Odds and Ends

The world of DEVELOPMENT can get confusing at times. With so much happening at the peripheries, it sometimes takes a lot of you to just sit down and note a remarkable day. The plethora of these 'happenings' never cease to give you new insights, especially if you are the one working for the development at those margins where even a small change matters. At times you turn a blind eye to most things since you are often in the same rut.

Being the last remnant of the Urban Health Project I was to accompany my Professors while they entertained Dan and Beth, visitors from Gates Foundation on the 18th of this month. We had chalked out a visit to the Urban Health Center (UHC) and then to a slum in Ahmedabad called Bombay Hotel Slum where an NGO called Sanchetna. After this we planned to visit the Deputy Commissioner Health.

I will take you through the day some other time, but as a Medical Anthropologist (or at least someone who hopes to be one), there were some very important learnings that I carried back with me. And I fear to loose them if I don't pen them down.

Dan informed me that the Gates Foundation is to fund for Safe Motherhood Programs in India. And as we were talking he revealed that usually there are two types of models that you see in the field, one is the public private partnership model like the Chiranjeevi Scheme in Gujarat, the other is the most common grass root model of community mobilization. Now as donors the first model is more cost effective. Now this I realized is donor's perspective. He was right in some ways about the broad two models that exist in the field. But the donor's perspective I realized is an important learning when you have to market ideas. And since I am working on health policies, I know how important it is to sell ideas, and sell it well.

I kept thinking on this donor's perspective. And later discussed it with my Prof. I was relating to Deborah Maine 's talk in the institute on "Bridges of Paper Bridges of Steel" where she is of the opinion to build as many EmOC centers in the country to mobilize women directly to these service centers - her argument - instead of pushing women the rote way - from mid-levels to PHC's to CHC's to EmOC's 'why not get them directly to the EmOc's?'. That is really a point put forward well. The question I asked my Prof. was "How many donors are buying this idea?" Here is what he said, to quote him "Not many, you see donors also have their own agenda, their own philosophy. For e.g. UNICEF always looks at community participation. They believe in community mobilization. So they will never buy this idea." Yes, I had to agree to that. For instance children are UNICEF's bread and butter, UNFPA will always talk of gender perspectives etc. And yes, since I did my internship with UNICEF India, I have to agree with him when he says that UNICEF believes in community participation since it is at the crux of almost all their programs and projects.

What now happens at various peripheries is that programs become donor centric - you have either a community based model or a 'building model' (as I like to call it!) - since the implementers are funded by donors who are believers of one of the two broad models. The problem with the implementers is that most of them rely only on one donor. Here is something that most of us HAVE to agree, whether we like it or not - 'implementation TERRITORIES'.

Most commoners I meet talk about the way things function in the country, throw brickbats - not really knowing what hits us really. There is no dearth of ideas for sure... but with so many things affecting the odds and ends that really matter.....

BANG! need I tell more?

This happens only in India!

I am not supposed to really give you this kind of 'classified' information. But sometimes I really wonder if anyone reads this blog. But anyways, one day if at all I become this renowned researcher that I aim to be, this will help me keep a track of things, of everything I ever heard in the zillion meetings that I attended.

So, here is the Golden Knot!

Now all know that the World Bank funds a number of projects in a number of countries. To fund any project in any country, the norm is that the country submits a proposal on the basis of which funds are allocated.

Now, for some work, my Professor was looking for a proposal that the Government of India had submitted to the World Bank for funds. And, it is not traceable at both the ends! God, imagine that! And considering I know my Prof. well. I know he would not have said that unless he would have tried all known sources.

I imagine it is there somewhere in some stack that probably looks like this:

Caution: You may take this with a pinch of salt if you wish!

Two things following me

There are two things that have been following me for some time now.

1. The word ITHACA. No, seriously. sometime back I read a book and so overwhelmed I was that I named my blog Ithaca. But seriously, its getting a bit too much now. I was surfing the internet a couple of days back and found myself looking at the University of Cornell Ithaca Campus. Hmpf! Didn't know there was Ithaca City in the US! Anyways, I am sure there are lots of Washington's in the US too. So that didn't bother me as much. But seriously, yesterday I was reading a paper on policy making from my favorite journal The Lancet and as usual I was going through the list of References. And there you go - Ithaca!! No ways, someone please save me! What's it with Ithaca?

2. For the past two years I have been bumping into cancer afflicted individuals. A few days back, my friend tells me his brother is now a cancer patient - Hodgkin's Disease. He wanted some help - since he has always known of my involvement with cancer patients. That made me decide the need to write on cancer and cancer afflicted individuals that I have come across for the past two years. So a few of my blogs will feature that henceforth.

The second is well reasoned and easy to slove. But the first? Any suggestions there?

Walkin on the streets I found this

... sure I do!