presented below as follows:
20 and 29 - Do not have children at all, but have the strong conviction that they will send their children to school once they get some.
34 and 38 - Have 3 children each, with 2 each in school and 1 each not in school. The 2 who are not in school constituted a percentage of 8.7%; these children are not in school because of their ages. The parents think they were very young and they will also start schooling very soon.
50 – A JHS graduate takes care of his six (6) biological children together with one (1) adopted child, and they are in school while others completed from both the university and SHS.
60 and 66 – If you look at their ages, one could tell they were among the few selected ones who were fortunate to have access to education. So, some of their children are master’s degree holders, and the least among them are SHS graduates.
Based on the findings of the demographic information gathered, one could see or tell that all these parents have had a taste of education. Therefore, the data has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the New Crop of Parents in the community is indeed another factor that contributed to the rise of the school-going rate.
One of the participants is also of the opinion that the use of heavy machines such as excavators in sand winning and stone cracking has reduced and weakened the use of manpower. They no longer need manpower services, and even if they needed it, it was no longer as lucrative or profitable as it used to be. Therefore, the parents turned to look at other alternatives that could secure the future of their wards. Hence, the readily available option was sending their children to school.
Below was the response of participant OL3:
[OL3] … They used manpower with a shovel; now the owners of the projects have brought in machines (excavators) to lift the sand straight into the car. So right now, the sand-winning business has run down totally. So, they don’t get the money they were getting formerly. Because this time around, manpower is no longer needed, they have now resorted to the use of machines that are virtually doing everything.
Two of the participants also argue that the rise was a result of the development of the community, which saw the influx of lecturers and students into the community. The community members saw or observed how these people go about their lives in terms of education and had a change of mind.
The responses of participants OL3, OL1, and OL2 were as follow below:
[OL3] By and by, as the place too was developing, it was developing with a new set of families who are educated joining in the community. Those educated among them were trying to educate their children on the educational … I mean, level. So out of this, some of the parents came to their senses that, then I should also help my children to go to school. So right now, “diɛr”, the parents are so interested in their children going to school. Now lecturers and … they are all, I mean, around the place. So, you see a lecturer’s child going to school all the time with his bag. That should tell you something, or you should think of something to support your children to secure their future in education.
[OL1] I agree with that assertion. It is a factor. I wouldn’t brag; I know others in this community who have silently mentioned that I also want to be like Nana’s children one day. I know silently that these are my boys; one of them is an Assistant Auditor and two of them are Lab Technicians. They come, and the community looks up to them. I also want to be like Nana’s son, and they know I did not educate them because I am Nana. Because I am not using their resources to educate them, they know my background already. What they said is correct. Because of advancement, some people have relocated from Winneba to this place; their lifestyle, as a result of education, has encouraged the rest, or is encouraging others to send their children to school.
However, the five (5) other participants opposed or disagreed with this assertion because, especially, OL2 argued that his wife was not given the chance to go to school, and for that reason, she did anything to help him educate their children. “She has been supportive to date. She didn’t see or look at anybody in the community before she pledged to me since the beginning of our relationship. These people, they claimed, as a contributing factor, were not in this community, and how long have they been in the community to have had such an influence on us? They came in not long ago, just recently. I disagreed with that assertion. I didn’t look at anybody before sending my children to school. She knew the value of education long before they came into this community.
Two of the participants also argued that the performance of the students of late also motivated parents to be more supportive these days. Their performance is encouraging the young ones in the community to take their education seriously. This is another factor accounting for the rise.
Below are the responses of participants PP1 and AOW1:
[PP1] Most of the children are also doing well. We have two schools here, a government school and a private school, and all the students in these schools now pass well.
[AOW1] The children too are now pushing hard. I can also see that last year, those who completed, some of them are furthering to SHS. Mhmmm! So, it is a little by little.
Other participants also have the conviction that Free SHS has contributed to the rise. Because it is now free, and every child wants to enjoy it.
Below are the responses of participants PP1 and AOW1:
[PP1] If you look at the rate at which they went to SHS is very high due to the free SHS policy. Most of them, after completion of JHS, were still at home; furthering to the SHS level was another problem.
[AOW1] Now, because of the Free Senior High School Policy, they all said they are going to school this year. Like I earlier indicated, the government too has helped us small by allowing the children to go to school free of charge and providing free uniforms.
The subject matter of the project touched the hearts and minds of the community members as participant PP2 put it, “I was given only twenty pesewas (Gh₵0.20) by my grandmother. But after the project was carried out, the money that was given to me was increased to one Ghana Cedis (Ghȼ1.00) by my brother. Their involvement in the drama was what opened the door for me for my brother to increase the amount given to me to go to school.
Through the intervention of this project, her school feeding fee was increased from Gh₵0.20 to Gh₵1.00, which was a significant impact or improvement in her life as a student.
The children in the community do role-playing whenever they watch such a project and learn a lot from the experiences they witness in the drama.
Below was the response of participant PP3:
[PP3] I quite remember we once had a project like that; it has been a long. The small, small children and they were doing the programme; they got to a part where they said “Boakyi! Boakyi!! Boakyi ooo Boakyi”!!! So it came to a point where we were sitting at the house, and some small, small children; the play they (facilitators) did, these small children were doing the same thing. Then my brother said Look at that. Do you remember the play they did? That is the project, and that is what the children are replicating or playing out? So the more they come, the more the children will pick up. It is because of us that God brought the Department to the University and gave them that expertise, so they should come and visit us once in a while.
The right name is “Kwakyi ooo Kwakyi” and not Boakyi. Because Kwekyi was in his second year at the DTA when the project was contacted, and he played the role of a father who always turned to drinking and never bothered to take care of his daughter at school. He always had quarrels with his wife and daughter in the scenes.
The participants agreed that the donation of reading materials to the community and schools within the community had a great impact on the lives of the schoolchildren.
The responses of participants OL3 and PP1 were as follows:
[OL3] The facilitators also donated books, pens, and some other things to the school, which the students benefited a lot from them the donation.
[PP1] They even brought us books that were shared among the children.
Some of the participants postulated that the project had drawn the community’s attention to education, so it prompted the chief and council of elders to lobby for a community library for the community. They see this community library as an achievement and an impact on the community.
At this juncture, the study looked into the associated challenges with this TfD project and its effects on the community.
Almost all the participants are of the view that the project did not bring any challenge or create any window that needs to be closed in the community. They added that even if there is any challenge, it may be at the individual level and not the community.
Below were the responses of participants OL1, AOW2, OL2, and OL3:
[OL1] No ooo, not much. I have not seen any major challenges in this community as a result of the project. At the committee level, we had a little challenge. The children sometimes abuse the committee in the name of fighting for their freedom. Some parents also undermined the committee’s work, so the committee is not functioning effectively anymore. If there is any other challenge, then it would be at the individual level and not the entire community.
[AOW2] The challenge we encountered as a committee after the enactment of the law that prevented schoolchildren from going out at night, as I indicated earlier, it got to a point where some of the children undermined our job by disrespecting us. Some of the parents did the same and supported their wards to undermine us, so it was not the children alone who were involved in such acts. In plain language, I will say they were insulting us. This job, too, nobody pays us.
[OL2] To me, I do not think this project brought any issue or challenge to the community, but maybe at the individual level. Thus, it is as if those who are poor are being forced or pushed to do something. If I do not have the money, but if I look at how the drama went and the reactions of my children after the drama, then it is a must that I send them to school. Me too, I do not have the money. That is the only problem I think the project might have brought to some parents who do not have money. It is like forcing them to do something they cannot afford. Sometimes, some of the parents whose children I enrolled in school feel shy whenever they see me. Because they felt like they could not take their children to school, I took over their responsibility. If I realised this, then I would quickly get close to his/her to let them know I am just helping him/her.
[OL3] Oh! No! No! We did not encounter any problems as a result of the project. Even if there was a problem, maybe it was an individual, but generally, no.
The participants pointed out that the CCPC has been dormant, ineffective, and relaxed in the discharge of its duties these days. In sum, the committee has stopped working.
Below was the response of participant OL1:
[OL1] Initially, they were doing well, but now their activities are relaxed. I must admit that it needs to be revived. We met the committee to know why they stopped, and the reasons were two (2); I think so many reasons were assigned, but I think only two (2) are very outstanding.
4.1.4.2.1 Why the CCPC Members stopped
The participants pointed out the under-listed reasons as factors that compelled the committee to stop their duties.
One of the participants argued that some of the committee members themselves did not show any sign of commitment in the execution of their mandated duties.
[OL1] The committee members themselves, some of them were sometimes not available to carry out the assignment.
Two of the participants argued that some of the committee members were abused by some of the children in the community for asking them to do the right thing.
Below were the responses of participants OL1 and AOW2:
[OL1] The second had to do with the children themselves. Some of the children thought they should be given the freedom to do what they want to do. So, they undermined the committee’s work.
[AOW2] The committee was discouraged not because the issue was irrelevant. You see the children of nowadays: if he/she goes wrong and you want to correct him/her because he/she is not your child; if care is not taken, these children may disrespect you or use offensive words on you. So, something like this does not help; it would have been better and more appropriate for their parents to do that because they are the same age as the committee members. The child would ask the committee member silly questions, like you telling me to go and sleep, “Are you the one paying my fees, buying books, or will you buy this and that for me?” you see? That committee member too would not fold his/her arms watching a small boy/girl disrespect him/her in that manner. Therefore, he/she would stop. That is another reason that made us stop.
Participant OL1 argued that some of the committee members were undermined by some parents for the sanctions of their wards, which OL2 and AOW2, who are members of the CCPC committee, supported.
Below was the response of participant OL1:
[OL1] Some parents thought it was their children, and whether their future becomes bright or not, it should not be the concern of the committee members. So, these are … the three (3) things that killed the enthusiasm of the committee members.
OL2 and AOW2 - members of the CCPC committee also argued that the leadership was/is not supportive enough to enable them to execute their mandate. The elders did not follow their own rules on which the committee operates to the letter. They further argued that all the elders said were just words without action.
The following responses of participants OL2 and AOW2 were as follows:
[OL2] It is true; it came to a point where we stopped. It was because … you see … at first, we made by-laws. All the chiefs … the king himself was part of it when we issued/introduced those by-laws. The by-laws we made were because, when it comes to night, the children don’t sleep early enough, but you know, as a student, you need to learn and also sleep early. So we decided and enacted by-laws to work with. So we issued by-laws in the form of a curfew: by 8:00 pm, every child must sleep. If you are in the room learning or outside learning, we don’t have a problem with that, but for you to be seen outside roaming when the time is past 8 pm, then we have an issue with you.
When we grab such a person and then take him/her to the chief, they don’t deal with them and let them go or get away with it. Do you understand? Meanwhile, we all made the laws that when we grab you, we should send you before the chief, so the chief will make your parents, not you the child, buy three bags of cement. We have taken so many people there, only to realise that what was said was just word of mouth without action. No action took place.
Now, when you meet the child and you tell him I will send you before the chief, then he/she will reply, “fa me ko eee?” which means you can take him/her there. Because he/she knows that when you take him/her there, it won’t get anywhere, or nothing will happen. Do you see how the thing is? So when it happens like this, you will see the work you are doing as useless and will lose hope or interest in the work, … you will be discouraged. So when you are discouraged like this, you become confused and sad because you don’t have an elderly person who supports you. When someone gives you work and supports you, it gives you strength, courage, and some charisma. It also makes the children fear and respect you, and they will stop violating the laws. Do you see how it is?
[AOW2] … Those days when the project was initiated, the elders were all involved and supported the idea and were checking whether or not the committee was working. So, the committee’s operation went on smoothly without any hindrance. But now they have stopped. The chief is aware that the committee has stopped doing its job, but he has not said anything since then.
However, some of the participants opined that the committee members were reluctant to deliver or discharge their services because it was not a paid job but a service to the community. They anticipated payment or a token at the end of the day, and that was not so.
Below were the responses of participants OL3 and AOW2:
[OL3] They are always after money because that is the intent they come with for such a function. Thinking they would get something to eat. Sometimes they expect the people (facilitators) to give them money after sitting down. So, you will see them talking, “ya bɛ ti na ha saaa waa ma yɛ whiee”, meaning we sat here for a while, and they haven’t given us anything. Eerhen! They are like that. En ti ͻmu diaaa ne se, they will come. If you call, then they will come; they will watch; sometimes they will contribute, alright, with the expectation that after that they will get something. Hahaha … So next time if you call them, they will start “last kuraa ͻmu baa ya nsu kuraa waa ma yɛ een waa ma yɛ whiee”. And they always think that the leaders rather get money or collect money from the organisers of the programme. “Ya bɛ ti na ha yɛn nyaa whieee se wa ko gyi sika no a sheshɛ won hͻ”? ... which means though they would attend to the call, but not necessarily to pay attention to what is going on or think of the future of their children. No, they come because of their expectations.
[AOW2] … It is voluntary work, so you are tempted to stop when you are constantly being undermined. The elders say that a child only belongs to the mother when it is in the womb, but when that child is delivered, it becomes the community’s property. So, it is someone who entrusted this work into my hands to do it for the betterment of the community, and there is no salary attached to it. If I am committed and sacrificing myself for you and you still dare to insult me, then I will stop it, enhannn!
The participants further opined that the time frame for the execution of the entire project was very short for the facilitators to have executed their project to its best.
The responses of participants OL3, PP1, and OL1 were as follow below:
[OL3] The time frame or period for the organisation of the whole project was very short, so the facilitators couldn’t do much. Therefore, I suggest the time frame be extended to a whole year. Please, are you getting me? Or to a certain number of months. I think that will work better for them. Because most of these facilitators have never worked with any community before; therefore, they need much time to study things well so that when they go out, they can do better.
[PP1] agreed with OL3 that the time frame was very short and went further to suggest that the DTA should have a Long-Term Development Plan for tackling community issues.
However, one of the participants - [OL1] disagreed with the submissions of OL3 and PP1. He rather argued that the time frame for the project was good enough and was of the firm belief that the facilitators staying in the community also helped them gather enough data they needed to be able to carry out their project.
[OL1] I think they were here for a month or so; I accommodated them here. Hmmm!!! The duration, I think the duration of their project was okay, and I am sure that also enabled them to have personal knowledge about the community and the challenge. Apart from the interviews and the other things that they conducted, their presence also enabled them to have a feel of the community.
But the PRs submitted to the DTA by the facilitators sided or agreed with the submissions of the first two (2) participants – (OL1 and PP1) that final year TfD students should be given enough time to execute their projects (if possible start from the first semester) so they could have enough time to do in-depth research about their community topic and communicate to ideal stakeholders to ensure standard projects.
The facilitators further suggested that TfD students/facilitators be tasked as part of academic requirements, to do a follow-up on previous projects that were conducted over the years to find out if the projects have caused any positive impact or otherwise.
Two (2) of the participants felt that the facilitators used them for an experiment to obtain their marks or grades and not necessarily to help address the issue identified in the community. If it were for the benefit of the community, then the facilitators would have stayed a bit, or the DTA would have also monitored the results of the project.
Below were the responses of participants OL1 and PP1:
[OL3] The facilitators only came for their project and left. That is all. Are you getting my point? They only came in to conduct the project for their marks. The small time that I get, I always say it. Hahahaha, … that is all. They have to because they only came for their project and left.
[PP1] … But because they are students, if they complete the project then … “pa na ͻmu kͻ” (they are gone). The only problem is that when they finish, they immediately leave the community. It is just for marks or as a course requirement. After your marks, that is all. You pack your things and leave the community.
However, the rest of the participants disagreed with this assertion. They were of the firm belief that the project helped shape and change attitudes in the community. Hence, the project was meant for the community’s development and not as perceived and argued by the above-stated participants.
Two (2) of the participants contend that the facilitators did not do regular or periodic follow-ups to monitor and evaluate the outcome of the project, and the DTA is not an exception. Moreover, the facilitators failed to put in place measures or leave behind structures that would ensure the sustainability of the project.
The responses of participants OL3 and PP1 were as follows:
[OL3] … if they had organised a group within the community that, as time goes on, we will come back for some information, or they give them some assignment on the project conducted, that could have been maybe a way or measure of sustaining it. But facilitators always come in for their projects, and that is all.
[PP1] … If they complete the project, then “pa na ͻmu kͻ” (they are gone). If they were around, then they should have been paying occasional visits or follow-ups on this project to inspect whether the children whose names they have written are still going to school as advised or not. And also find out whether the books that were distributed to them are put to good use or not. By bringing some of the books and then enquiring from at least five (5) children about the materials in the book. This would help verify whether they learn or not. The only problem is that when they finish, they immediately leave the community. The facilitators do not come back to check on the project. Even if the facilitators had completed school and were gone, then the Department, as it still exists and like you came back and they have given you direction to the community, at least, should have also occasionally sent some of the students to come to check on these projects. Because “Ɛn ka ͻmu bɛ duaa kokoo aa …” if they had planted a cocoa farm here, the Department by now would have been here to check its improvement.
After your mark, that is all; you pack your things and leave the community. The Department should make it a duty to help and should not leave it to the students alone. If the facilitators identified any problem and presented it to the Department and then left the Department, the Department should do follow-ups.
The participants were of the fervent belief that community leaders lack implementation skills, and that is what the facilitators failed to support them with. So, immediately, they leave the community; that becomes the end of the project. The community needs guidance and skills on how to sustain the project policies.
Below were the responses of participants OL3 and AOW2:
[OL3] The community could not sustain the project because the TfD facilitators left the community. They had to because the facilitators only came for their project. You see, the community is such that, eerh, their lifestyle is such that if anything comes into the town, they welcome it. Yes, they will welcome any project or any educational project that is brought into town, alright. But after that, how to implement them by themselves is a problem. And they will participate, alright, even if you involve them in maybe role-playing or something like that, they would take part, alright, but after that, the implementation becomes a problem.
[AOW2] … the committee has stopped; the children too have gone back to their usual ways – sleeping late at night and not on their books at night. … But those days when the project was initiated, the elders were all involved and supported the idea and were checking whether or not the committee was working. So, the committee’s operation went on smoothly without any hindrance. The chief is aware that the committee has stopped doing its job, but he has not said anything since then.
The participants opined that funding the project is a challenge that both the facilitators and the community face. The facilitators do not have the financial strength to give something as a token to the community task force (CCPC) to continue monitoring the project. The community itself is financially weak, as stated by one of the participants, to appreciate the work of the committee members or give scholarships to some of the brilliant but needy students in the community.
The responses of participants OL3, OL1, OL2, PP1, and AOW1 were as follow below:
[OL3] It will also be difficult for the facilitator to organise a group in the community. Because if you organise a group in the community, it will involve a lot, and as a student, where would you get the money to sponsor this? That is the issue.
[OL1] … but I think what the community has to do is to have some kind of a scheme, a scholarship scheme to support the bright but needy ones. Because of our very weak financial position, we have not been able to do that. I have the intention of establishing that, to establish a scheme to sponsor some of the children.
[OL2] The community itself … if the chief here wants the children to understand what they are doing, then he must do something to help. But it is as if he does not … he does advise parents … “oh! … everybody should do well and send their wards to school ooo”. You can counsel them to do that, but you must also do something to support these parents. It is not just about saying Send them to school. You see, some of the parents are poor. He/she does not have any work to do. In effect, he/he does not have money to take care of the child, … if you are the chief in this community, then you have to help these people so that their children too can go to school or have access to education. Whenever he counsels them, he leaves them just like that. They need a little push by giving their wards some kind of scholarship.
[PP1] If there is any help the Department can offer to any child in terms of scholarship, because UEW gives out scholarships to needy but brilliant children (VC’s Scholarship). Those of us in the rural communities do not get this scholarship. So, if the Department comes back and finds out that a child has been able to pass well, but is still at home because of financial difficulties. They have been Department Deans and HoDs, so they can lobby for this scholarship for that child. This will also help us. So, what the facilitators or the Department should do is to keep their eyes and minds on the project and not just for marks or as a course requirement, respectively.
[AOW1] Like, if we get scholarships or if some people sponsor us, I think it will help in the future.
The participants were of the view that the project was important to their lives because, before the facilitators decided to carry out such a project, the community was faced with a lot of indiscriminate acts. There were a lot of small heaps of refuse dumps all over; some community members threw away rubbish anywhere they found themselves, and they did that anyhow or carelessly. Some, too, after drinking pure water, just disposed of the sachet on the ground carelessly. A lot of bushy backyards were found in the community, which exposed them to some diseases like malaria because the bushy backyards bred a lot of mosquitoes. Therefore, there was a need for the community to curb or address the situation or issue.
Borzah, Mensah, Bediako, and Aryeetey (2019) PR confirmed that all sorts of waste are disposed of irresponsibly and that there were many waste dumps in the communities which were poorly managed.
Below are some of the responses from the participants to indiscriminate waste disposal by OL1, OL2, OL4, PP3, and PP2:
[OL1] It was relevant to have a project like that because only a few of us knew the need to have well-organised refuse disposal. Others did not see anything wrong with the irresponsible disposal of refuse. But they (the facilitators) came, you know, … we were, … the community was made aware of these sensitive issues.
[OL2] We don’t have a dump site, so in every home’s backyard, they have a self-created refuse dump. When you go to my backyard, Mommy has created ours; when you go to Maame Yaa’s backyard, she has also created hers. Every house has a self-created refuse dump in their homes
[OL4] Yes, the issues raised in the project were very relevant because I think before the project, littering around was a common thing that was done in this community.
[PP3] … Because some sickness erupts as a result of filth, something like the throwing away of rubbish haphazardly or indiscriminately; someone can also eat and place the rubbish on the ground just like that. That was the main reason why they came to sensitise us. And in fact, it was so fantastic and so good. You know, it’s all about environmental care, and previously, our refuse dump - how to dump our refuse and these things, was a problem. Where our dumpsite was located, it got to a point that those who kept rubbish in their houses did not certainly dispose of it at the right place it is supposed to be.
[PP2] They came and helped the community because you would have seen a lot of pure water sachets on the ground here as you came here today, and the surroundings would have been filthy. But when they came, they called us, and we helped them clean here. So for now, it is better.
At first, when it comes to every Friday, they sweep the entire community because we don’t sweep on Saturdays in this community. So they dedicated Fridays for sweeping around the whole community so that when you come to the community on a Saturday, you won’t see anything filthy around. But they have stopped. So when they stopped, at any time you visit this community, you will always find rubbish or filth around. So when they came with that project, it helped us paaaa!!!
The participants also argued that before the arrival of the facilitators, Osubon City did not have a central point where they dumped refuse. As a result, they think that was the cause or the reason why there were small heaps of refuse dumps around the community because their old dumpsite was far away from the community.
Below were the responses of participants OL1 and OL2:
[OL1] … we realised the need for us to have a central point for refuse disposal, and to date, that has been the place for refuse disposal.
[OL2] At first, we gathered the rubbish in our homes when we swept every morning. But when we gathered that rubbish, we didn’t have a particular place to dispose of it. We don’t have a dump site, so in every home’s backyard, they have a self-created refuse dump. First, we had a dump along the Gyahadze roadside, but when we looked at it from a different perspective, it was too far away in a way. When a child finished throwing the rubbish there and returned to prepare for school, it was a problem.
The participants stated clearly that the project was very important because, at the time the facilitators arrived in the community, it was flooded with small heaps of refuse dumps. A lot of small heaps of refuse dumps were seen all over the community, as each household had its own. Therefore, there was a need to clear all the heaps from the community. This act bred a lot of mosquitoes and house flies in the community, and that was a threat to their health as individuals and, by extension, the whole community.
Below was the response of the participant OL2:
[OL2] … When you go to my backyard, mommy has created ours; when you go to Maame Yaa’s backyard, she has also created hers. So that was how we were doing it for a long time. Every house has a self-created refuse dump.
Open defecation was a common practice in the community, as expressed by the rank and file of the participants. They argued that it was carelessly done in a manner that individuals could smell the bad odour in the community. Even though it has been minimised, there are still a few cases of open defecation around the community and along the main road passing through the community to Ampah Preparatory School, as clearly stated by participant OL4 as the challenge her school is currently facing.
Below were the voices of the participants AOW1 on open defecation:
The location captured in the image displayed above is very close to the house of the Osubon City chief and just a hand's stretch from the house of another neighbour in the community. Yet the fellow manages to openly defecate at this place, which has the main road leading to other houses in the community. The researcher is of the firm belief that the perpetrator carries out this indiscriminate act late at night because the culprit could not have done that in broad daylight. Because the locale is close to houses and is just by a road and can be seen by people passing by.
Some of the participants also opined that the facilitator came to the community at a very critical point when they stopped communal labour that they organised every Friday in the week to clean up the entire community. The cessation of this crucial exercise brought a lot of filth into the community, which needed a timely intervention to help curb or address the filthy state of the community. They argued that the facilitators intervened at the right time when their services were needed most.
Below are the responses of respondents OL2 and PP3:
[OL2] Then your people (the facilitators) came; they did very well. They worked very hard. They made us do communal labour (general cleaning). With the communal labour, we usually do it; it was done every Friday before it became every two (2) weeks. So on Fridays, the women of the community sweep everywhere. Everyone takes their brooms, and we sweep the town till it becomes neat. But it got to some time when we stopped and went back to the backyard refuse dump in our homes.
[PP3] When your brothers (the facilitators) came, we did communal labour before the durbar gathering. We swept everywhere and took out any hidden rubbish and burnt some rubbish into ashes neatly.
The participants argued that the facilitators arrived in the community at a time when most of the community members did not weed behind their houses, which bred a lot of mosquitoes in the community. They emphatically stated that there were instances when snakes were found in these bushy backyards, which posed a harmful threat to their lives as a community.
Below were the responses of the participants PP3 and AOW2, who were very emphatic on this issue:
[PP3] When they came in, they were able to educate us so that we would know and understand that when your backyard is weedy, you must weed it and burn it at a vantage point. You should not burn it in the community. Also, you must dump the rubbish in places that won’t bring house flies to the community. They taught us so many things, and as you can see here, it’s good. Previously, that wasn’t how it was, but it wasn’t all that active as in how we keep the community now. Like maybe, here will be bushy, or someone may throw something on the ground carelessly, and after that the backyards will be weedy.
[AOW2] Why they made us do the project was that there were a lot of bushy backyards. So if you don’t clear your backyard or weed and burn the weeds, there are insects in these weeds, and such insects like houseflies will come to your house and settle on your food. This will certainly give you diseases like cholera, malaria, and fever. Because bushy backyards breed mosquitoes, they will give you malaria. And houseflies too will give you sickness. If there is a lot of filth around your vicinity, and you do not pay attention to it, it will eventually bring sickness to you.
At this juncture, the researcher looked at how the project met the needs of Osubon City in the views of the participants.
Most of the participants opined that the project met the needs of the individuals and the community at large by drawing the attention of the community to the side effects of their negligence and its direct or indirect repercussions on the community. The awareness created in the community propelled or compelled most of the community members to desist from the indiscriminate disposal of waste in the community. In their view, the project was a plus to the community.
The responses of respondents OL1, OL2, PP3, and AOW1 were as follow below:
[OL1] … It was relevant to have a project like that because only a few of us knew the need to have well-organised refuse disposal. Others did not see anything wrong with disposing of refuse anyhow. But they came, you know, … we were, … the community was made aware and realised the sensitivity of these issues.
[OL2] They (the facilitators) did very well, and it helped us. It was the project that made us realise that these rubbers – pure water rubbers and the others attract diseases; when rain falls, it breeds mosquitoes, and this brings so many diseases like malaria, cholera, fever, and other deadly diseases.
[PP3] … So later I realised the thing was not only for the community alone, but individually too it will help. I then saw the essence of participating in the project so that we can all do it for the thing to make things nice. Now, I realised that since that time, after the project, people don’t eat or drink and throw away rubbish or pure water sachets just like that. And it is all because of that project, and it was so fantastic, as I was saying. They did it and did it to the best of our understanding, and it was very successful, and it was a big programme. When they (the facilitators) came, they taught us that if we throw rubbish away anyhow, it will bring flies to the houses/community. When you are eating, and houseflies can settle on your food, this could give you a disease.
[AOW1] I don’t see any problem with the project, but us. Because we have to understand certain things, or do the right thing and ensure the right thing is done. Do you understand? Because when dealing with filth issues, it's not just here alone but everywhere; it is not good to live with filth as humans. This brings about malaria and the rest. So I don’t see the project as a burden on us. If it wasn’t necessary, we wouldn’t have swept our houses at all, but because that is important, that is why we sleep in the houses in the first place. Once your house is swept, you must go and throw it away. If not, then what is the point of sweeping in the first place? If you dump the rubbish in the right place, it won’t give you problems.
The participants were of the view that the issues tackled in the project were the happenings in the community. The scenes in the drama mirrored their lives, and that enabled them to resonate with the project's intent. They related to and connected with each issue raised in the project, which demanded a swift response from them. They responded to most of the alternatives raised in the project without any hesitation for their good.
Below were the responses of respondents OL1, OL2, PP2, and AOW1:
[OL1] The drama and the project in their totality reflected our lives. The drama portrayed the indiscriminate disposal of refuse and the need for us to have a central point for that matter. They met the needs of the community. Sanitation is still relevant in the community.
[OL2] … Also, with the issues in the drama, that was something that was happening in this community. You see, one was a chief, and he announced to the community that everyone should come for communal labour, and what you will notice is that some people took their tools and headed to their farms. That was the same thing that happened in the play. So it has helped us, and it was something that always happens. Whenever the chief announced that there was going to be communal labour, some would not come. You will see them take their things and go to work; others go to the farm, and others outrightly dismiss themselves. But he gets a few people who help in the communal labour.
[PP2] It was exactly what they did because sanitation was our main problem in this community. It was very important because filth brings sickness, and they helped reduce it. So it was very relevant that they did such a project. Yeah, it was happening in this community. Someone would be walking in the community, and when he/she had finished drinking pure water, they would drop it on the ground; … they (facilitators) said, put the sachet into your pocket so that when you get to a place or where there is a dustbin, then you dispose of it, but they will not do that. After drinking water, they would just drop it there. Anything at all they eat, like yoghurt, they would drop it on the ground; and you will see the whole community in a mess.
[AOW1] Most of the issues were exactly what was happening here because the chief had beaten the gong that a new dumping site had been allocated to us, but still some people were not going there. They leave rubbish in their backyards; they don’t gather or burn it, they don’t do anything at all. They (the community) had small heaps of refuse here a lot. So it was happening here. Although we had a place where we dumped refuse, they won’t take the rubbish there.
Some of the participants also postulated that the project was a wake-up call to them in the sense that they used to have a clean-up exercise the community organised as a way of keeping them clean and free from disease, but that general exercise was terminated without any tangible cause. Therefore, the facilitators being in the community prompted and re-energised them to revive the communal labour they used to do some time ago to clean their community.
The responses of the participants OL2, PP3, and AOW2 below confirmed the above assertion:
[OL2] Then your people (the facilitators) came; when they came, they did very well. They worked very hard. They made us do communal labour (general cleaning). With the communal labour, we usually do it; it was done every Friday before it became every two (2) weeks. So on Fridays, the women of this community sweep everywhere. Everyone takes their brooms, and we sweep the town till it becomes neat. But it got to some time when we stopped and went back to the backyard refuse dump in our homes.
[PP3] When this sanitation programme came, it reenergized the youth, and now even if the king does not announce communal labour, people take brooms and sweep their environs and backyards, so by the time you realise the community is clean, even when the king doesn’t call for communal labour. Because when we started, and we got to a point, everything stopped; the project facilitator came in and woke us up. There is something called revive, meaning you used to do some acts, but now you have stopped.
[AOW2] When they brought that programme, it re-energised us. Because if you are doing work, it will get to a time when you would stop. So when they brought the sanitation project, it re-energised us. At that time, we weeded, cleared, and swept the roadside. After that, what we were supposed to burn, we did, and those that were not too big, we collected and dumped at a convenient place. So it made the community neat and fine.
Yeah, it was very important; like I earlier indicated, we were doing it and stopped, so they lifted us again. Personally, it is important to me … hahahaha … I wouldn’t sweep if it wasn’t important to me. Once I always sweep around my house and makes here fine ... do you remember the last time you came here before you came we had already swept in the morning ooo, but as time passes you saw a lot of pure water rubbers and other things on the floor of the house, so when you requested to take a shot or photograph of it; I knew it wasn’t good. That was why I didn’t agree to you taking a picture of it. So I had to quickly sweep the place for us to engage in our conversation. So the project was certainly important. The project was important because if you are doing something and you stop, and someone else comes to revive it, it means the person has encouraged and motivated you to continue with the work. So it helped us. They also educated us on the effects of bad or poor sanitation on individuals and the community at large
It has been observed that even some of the participants and other witnesses who were an integral part of the project and preached the gospel of cleanliness to other community members are now practising the opposite. They do not keep their houses and surroundings clean. This was evident from the researcher’s visit to the houses of PP3 and AOW2. AOW2 went ahead to explain why her house was untidy at the time of the researcher’s visit and why she did not permit the researcher to take a shot of her surroundings, as evident in the study.
At this point, the researcher looked at how the project was being sustained in the community. Thus, looking at the initiative the individuals and the community put in place to sustain this pertinent project. The study looked at these initiatives, measures, or efforts at the individual and community levels by identifying the efforts each of them put in to help attain the project’s goals and objectives.
The feedback received from the participants indicates that at the individual level, they did very little to sustain the project, even though some individuals served as invisible task forces who reported culprits to the chief and the CCPC member. Others also mobilised their children to clean their surroundings. Other efforts are found in the responses of the participants and are further listed one after the other in Paper Five (5).
Below were the responses of participants OL2, PP3, PP2, AOW1, and AOW2 on their efforts in sustaining the project:
[OL2] Once in a while, I gather the children around, and we pick up loitering rubbish, especially on weekends when everyone is free. You go this side and let me take this side. Take this piece of wood and gather the rubbish, and let’s burn it. That helped me because I realised the rubbish is the source of these diseases, and if they are there, it is I, myself, who will bring sickness. If I say I won’t pay attention to it, the children will get sick, and I will go and buy medicine or even be admitted to the hospital.
Some community members report acts of indiscipline to the committee: see or look at this sister or woman over there; she poured the rubbish there, and she thought no one was watching her. Herrrr! Where is that young lady? Call her here, and they would call her before us, … where you poured the rubbish down there is not where we directed you to pour it down. Go back there and gather and collect your thing and dump it at the authorised place because that place is inconvenient.
[PP3] Some of us serve as invisible forces who report to the chief, acting contrary to the chief’s order and the project’s aim. I don’t throw away rubbish or pure water sachets anyhow in the community, and sometimes I put such rubbish in my pocket and later dump it in the appropriate place, either in the dustbin or on the refuse dump. Sometimes, when I see someone throw rubbish in an inappropriate place, what I tell them is, “brother/sister, where you dumped this thing is not good… sister/brother, please collect it from there; it is filth, and there is a dustbin here, come and dispose of it inside”. Even if the person is not close to the dustbin, I sometimes collect it myself; then the fellow would ask, “Why?” For me, I am in this community; maybe he or she is just passing by. I think I did one or two “bi”, and people didn’t understand me. Because I was close to the dustbin, when I collected it, he was now watching me. I wanted to show him that if he was holding something, maybe rubbish, he should be able to hold it, or he should put it in his pocket. As someone rightly put it, “your first dustbin is your pocket”. So he should put it in his pocket, and if he won’t do that either, he should hand it over to me. This is something I do. I don’t frequently meet/see that, but once I come across it, then I would collect it. Maybe in front of our church, maybe after a programme, I move around and gather all the rubbish; then the pastor too will join and instruct others to also join us. The said leader is an example, so that is how I am doing it. When I am doing it, I make sure “se”, and I know it is not all of them that will accept or follow, but some will accept or follow it. As some accept it, even if it is a few of them, they too will send/take it somewhere, and others too will accept it or learn from them. That is my contribution as an individual to the community.
[PP2] I, for instance, if I am walking around and I see filthy things or find pure water sachets, I pick them. I remember the Church of Pentecost did a get-together some time back; they ate with takeaways and the rest. So after the party, they gathered everything, collected, and dumped it under this light pole. So if you are passing by, you would see these things there, and the wind was blowing them apart into the community. So, the next morning I woke up and asked why they didn’t burn the rubbish, and personally I found a stick, gathered everything, and then set it on fire. I watched everything burn down before I left. This is a little thing to do to help the community.
I have been sweeping all around our house every day; if I do that, then the woman I am staying with would start complaining. And don’t want to stop; I want to continue doing it, but some people will not do that.
[AOW1] Like I was saying earlier, if nobody cares to do it, then I should have been doing it by sweeping and picking up the rubbish around, but “me so saaa” (I am same), I am not also doing it. I only sweep small spaces around my house. I don’t go to town that I am going to clean someone else's house. I am also being stubborn like the others, … hahahaha ... Even when I see people indiscriminately throw away rubbish, I don’t ask them to collect it. Because there are some people who, when you say it or prompt them, will be annoyed with or mad at you. You are not the one to tell him/her to tidy up or clean up their surroundings. Is he/she not aware of his/her surroundings? So I don’t tell anybody to keep his/her surroundings clean.
[AOW2] At the individual level, we all sweep around our houses, and we do it. But the committee, like we were coming together for communal labour, “nu”, we have stopped, and we have also stopped the Friday sweeping that we used to do every week. We were doing that, but now we have stopped. They came, and together we revived it, but when they left the community, we stopped again. For now, the committee has stopped, but individuals are working.
According to the participants, the community did marvellously well in sustaining this project. During the inception and after the project, the community had initiated and implemented a lot of policies to help keep the community neat and clean. These policies are captured below in this paper in the responses of the participants, where the impact of the project is discussed and expatiated, and later listed in Paper Five (5).
Below were the responses of participants OL1, OL2, OL4, PP3, and PP2:
[OL1] At the community level, we have purchased a few sanitation implements like shovels, rakes, etc., for communal labour. Like I told you, this one too is … people are not enthusiastic about communal labour days.
[OL2] When they (facilitators) were gone, we did communal labour once in a while for a while, but not as regularly as we used to do it when they came. If someone’s backyard is bushy, you will see he/she picks up the cutlass or a hoe and weeds, and others also pick up the rubbers. We later heard, or even now, that they sell the pure water sachets. So some will pick them and gather them in the sacks, and it is sold out. So for the clean-ups, we did, but we stopped about a year ago. Now the clean-up is down. We usually did it with enthusiasm, and every heap of rubbish was cleared because we worked harder. Now it has gone down.
[OL4] We sometimes organise our kids or our pupils to go through the lanes where we will pass to school to do clean-up exercises.
[PP3] The community revived a clean-up exercise and communal labour that were once introduced by both the chief and community members. We organise clean-up exercises once in a while. Once in a while, the king announces to the community members to weed around, or that there is communal labour we should go and weed. In this community, it got to a point where every Friday, the ladies sweep the entire community. But the community stopped or paused for some time. The parents encourage their children to always dump the refuse at the lab site.
[PP2] The community is helping, but there is one thing the community has stopped doing, which is paining me. Thus, Friday sweeping. That one, they must start it again. When I came to this community as a kid, they were doing that, but now they have stopped; they don’t do it anymore. It needs to be looked at again.
In this section, the participants stated clearly the impacts of the intervention, both the benefits and challenges of the project. From the responses of the participants, it is evident that the community enjoyed a lot of benefits from this intervention. The study categorised the impacts into two (2); thus, the project’s benefits and its challenges to the community.
4.2.4.1 Project’s Benefits
This segment looked at the project's benefits to the community by examining the extent to which the intervention has addressed the sanitation issues or challenges in the community.
According to the participants, when the facilitators came to the community, the chief and his council of elders, together with some members of the community, formulated some by-laws that helped control indiscriminate acts in the community. After a common decision was taken, they saw the need to get a body that would monitor and enforce these new by-laws so that perpetrators do not take them for granted. Therefore, they all agreed to again fall on the already existing CCPC members to make sure the community members adhere to the rules and regulations governing good sanitation practices.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, OL1, and AOW1:
[OL2] Again, you know, it’s like the “CCPC”. The CCPC, Community Child Protection Committee, the chief asked this same committee to monitor the project and make sure the community members abide by the bye-laws. I was the Leader/Chairman and still occupy the position as of now. We are six (6) on the committee. And it helped us in a way. When someone throws rubbish in an inconvenient or unauthorised place, they will report it to us. In a way, we were like watchmen or security. So maybe if someone does something or anything wrong, then they will report it to us, and we would sanction the fellow.
[OL1] This one too, we had a small committee as the education one; it has also not been as active as expected.
[AOW1] There was a committee in charge of reporting those who went against the sanitation rules to the chief for appropriate sanctions. The committee reported two (2) people to the chief, but he didn’t take it seriously. As a result of that, everybody has stopped. He formed and mandated the committee to move around the community and then report such offences to him, so when he was seen to be relaxed, the committee realised the rounds they were doing had no relevance; so they stopped.
The chief and his council of elders in their wisdom thought the CCPC committee alone could not do this daunting task; he, therefore, tasked some of the youth to serve as Invisible Task Forces to help himself and the committee monitor and make sure good sanitation practices are practiced in the community by reporting culprits The Invisible Task Forces served as a third force that helped enforced the laws and also helped brought defaulters to book; because it is not always that the committee members were around to monitor such behaviours. The Invisible Task Force did well and reported many perpetrators to them.
The response of participant PP3 was as follows:
[PP3] It got to a certain point; the chief himself ordered us to catch defaulters and bring them before him. Some of us serve as invisible forces who report to the chief, acting contrary to the chief’s order and the project’s aim. Some of my brothers were part of us; some of them are John Oduro and Ben. We did that to the extent that even when the facilitators left, when you throw rubbish at a place which is not right, they will write your name down and take it to the chief. So you will be there, and the chief will call for you unexpectedly, and then you will go, … why have you thrown rubbish here? The project the students did here, have you not seen it or not? So they were doing that. The project still exists. I am not sure someone can throw away anything in some places anyhow. When they see you, they will report you, and you may not know the person who might have reported you to the chief. So I still believe the project is ongoing.
All the participants argued and agreed that one of the greatest impacts of the project is the allocation of a new refuse dumpsite for the community. This was made possible when the facilitators identified that the whole community did not have a central dumpsite close to them. This was a major cause of the community having a lot of small heaps of refuse dumps in the community. The facilitators therefore recommended and suggested to the chief and his council of elders that a new dump be allocated to the community and be close to them to help curb the issue at hand. They gladly accepted the request, and a new dumpsite was given to the community, which helped minimise irresponsible disposal of refuse in the community. But the new dumpsite also had its challenges, as some of the community members indiscriminately dumped refuse along the path to the site.
Below were the responses of respondents OL2, PP3, and AOW1:
[OL2] When your brothers (the facilitators) came … they made the king of the community give us land as our general refuse dump site. So when we sweep our home, we now send them there. Sometimes we set fire to it and burn them.
[PP3] So the chief and his elders decided that the community members should choose a place they think would be good for them as their refuse dump site. But some, too, on their way to dispose of the refuse, throw them away halfway to the refuse dumpsite.
[AOW1] When they brought the project, everybody saw that what the chief did and advocated for was very important. Thus, we needed to collect and dump rubbish at a common place. So that at a point we can burn them to make the community neat; so after the project, we have seen people started sending refuse there.
The participants also opined that the project helped the community revive the communal labour they used to organise to clean up the whole community, that was stopped for some reasons that were beyond the imagination of the participants themselves. Before, during, and after the period the researcher conducted his research, he observed that no general clean-up exercise was organised in Osbon City. This further confirmed and consolidated the responses of the participants that the community has halted the clean-up exercise.
Below were the responses of participants AOW2 and PP3:
[AOW2] The project helped revive our clean-up exercise that we stopped some years back.
[PP3] … They made us do communal labour (general cleaning). They did well. … it got to some time when we stopped and went back to the backyard refuse dump in our homes.
The participants also believed that the appearance of the facilitators in Osubon City helped minimise indiscriminate waste disposal, even though one could still find some of these acts in the community. It has been minimised to a considerable extent because the facilitators themselves lived by example and the community members emulated them. The community members are now cautious of themselves and do not throw away rubbish indiscriminately on the ground. The picture below is evidence to the effect that some are still keeping their environment clean, no matter the situation.
Below were the responses of respondents PP3, PP2, AOW1, and AOW2:
[PP3] Now, I have realised that, since that time, project people don’t eat and throw away the rubbish or pure water just like that. And it is all because of that project, and it was so fantastic as I was saying. They did it and did it to the best of our understanding, and it was very successful, and it was a big programme.
So today, when anybody gets up … previously, when you set off to the refuse dump site, you would not reach the site, but you would find much rubbish thrown on the pathway. But today, all such acts are no more. Nowadays, frankly speaking, I haven’t seen any action as such because of what they did; they did it well. They did it to a point that we realised that if you don’t keep your house/environment clean, you will get ill. When you get sick too, you will go to the hospital, and there are two chances: you will either be healed or die. So, now I can’t say we got all because we can’t be 100%, but I can say 95% of the project goals have been achieved.
One of the impacts is that I don’t see indiscriminate disposal of waste in the community anymore. There are no small heaps of refuse dumps in the community. It has ceased. I can’t say we got 100%, but in most of the houses, you will not see that. If someone does that, then it may be someone who has distanced him/herself from the community; they may do such indiscriminate acts.
[PP2] For now, those acts are not happening anymore. The project has achieved its goal in my view because littering in the community has been reduced to a considerable extent. It is now better, but it is still happening in a few cases within the community. At first, it was very bad as compared to the happenings in the community today. It is better today.
[AOW1] For now, it is true that we still have some rubbish in the community, but the small, small heaps of rubbish that were created in the community have been reduced. It is no longer the same as it used to be before their arrival. It has been reduced, but not completely eradicated.
All the participants agreed that during the one-month stay of the facilitators in the community, their surroundings were always seen as neat and clean. Because the facilitators were always sweeping every morning, the youth and some community members joined them in the exercise. They also regularly organised clean-up exercises in the community, which always saw the entire community clean. Their behaviour persuaded and influenced community members, especially the youths who were always at the centre of the general clean-up exercises. But when the facilitators left the community for about two (2) months, the community returned to its usual ways.
Below were the responses of participants OL4, OL2, and PP3:
[OL4] … But after the project, for about one (1) month, wherever you pass, you see the neatness around. So, it was very relevant.
[OL2] Sanitation, to me, was good, and it was good for the community too; especially the chief was happy your brothers (facilitators) came with that intervention. It wasn’t about rubbish alone, but it included weeding because we, together with the facilitators, weeded from one point to the other, the roadside and all around the community, and we swept everywhere neatly before the durbar even came on. This made the chief so happy that we did so, and brightened up the community.
[PP3] … It was one thing that they (the facilitators) did for a long time. They even took part; they, together with us, cleaned up the community. They wore gloves and provided some for us, and they also took us to the places we used to dump refuse. So at that point too, I don’t know how to put it, but it has helped. Because then some of the community members didn’t send the refuse to the designated place as it was required of them.
The facilitators preached the need to weed backyards in the community, which was one of the sanitation cankers in the community, according to the participants. They argued that bushy backyards were one of the major sources that bred mosquitoes in the community and were minimized to a considerable extent through the efforts of the facilitators together with the opinion leaders in the community.
Below are some of the responses of respondents OL2 and PP3:
[OL2] Many people now weed around their houses. Some regularly clear their backyards. No more bushy backyards as they used to be. It helped avoid, limit, or reduce some sicknesses in the community, like malaria fever. First, a lot of mosquitoes breed here, but now it is reduced to a considerable rate. Now, our houses and backyards are neat and clean.
[PP3] … Secondly, bushy backyards too …, in those days some people usually leave their backyards to become so overgrown that sometimes you could even see a snake moving in there. So I don’t see such a thing again. For now, the community members regularly weed around their backyards. Others also spray around their houses. So backyard weeds have been reduced totally.
The participants were of the firm belief that open defecation had been minimised to a considerable extent when the facilitators carried out the project in the community, even though a few cases could still be found. Because the project preached against open defecation, the community bought into the idea, and right now some of the community members have built private toilet facilities in their homes. This initiative has helped limit open-defecation practices in the community.
Below was a response from participant PP3:
[PP3] Open defecation too has been limited, but we have a few people practising that. Now, when children defecate in the open or around the house, their mothers make sure they collect it and subsequently dig and then bury it. I have personally witnessed this in this community.
One of the participants believed that the project prompted the community to get some of the tools needed to carry out general clean-up exercises, which the community initially did not have. Right now, the community is working assiduously to mobilise some resources to help them get more of this equipment for the community, according to OL1.
Below was the response of participant OL1:
[OL1] At the community level, we have purchased a few sanitation implements like shovels, rakes, etc., for communal labour. We are planning to get more of the tools.
The participants argued that the facilitators employed a simple persuasive technique that helped ensured or made they/them served as watchdogs or checks over/on each other. This simple but persuasive technique is that when someone drops a sachet of rubber or anything on the ground, it becomes your duty to prompt him/her that something valuable of theirs has fallen and they need to pick it up. This technique was “please excuse me, something precious of yours has dropped”, and it worked perfectly on most of the participants, community members, and some of the students, as they prompted their colleagues to always do the right thing at the right time and place. This helped shape their mental and attitudinal setups.
Below were some of the responses of respondents OL4, PP3, PP2, and AOW1:
[OL4] The project has been able to instill in the students what it means for them to put rubbish in dustbins and not on the ground. Yes, and I remember this particular one when they were told that if you see someone drop something on the floor, you tell the person, “Please excuse me, something precious of yours has dropped,” to draw the person’s attention to come back for it. So, they were using that among themselves even in town.
Now, some individuals gather rubbish around their backyards and set it on fire or burn it. But still, we need to do more.
[PP3] … Even I, for instance, when I am walking in a different place, maybe not in this community, when I drink water or buy some biscuits, after drinking or chewing the product, then I immediately remember the project and then I put it in my pocket so that when I get home, I find a dustbin and then I put it inside.
[PP2] Now, after eating, people do not throw away the rubbish anyhow. Personally, if I am walking in the community and I eat, I never throw the rubbish away. I would hold/keep it till I come to the house and then dispose of it in our dustbin so that the next morning, after sweeping, I put the rubbish together and then dispose of it at the dumpsite. Now I feel shy about dropping the sachet of rubber on the ground after drinking water. I can’t. I always feel like if I drop it, someone else is watching me and would ask me to pick it up. Due to this, I won’t even drop it for you to direct me to pick it up myself. So I hold it wherever I am going until I get to the house, or if I see any dustbin around, then I dispose of it. That is how I do it. That was what they taught us, and that is what my mind kept telling and reminding me of. I don’t want someone to humiliate me because I dropped something on the ground.
[AOW1] Some also learned to keep their surroundings clean after the project. They saw the need to keep their environment clean.
Some participants also stated that the facilitators had contributed some bags of cement to the community, as their support for the construction of a public toilet in the community was an indication of their presence and concern in/for Osubon City.
Below was the response of participant AOW2:
[AOW2] They contributed some building materials for the construction of our new ultra-modern toilet facility in the community, even though the project was catered for by our MP.
Some also believed that the facilitators giving them dustbins was a sign of commitment to the fight against poor sanitation practices in the community. The bins helped the beneficiaries a lot, and some of the dustbins are still in use to this day. One (1) was seen placed in front of the Church of Pentecost and two (2) at Ampah Proprietary School.
Below were the responses of participants OL4, PP3, PP2, and AOW1:
[OL4] The project met the needs of the community because they were able to donate some dustbins to the community and found various means of getting solutions to the problems. My school, yes, was giving dustbins which we did not have, and even if we had, it was only one. But after the project, we were given an additional two (2) so that proper sanitation practices would be met. So, I think it was able to communicate well with the community. Yeah, so overall it has impacted positively, as well as the donations which were given to us till now; they are the ones we are using.
[PP3] They were able to share dustbins, and even one of the dustbins is at the roadside, and I even forgot to show it to you. They placed it there so that when you finish eating and you can’t send the rubbish home, you can dump it in, and even some other schools were given dustbins.
[PP2] They brought us dustbins, and that is what they are still using. They gave two (2) to the community, some to both the private and government schools in the community.
[AOW1] They brought us dustbins. They gave one to my church – the church of Pentecost, one to the community, and some to the schools.
This section also brought to light the challenges associated with the project in the community by pointing out things that could have been done better and further established why certain issues remained the same or went in reverse order again after the project was executed and the facilitators packed their bags and baggage and left the community.
The participants stated emphatically that one major challenge they have as a community, as far as sanitation is concerned, is that the new dumping site that was lobbied for the community was sold out to someone as a plot of land in mid-February 2021 by an unknown person in the community. The new owner of the plot has sacked them for dumping refuse there. This issue is now under investigation by the chief and his council of elders to bring the culprit to book to serve as a deterrent to other community members. Currently, Osubon City does not have a dumping site.
Below were the responses of participants OL1, OL2, and AOW1:
[OL1] Some unknown person went behind and sold out the new dumpsite allocated to the community. The new plot or landowner banned the community from dumping rubbish on his land.
[OL2] … right now, as we are conversing, we have a problem, and that was about a week or two (2) weeks ago. They said the land the king gave us; someone sold the land ha ha ha ha ha … “asem oooo”. According to the king, he wasn’t the one who sold the land. So as it is, he is now going to launch an investigation into the case to ascertain who sold the land. Hence, the person who bought the land says he wouldn’t also allow the children or the town folks to use the place as a refuse dump anymore.
[AOW1] Ehmmm, someone sold out the new dumpsite given to us. So, as it is now, we don’t have a dumpsite.
At the time the researcher was in Osubon City, the community did not have a place to dump refuse, and it painted a picture of the community resorting to its old ways of handling sanitation issues.
Another issue the participants raised was that the CCPC committee members who were charged with monitoring and enforcing laws have themselves stopped executing their job. For now, the committee is ineffective. They are now relaxed on the job they willingly accepted as a voluntary service to the community, and the chief who entrusted the job to them has since not questioned them on why they stopped.
Below were the responses of participants OL1 and PP2:
[OL1] … we had a small committee … it has also not been active as expected.
[PP2] There was a committee monitoring all these things in the community after the project was conducted, but today the committee is not functioning anymore.
The participants, some of whom are/were members of the CCPC committee, pointed out some reasons why they halted their job, and the other participants also expressed their thoughts on what might have caused the committee to halt its functions in their view, as they were mandated by the good people of Osubon City to execute their duties to the core no matter the circumstances.
Some of the participants who double as members of the CCPC committee felt the chief himself, who had given them the mandate to operate, did not adhere to the laws by giving strict sanctions to culprits. They felt so disappointed that the leadership did not follow their own rules and let culprits get away with it. Some say what the leadership said was a word of mouth, and no actions or seriousness were attached to it.
Below were the responses of participants OL2 and OL1:
[OL2] When you are doing communal labour, and today somebody doesn’t come to the communal labour, we must tell the person something. We must levy or sanction or collect something from such a person. Either we will collect money or something. We must take it. Do you see how the thing is? Enhannnn!!! So, if you don’t collect something tomorrow, someone else will go or will do the same thing. When this person did it, they didn’t even collect anything from him/her. But they let them get away with that. It is like we didn’t know what we were doing. We were only making enemies, and no profit came out of that. We were just wasting our time for nothing.
However, the OL1 agreed with them to some extent but was quick to justify some of the decisions they undertook as leaders. He argued that they rather empathised with the culprits and were not lenient with them, as the other participants put it. He further expatiated that some of the culprits were already facing a financial crisis; therefore, heavy sanctions were going to be a double burden on them. Hence, they, as leadership, resorted to educating and counselling the culprits. He believes that educating them was the best way to go, not punitive measures.
[OL1] Some of the committee members felt that we don’t give stiff punishments, and even if we sanctioned or levied culprits, they don’t pay or heed the instructions, as a reason for their reluctance in the discharge of their duties as a committee.
That is very true. But what is … no, it is two (2) areas. What is not true about the sanctions is that … we have not relaxed them. But you … the ability for them to pay is rather the challenge. The sanction is there. It is Gh₵50.00. … But it was not so punitive. Even that meagre fee was very difficult for some people to pay. So, sometimes … as a community, sometimes you are tempted to relax some of these things to educate them more, because the punitive aspect by force will not help. Maybe we have to go back to resorting to punitive sanctions rather than education. I believe in educating people. When the person is well educated, he understands certain things and does them willingly rather than being forced.
OL1 argued that the committee felt reluctant because the leadership could not motivate them by giving something small as a token of appreciation for their voluntary services rendered to the community. They could not do that because they were and are still financially incapacitated. This same issue was raised and extensively dealt with in the findings and discussions of the educational project earlier.
Below was OL1’s response:
[OL1] The committee is also relaxed because it is voluntary work. We can’t be giving … rewarding them, or let me use the word “motivate them”. The capacity for motivation is not there. For that matter, one will not see why he should continue to sacrifice for these things.
Some of the participants also argued that the culprits could not pay the charges because they were/are financially broke or weak. But others further argued that it was a calculated attempt not to pay the fines, because the culprits intentionally accepted the charges but knew within themselves that they would never pay the agreed penalties. This issue, too, was tackled and elaborated in the educational project findings and discussions.
Below was the response of participant OL1:
[OL1] But you see … the ability for them to pay is rather the challenge. The sanction is there. It is Gh₵50.00. … But it was not so punitive. Even that meagre fee to be paid was very difficult for some people to pay. So, sometimes … as a community, sometimes you are tempted to relax some of these things to educate them more than the punitive aspect. By force, bring it.
According to the participants, members of the CCPC committee were undermined in the delivery of their duties to the community. So the committee members felt that if I want to help and you take offence and now turn round to abuse me because I asked you to do the right thing, then to avoid trouble I must stop rendering that service to the community.
Below were the responses of participants AOW2 and PP2:
[AOW2] Some of the committee members do not want to be insulted by some of the community members.
The above commentary run by AOW2 confirms what PP2 indicated in her interview that: “some people take offence when you sweep their backyards for them. You see, there is a woman here who doesn’t sweep her backyard, but whenever I sweep there, she comes here and insults me. You are seated doing nothing ooo, and someone came and swept your backyard for you, and you are insulting the fellow. She doesn’t know that it is not good.
The participants further pointed out that the communal labour they used to organise some time ago was dead, but the facilitators helped revive it in the community. But it has again ceased, and this poses a dangerous threat to the people of Osubon City, because filth and small heaps of refuse dumps have begun subtly welcoming the community.
Below were the responses of participants PP2 and AOW1:
[PP2] … there is one thing the community has stopped which is paining me, and that is the Friday sweep. That one, they must start it again. When I came to this community as a kid, they were doing that, but now they have stopped; they don’t do it anymore.
[AOW1] I recall it was about six (6) months ago that the church of Pentecost’s youth organised just one clean-up exercise in this community, and that was the only day they came together to do work, and that was all.
The researcher further probed the participants on why the community stopped such a crucial intervention at the time the community needed it most. The reasons for which the community stopped executing the communal labour exercise, from the view of the participants, are clearly stated below.
The participants stated clearly that some community members do not participate at all in some of the exercises organised in the community without any tangible reasons. Others too just gave flimsy excuses to justify why they cannot make it, in the name of I have some small work at the farm to finish up with, or it is time for me to cook.
Below are the responses of respondents OL2 and AOW2:
[OL2] Me, I have some small work at the farm, so I am going to do it. Do you understand? Maybe that time is a period when we are supposed to do the communal labour, and then he/she leaves the community exercise and goes away. So, once in a while, we were doing communal labour, but because of this attitude, everything went down on this communal labour, … communal labour exercise. Because the fellow didn’t come, and if you go to say it, nobody will mind you or collect anything from them.
[AOW2] This one didn’t do anything; that one didn’t come at all, but I have done something small, so I am also leaving. As such, if these attitudes persist, it will come to a time when you call for a clean-up exercise, nobody will come. That is what happened.
The participants further argued that some community members also participated in the exercise, all right, but all that they did was self-arrangement and social loafing. Their appearance was felt, but not their input. These attitudes, behaviours, and characters send bad signals to other community members who thought it wise to rather stop the exercise than confront them. They are of the view that it may lead to another misunderstanding among them. The decision to rather quit the communal labour exercise was unfortunate on the part of the people of Osubon City.
Below were the responses of participants OL1, OL2, and AOW2:
[OL1] It was like we were worrying ourselves. There came a point when we called for communal labour, but just a few people showed up. Some of them just came around but would not work. So we stopped.
[OL2] Whenever the chief announces that there is going to be communal labour, some would not come. Those who came too didn’t work. They only came and walked around.
[AOW2] Some will come, others will not, and some would come but will not work, and so on. As a result of this, we decided to stop so everybody can sit in their comfortable places.
Some of the participants argued that the leadership did not penalise or sanction members who defiled the chief’s call by not showing up at all. So, they also did not see the need to continue with the activity that is meant for the well-being of the entire community.
Below was the response of respondent AOW2:
[AOW2] The chief would only say that if you don’t come, he will charge you, but none of the people who didn’t show up have ever been charged before in this community. Sometimes, too, the chief just says it without backing it with action.
Another challenge some of the participants expressed was the worrying issue of open defecation practices. It is still practised in the community, but in a subtle way. The students and teachers of Ampah Preparatory School suffer this situation most of the time, as some community members openly defecate along the paths that lead to their school. This issue needs to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.
Below was the response of participant OL4:
[OL4] … Hmmm … people defecating around. Each time, each morning, you will see defecation all over. Not around the school, but along the paths we use, and the bushes all around, you will see defecation there.
They have toilets. They have two (2) public toilets in the community. But I don’t know… maybe they cannot get money to go and pay oooo or “se den oooo, I can’t tell”. Their toilets too, I don’t think they are far from their homes. Enmm, they are not far.
Even though the community now has an ultra-modern toilet facility, according to the caretaker, some members of the community feel that paying Gh₵0.50 or 0.70 (for a graphic and a toilet roll, respectively) to use the facility is very expensive, while others are unable to afford it. Therefore, the only alternative left is to resort to the use of the nearby bushes.
The above-elaborated issue is not the only challenge that Ampah Preparatory School faces, but the main path leading to the school is used by some community members as a refuse dumpsite. Hence, both the teachers and their students find it difficult to use that path whenever it rains.
From the response of participant OL1, it is clear that the community did not have its own tools for the clean-up exercises they used to organise. They only bought a few of the implements when the TfD facilitators visited the community. So there was a need to get some of these tools to enable the facilitators to have smooth clean-up exercises in the community. He also admitted that the implements were inadequate and that the community needs to get more of them for future execution of community clean-up exercises.
Below was the response of respondent OL1:
[OL1] … at the community level, we have purchased a few sanitation implements like shovels, rakes, etc. for communal labour. Like I told you, this one too, … we need to get more of that.
Almost all the participants are of the view that sanitation is a worrying issue, as some community members still throw rubbish or litter around. Most or some community members do not regularly keep their surroundings clean. Others still have small heaps of refuse dumps around their homes. Through the researcher's observations, some of the culprits go so far as to the extent of disposing of rubbish along the main road from Osbon City leading to Gyahadze in Osubon City. So the issue of poor sanitation is still prevalent in the community, as OL1 rightly put it, and the issue must be looked into again as a matter of urgency to put some preventive measures in place before it further escalates.
Below were the responses of participants OL1 and OL4:
[OL1] … The sanitation issue is still prevalent. Even though the project has helped reduce it somehow, we still need to address some of the challenges.
[OL4] Yes, the sanitation issue is still a problem in the community. Is a problem paaaaaaa!!! Because we come to our school, we will pass through the community before we get here. When you walk through the community to the school, you will see a lot of rubbish and uncleanliness around.
The new dumpsite allocated to the community also had its challenges, since some community members disposed of rubbish along the road to the site, while others got there but just dumped the rubbish at the edges of the dumpsite. Some unknown persons also dump rubbish along the road leading to the site. Some of the participants were of the view that it was the handiwork of the children, while others also claimed that some of the parents or grown-ups were involved in these criminal acts. They both justified their bases for such claims. Some stated emphatically that even if it were the children themselves, their parents played a part in it. Because they know very well that some of the children they send to the site do not have the strength to carry the refuse there. Yet they force them to do so. Therefore, when they are tired and see that there is nobody around, then they drop it there. Some children do that sometimes because the load is heavier than them whiles others just do that out of stubbornness.
Below were the responses of participants OL2, AOW1, AOW2, and PP2:
[OL2] We had a small problem, and that has to do with the children. You see, it is the grown-up who sweeps, and after sweeping, they gather and collect the rubbish for the children to carry to the dumpsite, … Ha ha ha ha, … instead of the grown-up sending it, she will let the child carry it there. Do you understand? Because the child is a kid, when he/she gets to a point where he/she is tired, then he/she dumps it there and goes away. Do you understand? If nobody sees him/her, then he/she gets away with it. But if someone sees them, they sometimes force them to collect the rubbish to the right place. It is not the child’s fault; he/she is tired, and that made him/her dump the rubbish there. So that is the only small problem we are faced with.
[AOW1] Even when we were given the new dump site, it wasn’t all of us that go to the site to dump refuse. Some would give the refuse to small children, and these children too will not get to the site, but dump it along the road.
[AOW2] We are now dumping our refuse at the new site. It is far away from the community, and if you give the refuse to a child to dump it there, they will not go inside it. So the refuse is now coming close to the road. That is the problem we have. That is why I am saying that, because it is far if you give it to a stubborn child and he/she turns and sees nobody, he/she will leave it along the road and come back home.
However, participant PP2 argued that both the children and the grown-ups are/were culprits in this case.
[PP2] It is both the children and the grown-ups who throw away rubbish along the way to the dumpsite. They feel the location is far away, and that is why they are doing that. They don’t do that in the morning. They would wait till the night or early dawn because if you drop it there and you are caught, they will sanction/charge you. So they don’t do it at the time people are around. So nighttime is the best option for them. That is how they do it.
Participant PP3 also argued that, in his view, the dustbins the facilitators provided to the community and the schools were small in size and inadequate to help achieve the purpose of the project. He is of the view that the dustbins only serve a few individuals and not the majority in Osubon City.
Below was the response of participant PP3:
[PP3] The project didn’t give us any problems, just that the dustbins were too small in size and inadequate. That was what they wanted to do, but because the support was not there, the strength “nu” in terms of financial difficulties, they couldn’t provide enough dustbins. Had it not been for that, they would have provided a lot of dustbins to the community. One of the dustbins is placed at the roadside close to the church building located there. The other one, too, is placed at the centre of the community here so people can dispose of refuse there. They also gave some to the other schools located in the community. The problem I had with the project was that there were not enough dustbins. The dustbins should have been adequate so they could be placed at every corner or vantage point in the community. Because someone cannot drink water at his/her house or a faraway place and then walk to this place just to come and place the sachet in the dustbin. So if one is close to such a person, I think it will help address the issue at hand.
I don’t know the preparations the chief and his council of elders are putting in place to address this issue in terms of providing the community with dustbins.
PP2 argued that even though a new dumpsite was allocated to them, those at the top part of the community never patronised it until the site was sold out. Meaning they were still having small heaps of refuse dumps around their houses, and in her view, that was a challenge.
Borzah et al (2019) PR confirmed that the community members did not patronise their first dumpsite because it was far away from the community.
Below was the response of participant PP2:
[PP2] … But the people at the top there, if you ask them to come to pass here and dump their refuse down there, they won’t do it. So because of this attitude, if you go through the community, you will still find a lot of small heaps of refuse dumps.
Some of the participants further argued that funding was another challenge that hindered the project facilitators from achieving certain objectives of the project. The issue of funding was also extensively dealt with in the findings and discussions of the educational project in this same paper. The PR submitted to the DTA by the facilitators captured that they were financially handicapped and were therefore compelled to change their activities eventually. They further stated that there was a time when they travelled on a bicycle because they had no money.
Below were the responses of participants PP3 and PP2:
[PP3] The dustbins were too small in size and inadequate. That was what they wanted to do, but because the support was not there, the strength “nu” in terms of financial difficulties, they couldn’t provide enough dustbins. Had it not been for that, they would have provided a lot of dustbins to the community.
[PP2] I wish we could be given a big container so we can dump our refuse in, but can I ask you a question? … If we are given one, it will involve money, and who will pay for that?
The study concluded this project by measuring reach, resonance, and response, as Herrington (2016) contends, as the effective method of evaluating the impacts of PTC projects.
Results of Measuring Reach, Resonance, and Response
Reach: looked at the suitability of the audience and the inclusiveness of the theatre, and the participation of key stakeholders. All seven (7) participants unanimously agreed that both projects were presented to the right target audience.
Resonance: focused on the connection and how the participants perceived the project to have reflected real situations and problems in the community by establishing the new awareness caused and changed in perceptions, feelings, and values. They again unanimously agreed that both projects reflected their lives or the happenings in the community with which they easily related and connected.
Response: Look at the intermediate and long-term impacts of this project. As in whether this project was relevant and also reached the right targeted people and provided opportunities for the target audience to think about the education issue from new perspectives that changed attitudes, behaviours, and then social change that impacted their lives as a community.
On the education project, at the individual level, five (5) of the participants did great in sustaining the project and are still taking initiatives that support and promote the aims and objectives of the project. But at the community level, only two (2) of the participants believed that the community took a little initiative and stopped along the way, just like the other five (5) participants asserted.
Whilst on the sanitation project, at the individual level, one (1) of the participants argued that the individual did somehow better, while six (6) of them believed the community did better and took great initiatives in sustaining the sanitation issue but stopped along the line.
This paper outlines the major findings of the study. The findings were made, and conclusions were drawn from which corresponding recommendations have been made. Suggestions have been made for further research based on the outcome of the study.
The study looked at the participants' responses to the research objectives as far as the education and sanitation projects are concerned and established the following concrete findings stated below. The researcher made recommendations, outlined the contribution of the study to the discipline of TfD and the DTA, Osubon City, and finally made suggestions for further studies based on the responses to the research objectives.
The study was based on four (4) specific research objectives. The first objective established whether the stakeholders perceived the projects to be relevant to their lives or not; the second determined whether these projects met the needs of Osubon City or not, followed by the third objective, which looked at how the individual/community is/was sustaining these projects, while the fourth documented the impacts of these projects on Osubon City.
The first objective focused on finding out whether the stakeholders perceived these projects to be relevant to their lives or not, and the study revealed that:
According to the participants, the project was relevant at the time it was conducted because the level of illiteracy and ignorance among parents and children in the community was very high. Since most parents did not have any formal education themselves, they were ignorant of the value of education. Though some of the children were in school, they were naïve and ignorant, so they did not understand the value of education. Therefore, the children did not take their studies seriously. This was one of the major factors that accounted for why most parents and wards did not bother about the value of education in the community.
The involvement of parents, which is an integral part of education and cannot be taken for granted, was missing in the community those days. The few parents who sent their children to school also did not involve themselves in their wards' education to know what they needed for schooling.
The project was relevant at the time it was conducted because the economic situation of the parents at the time did not permit them to send their wards to school, not to talk of providing for the needs that it comes with. But the project motivated and encouraged them to push their wards into school with their limited/little resources.
The abysmal performance of the children after JHS was a factor that inhibited the parents from sending their brothers and sisters to school. Hence, there was a need to educate the schoolchildren as well because they were not taking their studies seriously as students. Plan Ghana gave them a scholarship opportunity to sponsor a few children from Osubon City to Winneba Senior High School, but only one child was able to take up the opportunity; the rest failed.
Osubon City is faced with a lot of indiscriminate acts in the community. There were a lot of small heaps of refuse dumps all over; some community members threw away rubbish anywhere they found themselves, and they did that anyhow or carelessly. Some, too, after drinking pure water, just drop the sachet on the ground carelessly. A lot of bushy backyards were found in the community, which exposed them to some diseases like malaria because the bushy backyards bred a lot of mosquitoes.
The community did not have a close central point where they could dump refuse. As a result of this, they created small heaps of refuse around the community.
The community was flooded with small heaps of refuse dumps. A lot of these small heaps of refuse dumps were seen all over the community, as every household had its own. Therefore, there was a need to clear all these heaps from the community.
Open defecation was a common practice in the community, and it was carelessly done in a manner that individuals could smell a bad odour in the community.
The facilitator went to the community at a very critical point when they stopped the communal labour they used to organise every Friday of the week to clean up the entire community. The cessation of this crucial exercise brought a lot of filth into the community that needed a timely intervention to help curb or address the filthy state of the community.
The facilitators arrived in the community at a time when most of the community members were not weeding around their houses, and that bred a lot of mosquitoes in the community. They emphatically stated that there were instances when snakes were found in these bushy backyards, which posed a harmful threat to their lives as a community.
Determining whether these projects met the needs of Osubon City or not was the second objective of the study, which revealed that:
The project on education created some kind of awareness among the parents in the community by raising issues that keep on echoing in their ears and minds. So, the project conscientized the parents to get involved in their wards’ education to a certain point.
Whilst on sanitation, the project drew the attention of Osubon City to the side effects of their negligence and its direct or indirect repercussions on the community. The awareness created propelled or compelled most of the community members to desist from indiscriminate waste disposal in the community.
All the participants agreed that all the issues raised in both projects' dramas reflected their lives. The issues happened in the community and were not imported ideas for just drama seeks. That was what touched the hearts and minds of the community members to easily relate to and connect with the projects. The scenes in the drama mirrored their lives or the happenings in Osubon City, and that enabled them to resonate with the project's intent. They related to and connected with every issue raised in the projects, which demanded a swift response from them. They responded to most of the alternatives raised in the projects without any hesitation for the betterment of themselves and the community.
The participants believed the education project was a wake-up call to the community because the project called on the opinion leaders, parents, and children to pay particular attention to educational issues.
Whilst on sanitation, the facilitators’ presence in the community prompted and re-energised them to revive the communal labour terminated without any tangible cause or reason and to also put some measures in place to address the sanitation issues in the community.
The third objective of the study looked at how the individual/community is/was sustaining this project, which revealed that:
At the individual level, they did very little to sustain the project, as the participants indicated. It is just a few of them who tried to do the right thing, no matter the circumstances, but the rest did not at all, and others, too, once in a blue moon, try to act responsibly.
The CCPC was charged to take over from where the facilitators left off. The duties of the committee were to make the children either sleep by 9:30 pm or be indoors reading their books. No child was allowed to roam about in the community, and if you were caught, you were sanctioned together with your parents.
The fourth objective documented the impacts of this project on Osubon City. The impacts of the project were looked at in two (2) phases; thus, the project benefits and challenges. It was revealed that:
Parents now involve themselves in their wards' education. They opined that parents’ involvement is an integral part of education and should not be taken for granted at all costs.
The project brought about the increment of the school-going rate in the community.
The factors that accounted for the change or increase in school-going rate include the contribution of the TfD project, a new crop of parents/literate parents, the use of machines for sand winning and stone cracking, the influx of lecturers and students in the community, good academic performance, and free SHS.
The subject matter of the project touched the hearts and minds of some community members, as participant PP2 put it. Through the intervention of this project, her school feeding fee was increased from Gh₵0.20 to Gh₵1.00, which was a significant impact or improvement in her life as a student.
The children in the community do role-playing whenever they watch such a project and learn a lot from the experiences they witness in the drama projects.
The small children were seen playing out some of the scenes in the drama; that has a part that says “Boakyi! Boakyi!! Boakyi ooo Boakyi”!!! The children replicated or played out the same thing. So the more the children watch such a project, the more they pick up or learn from the drama.
The right name is “Kwakyi ooo Kwakyi” and not Boakyi. Because Kwekyi was in his second year at the DTA when the project was conducted, and he played the role of a father who always turned to drinking and never bothered to take care of his daughter at school. He always had quarrels with his wife and daughter in the scenes.
The project drew the community’s attention to education, so it prompted the chief and his council of elders to lobby for a community library for the community.
One of the greatest impacts of the project is the allocation of a new refuse dumpsite for the community. This was through the facilitators’ intervention that the chief of Osubon City allocated to the community a new dumpsite close to them, which helped curb the issue at hand.
The facilitators employed a simple but persuasive technique that helped ensure that the participants themselves served as watchdogs or checks over/on each other. The technique was that when someone drops a sachet of rubber or anything on the ground, it becomes their duty to prompt him/her that something valuable of theirs has fallen and they need to pick it up. Thus, “please excuse me, something precious of yours has dropped”. This psychological approach worked perfectly on most of the participants, community members, and some of the students. They prompted others or their colleagues to always do the right thing at the right time and place. This helped shape their mental and attitudinal setups. Some of the participants said they now feel shy about dropping rubbish on the ground, and others also put pure water sachets in their pockets after drinking the water for fear that they may be prompted/asked to do the honourable thing, which would be an embarrassment to their personality.
Because the CCPC committee alone could not do this daunting task alone; and therefore tasked some of the youth to serve as invisible task forces to help the committee monitor and make sure good sanitation practices are practised in the community. They helped by reporting members who go against the rules. This invisible task force served as a third force that helped enforce the laws and also helped bring defaulters to book. The invisible task force did well and reported many perpetrators who were sanctioned appropriately.
The facilitators employed a simple persuasive technique to ensure or make sure they serve as watchdogs or checks over/on either other. This simple but persuasive technique was that when someone drops a sachet of rubber or anything on the ground, it becomes their duty to prompt him/her that something valuable of theirs has fallen and they need to pick it up. This psychologically worked perfectly on most of the participants, community members, and some of the students as they prompt others or their colleagues to always do the right thing at the right time and place. This helped shape their behavioural and attitudinal setups.
The project helped minimise indiscriminate/irresponsible waste disposal in the community. Because the facilitators themselves lived by example, and the community members emulated them. Some of the community members are now cautious of themselves and do not throw away rubbish indiscriminately on the ground.
During the one-month stay of the facilitators in the community, the surroundings of the community were always seen as neat and clean. Because the facilitators were always sweeping every morning, the youth and some community members joined them in the exercise. They also regularly organised clean-up exercises in the community, which always saw the entire community clean. Their behaviour persuaded and influenced community members, especially the youths who were always at the centre of the general clean-up exercises.
Open defecation has been minimised to a considerable extent when the facilitators carried out the project in the community. The project preached against open defecation, and the community bought into the idea, and right now some of the community members have built their private toilet facilities in their houses. This initiative has helped limit open-defecation practices in the community.
The project prompted the leadership to get some of the tools needed to carry out general clean-up exercises, which the community initially did not have. Right now, the community is working assiduously to mobilise some resources to help them get more of this equipment for the community, according to OL1.
The community revived its usual communal labour they used to organise some time ago to clean up the whole community, which had been stopped for some reasons that defied the imagination of the participants.
Bushy backyards were one of the major sources that bred mosquitoes in the community, and that have been minimised to a considerable extent through the efforts of the facilitators together with the opinion leaders in the community.
On the education project, the community leadership tasked the committee to monitor and ensure that school-going children slept on time or were indoors learning, and any child who violated the by-laws, parents were charged to either pay Gh₵50.00 or buy three (3) bags of cement for the community.
Whilst the facilitators were on the sanitation project, the community came together and formed some by-laws that helped control indiscriminate acts in the community. The leadership again fell on or tasked the CCPC members to ensure the community members adhered to the rules and regulations governing good sanitation practices.
The education project donated reading materials to the community, and schools within the community had a great impact on the lives of the schoolchildren.
Whilst the facilitators on the sanitation project gave Osubon City and the schools' dustbins, which the community members saw as a sign of commitment towards the fight against poor sanitation practices in the community. The bins helped the beneficiaries a lot, and some of them are still in use to this day.
They further contributed some bags of cement to the community as their support for the construction of a public toilet in the community. This move has been seen as an indication of their presence and impact in Osubon City.
The CCPC has been dormant, ineffective, or relaxed in the discharge of its duties these days. In sum, the committee has stopped working.
The committee stopped working because of the following reasons: some committee members did not have time for the work, the children abused the committee members, the parents undermined the committee’s work, the elders/leadership are/were not supportive, and it was a voluntary service.
Whilst on the sanitation project, the committee halted due to the following reasons: the committee members felt the rules were/are not strictly enforced by Leadership, the inability of the leadership to motivate committee members, the inability of culprits to pay fines, and Some Members were being undermined for discharging their duties.
Some of the participants have the perception that the projects were for grading purposes only. Some of the participants felt that the facilitators used them for an experiment to obtain their marks or grades and not necessarily to help address the issue identified in the community.
The participants opined that the time frame for the execution of the entire project was very short for the facilitators to have executed their project to its best. Therefore, the facilitators could not do much.
However, on the sanitation project, one of the participants disagreed with the above submission. He rather argued that the time frame for the project was good enough and was of the firm belief that the facilitators staying in the community also helped them gather enough data they needed to be able to carry out their project.
But both PRs submitted to the DTA also captured that the time frames for their projects were very short, and this affirmed the assertion above by the previous participants.
Some of the participants contend that the facilitators did not do regular or periodic follow-ups to monitor and evaluate the outcome of the project, and the DTA is not an exception. Moreover, the facilitators failed to put in place measures or leave behind structures that will ensure the sustainability of the project.
Some of the participants are of the view that the community leaders or the stakeholders who are supposed to implement the policies of the projects and as well sustain them lack implementation or sustainability skills, and that was what facilitators failed to support them with.
Funding the projects was a challenge that both the facilitators and the community were/are faced with. The facilitators did not have the financial strength to give a meagre amount of money as a token to the community task force (CCPC) to continue monitoring the project. The community itself is also financially weak, as stated by one of the participants, to appreciate the work of the committee members or give scholarships to some of the brilliant but needy students in the community.
Whilst on the sanitation project, the same challenge hindered facilitators from achieving certain objectives of the project. The PRs submitted to the DTA captured that they were financially handicapped and were therefore compelled to change their activities eventually. It is stated that it got a time they travelled on a bicycle because they had no money.
The new dumpsite the facilitators lobbied for the community has been sold out by an unknown person in the community to someone as a plot of land. The new owner of the plot has sacked them for dumping refuse there. The issue is now under investigation by the chief and council of elders to bring the culprit to book to serve as a deterrent to other community members. Currently, Osubon City does not have a dumpsite.
Some people in the community take offence when their backyards are swept for them. There is a woman there; when her backyard is swept for her, she takes offence and insults whoever does that for her. One other participant said she has never prompted anyone to keep his/her surroundings clean and will never do that. When asked why, she said she does not want to be insulted by anybody.
“When I see people indiscriminately throw away rubbish, I don’t ask them to collect it. Because there are some people who, when you say it or prompt them, they become annoyed or mad at you. You are not the one to tell him/her to tidy up or clean up their surroundings. Is he/she not aware of his/her surroundings? So I don’t tell anybody to keep his/her surroundings clean.
The communal labour they used to organise some time ago was dead, but the facilitators revived it in the community, and it has again ceased. This poses a dangerous threat to the people of Osubon City because filth and small heaps of refuse have begun subtly welcoming the community.
The community stopped such a crucial intervention at the time the community needed it most because of the following reasons: some community members do not show up when there is communal labour, some show up but will not work, and the community members who didn’t show up were not sanctioned.
Another worrying issue expressed by the participants was open defecation practices. It is still practised in the community, but in a subtle way. The students and teachers of Ampah Preparatory School suffer this situation most, as some of the community members openly defecate along the paths that lead to their school. This issue needs to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.
The community did not have the needed tools for the clean-up exercises they used to organise. They only bought a few of the implements when the facilitators visited the community, and they admitted that the implements were inadequate and that the community needs to get more of them for future execution of community clean-up exercises.
Some community members still throw rubbish or litter around. Most or some community members do not regularly keep their surroundings clean, and others are creating small heaps of refuse dumps in the community again. Some of the culprits go to dispose of rubbish along the main road from Osbon City leading to Gyahadze, as observed by the researcher. So the issue of poor sanitation is still prevalent in the community, as OL1 rightly put it, and it must be looked into again as a matter of urgency to put some preventive measures in place before it further escalates.
Some community members disposed of rubbish along the road to the site, while others got there but just dumped the rubbish at the edges of the dumpsite. Some dumped rubbish along the road leading to the site. Some of the participants were of the view that these acts were the handiwork of the children whiles others also claimed that some of the parents or grown-ups were involved in these criminal acts. They both justified their bases for such claims. Some stated emphatically that even if it were the children themselves, their parents played a part. Because they know very well that some of the children they send to the site do not have the strength to carry the refuse there, yet they force them to do so. Therefore, when they are tired and see that there is nobody around, they drop it there. Some children do that sometimes because the load is heavier than them whiles others just do that out of stubbornness.
The dustbins the facilitators provided to the community and the schools were small in size and inadequate to help achieve the purpose of the project. Others are of the view that dustbins only serve a few individuals and not the majority in Osubon City.
Those at the topmost part of Osubon City never patronised the new dumpsite allocated to them. Meaning they were/are still having small heaps of refuse dumps around their houses and in their view. They are of the view that it is still a challenge to the community.
The study concludes that the projects have ably made some significant improvements in the community, but there are/were some challenges associated with the projects that both Osubon City and the DTA must take notice of and then take corrective actions on them. These challenges are listed in both papers four (4) and five (5). The researcher calls on both Osubon City, future facilitators, and the DTA to pay heed to the recommendations of this study for better improvement of the community, future projects, or the TfD programme, respectively, in the future.
Based on Herrington's (2016) 3Rs conceptual framework module for evaluating a PTC project, which was employed for this study, the researcher concludes that the projects had reached their rightful target audience; the projects resonated well with the lives of the participants, and for that matter, they ably related to and connected with the projects. The participants argued that the subject matter of the projects was very relevant to and reflected their lives.
Considering the responses, the participants did well concerning the corrective measures put in place in sustaining the education project at the individual level rather than the community level, whilst on sanitation, the participants at the individual level did less, but the community did fantastically well in sustaining this project as compared to its effort in the education project.
This study, therefore, only provided the ingredients needed for quality assurance and improvement of TfD projects carried out by facilitators under the auspices of the DTA at Osubon City and the TfD programme as a special area of study, unless future facilitators, the DTA, and Osubon City itself pay heed to the lessons of this evaluation study and then take the needed corrective actions. The stakeholders in these projects, especially Osubon City, must obtain and act responsibly on, or make sound use of, these evaluation findings and recommendations on the projects, sanitation as a matter of urgency. Because the filth is vehemently regaining its root in the community subtly, and that is a threat to the community and should be relooked at.
All the measures put in place by both the facilitators and the community leaders were just short-term and not long-term measures, which need a relook by both parties.
The study further concluded that education appeared as an individual responsibility because its sustenance at the individual level was/is very high, while sanitation seemed like a collective/community responsibility, which witnessed a very impressive effort at the community level in terms of the sustenance of the sanitation project.