Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss 
A September 15 article on the New Era website reports that UNICEF-funded kindergartens in cyclone affected areas of Myanmar’s delta are empty. The Kale Pyaw Neya (literally, Happy Children Place) kindergartens have no kids in them, Aung Kyaw Moe writes, because parents can’t afford to pay for carers. He quotes an INGO staff person working in Bogale Township as saying that:
“In just about every village I’ve been to, of the Kale Pyaw Neya only the buildings are left. I didn’t see any kids still attending. I was told the reason is that people in the villages can’t pay the salaries of the staff for the Kale Pyaw Neya.”
The author also quotes a farmer from Methila Village in Taungkale Tract, Ngaputaw as commenting that:
“To give a monthly salary of about 25,000 to 30,000 Kyat (USD 25-30) for a youngster to take care of the children, each household in the village had to put in about 500 Kyat. Now that the village economy isn’t good, people can’t put in money so the Kale Pyaw Neya kindergarten had to be shut.”
The article continues that these and other kindergartens were constructed after Cyclone Nargis with funds from UNICEF as well as donations from local groups and businesses, and with help from parents. The project included not only the buildings but also provision of toys, books and food, but after completion, responsibilities fell entirely to the local authorities, women’s groups, health and education officers, and parents.
Are the Kale Pyaw Neya another example of an internationally-funded project without legs? Are they failing everywhere, or does this article give the wrong impression? Do any New Mandala readers working in the delta, or who have been to these areas recently and perhaps seen the kindergartens (there’s a photo of one in the original article) care to comment?
I have been to the delta recently. I have seen kids working for their living, in tea shops, on the streets selling food, just to survive for the next meal. I have seen kids as young as 6 or 7 in shops cutting old motor car tyres being prepared to be made into other usable products, such as slippers; I have seen them sifting through murky, slimly and smelly drains with their tender bare hands, this is where they all are, no time for schooling.
Where are the teachers? Affordability may play a part. Perhaps a holistic plan of UNICEF should include good pay for teachers to attract some qualified teachers too. But the problems goes deeper and deeper. There is no administrative infrastructure to support the system at all, nor indeed any form of infrastructure anywhere. Education, communication, transport, all these systems have been eroded for so long, these “stand alone” projects are bound for abysmal failure.
Where are the parents? Out in the fields or on the roads finding a means to survive for the next meal as well.
The only infrastructure that seems to be working is the military apparatus, but only for themselves. There is a lot of money and power there but no brains to create a political will to lift the nation out of this hell hole. Hence a failed state.
0
0
It is rather common (unfortunately) that after a disaster quite a lot of projects are finished which have only limited value for the affected people. The Tsunami is another recent example, when all organisations (whether they have the competence or not) built houses. There are two main reasons why such a waste occurs:
1. From donation etc. a lot of funds are available that have to be spend in a limited time. Consequently one main task is to get rid of the money.
2. Success of a project funded mainly by donations is not at all connected to those who should make use of it, but in how far the donours look at it as money well spend. A Kindergarden with properly dressed kids, nice toys (see the Panda in another blog!), well build etc. fits the idea of a good project of the donours from the north atlantic region.
I once thought that one reason why most development projects are so useless has something to do with limited funds. Now I think, the more money is available, the more the projects are useless. This is one reason why I don’t think it is a good idea to increase global development spending. Unfortunately, currently a lot of money is available for (under)development projects. I guess in Thailand there are quite a few good examples of projects, whose prime objective is PR rather then facilitating “participatory sustianble development”. The only positive aspect is that in any case, close to 80% of the funds of a development project are spend for salaries (experts, consultants) and often more then 10% for the office. In other words, less then 10% reach the people and the local level.
0
0
Bamar,
‘There is a lot of money and power there but no brains to create a political will to lift the nation out of this hell hole.’
Absolutely spot on. Brains singleminded only for clinging on to power and wealth, but not a grey cell willing or working for the people.
0
0