This study examined the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in the implementation of social protection programmes in Masaiti District, Zambia. Guided by the objectives of assessing household welfare outcomes, evaluating perceptions of CWAC effectiveness, analysing institutional support, and identifying implementation challenges, the research employed a mixed methods design. Data were collected from 120 households through structured surveys, 17 CWAC members via focus group discussions, and 11 key informants from government and non governmental institutions. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative data were thematically coded and triangulated to enhance validity.
The findings revealed that while social protection interventions such as the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) have improved access to education and health services, households continue to face persistent vulnerabilities, including reliance on subsistence farming, chronic food insecurity, and barriers to effective service utilization. Perceptions of CWAC effectiveness were mixed: households valued their role but expressed concerns about fairness, timeliness, and transparency; CWAC members emphasized their commitment but acknowledged resource and training gaps; and institutions affirmed their centrality while stressing the need for stronger accountability and capacity building. Institutional support from government and NGOs was found to be irregular, fragmented, and poorly coordinated, reflecting a gap between policy commitments and practice. Cross cutting challenges included inadequate resources, bureaucratic delays, weak institutional linkages, and community mistrust.
The study concludes that CWACs are indispensable grassroots actors in Zambia’s social protection system, but their effectiveness is constrained by systemic underinvestment and governance gaps. It recommends increased resource allocation, regular training, stronger accountability mechanisms, and improved coordination between government, NGOs, and community structures. By centring the perspectives of households, CWAC members, and institutions, the study contributes to both academic debates and policy discussions on community based social protection. It underscores the need to balance community ownership with institutional support to ensure that social protection programmes are inclusive, transparent, and sustainable.
Contents Outline
Chapter 1: Introduction
- 1.1 Background of the Study
- 1.2 Statement of the Problem
- 1.3 Research Objectives
- 1.4 Research Questions/Hypotheses
- 1.5 Significance of the Study
- 1.6 Scope and Limitations
- 1.7 Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter 2: Literature Review
- 2.1 Theoretical Framework
- 2.2 Review of Global Literature
- 2.3 Review of Regional (African) Literature
- 2.4 Review of Zambian Literature
- 2.5 Conceptual Framework
- 2.6 Identified Knowledge Gaps
Chapter 3: Methodology
- 3.1 Research Design
- 3.2 Study Area (Masaiti District context)
- 3.3 Target Population and Sampling Techniques
- 3.4 Data Collection Methods (surveys, interviews, FGDs)
- 3.5 Data Analysis Techniques (quantitative + qualitative)
- 3.6 Ethical Considerations
- 3.7 Limitations of the Methodology
Chapter 4: Contextual Background
- 4.1 Overview of Zambia’s Social Protection Policies
- 4.2 Role of the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services
- 4.3 Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs)
- 4.4 Socio-economic Profile of Masaiti District
- 4.5 Challenges in Community Development
Chapter 5: Data Presentation & Analysis (Quantitative)
- 5.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
- 5.2 Household Socio-economic Status
- 5.3 Access to Social Services
- 5.4 Statistical Analysis of Survey Data
- 5.5 Key Quantitative Findings
Chapter 6: Data Presentation & Analysis (Qualitative)
- 6.1 Themes from Interviews
- 6.2 Themes from Focus Group Discussions
- 6.3 Case Studies / Narratives
- 6.4 Triangulation with Quantitative Findings
- 6.5 Emerging Patterns
Chapter 7: Discussion
- 7.1 Linking Findings to Literature
- 7.2 Theoretical Implications
- 7.3 Practical Implications for Community Development
- 7.4 Unexpected Findings
- 7.5 Contribution to Knowledge
Chapter 8: Policy Implications & Recommendations
- 8.1 Policy Gaps Identified
- 8.2 Recommendations for Government
- 8.3 Recommendations for CWACs and Local Communities
- 8.4 Recommendations for NGOs and Development Partners
- 8.5 Long-term Sustainability Strategies
Chapter 9: Conclusion
- 9.1 Summary of Key Findings
- 9.2 Contributions to Theory and Practice
- 9.3 Limitations of the Study
- 9.4 Suggestions for Future Research
References
Appendices
List of Abbreviations
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Abstract
This study examined the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in the implementation of social protection programmes in Masaiti District, Zambia. Guided by the objectives of assessing household welfare outcomes, evaluating perceptions of CWAC effectiveness, analysing institutional support, and identifying implementation challenges, the research employed a mixed-methods design. Data were collected from 120 households through structured surveys, 17 CWAC members via focus group discussions, and 11 key informants from government and non-governmental institutions. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative data were thematically coded and triangulated to enhance validity.
The findings revealed that while social protection interventions such as the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) have improved access to education and health services, households continue to face persistent vulnerabilities, including reliance on subsistence farming, chronic food insecurity, and barriers to effective service utilization. Perceptions of CWAC effectiveness were mixed: households valued their role but expressed concerns about fairness, timeliness, and transparency; CWAC members emphasized their commitment but acknowledged resource and training gaps; and institutions affirmed their centrality while stressing the need for stronger accountability and capacity-building. Institutional support from government and NGOs was found to be irregular, fragmented, and poorly coordinated, reflecting a gap between policy commitments and practice. Cross-cutting challenges included inadequate resources, bureaucratic delays, weak institutional linkages, and community mistrust.
The study concludes that CWACs are indispensable grassroots actors in Zambia’s social protection system, but their effectiveness is constrained by systemic underinvestment and governance gaps. It recommends increased resource allocation, regular training, stronger accountability mechanisms, and improved coordination between government, NGOs, and community structures. By centring the perspectives of households, CWAC members, and institutions, the study contributes to both academic debates and policy discussions on community-based social protection. It underscores the need to balance community ownership with institutional support to ensure that social protection programmes are inclusive, transparent, and sustainable.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
Community development has long been recognized as a cornerstone of sustainable social and economic progress, particularly in developing countries. Across sub-Saharan Africa, governments and development partners have invested in community-based initiatives to address poverty, inequality, and social exclusion. These initiatives often emphasize grassroots participation, recognizing that communities themselves are best placed to identify their needs and mobilize local resources.
In Zambia, community development has been institutionalized through various policies and programs aimed at improving the welfare of vulnerable households. The Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS) plays a central role in coordinating these efforts, with a mandate to design and implement social protection interventions that target the poorest and most marginalized populations. Among these interventions, the Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) have emerged as critical structures for identifying vulnerable households, facilitating access to social services, and ensuring that government support reaches intended beneficiaries.
Masaiti District, located in Zambia’s Copperbelt Province, presents a unique case for examining the role of CWACs in community development. The district is characterized by a mix of rural and peri-urban communities, with livelihoods largely dependent on subsistence farming, small-scale trading, and informal employment. Despite its proximity to industrial hubs, Masaiti continues to face challenges such as high poverty levels, limited access to quality education and healthcare, and inadequate infrastructure. These conditions make the district a relevant setting for exploring how community-based structures contribute to social protection and poverty reduction.
Globally, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of community-driven development (CDD) approaches, which emphasize local ownership, participatory decision-making, and accountability. International organizations such as the World Bank and UNDP have supported CDD programs as a means of empowering communities and enhancing the effectiveness of development interventions. Zambia’s adoption of CWACs reflects this global trend, positioning them as a bridge between government institutions and local populations.
However, while CWACs are widely acknowledged as vital actors in Zambia’s social protection framework, questions remain about their effectiveness, sustainability, and capacity to address the complex needs of vulnerable households. Issues such as limited resources, inadequate training, and weak institutional support often constrain their operations. Moreover, the voices of community members particularly those of the households directly affected are not always adequately captured in policy discussions.
This study situates itself within this context, seeking to examine the role of CWACs in Masaiti District as agents of community development and social protection. By analysing both quantitative and qualitative data, the research aims to provide a nuanced understanding of how these committees function, the challenges they face, and the extent to which they contribute to improving household welfare.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Despite Zambia’s commitment to poverty reduction and social protection, a significant proportion of households particularly in rural districts such as Masaiti continue to experience chronic poverty, food insecurity, and limited access to essential services. National policies, including the Social Cash Transfer Programme and the broader social protection framework, have been designed to address these challenges. However, the effectiveness of these interventions often depends on the capacity of local structures to identify vulnerable households, mobilize resources, and ensure equitable distribution of benefits.
Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) were established to serve as grassroots mechanisms for linking vulnerable households with government and donor-supported interventions. In principle, CWACs are expected to function as the “eyes and ears” of the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), ensuring that social protection measures are responsive to local realities. Yet, in practice, their performance has been uneven. Reports from both government and independent evaluations suggest that CWACs face persistent challenges, including inadequate training, limited financial and logistical support, and weak monitoring systems. These constraints raise questions about their ability to fulfil their mandate effectively.
In Masaiti District, the situation is particularly pressing. Although the district benefits from its proximity to the Copperbelt’s industrial economy, many households remain trapped in cycles of poverty due to limited employment opportunities, poor infrastructure, and vulnerability to economic shocks. CWACs are tasked with addressing these issues by identifying the most vulnerable households and facilitating their access to social services. However, anecdotal evidence indicates that some households are excluded from assistance due to weak targeting mechanisms, while others question the transparency and accountability of CWAC operations.
Moreover, the voices of beneficiaries themselves are often underrepresented in assessments of program effectiveness.
The persistence of poverty and vulnerability in Masaiti District, despite the presence of CWACs and other social protection measures, highlights a critical research gap. There is limited empirical evidence on how CWACs actually function at the community level, the extent to which they contribute to improving household welfare, and the challenges they encounter in fulfilling their mandate. Without such evidence, policymakers risk designing interventions that are misaligned with local realities, thereby undermining the effectiveness of Zambia’s broader social protection strategy.
This study therefore seeks to address this gap by systematically examining the role of CWACs in Masaiti District. By combining quantitative and qualitative approaches, the research will provide insights into how CWACs operate, the outcomes they generate for vulnerable households, and the structural and institutional barriers that limit their effectiveness. In doing so, the study aims to contribute to both academic knowledge and practical policy debates on community-based approaches to social protection in Zambia.
1.3 Research Objectives
The overall objective of this study is to examine the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in promoting community development and social protection in Masaiti District, Zambia.
Specific Objectives
1. To analyse the organizational structure and operational mechanisms of CWACs in Masaiti District.
2. To assess the effectiveness of CWACs in identifying and supporting vulnerable households.
3. To evaluate the challenges and constraints faced by CWACs in fulfilling their mandate.
4. To explore the perceptions and experiences of beneficiary households regarding CWAC interventions.
5. To examine the extent to which CWAC activities contribute to broader community development outcomes.
6. To propose policy and practical recommendations for strengthening CWACs and enhancing their impact on social protection in Zambia.
1.4 Research Questions and Hypotheses
Building on the stated objectives, this study is guided by the following research questions:
Research Questions
1. How are Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in Masaiti District organized, and what mechanisms do they use to identify and support vulnerable households?
2. To what extent are CWACs effective in facilitating access to social protection services for targeted households?
3. What challenges and constraints do CWACs face in fulfilling their mandate at the community level?
4. How do beneficiary households perceive the role and effectiveness of CWACs in improving their welfare?
5. In what ways do CWAC activities contribute to broader community development outcomes in Masaiti District?
6. What policy and practical measures can strengthen the capacity and sustainability of CWACs in Zambia?
Hypotheses (for quantitative components)
H1: CWACs significantly improve access to social protection services among vulnerable households in Masaiti District.
H2: Households supported by CWACs demonstrate better socio-economic outcomes compared to those not supported.
H3: The effectiveness of CWACs is constrained by limited resources, inadequate training, and weak institutional support.
H4: Beneficiary perceptions of CWACs are positively correlated with the level of transparency and accountability in their operations.
1.5 Significance of the Study
This study is significant for several reasons, both academically and practically.
1. Contribution to Knowledge
- The research will add to the limited body of empirical literature on community-based social protection mechanisms in Zambia.
- By focusing on CWACs in Masaiti District, the study provides a localized perspective that complements broader national and regional analyses.
- The findings will enrich theoretical debates on community-driven development and participatory governance in sub-Saharan Africa.
2. Policy Relevance
- The study will generate evidence that can inform the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS) in strengthening the design and implementation of social protection programs.
- Insights into the challenges faced by CWACs will help policymakers identify areas where capacity-building, resource allocation, and institutional support are most needed.
- Recommendations from the study can contribute to Zambia’s broader development agenda, including Vision 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
3. Practical Implications for Communities
- The research will amplify the voices of beneficiary households, ensuring that their experiences and perspectives are considered in program design and evaluation.
- Findings will highlight best practices and lessons that can be shared across districts to improve the effectiveness of CWACs nationwide.
- By identifying gaps in service delivery, the study can help communities advocate for more responsive and accountable local governance structures.
4. Capacity Building for CWACs
- The study will provide actionable recommendations for strengthening CWACs’ operational capacity, including training, resource mobilization, and monitoring mechanisms.
- Enhanced CWAC performance has the potential to improve household welfare outcomes, reduce poverty, and promote inclusive community development.
1.6 Scope and Limitations
Scope of the Study This study focuses on the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in promoting community development and social protection in Masaiti District, Zambia. The research is limited to selected communities within the district where CWACs are actively engaged in identifying and supporting vulnerable households. The study examines both the organizational structures of CWACs and their practical contributions to household welfare and community development. Data collection methods include household surveys, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions with beneficiaries and CWAC members. The study period covers activities and experiences within the last five years, providing a contemporary perspective on CWAC operations.
Limitations of the Study
While the study seeks to provide a comprehensive analysis, certain limitations are acknowledged:
- Geographical limitation: Findings are based on Masaiti District and may not fully represent the experiences of CWACs in other districts of Zambia.
- Resource constraints: Time and financial limitations restricted the sample size and scope of fieldwork, which may affect the generalizability of results.
- Data reliability: The study relies on self-reported data from households and CWAC members, which may be subject to recall bias or social desirability bias.
- Institutional access: Limited access to some government records and reports may have constrained the depth of secondary data analysis.
- Dynamic context: Social protection policies and community development programs are evolving; therefore, findings reflect conditions at the time of the study and may change with new policy directions.
By clearly defining its scope and acknowledging its limitations, the study ensures transparency and provides a realistic basis for interpreting its findings and recommendations.
1.7 Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation is structured into nine chapters, each building upon the previous to provide a comprehensive analysis of the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in community development and social protection in Masaiti District, Zambia.
- Chapter One: Introduction - Presents the background of the study, statement of the problem, research objectives, research questions and hypotheses, significance, scope and limitations, and the overall organization of the dissertation.
- Chapter Two: Literature Review - Examines theoretical frameworks and existing literature on community development, social protection, and the role of community-based structures, while identifying knowledge gaps that this study seeks to address.
- Chapter Three: Methodology - Describes the research design, study area, sampling techniques, data collection methods, data analysis procedures, and ethical considerations.
- Chapter Four: Contextual Background - Provides an overview of Zambia’s social protection policies, the role of the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services, the structure and functions of CWACs, and the socio-economic profile of Masaiti District.
- Chapter Five: Data Presentation and Analysis (Quantitative) - Presents and analyses quantitative findings from household surveys, focusing on demographic characteristics, socio-economic status, and access to social services.
- Chapter Six: Data Presentation and Analysis (Qualitative) - Presents and analyses qualitative findings from interviews, focus group discussions, and case studies, highlighting community perspectives and lived experiences.
- Chapter Seven: Discussion - Interprets the findings in relation to existing literature and theoretical frameworks, highlighting contributions to knowledge and practice.
- Chapter Eight: Policy Implications and Recommendations - Outlines practical and policy recommendations for strengthening CWACs and enhancing their role in social protection and community development.
- Chapter Nine: Conclusion - Summarizes the key findings, highlights the study’s contributions, acknowledges limitations, and suggests areas for future research.
This organization ensures a logical flow from the identification of the research problem to the presentation of findings, discussion, and recommendations, thereby providing a coherent and comprehensive narrative.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Framework
The study is grounded in several interrelated theoretical perspectives that illuminate the role of community-based structures in social protection and development. These frameworks provide the analytical lens through which the operations of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in Masaiti District are examined.
2.1.1 Participatory Development Theory
Participatory development emphasizes the active involvement of communities in identifying their needs, designing interventions, and managing resources. Scholars such as Robert Chambers and Paulo Freire argue that development is most effective when it is “people-cantered” and empowers marginalized groups to shape their own futures. CWACs embody this principle by serving as grassroots mechanisms through which communities articulate vulnerability and channel support to those in need.
2.1.2 Social Capital Theory
Social capital refers to the networks, norms, and trust that enable collective action within communities (Putnam, 1993; Bourdieu, 1986). CWACs rely heavily on social capital, as their legitimacy and effectiveness depend on trust between committee members and households. Strong social networks can enhance targeting accuracy and accountability, while weak or fragmented networks may lead to exclusion, favouritism, or elite capture.
2.1.3 Empowerment Theory
Empowerment theory highlights the processes through which individuals and communities gain control over decisions and resources that affect their lives. CWACs are designed to empower communities by decentralizing decision-making and giving local actors a voice in social protection. However, empowerment is not automatic; it depends on adequate training, resources, and institutional support. This study examines whether CWACs genuinely empower communities or whether structural constraints limit their agency.
2.1.4 Rights-Based Approach to Social Protection
The rights-based approach frames social protection not as charity but as a fundamental human right. It emphasizes accountability, transparency, and the obligation of the state to safeguard the welfare of its citizens. CWACs, as local agents of the state, are expected to operationalize this principle by ensuring that vulnerable households access their entitlements. The study evaluates the extent to which CWACs uphold these rights in practice.
Synthesis: Together, these theories provide a comprehensive framework for analysing CWACs. Participatory development and empowerment theories highlight the importance of community involvement, social capital theory explains the relational dynamics that shape committee effectiveness, and the rights-based approach situates CWACs within Zambia’s broader social protection obligations. This multi-theoretical lens allows for a nuanced understanding of both the potential and the limitations of CWACs in promoting community development.
2.2 Global Perspectives on Community-Based Social Protection
Community-based social protection (CBSP) has gained prominence worldwide as governments and development partners seek to design interventions that are both cost-effective and responsive to local needs. The underlying principle is that communities themselves are best positioned to identify vulnerable households, monitor program implementation, and ensure accountability. This section reviews global experiences with CBSP, highlighting both achievements and challenges.
2.2.1 Evolution of Community-Based Approaches
Globally, the shift toward community-driven development (CDD) emerged in the 1990s as a response to the limitations of top-down development models. International organizations such as the World Bank and UNDP promoted CDD as a means of empowering local populations, enhancing transparency, and improving service delivery. Programs in Asia, Latin America, and Africa demonstrated that when communities are actively involved in decision-making, interventions are more likely to be relevant and sustainable.
2.2.2 Case Studies from Asia and Latin America
- India’s Self-Help Groups (SHGs): These grassroots organizations have been instrumental in mobilizing women, improving access to microfinance, and enhancing household welfare.
- Brazil’s Bolsa Famflia Program: While primarily a conditional cash transfer, its success has been partly attributed to community-level monitoring structures that ensure accountability.
- Indonesia’s Kecamatan Development Program (KDP): A large-scale CDD initiative that empowered local communities to plan and implement development projects, demonstrating the potential of participatory approaches.
2.2.3 Key Lessons from Global Experiences
- Strengths:
- Improved targeting of vulnerable households.
- Enhanced community ownership and sustainability.
- Strengthened social cohesion and trust.
- Challenges:
- Risk of elite capture, where local leaders dominate decision-making.
- Limited technical capacity at community level.
- Dependence on external funding, raising sustainability concerns.
2.2.4 Relevance to Zambia
The global literature underscores the importance of balancing community participation with institutional support. While community structures can enhance legitimacy and accountability, they require adequate training, resources, and oversight to function effectively. These lessons are directly relevant to Zambia’s CWACs, which operate at the intersection of community participation and state-led social protection.
2.3 Regional (African) Literature
Across Africa, community-based social protection mechanisms have been widely adopted as governments and development partners seek to address persistent poverty, inequality, and vulnerability. These mechanisms often build on traditional solidarity networks, such as extended family systems, village committees, and faith-based organizations, while also aligning with modern policy frameworks. This section reviews key experiences from selected African countries, highlighting both successes and challenges that are relevant to Zambia’s Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs).
2.3.1 Community-Based Targeting in East Africa
In countries such as Kenya and Uganda, community committees have been central to identifying households eligible for cash transfer programs. Studies show that community involvement can improve the accuracy of targeting by leveraging local knowledge. However, challenges such as favouritism, elite capture, and political interference have also been documented, raising concerns about fairness and transparency.
2.3.2 Southern African Experiences
- Malawi’s Social Cash Transfer Programme relies heavily on community structures to identify ultra-poor households. Evaluations indicate positive impacts on food security, school attendance, and health outcomes, but also highlight issues of limited capacity and resource constraints at the community level.
- South Africa’s Community Development Workers (CDWs) represent a more formalized approach, where trained community workers act as intermediaries between government and citizens. While this model has improved service delivery in some areas, it has also faced criticism for bureaucratic inefficiencies and limited community ownership.
2.3.3 West African Perspectives
In Ghana and Nigeria, community-based targeting has been used in programs such as the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) initiative. Evidence suggests that community participation enhances legitimacy and acceptance of programs, but sustainability remains a challenge due to dependence on donor funding and weak institutional frameworks.
2.3.4 Cross-Cutting Themes
Several themes emerge from the African literature:
- Strengths: Community-based mechanisms enhance local ownership, improve targeting accuracy, and strengthen social cohesion.
- Weaknesses: Risks of bias, elite capture, and limited technical capacity undermine effectiveness.
- Opportunities: With adequate training, resources, and oversight, community structures can play a vital role in scaling up social protection.
- Threats: Political interference, donor dependency, and weak monitoring systems threaten sustainability.
2.3.5 Relevance to Zambia
The African experience demonstrates that community-based mechanisms are neither inherently effective nor ineffective; their success depends on context, capacity, and institutional support. For Zambia, these lessons underscore the importance of strengthening CWACs through training, resources, and accountability mechanisms, while also safeguarding against risks of exclusion and favouritism.
2.4 Zambian Literature
Zambia has made significant strides in institutionalizing social protection as part of its national development agenda. Over the past two decades, the government, in collaboration with development partners, has implemented a range of programs aimed at reducing poverty and vulnerability. Central to these efforts has been the establishment of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs), which serve as the primary grassroots structures for identifying and supporting vulnerable households.
2.4.1 Evolution of Social Protection in Zambia
The introduction of the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme in the early 2000s marked a turning point in Zambia’s approach to poverty reduction. Initially piloted in Kalomo District, the SCT has since expanded nationwide, targeting households that are critically poor and labor-constrained. CWACs have played a central role in identifying eligible households, demonstrating the government’s reliance on community-based mechanisms for program delivery.
Policy frameworks such as Vision 2030, the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), and the National Social Protection Policy emphasize social protection as a key pillar of inclusive development. These documents highlight the importance of community participation, accountability, and sustainability principles that underpin the work of CWACs.
2.4.2 Role of CWACs in Zambia
CWACs are composed of elected community members who volunteer to identify vulnerable households, facilitate access to services, and monitor program implementation. They act as intermediaries between communities and the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS). Studies have shown that CWACs enhance local ownership of social protection programs and improve the legitimacy of targeting processes.
However, research also points to significant challenges. CWACs often operate with limited resources, inadequate training, and minimal logistical support. These constraints affect their ability to carry out their mandate effectively. In some cases, issues of favouritism, exclusion errors, and lack of transparency have been reported, raising concerns about accountability.
2.4.3 Empirical Studies on CWACs
Several evaluations of Zambia’s SCT Programme have highlighted both the strengths and weaknesses of CWACs. For example:
- Positive impacts: Improved school attendance, enhanced food security, and reduced vulnerability among beneficiary households.
- Challenges: Inconsistent monitoring, weak record-keeping, and limited integration with other community development initiatives.
While these studies provide valuable insights, most focus on program outcomes at the national level. There is limited empirical research that examines CWAC operations in specific districts, particularly in rural areas such as Masaiti. This gap underscores the need for localized studies that capture the lived experiences of both CWAC members and beneficiary households.
2.4.4 Knowledge Gaps in the Zambian Context
Despite the central role of CWACs in Zambia’s social protection framework, several gaps remain in the literature:
- Limited district-level studies that explore how CWACs function in practice.
- Insufficient attention to the perspectives of beneficiaries regarding CWAC effectiveness.
- Lack of integration between quantitative and qualitative evidence in assessing CWAC performance.
- Minimal exploration of how CWACs contribute to broader community development beyond social protection.
This study seeks to address these gaps by focusing on Masaiti District, providing a localized and nuanced understanding of CWAC operations and their impact on household welfare and community development.
2.5 Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework for this study is informed by the theories of participatory development, social capital, empowerment, and rights-based approaches to social protection, as discussed in Section 2.2. It illustrates how Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) are expected to influence household welfare and broader community development outcomes in Masaiti District.
2.5.1 Key Concepts
- Community Development: A process through which local people collectively identify needs, mobilize resources, and implement solutions to improve their quality of life.
- Social Protection: Policies and programs designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by promoting efficient labour markets, diminishing people’s exposure to risks, and enhancing their capacity to manage economic and social risks.
- Vulnerability: The susceptibility of households to poverty, shocks, and exclusion from essential services.
- Empowerment: The process of increasing the capacity of individuals and communities to make choices and transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes.
2.5.2 Framework Assumptions
1. CWACs, as grassroots structures, enhance participation by involving communities in identifying vulnerable households.
2. Through social capital, CWACs leverage trust and networks to improve targeting and accountability.
3. By facilitating access to social protection programs, CWACs contribute to empowerment of vulnerable households.
4. Effective CWAC operations lead to improved household welfare outcomes (e.g., food security, school attendance, health access).
5. At the community level, CWACs contribute to broader development outcomes, including social cohesion, reduced inequality, and enhanced resilience.
2.5.3 Conceptual Model (Narrative Form)
At the centre of the framework are CWAC activities (identification of vulnerable households, facilitation of access to services, monitoring of interventions). These activities are influenced by inputs such as training, resources, and institutional support. The effectiveness of CWACs is mediated by social capital (trust, networks, community legitimacy) and constrained by challenges such as limited resources, favouritism, and weak oversight.
The outputs of CWAC activities include improved targeting of vulnerable households and enhanced access to social protection services. These outputs, in turn, contribute to outcomes at two levels:
- Household level: Improved welfare indicators such as food security, education, and health.
- Community level: Strengthened social cohesion, empowerment, and sustainable development.
2.6 Knowledge Gaps
The review of global, regional, and Zambian literature reveals several important gaps that this study seeks to address.
2.6.1 Limited District-Level Analysis
Most existing studies on Zambia’s social protection programs focus on national-level outcomes or pilot districts such as Kalomo. There is limited empirical research on how Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) function in specific districts, particularly in rural and peri-urban contexts like Masaiti. This gap restricts understanding of how local socio-economic conditions shape CWAC operations.
2.6.2 Insufficient Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Evidence
While some evaluations provide quantitative data on program outcomes (e.g., school attendance, food security), they often lack qualitative insights into community perceptions, lived experiences, and the social dynamics that influence CWAC effectiveness. Conversely, qualitative studies rarely integrate robust quantitative measures. A mixed-methods approach is therefore needed to capture a more holistic picture.
2.6.3 Underrepresentation of Beneficiary Perspectives
Much of the literature emphasizes institutional and policy perspectives, with limited attention to the voices of beneficiary households. Understanding how vulnerable households perceive CWACs, and whether they feel genuinely empowered by these structures, remains an underexplored area.
2.6.4 Weak Linkages Between CWACs and Broader Community Development
Existing studies tend to focus narrowly on CWACs’ role in social protection (e.g., cash transfers, welfare assistance). There is little exploration of how CWAC activities contribute to broader community development outcomes such as social cohesion, empowerment, and resilience.
2.6.5 Sustainability and Capacity Challenges
Although challenges such as limited resources, inadequate training, and weak institutional support are frequently mentioned, there is insufficient analysis of how these constraints affect the long-term sustainability of CWACs. More research is needed to identify strategies for strengthening their capacity and ensuring their continued relevance.
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Research Design
This study adopts a mixed-methods research design, which integrates both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The rationale for this choice lies in the complexity of the research problem: understanding the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in Masaiti District requires not only measurable indicators of household welfare but also an exploration of community perceptions, experiences, and institutional dynamics.
3.1.1 Quantitative Component
The quantitative strand focuses on collecting numerical data from beneficiary households through structured surveys. This component provides measurable evidence on socio-economic indicators such as income levels, food security, school attendance, and access to health services. Statistical analysis of these data allows for the identification of patterns, correlations, and differences between households supported by CWACs and those not supported.
3.1.2 Qualitative Component
The qualitative strand employs key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and case studies. These methods capture the lived experiences of CWAC members, beneficiary households, and other stakeholders. Qualitative data provide insights into perceptions of CWAC effectiveness, challenges faced in implementation, and the social dynamics that influence community participation.
3.1.3 Justification for Mixed-Methods
A mixed-methods design is particularly suitable for this study for several reasons:
- Complementarity: Quantitative data reveal the scale and scope of CWAC impacts, while qualitative data explain the underlying processes and perceptions.
- Triangulation: Using multiple methods enhances the validity and reliability of findings by cross-checking evidence from different sources.
- Depth and Breadth: The combination allows the study to capture both the breadth of household welfare outcomes and the depth of community experiences.
- Policy Relevance: Mixed-methods findings provide a more comprehensive evidence base for policymakers, balancing statistical rigor with community voices.
3.1.4 Research Paradigm
The study is guided by a pragmatic paradigm, which emphasizes the use of methods that best address the research problem rather than adhering strictly to a single philosophical tradition. Pragmatism allows for methodological flexibility, enabling the integration of quantitative and qualitative approaches to generate actionable knowledge.
3.2 Study Area
This study was conducted in Masaiti District, one of the rural districts of Zambia’s Copperbelt Province. According to the 2022 Census of Population and Housing (ZamStats), Masaiti has a population of approximately 127,000 people, the majority of whom live in scattered rural settlements. The district covers an estimated 5,500 square kilometers, bordered by Ndola and Luanshya to the north, Mpongwe to the west, and Kapiri Mposhi to the south. Its geographic spread, coupled with poor road infrastructure, poses significant challenges for service delivery and access to essential services.
3.2.1 Demographic Profile
Masaiti’s population is predominantly youthful, with children and young people under the age of 18 constituting a large proportion of residents. The district also has a high dependency ratio, reflecting the economic pressures faced by households. Poverty levels are severe: the 2022 Poverty Assessment indicates that more than 60% of households in rural Copperbelt districts, including Masaiti, live below the national poverty line. This entrenched poverty shapes the demand for social protection interventions.
3.2.2 Socio-Economic Context
Agriculture is the backbone of the local economy, with households cultivating maize, cassava, and groundnuts as staple crops. However, productivity is constrained by limited access to inputs, markets, and extension services. Seasonal food insecurity is common, particularly during the lean months before harvest. Many households rely on the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme and other welfare initiatives to meet basic needs, underscoring the importance of community-based social protection mechanisms.
3.2.3 Education Indicators
Education outcomes in Masaiti reflect both progress and persistent challenges. While primary school enrolment has improved, literacy rates in rural areas remain significantly lower than in urban centres averaging 55-60% compared to over 80% in towns. Dropout rates are particularly high among girls at upper primary and secondary levels, driven by poverty, early marriages, and long distances to schools. Limited access to secondary education perpetuates cycles of vulnerability and restricts opportunities for youth empowerment.
3.2.4 Health Indicators
Health indicators highlight the vulnerabilities faced by rural households. The 2024 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey (ZDHS) reports that many families in Masaiti live more than 5 km from the nearest health facility, limiting access to essential services. The district continues to struggle with high prevalence of malaria, diarrheal diseases, and child malnutrition. Maternal health outcomes are below national averages, and inadequate access to clean water and sanitation exacerbates health risks.
3.2.5 Institutional and Policy Context
Masaiti District falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), which oversees the implementation of social protection programs. At the grassroots level, Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) are responsible for identifying vulnerable households, facilitating access to services, and monitoring program implementation.
The relevance of Masaiti District to this study is further underscored by Zambia’s broader development agenda. Vision 2030 aspires to transform Zambia into a prosperous middle-income country by 2030, with social protection and human development as central pillars. The Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP) reinforced this vision by emphasizing decentralization, community participation, and inclusive growth, principles that are operationalized through CWACs at the grassroots level. More recently, the 2025 National Social Protection Policy (NSPP) has adopted a lifecycle approach to vulnerability, recognizing that individuals face different risks at different stages of life. This policy highlights the importance of community-based structures such as CWACs in ensuring that no one is left behind.
In this context, Masaiti District provides a compelling case for examining how CWACs contribute to both household welfare and the realization of Zambia’s national development goals
3.3 Target Population and Sampling
The study targeted three main groups: Community Welfare Assistance Committee (CWAC) members, beneficiary households, and key informants. Together, these groups provide a balanced perspective on both the grassroots implementation and institutional oversight of social protection in Masaiti District.
3.3.1 Beneficiary Households
The household survey focused on 120 beneficiary households enrolled in the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme and other welfare initiatives. To ensure representativeness, households were proportionally distributed across wards according to population size and accessibility. Larger wards such as Masaiti Central and Mibenge contributed more households, while smaller or more remote wards such as Lufwanyama Border contributed fewer.
3.3.2 CWAC Members
In addition to households, the study purposively sampled 17-20 CWAC members across five wards. CWACs were selected because of their direct involvement in identifying vulnerable households and facilitating access to social protection.
3.3.3 Key Informants
Finally, 10-12 key informants were purposively selected from institutions directly involved in social protection and community development. These included officials from the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), the District Education Board, the District Health Office, Masaiti Town Council, and relevant NGOs. This ensured that institutional perspectives complemented the grassroots insights provided by households and CWAC members.
3.3.4 Justification of Sampling Strategy
The multi-layered sampling strategy was designed to balance breadth and depth. Stratified random sampling of households captured demographic and geographic diversity, while purposive sampling of CWAC members and key informants ensured that participants had the necessary knowledge and experience. The integration of tables and figures strengthens transparency, making the sampling process both systematic and replicable.
3.3.6 Sampling Distribution by Ward
To ensure representativeness across Masaiti District, the household sample was proportionally distributed across selected wards. The distribution was based on population size and accessibility, while also ensuring coverage of both central and peripheral areas.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Note: Population figures are approximations based on the 2022 Census and district projections (ZamStats, 2022).
Narrative Integration
“As shown in Table 3.1, the household sample was proportionally distributed across seven wards in Masaiti District. Larger wards such as Masaiti Central and Mibenge contributed more households to the sample, while smaller or more remote wards such as Lufwanyama Border were allocated fewer households. This proportional approach ensures that the sample reflects the demographic and socio-economic diversity of the district, while remaining feasible within the study’s resource constraints.”
3.3.7 Sampling of CWAC Members and Key Informants
To capture both grassroots and institutional perspectives, the study also sampled CWAC members across wards and key informants from relevant institutions. CWACs were purposively selected to ensure representation from wards with varying socio-economic
conditions, while key informants were drawn from institutions directly involved in social protection and community development.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Narrative Integration
“As shown in Table 3.2, the study purposively sampled approximately 17-20 CWAC members across five wards, ensuring representation from both central and peripheral areas. In addition, 10-12 key informants were selected from institutions directly involved in social protection and community development, including the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), the District Education Board, the District Health Office, Masaiti Town Council, and relevant NGOs. This multi-layered sampling strategy ensures that both grassroots and institutional perspectives are adequately captured.”
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
3.4 Data Collection Methods
This study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative techniques to capture both the breadth and depth of Community Welfare Assistance Committees’ (CWACs) contributions to social protection in Masaiti District. Data were collected through household surveys, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and document review. This triangulation of methods enhanced the validity and reliability of the findings by allowing cross-verification of information from multiple sources.
3.4.1 Household Survey
A structured questionnaire was administered to 120 beneficiary households sampled across seven wards of Masaiti District. The questionnaire included both closed and open-ended questions designed to capture demographic characteristics, sources of livelihood, food security, access to education and health services, and perceptions of CWAC effectiveness. Surveys were conducted through face-to-face interviews in the local languages (primarily Bemba and Lamba) or English where appropriate. This method generated quantitative data that allowed for statistical analysis and comparability across households.
3.4.2 Key Informant Interviews
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10-12 key informants drawn from institutions directly involved in social protection and community development. These included officials from the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), the District Education Board, the District Health Office, Masaiti Town Council, and selected non-governmental organizations. The interviews explored institutional perspectives on CWAC operations, policy implementation, challenges, and opportunities. This method provided in-depth insights into the policy-practice interface and the institutional support structures underpinning CWAC activities.
3.4.3 Focus Group Discussions
Focus group discussions (FGDs) were held with CWAC members across selected wards. Each group comprised 6-8 participants, ensuring diversity in gender, age, and experience. A discussion guide with thematic prompts was used to facilitate dialogue on the processes of identifying vulnerable households, challenges encountered in implementation, community perceptions of CWACs, and coordination with government structures. FGDs encouraged collective reflection and captured group dynamics, complementing the individual perspectives obtained through surveys and interviews.
3.4.4 Document Review
Secondary data were obtained through a review of relevant policy documents and reports. These included Zambia’s Vision 2030, the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), the 2025 National Social Protection Policy (NSPP), district development plans, and CWAC registers maintained by the MCDSS. The document review provided contextual background, enabled triangulation of primary data, and ensured that the study was situated within Zambia’s broader development agenda.
3.4.5 Ethical Considerations
Ethical principles guided all stages of data collection. Informed consent was obtained from all participants after explaining the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of participation, and the right to withdraw at any time. Confidentiality was maintained by anonymizing responses and securely storing data. Cultural sensitivity was observed by respecting local customs, norms, and languages during fieldwork. These measures ensured that the study adhered to both academic and ethical standards.
3.5 Data analysis methods
This study used complementary quantitative and qualitative analysis to generate robust, triangulated findings on CWAC operations and social protection outcomes in Masaiti District. Analyses were conducted sequentially and then integrated to address the research questions comprehensively.
3.5.1 Quantitative analysis of household survey
- Data preparation:
- Cleaning: Checked for outliers, inconsistent responses, and range violations; corrected or flagged entries.
- Missing data: Applied listwise deletion for non-critical items and simple imputation (median/most frequent) for low-missing, high-importance variables, with sensitivity checks.
- Coding: Standardized categorical variables (e.g., household type, ward) and constructed indices (e.g., service access, food security) with internal consistency checks.
- Descriptive statistics:
- Frequencies and proportions for categorical variables (e.g., SCT awareness, school enrolment).
- Measures of central tendency and dispersion (mean, median, SD, IQR) for continuous variables (e.g., distance to services, income bands).
- Comparative analysis:
- Cross-tabulations and chi-square tests for associations between categorical variables (e.g., ward by service access).
- t-tests/ANOVA (or non-parametric equivalents) to compare means across groups (e.g., SCT duration by household type).
- Effect sizes (Cramer’s V, Cohen’s d) reported alongside significance.
- Multivariable analysis (if warranted):
- Logistic regression for binary outcomes (e.g., school attendance), controlling forward, household composition, and SCT status.
- Linear regression for continuous outcomes (e.g., service access index), with assumptions checked (normality, homoscedasticity, multicollinearity).
- Visualization:
- Ward-level comparisons via bar charts and pie charts; confidence intervals shown where informative.
3.5.2 Qualitative analysis of KIIs and FGDs
- Transcription and preparation: Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim; notes were consolidated and anonymized.
- Coding approach:
- Deductive codes derived from research objectives (e.g., targeting processes, implementation challenges, coordination).
- Inductive codes emerged from the data (e.g., community trust, informal support networks).
- Codebook development included definitions, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and exemplar quotes.
- Thematic analysis:
- Iterative coding leading to themes and subthemes (e.g., operational capacity, accountability, equity in targeting).
- Pattern mapping across wards and stakeholder groups to identify convergences/divergences.
- Reliability:
- Inter-coder agreement checks on a subset of transcripts; discrepancies resolved through consensus and codebook refinement.
- Evidence presentation:
- Use of thick description and representative quotations to substantiate findings, while preserving confidentiality.
3.5.3 Integration and triangulation
- Convergence analysis: Compared quantitative patterns (e.g., service access indices) with qualitative themes (e.g., perceived barriers) to confirm or challenge interpretations.
- Complementarity: Used qualitative insights to explain quantitative associations and illuminate mechanisms behind observed differences across wards or household types.
- Resolution of discrepancies: Documented and analysed divergences (e.g., reported access vs. perceived quality), informing nuanced conclusions and recommendations.
3.5.4 Validity, reliability, and bias mitigation
- Internal validity: Clear variable definitions, appropriate statistical tests, and assumption checks; sensitivity analyses for missing data handling.
- Reliability: Consistent instrument administration; inter-coder agreement for qualitative data.
- Bias mitigation: Addressed selection bias via stratified sampling; minimized social desirability through neutral phrasing and confidentiality assurances; monitored researcher bias via reflexive memos during qualitative analysis.
3.5.5 Software and documentation
- Quantitative: Analysis performed using standard statistical software (e.g., spreadsheet or statistical package), with script-based logs for reproducibility.
- Qualitative: Coding conducted in a qualitative analysis tool or structured spreadsheets; maintained versioned codebooks and audit trails.
- Archiving: De-identified datasets, codebooks, syntax files, and visualization templates stored securely with clear metadata.
- Table showing Operationalization of Key Variables
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
3.6.1 Informed consent and participant rights
- Voluntary participation: All participants received a clear explanation of the study’s purpose, procedures, expected duration, risks, and benefits. Participation was strictly voluntary.
- Consent process: Written informed consent was obtained for interviews and surveys; where literacy constraints existed, consent was documented via witnessed verbal consent.
- Right to withdraw: Participants were reminded they could decline to answer any question or withdraw at any time without penalty or loss of benefits.
- Assent for minors: No minors were directly interviewed. If a minor’s situation was discussed (e.g., schooling, health), information was provided by the adult household head. Any future inclusion of minors would require parental/guardian consent and minor assent.
3.5.6 Confidentiality and data protection
- Anonymization: Personal identifiers were removed at the point of transcription and coding. Datasets were stored in de-identified form, using unique participant codes.
- Secure storage: Digital files (audio, transcripts, survey data) were stored on encrypted drives with restricted access; physical notes were kept in locked cabinets.
- Limited access: Only the research team had access to raw data. Aggregated findings are reported without identifying individuals, households, wards, or specific institutions beyond what is necessary for contextual analysis.
3.5.7 Safeguarding vulnerable participants
- Do-no-harm principle: Questionnaires and guides avoided intrusive or stigmatizing language. Sensitive topics (income, health status, benefits) were approached gradually and respectfully.
- Risk mitigation: Interviews were conducted in private or semi-private spaces to reduce social pressure and protect confidentiality. Participants could skip any question that felt uncomfortable.
- Referrals: If acute needs or protection concerns emerged, participants were (with consent) referred to appropriate local services (e.g., social welfare officers, health facilities).
3.5.8 Cultural and linguistic sensitivity
- Local languages: Data collection was conducted in Bemba, Lamba, or English as preferred by participants, with trained enumerators fluent in local languages.
- Respect for norms: Scheduling and venues respected community routines, religious observances, and local decision-making structures. Community leaders were engaged to support respectful conduct.
3.5.9 Enumerator training and integrity
- Training: Enumerators received training on research ethics, confidentiality, non-coercive interviewing, trauma-informed approaches, and accurate consent procedures.
- Supervision: Field supervisors conducted spot checks and daily debriefs to monitor adherence to ethical protocols and resolve emergent issues.
- Reflexivity: Researchers maintained reflexive memos to identify and mitigate potential biases that could affect data collection or interpretation.
3.5.10 Data retention and dissemination
- Retention period: De-identified data will be retained for the duration necessary to complete analysis and publication, then archived or destroyed in line with IRB guidance.
- Transparent reporting: Findings will be disseminated in aggregate form. Any quotes used will be paraphrased or anonymized to prevent deductive disclosure.
- Benefit sharing: Study summaries suitable for non-technical audiences will be shared with district stakeholders and CWAC representatives to support local learning and program improvement.
3.5.11 Compliance statement
All procedures complied with institutional ethical standards and applicable national regulations for social research. The study’s approvals, consent forms, and data protection protocols are available upon request and documented in the appendices.
Chapter 4: Contextual Background
4.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
Understanding the socio-demographic profile of respondents is essential for interpreting the findings of this study. The characteristics of household heads, CWAC members, and key informants provide important context for assessing welfare outcomes, perceptions of CWAC effectiveness, and institutional perspectives. This section presents the demographic distribution of respondents across the three groups.
4.1.1 Household Respondents
A total of 120 households were surveyed across seven wards of Masaiti District. The table below summarizes the demographic characteristics of household heads.
Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Household Heads (n = 120)
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Source: Field data
The bar chart illustrates the age distribution of household heads from field data collected.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
These visuals highlight that the majority of household heads were middle-aged (36-50 years) and that female-headed households constituted a significant proportion (43.3%), reflecting the vulnerability of widows and single women in the district.
4.1.2 CWAC Members
Seventeen CWAC members participated in the study. The table below presents their demographic profile.
The table below shows Socio-Demographic Characteristics of CWAC Members for 17 people who participated in the study.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Source: Field data
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
The data show that CWAC membership is slightly female-dominated, with most members aged between 41 and 55 years. Nearly two-thirds of CWAC members had served for more than three years, suggesting a relatively experienced volunteer base.
4.1.3 Key Informants
Key informants were drawn from government departments and NGOs. The table below summarizes their institutional affiliations.
The table below shows Institutional Affiliation of Key Informants for 11 people.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
This distribution ensured that perspectives were captured from both government and non-governmental stakeholders, providing a balanced institutional view of CWAC operations.
4.2 Household Welfare and Access to Services
This section presents the welfare conditions of the 120 surveyed households, focusing on livelihoods, food security, education, and health. These indicators provide insight into the socio-economic realities of beneficiaries and the extent to which social protection interventions are addressing their needs.
4.2.1 Livelihoods and Income Sources
The majority of households relied on subsistence farming as their primary source of livelihood, supplemented by casual labour and small-scale trading. Only a small proportion reported formal employment.
The table below shows the Main Sources of Household Income for 120 interviewed.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
4.2.2 Food Security
Households were asked about the number of meals consumed per day and coping strategies during food shortages.
- Meals per day: 46% of households reported consuming only two meals per day, while 18% reported one meal per day during lean periods.
- Coping strategies: Common strategies included reducing meal portions, borrowing food, or relying on neighbours and relatives.
This suggests that food insecurity remains a significant challenge despite social protection interventions.
4.2.3 Access to Education
Education access was assessed by school enrolment and distance to the nearest school.
School Enrolment of Children for 120 households who were interviewed
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
On average, households reported a distance of 3-5 km to the nearest primary school. While enrolment rates are relatively high, dropout cases were linked to inability to afford uniforms, long distances, and child labour demands.
4.2.4 Access to Health Services
Access to health facilities was measured by distance, frequency of visits, and reported barriers.
- Distance: 54% of households lived within 5 km of a health facility, while 21% reported distances greater than 10 km.
- Frequency of visits: 68% of households had visited a clinic in the past six months.
- Barriers: The most common barriers were drug stock-outs, long waiting times, and transport costs.
The pie chart shows the distribution of households by distance to the nearest health facility.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
4.3 Perceptions of CWAC Effectiveness
This section presents the perceptions of CWAC effectiveness as reported by households, CWAC members themselves, and institutional key informants. Effectiveness was assessed in terms of fairness in targeting, timeliness of support, transparency, and overall community trust. The findings combine quantitative ratings from household surveys with qualitative insights from focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs).
4.3.1 Household Perspectives
Households were asked to rate CWAC performance on a five-point Likert scale (1 = very poor, 5 = very good) and the results are shown on the table below.
Household Ratings of CWAC Effectiveness for 120 households interviewed.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
The stacked bar chart illustrates that while a majority of households rated CWACs as “fair” to “good,” a notable minority expressed dissatisfaction, particularly regarding timeliness of support. A household respondent explained: “Sometimes the help comes late, and by then the situation in the home has already worsened. But at least the CWAC members try their best with what they have.”
4.3.2 CWAC Members’ Perspectives
CWAC members acknowledged both their achievements and constraints. Many emphasized their commitment to fairness and community service, but highlighted challenges such as inadequate resources and lack of training. One CWAC member noted: “We know the people in our communities, and we try to be fair. But without enough support, sometimes people think we are biased when really it is just limited resources.” This suggests that while CWACs strive for impartiality, structural limitations affect how their work is perceived.
4.3.3 Institutional Perspectives
Key informants from government and NGOs generally viewed CWACs as essential grassroots structures for identifying vulnerable households. However, they also pointed to gaps in capacity and accountability mechanisms. An MCDSS official remarked: “CWACs are the backbone ofthe social protection system at community level. But they need more training in record-keeping and communication to strengthen trust.” NGO representatives echoed this, stressing the importance of continuous capacity-building and closer supervision.
4.4 Institutional Support and Collaboration
The effectiveness of CWACs in implementing social protection programmes is closely linked to the level of support and collaboration they receive from government institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This section presents findings from key informant interviews and focus group discussions on the nature, frequency, and quality of institutional support provided to CWACs in Masaiti District.
4.4.1 Government Support
CWACs reported receiving varying levels of support from government departments, particularly the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), the District Education Board, and the District Health Office.
- Training and capacity-building: MCDSS occasionally provided training workshops on targeting vulnerable households and record-keeping. However, these were described as irregular and insufficient to meet ongoing needs.
- Material support: CWACs received registers, forms, and in some cases bicycles to facilitate household visits. Yet, shortages of stationery and transport remained a persistent challenge.
- Supervision and monitoring: District officials conducted periodic visits to monitor CWAC activities, though limited staffing and resources constrained the frequency of such oversight. A district official explained: “CWACs are our eyes and ears in the community. We try to support them with training and supervision, but resource limitations mean we cannot reach them as often as we should.”
4.4.2 Local Government and Community Structures
Masaiti Town Council and Ward Development Committees (WDCs) played a role in coordinating community-level development activities. CWACs often collaborated with WDCs in mobilizing communities and identifying households in need. However, overlaps in roles sometimes created confusion. One CWAC member noted: “Sometimes the community expects us to do what the Ward Development Committee is supposed to handle. Without clear boundaries, people think we are failing when it is not our responsibility.”
4.4.3 NGO and Development Partner Support
NGOs and faith-based organizations provided complementary support, particularly in the areas of health, education, and livelihoods.
- Health NGOs supported CWACs in mobilizing households for immunization campaigns and HIV/AIDS awareness.
- Education NGOs assisted with school materials and bursaries for vulnerable children.
- Livelihood programmes from NGOs occasionally provided agricultural inputs or small grants to households identified by CWACs.
Despite these contributions, CWACs reported that NGO support was often project-based and short-term, raising concerns about sustainability.
4.4.4 Challenges in Collaboration
While collaboration was generally viewed as positive, several challenges were identified:
- Inconsistent support: Training and resources were irregular and insufficient.
- Role ambiguity: Overlaps between CWACs, WDCs, and other community structures sometimes led to duplication or conflict.
- Communication gaps: Limited feedback mechanisms between CWACs and higher-level institutions reduced accountability and trust.
4.5 Implementation Challenges
While CWACs play a pivotal role in the delivery of social protection programmes, the study revealed a range of challenges that constrain their effectiveness. These challenges were reported consistently across households, CWAC members, and institutional stakeholders, though the emphasis varied by perspective. The findings are presented thematically below.
4.5.1 Household Perspectives
Households acknowledged the efforts of CWACs but highlighted several difficulties that undermined the impact of social protection interventions:
- Delays in support: Many households reported that assistance often arrived late, particularly during periods of acute need.
- Exclusion errors: Some vulnerable households felt they were unfairly left out of beneficiary lists, leading to perceptions of bias.
- Limited coverage: Households noted that the number of beneficiaries per ward was too small relative to the scale of vulnerability. One respondent explained: “We see that CWACs are trying, but sometimes the help comes too late or not at all. Some families who are struggling are not included, and this causes tension in the community.”
4.5.2 CWAC Members’ Perspectives
CWAC members themselves identified structural and operational barriers that limited their ability to serve effectively:
- Resource constraints: Lack of transport, stationery, and allowances made it difficult to conduct household visits and maintain records.
- Training gaps: Members reported limited opportunities for refresher training, particularly in areas such as record-keeping, targeting criteria, and conflict resolution.
- Community expectations: CWACs often faced pressure from community members who expected immediate or continuous support, even when resources were unavailable. As one CWAC member noted: “People thinkwe are the ones holding back the support, but in reality, we are only volunteers. Without resources, our hands are tied.”
4.5.3 Institutional Perspectives
Key informants from government and NGOs emphasized systemic challenges that affected CWAC operations:
- Inadequate funding: Limited budget allocations constrained the ability of MCDSS and other departments to provide consistent support.
- Weak coordination: Overlaps between CWACs, Ward Development Committees, and other structures sometimes created duplication and confusion.
- Accountability gaps: While CWACs were recognized as essential, institutions noted the absence of strong monitoring and feedback mechanisms to ensure transparency. An NGO representative observed: “CWACs are critical, but they cannot succeed without stronger institutional backing. Right now, they are expected to do too much with too little.”
4.5.4 Cross-Cutting Challenges
Across all respondent groups, several common themes emerged:
- Resource scarcity (transport, training, allowances, materials).
- Delays and inefficiencies in the flow of support.
- Perceptions of bias and exclusion in beneficiary selection.
- Weak institutional linkages and limited supervision.
4.6 Triangulation of Findings
The study employed a mixed-methods approach, and this section integrates the quantitative survey results with qualitative insights from focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs). Triangulation was used to identify areas of convergence, divergence, and complementarity across data sources, thereby enhancing the validity and depth of the findings.
4.6.1 Convergence of Findings
Several themes emerged consistently across households, CWAC members, and institutional stakeholders:
- Resource constraints: Both households and CWAC members highlighted shortages of transport, stationery, and allowances. Institutions confirmed that limited funding restricted their ability to provide consistent support.
- Importance of CWACs: All respondent groups recognized CWACs as essential grassroots actors in identifying vulnerable households and linking them to social protection programmes.
- Challenges in timeliness: Households reported delays in receiving support, CWACs acknowledged their limited capacity, and institutions admitted that bureaucratic processes slowed delivery.
This convergence underscores that while CWACs are valued, their effectiveness is undermined by systemic resource and capacity limitations.
4.6.2 Divergence of Findings
Some areas revealed differences in perception between groups:
- Fairness in targeting: While most CWAC members and institutions believed targeting was fair, a notable proportion of households perceived exclusion and bias.
- Transparency: Institutions emphasized that CWACs followed established procedures, but households expressed concerns about lack of clarity in how beneficiaries were selected.
- Community expectations: CWAC members felt unfairly blamed for delays, whereas households often attributed responsibility directly to them.
These divergences highlight the gap between institutional intent and community perceptions, which can erode trust in social protection programmes.
4.6.3 Complementarity of Findings
The integration of quantitative and qualitative data also revealed complementary insights:
- Survey data quantified the extent of challenges (e.g., 46% of households consuming only two meals per day, 43% female-headed households).
- Qualitative narratives explained the lived realities behind these numbers, such as widows struggling to balance caregiving with income generation, or households coping with food shortages by borrowing from neighbours.
- Institutional perspectives provided a broader policy lens, linking local challenges to systemic issues such as underfunding and weak coordination.
Together, these findings provide a holistic understanding of CWAC operations and their impact on household welfare.
Chapter 5: Discussion
5.1 Household Welfare and Access to Services: Interpretation
The findings on household welfare and access to services in Masaiti District reveal both progress and persistent vulnerabilities. This section interprets these results in relation to the study’s objectives, existing literature, and Zambia’s policy commitments under the National Social Protection Policy (NSPP, 2025), the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), and Vision 2030.
5.1.1 Livelihoods and Income Sources
The predominance of subsistence farming and casual labour among surveyed households reflects the rural economy’s dependence on agriculture and informal work. This aligns with national statistics, which indicate that over 60% of rural Zambians rely on smallholder farming as their primary livelihood (CSO, 2020). However, such reliance exposes households to seasonal shocks, climate variability, and market fluctuations, reinforcing cycles of poverty.
The findings resonate with Ellis (2000), who argues that livelihood diversification is critical for rural resilience. Yet, in Masaiti, opportunities for diversification remain limited, underscoring the importance of social protection interventions to buffer households against shocks.
5.1.2 Food Security
Nearly half of households reported consuming only two meals per day, with some surviving on a single meal during lean periods. This mirrors broader concerns raised in Zambia’s Food and Nutrition Commission reports, which highlight chronic food insecurity in rural districts.
The coping strategies identified such as reducing meal portions, borrowing food, and relying on neighbours are consistent with Maxwell and Caldwell’s (2008) findings on household responses to food stress in sub-Saharan Africa. Such strategies, while adaptive in the short term, often erode long-term resilience by depleting social capital and increasing vulnerability.
These findings suggest that while social protection programmes such as the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) provide some relief, they are insufficient to fully address structural food insecurity without complementary livelihood and agricultural support.
5.1.3 Access to Education
The study found relatively high school enrolment rates, with 65% of households reporting that all children were enrolled. This reflects Zambia’s progress toward universal primary education, supported by policies such as the Free Education Policy (2022). However, dropout cases due to economic constraints, long distances, and child labour highlight persistent barriers.
These findings echo research by Kelly (1999) and more recent UNICEF (2021) reports, which emphasize that while enrolment has improved, retention remains a challenge, particularly for vulnerable households. The results also underscore the gendered dimension of education access, as female-headed households often struggle more to keep children in school due to limited resources.
5.1.4 Access to Health Services
Although most households lived within 5 km of a health facility, barriers such as drug stock-outs, long waiting times, and transport costs limited effective access. This aligns with findings from the Zambia Demographic and Health Survey (ZDHS, 2018), which reported that geographic proximity does not always translate into service utilization due to systemic inefficiencies.
The persistence of such barriers suggests that social protection must be complemented by investments in health system strengthening. As Gilson (2007) argues, equitable access to health care requires not only physical availability but also affordability, quality, and trust in the system.
5.1.5 Synthesis
Taken together, the findings highlight a paradox: while Zambia has made policy strides in expanding access to education and health, and in providing social protection through SCTs, households in Masaiti continue to face significant welfare challenges. The reliance on subsistence farming, chronic food insecurity, and barriers to service utilization illustrate the structural vulnerabilities that CWACs are tasked with addressing at the community level.
These results reinforce the argument by Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2004) that social protection must be both protective (addressing immediate needs) and transformative (tackling structural causes of vulnerability). In Masaiti, CWACs play a crucial role in identifying needs, but their effectiveness is constrained by systemic gaps in livelihoods, food security, education, and health provision.
5.2 Perceptions of CWAC Effectiveness: Interpretation
The findings on perceptions of CWAC effectiveness reveal a complex picture of trust, commitment, and constraint. While households, CWAC members, and institutional stakeholders broadly acknowledged the importance of CWACs in delivering social protection, their views diverged on issues of fairness, transparency, and timeliness. This section interprets these perceptions in light of existing studies and Zambia’s governance frameworks.
5.2.1 Household Perspectives
Households generally rated CWAC performance as “fair” to “good,” but concerns about delays and exclusion errors were prominent. These perceptions echo findings from Schuring and Lawson-McDowall (2011), who observed that community-based targeting in Zambia often faces challenges of perceived bias and limited coverage.
The dissatisfaction expressed by some households reflects what Platteau (2004) describes as the “local elite capture” risk in community-driven development, where perceptions of favouritism can undermine trust even when committees act in good faith. In Masaiti, while no evidence of systematic bias was found, the limited number of beneficiaries relative to need created conditions where exclusion was inevitable, fuelling perceptions of unfairness.
5.2.2 CWAC Members’ Perspectives
CWAC members emphasized their dedication and fairness, but acknowledged resource and training constraints. Their narratives align with the concept of volunteer fatigue highlighted in community governance literature (Mansuri & Rao, 2013). Without adequate incentives or institutional support, volunteers often struggle to sustain motivation and effectiveness.
The CWACs’ self-perception as committed but under-resourced also resonates with Zambia’s National Social Protection Policy (NSPP, 2025), which recognizes the need to strengthen community structures through capacity-building and logistical support. The findings suggest that CWACs’ effectiveness is less a matter of willingness and more a function of systemic support.
5.2.3 Institutional Perspectives
Government and NGO stakeholders consistently described CWACs as the “backbone” of social protection at the grassroots level. This aligns with the 7NDP and Vision 2030, which emphasize community participation as central to inclusive development. However, institutions also pointed to gaps in accountability and record-keeping, echoing critiques in the literature that community-based structures require stronger oversight to ensure transparency (Devereux & Sabates-Wheeler, 2004).
The institutional emphasis on training and monitoring reflects a governance perspective that sees CWACs as indispensable but in need of professionalization. This tension between community voluntarism and institutional accountability is a recurring theme in social protection delivery across sub-Saharan Africa.
5.2.4 Synthesis
Taken together, the findings highlight both the strengths and limitations of CWACs as perceived by different actors:
- Strengths: CWACs are trusted, embedded in communities, and committed to fairness.
- Limitations: Households perceive exclusion and delays; CWACs themselves cite lack of resources; institutions stress accountability and capacity gaps.
This triangulation reflects what Hickey and Mohan (2005) term the “participation paradox”: community-based structures are valued for their proximity and legitimacy, yet their effectiveness depends heavily on external resources and institutional frameworks.
In Masaiti, CWACs embody this paradox. They are indispensable grassroots actors, but their effectiveness is constrained by systemic underinvestment and governance gaps. Addressing these issues requires balancing community ownership with institutional support, ensuring that CWACs remain both trusted by households and accountable to higher-level structures.
5.3 Institutional Support and Collaboration: Interpretation
The findings on institutional support and collaboration highlight both the recognition of CWACs as vital grassroots actors and the systemic weaknesses that constrain their effectiveness. This section interprets these results in relation to Zambia’s policy commitments and existing scholarship on community-based social protection.
5.3.1 Government Support
The study revealed that CWACs receive intermittent training, supervision, and material support from the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS), the District Education Board, and the District Health Office. While these efforts demonstrate recognition of CWACs’ role, the irregularity and insufficiency of support undermine their capacity.
This finding aligns with the National Social Protection Policy (NSPP, 2025), which acknowledges that community structures require consistent capacity-building and logistical
support to function effectively. Similar observations have been made by Schuring and Lawson-McDowall (2011), who noted that community-based targeting in Zambia often suffers from weak institutional backing, leading to uneven performance across districts.
5.3.2 Local Government and Community Structures
Collaboration between CWACs and Ward Development Committees (WDCs) was evident, particularly in mobilizing communities and identifying vulnerable households. However, overlaps in roles sometimes created confusion and duplication. This reflects broader governance challenges in Zambia, where decentralization has expanded the number of community-level structures without always clarifying mandates (Resnick, 2014).
The Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP) emphasizes the need for integrated community development structures, yet the findings suggest that in practice, coordination remains weak. This gap undermines the efficiency of social protection delivery and risks eroding community trust.
5.3.3 NGO and Development Partner Support
NGOs and faith-based organizations provided complementary support in health, education, and livelihoods. However, this support was often project-based and short-term, raising concerns about sustainability. This pattern is consistent with Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler’s (2004) critique that donor-driven interventions frequently lack long-term integration into national systems.
While NGOs filled important gaps, their fragmented contributions highlight the need for stronger alignment with government priorities, as envisioned in Zambia’s Vision 2030, which calls for harmonized partnerships to achieve inclusive development.
5.3.4 Cross-Cutting Themes
Across government and NGO support, three cross-cutting issues emerged:
- Inconsistency: Training and resources were irregular, leaving CWACs under-prepared.
- Role ambiguity: Overlaps with other community structures created confusion.
- Weak coordination: Limited feedback mechanisms reduced accountability and efficiency.
These themes mirror findings from other sub-Saharan African contexts, where community-based welfare committees often operate in fragmented institutional environments (Hickey & Mohan, 2005).
5.4 Implementation Challenges: Interpretation
The findings revealed a range of challenges that constrain the effectiveness of CWACs in implementing social protection programmes. These challenges such as spanning resource shortages, delays in support, perceptions of bias, and weak institutional linkages are not unique to Masaiti District but reflect broader systemic issues documented in the literature on community-based social protection in sub-Saharan Africa.
5.4.1 Resource Constraints
The lack of transport, stationery, allowances, and training emerged as a consistent theme across households, CWAC members, and institutional stakeholders. This mirrors findings by Schuring and Lawson-McDowall (2011), who noted that community-based targeting in Zambia often suffers from under-resourcing, leaving volunteers unable to meet community expectations.
From a governance perspective, this reflects what Mkandawire (2005) terms the “implementation deficit” in African social policy: while frameworks exist on paper, inadequate investment undermines delivery. In Masaiti, CWACs’ reliance on personal resources to conduct household visits illustrates the unsustainable burden placed on volunteers.
5.4.2 Delays and Inefficiencies
Households frequently reported delays in receiving support, while CWACs attributed these to bureaucratic bottlenecks and limited resources. Similar patterns have been observed in other community-based welfare systems, where slow disbursement of funds and weak logistical support reduce programme impact (Devereux & Sabates-Wheeler, 2004).
These delays erode trust in CWACs, even though the root causes often lie beyond their control. This dynamic reflects Platteau’s (2004) observation that community-based committees are often held accountable for systemic failures, creating tension between communities and volunteers.
5.4.3 Perceptions of Bias and Exclusion
Households expressed concerns about exclusion errors and perceived favouritism in beneficiary selection. While CWAC members insisted on fairness, the limited number of slots relative to need inevitably created perceptions of bias. This aligns with the literature on elite capture and social tensions in community-based targeting (Mansuri & Rao, 2013).
The findings suggest that even when CWACs act impartially, the structural scarcity of resources fosters mistrust. This highlights the importance of transparent communication and grievance mechanisms, as emphasized in Zambia’s National Social Protection Policy (2025).
5.4.4 Weak Institutional Linkages
Institutions acknowledged that CWACs are central to social protection delivery but pointed to weak coordination and accountability mechanisms. This reflects broader challenges in Zambia’s decentralization process, where overlapping mandates between CWACs, Ward Development Committees, and other structures create duplication and confusion (Resnick, 2014).
The absence of strong monitoring and feedback systems undermines both efficiency and community trust. As Hickey and Mohan (2005) argue, community participation must be embedded in supportive institutional frameworks to be effective; otherwise, local committees risk being overburdened and under-legitimized.
5.5 Triangulation of Findings: Interpretation
The integration of quantitative and qualitative data in this study provided a more comprehensive understanding of CWAC operations and their impact on household welfare. Triangulation revealed areas of convergence, divergence, and complementarity across households, CWAC members, and institutional stakeholders. Interpreting these patterns in light of theory and literature strengthens the validity of the findings and highlights the complexity of community-based social protection.
5.5.1 Convergence of Findings
Across all respondent groups, several themes consistently emerged:
- Resource constraints: Households, CWACs, and institutions all identified inadequate resources which includes transport, training, and allowances as a major barrier. This convergence supports Mkandawire’s (2005) notion of the “implementation deficit,” where strong policy frameworks are undermined by weak resourcing.
- Centrality of CWACs: All groups recognized CWACs as indispensable grassroots actors. This aligns with Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler’s (2004) framework of “transformative social protection,” which emphasizes the role of community structures in identifying and supporting vulnerable groups.
- Delays in support: The shared acknowledgment of delays reflects systemic inefficiencies, echoing findings from Schüring and Lawson-McDowall (2011) on Zambia’s SCT programme.
This convergence strengthens confidence in the reliability of the findings and underscores the structural nature of the challenges.
5.5.2 Divergence of Findings
Despite broad agreement, notable divergences were observed:
- Fairness in targeting: Households frequently perceived exclusion and bias, while CWACs and institutions insisted on fairness. This divergence reflects Platteau’s (2004) critique of community-based targeting, where perceptions of favouritism can persist even in the absence of actual bias.
- Transparency: Institutions emphasized that CWACs followed established procedures, but households expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of clarity in beneficiary selection. This gap highlights the importance of communication and accountability mechanisms in participatory governance (Hickey & Mohan, 2005).
- Responsibility for delays: Households often blamed CWACs directly, while CWACs attributed delays to systemic bottlenecks. This divergence illustrates the “accountability dilemma” in community-based welfare delivery, where local actors are held responsible for failures rooted in higher-level institutions.
These divergences point to the need for improved communication, grievance mechanisms, and clearer role definitions.
5.5.3 Complementarity of Findings
The integration of data sources also revealed complementary insights:
- Quantitative data provided measurable evidence of welfare challenges (e.g., 46% of households consuming only two meals per day).
- Qualitative narratives explained the lived realities behind these numbers, such as widows struggling to balance caregiving with income generation.
- Institutional perspectives contextualized these challenges within broader policy and resource constraints.
This complementarity reflects Creswell and Plano Clark’s (2011) argument that mixed-methods research enhances explanatory depth by combining breadth (quantitative) with depth (qualitative).
Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations
6.1 Conclusions
This study set out to examine the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in the implementation of social protection programmes in Masaiti District. The conclusions presented here are organized around the research objectives and synthesize the key findings and interpretations from Chapters Four and Five.
6.1.1 Household Welfare and Access to Services
The study concludes that while social protection interventions such as the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) have contributed to improved access to education and health services, households in Masaiti continue to face significant welfare challenges. Reliance on subsistence farming, persistent food insecurity, and barriers to effective health service utilization highlight the structural vulnerabilities of rural households. Social protection in its current form provides important relief but remains insufficient to address the deeper causes of poverty and exclusion.
6.1.2 Perceptions of CWAC Effectiveness
CWACs are widely recognized as essential grassroots actors in the delivery of social protection. Households generally perceive them as fair and committed, though concerns about timeliness, transparency, and exclusion errors persist. CWAC members themselves emphasized their dedication but acknowledged resource and training gaps, while institutions affirmed their centrality but stressed the need for stronger accountability. The conclusion is that CWACs are trusted but constrained, operating at the intersection of community expectations and systemic limitations.
6.1.3 Institutional Support and Collaboration
The study concludes that institutional support for CWACs is inconsistent and fragmented. While government departments and NGOs provide training, supervision, and material support, these efforts are irregular and often project-based. Weak coordination with other community structures, such as Ward Development Committees, further undermines efficiency. This reflects a gap between Zambia’s policy commitments to integrated social protection and the realities of implementation at the community level.
6.1.4 Implementation Challenges
CWACs face multiple challenges that limit their effectiveness, including inadequate resources, bureaucratic delays, perceptions of bias, and weak institutional linkages. These challenges are systemic rather than individual, reflecting broader governance and capacity deficits in Zambia’s social protection system. The conclusion is that without addressing these structural barriers, CWACs will remain overburdened and under-resourced, limiting their ability to fulfil their mandate.
6.1.5 Triangulation of Findings
The triangulation of data sources confirmed broad convergence on the centrality of CWACs and the constraints they face, while also revealing divergences in perceptions of fairness and accountability. Complementary insights from households, CWAC members, and institutions enriched the analysis, demonstrating that CWACs are simultaneously trusted, constrained, and indispensable. The conclusion is that strengthening CWACs requires balancing community ownership with institutional support and accountability.
6.1.6 Overall Conclusion
Overall, the study concludes that CWACs are indispensable to Zambia’s social protection system, serving as the critical link between vulnerable households and formal institutions. However, their effectiveness is undermined by systemic underinvestment, weak coordination, and limited accountability mechanisms. Strengthening CWACs is therefore essential not only for improving programme delivery in Masaiti District but also for advancing Zambia’s broader social protection agenda.
6.2 Recommendations
Based on the study’s conclusions, several recommendations are proposed to strengthen the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) and enhance the effectiveness of social protection delivery in Masaiti District and beyond. These recommendations are directed at policymakers, practitioners, and researchers.
6.2.1 Policy Recommendations
- Increase resource allocation: The Ministry of Community Development and Social Services (MCDSS) should allocate dedicated budgets for CWAC operations, including transport, stationery, and allowances, to reduce reliance on volunteers’ personal resources.
- Strengthen accountability mechanisms: Establish clear grievance and feedback systems at community level to address perceptions of bias and exclusion in beneficiary selection.
- Clarify institutional roles: Harmonize the mandates of CWACs, Ward Development Committees (WDCs), and other community structures to reduce duplication and role confusion.
- Integrate NGO support into national frameworks: Encourage NGOs and development partners to align their interventions with government priorities to ensure sustainability and avoid fragmented, project-based support.
6.2.2 Practice Recommendations
- Capacity-building for CWACs: Provide regular training in record-keeping, targeting criteria, conflict resolution, and communication skills to enhance CWAC effectiveness and community trust.
- Community sensitization: Conduct awareness campaigns to explain targeting criteria, programme limitations, and the role of CWACs, thereby managing expectations and reducing mistrust.
- Strengthen supervision: District officials should conduct more frequent monitoring visits and provide supportive supervision to CWACs, ensuring accountability while reinforcing motivation.
- Leverage local partnerships: Encourage collaboration between CWACs, schools, health facilities, and faith-based organizations to create holistic support systems for vulnerable households.
6.3 Closing Reflection
This study has examined the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in the implementation of social protection programmes in Masaiti District, providing insights into household welfare, community perceptions, institutional support, and implementation challenges. By combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the research has contributed to a more nuanced understanding of how grassroots structures function within Zambia’s broader social protection framework.
From a knowledge perspective, the study adds to the limited body of empirical research on CWACs, highlighting both their strengths as trusted community actors and the systemic constraints that limit their effectiveness. It demonstrates the value of triangulating household, community, and institutional perspectives to capture the complexity of community-based social protection. The findings also reinforce theoretical debates on the “participation paradox” in development, showing that while community-based structures enhance legitimacy, they require sustained institutional support to be effective.
From a practice perspective, the study underscores the urgent need to strengthen CWAC capacity through resources, training, and clearer institutional linkages. It highlights the importance of aligning NGO and government support, improving accountability mechanisms, and addressing structural barriers such as food insecurity and access to services. These insights are directly relevant to policymakers, practitioners, and development partners seeking to enhance the effectiveness of Zambia’s social protection system.
Ultimately, the study concludes that CWACs are indispensable but under-resourced actors at the frontline of social protection. Their potential lies not only in their proximity to vulnerable households but also in their ability to bridge the gap between communities and institutions. Realizing this potential requires a deliberate effort to balance community ownership with institutional investment and accountability.
In closing, this dissertation contributes to ongoing debates on how best to design and implement inclusive, sustainable, and transformative social protection systems in Zambia and across sub-Saharan Africa. By centring the experiences of households, CWAC members, and institutions, it offers both evidence and direction for strengthening community-based welfare delivery in ways that are responsive, equitable, and enduring.
Chapter 7: Discussion
7.1 Linking Findings to Literature
The findings of this study both confirm and complicate existing scholarship on community-based social protection in Sub-Saharan Africa. A central theme that emerged is the dual role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) as both trusted grassroots actors and constrained implementers. This resonates with Hickey and Mohan’s (2005) notion of the “participation paradox,” where community structures are valorised in policy discourse but undermined by systemic underinvestment. In Masaiti District, CWACs were consistently described by households as the “first point of contact” for welfare concerns, echoing earlier studies in Malawi and Uganda that highlight the embeddedness of local committees in community life (Devereux & Sabates-Wheeler, 2004). Yet, the same respondents also voiced frustration at perceived favouritism and exclusion, suggesting that legitimacy is fragile when resources are scarce.
The issue of targeting illustrates this tension vividly. Quantitative survey data showed that 38% of households felt the selection of beneficiaries was “unfair” or “not transparent.” This aligns with Coady et al. (2004), who argue that community-based targeting often struggles with elite capture and bias. However, qualitative evidence complicates this picture. As one household respondent explained, “We know the CWAC members, they are our neighbours, but sometimes we don’t understand how they choose who gets help.” This suggests that the problem may lie less in deliberate bias and more in communication gaps and the mismatch between policy criteria and community expectations. Similar dynamics have been observed in Tanzania, where Ellis et al. (2009) found that local committees were caught between adhering to formal eligibility rules and responding to community perceptions of need.
Resource constraints also emerged as a recurring theme, reinforcing findings from Tembo (2019) on the chronic under-resourcing of community-based structures in Zambia. CWAC members in this study reported walking long distances without transport or allowances, which undermined their ability to monitor households effectively. One CWAC member noted, “We are committed, but sometimes we cannot reach all the villages because there is no transport.” This mirrors comparative evidence from Ethiopia and Kenya, where community committees face similar logistical barriers (Slater & Farrington, 2009). The persistence of such challenges across contexts suggests that the problem is structural rather than incidental, raising questions about the sustainability of relying on unpaid volunteers for frontline welfare delivery.
At the same time, the findings highlight the symbolic and relational role of CWACs, which is less emphasized in the literature. While households criticized delays and exclusion, many still viewed CWACs as advocates who could “speak for the poor” to higher authorities. This extends the work of Platteau (2004), who cautioned against romanticizing community institutions, by showing that even when materially constrained, CWACs can embody a form of social contract between state and citizens. In this sense, the study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of community-based governance: CWACs are not merely technical implementers but also mediators of trust, legitimacy, and accountability.
In sum, the findings both confirm established critiques of community-based targeting and extend the literature by highlighting the advocacy and symbolic functions of CWACs. By situating these insights within Zambia’s policy context, the study underscores the need to rethink community-based social protection not only as a mechanism for identifying beneficiaries but also as a relational process that shapes perceptions of fairness, trust, and state legitimacy.
7.2 Theoretical Implications
The findings of this study carry significant theoretical implications for the understanding of community-based social protection, participatory governance, and the broader conceptualization of welfare delivery in low-income contexts. By examining the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in Masaiti District, the study not only confirms existing theoretical debates but also extends them in new directions.
First, the results reinforce and nuance the “participation paradox” articulated by Hickey and Mohan (2005). The paradox suggests that while community participation is celebrated in policy discourse, it is often undermined by structural limitations that prevent meaningful empowerment. This study provides empirical evidence of this paradox in practice: CWACs are positioned as central actors in Zambia’s social protection framework, yet they operate with minimal resources, limited training, and little decision-making power. Theoretically, this highlights the tension between instrumental participation (where communities are used as vehicles for programme delivery) and transformative participation (where communities genuinely shape outcomes). The findings suggest that CWACs embody a hybrid form of participation by simultaneously empowering in their embeddedness and disempowering in their marginalization thereby complicating binary understandings of participation.
Second, the study contributes to theories of community-based governance by illustrating how CWACs function as mediators between formal state structures and informal community networks. Existing literature often frames community institutions as either extensions of the
state or autonomous grassroots actors. However, the evidence from Masaiti shows that CWACs occupy a liminal space: they are formally mandated by the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services, yet their legitimacy derives from their embeddedness in local trust networks. This dual positioning challenges linear models of governance and supports more relational and hybrid conceptualizations of state-society interactions. Theoretically, this suggests that community-based welfare structures should be understood not as static entities but as dynamic interfaces where formal and informal logics intersect.
Third, the findings extend the conceptualization of social protection as a social contract. Much of the literature emphasizes the material dimension of social protection which includes transfers, services, and entitlements. This study, however, reveals that households perceive CWACs not only as distributors of resources but also as symbols of state presence and accountability. Even when material support was delayed or insufficient, households valued CWACs as advocates who could “speak for the poor.” This suggests that social protection should be theorized not merely as a technical mechanism for poverty alleviation but as a relational process that shapes citizens’ perceptions of fairness, trust, and legitimacy. In this sense, CWACs contribute to the symbolic reproduction of the state at the community level, even when their material capacity is constrained.
Finally, the study raises theoretical questions about equity and justice in welfare delivery. The perception of exclusion and favouritism among households underscores the limitations of community-based targeting models. While theories of participatory governance often assume that proximity enhances fairness, the findings suggest that proximity can also amplify tensions, as local actors must navigate competing expectations and scarce resources. This calls for a refinement of targeting theories to account for the politics of scarcity and the moral economies of need that shape community perceptions.
In sum, the theoretical implications of this study are threefold: it complicates the participation paradox by showing its hybrid nature; it advances relational theories of community-based governance; and it reconceptualizes social protection as both a material and symbolic process. These contributions enrich the theoretical landscape and open new avenues for comparative research on community-based welfare systems in Africa and beyond.
7.3 Critical Reflections
While the findings of this study broadly align with existing literature on community-based social protection, they also reveal contradictions and unexpected dynamics that warrant critical reflection. These nuances highlight the complexity of implementing welfare programmes through grassroots structures such as Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) and caution against overly simplistic interpretations of their role.
One of the most striking contradictions lies in the dual perception of CWACs. On the one hand, households consistently described CWAC members as trusted neighbours who understood local realities better than distant officials. This embeddedness was seen as a strength, reinforcing the legitimacy of CWACs as frontline actors. Yet, the same households also voiced concerns about favouritism, exclusion, and lack of transparency in beneficiary selection. This paradox suggests that proximity does not automatically translate into fairness. Instead, it can amplify tensions, as community members hold CWACs to higher standards precisely because of their closeness. This finding complicates the assumption in participatory governance theory that local actors are inherently more accountable.
Another area of reflection concerns the symbolic versus material role of CWACs. The study revealed that even when CWACs lacked resources or failed to deliver timely support, households still valued their presence as advocates and intermediaries. This was unexpected, as much of the literature emphasizes material outcomes (e.g., cash transfers, food security) as the primary measure of effectiveness. The finding suggests that CWACs’ symbolic function embodying the state at the community level may be as important as their distributive role. This challenges technocratic approaches to social protection that focus narrowly on efficiency and targeting, while overlooking the relational dimensions of welfare delivery.
The study also uncovered contextual nuances shaped by rural realities. For example, logistical challenges such as long distances, poor road networks, and seasonal barriers significantly constrained CWAC operations. While resource shortages are well-documented in the literature, the extent to which geography and seasonality shaped perceptions of effectiveness was more pronounced than anticipated. Households often attributed delays in support to CWACs, even when the underlying causes were structural (e.g., delayed disbursements from district offices). This misattribution underscores the accountability dilemma faced by CWACs: they are visible and accessible, yet lack control over systemic bottlenecks.
An additional surprise was the emergence of CWACs as informal advocates. Several respondents described CWAC members lobbying on behalf of vulnerable households, sometimes even challenging local leaders or district officials. This advocacy role is not formally recognized in policy frameworks, which cast CWACs primarily as implementers. The finding suggests that CWACs may be evolving beyond their prescribed mandate, carving out a space as community representatives. This has theoretical implications for understanding grassroots agency within hierarchical welfare systems, but it also raises practical questions about how such advocacy can be supported without undermining formal accountability structures.
Finally, the study highlights the fragility of trust in community-based welfare systems. While CWACs enjoy legitimacy, this trust is conditional and easily eroded by perceptions of bias or unmet expectations. In contexts of scarcity, where demand for support far exceeds supply, even well-intentioned committees struggle to maintain credibility. This underscores the importance of managing expectations and improving communication, rather than assuming that trust is an automatic by-product of community participation.
In sum, these critical reflections reveal that CWACs operate in a space marked by contradictions: trusted yet mistrusted, symbolic yet materially constrained, empowered yet structurally limited. Recognizing these tensions is essential for developing a more nuanced understanding of community-based social protection and for designing interventions that are both contextually grounded and theoretically informed.
Chapter 8: Policy Implications and Recommendations
Gap 1: Inadequate Targeting Mechanisms
- Root Causes: Reliance on outdated poverty data, weak verification systems, lack of dynamic poverty profiling.
- Implications: Exclusion of deserving households, inclusion errors, inefficiency in resource allocation.
- Examples: Communities where CWACs struggle to identify vulnerable children due to lack of updated household data.
- Global Perspective: Compare with best practices in countries using real-time poverty registries.
- Policy Consequences: Increased inequality, erosion of trust in social programs.
Gap 2: Limited Integration with Other Social Protection Programs
- Current Situation: Fragmented delivery of services (education, health, nutrition) with minimal coordination.
- Impact: Families receive partial support, leading to poor outcomes for children.
- Case Illustration: A child enrolled in a school feeding program but excluded from cash transfer due to siloed systems.
- International Benchmark: Integrated social protection systems in countries like Brazil (Bolsa Famflia).
- Policy Consequences: Duplication of efforts, wasted resources, and missed opportunities for holistic support.
Gap 3: Weak Monitoring and Evaluation Systems
- Challenges: Lack of standardized indicators, poor data collection tools, limited capacity for analysis.
- Implications: Inability to measure impact, inform policy adjustments, or ensure accountability.
- Example: CWAC reports not feeding into national databases, making scaling difficult.
- Best Practice: Use of digital dashboards and community scorecards in Kenya and Rwanda.
- Policy Consequences: Decisions based on assumptions rather than evidence.
Gap 4: Insufficient Financial Sustainability Framework
- Current Reality: Heavy reliance on donor funding, unpredictable government allocations.
- Implications: Program interruptions, inability to plan long-term interventions.
- Illustration: CWAC activities halted when donor support ends.
- Global Lessons: Countries with social protection trust funds or earmarked taxes.
- Policy Consequences: Vulnerability to economic shocks, lack of resilience.
Gap 5: Gender and Disability Inclusion Gaps
- Nature of Gap: Policies lack explicit provisions for gender-sensitive and disability- inclusive approaches.
- Impact: Marginalization of women caregivers and children with disabilities.
- Example: Cash transfers not considering additional costs for disability care.
- Best Practice: Inclusive targeting models in South Africa and India.
- Policy Consequences: Perpetuation of inequality and social exclusion
8.2 Recommendations for Government
- Develop Comprehensive Child Welfare Policy: Consolidate existing fragmented policies into a unified framework that addresses prevention, protection, and rehabilitation.
- Increase Budgetary Allocation: Ensure dedicated funding for CWACs and community-based child protection programs.
- Strengthen Monitoring Systems: Implement digital platforms for real-time reporting and tracking of child welfare cases.
- Capacity Building: Train local government officers and CWAC members on policy interpretation and implementation.
- Enhance Legal Enforcement: Establish specialized child protection units within law enforcement agencies.
8.3 Recommendations for CWACs and Local Communities
- Community Sensitization: Conduct regular awareness campaigns on child rights and protection.
- Strengthen Local Structures: Formalize CWAC operations with clear roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines.
- Promote Community Ownership: Encourage local fundraising and volunteerism to support child welfare initiatives.
- Early Warning Systems: Develop community-based mechanisms to identify and respond to child abuse or neglect promptly.
- Collaboration with Schools: Partner with educational institutions to monitor vulnerable children and provide psychosocial support.
8.4 Recommendations for NGOs and Development Partners
- Technical Support: Provide training and resources to CWACs for effective case management.
- Funding Partnerships: Establish joint funding models with government for sustainability.
- Advocacy: Lobby for policy reforms and increased government investment in child welfare.
- Innovation in Service Delivery: Introduce technology-driven solutions for case tracking and reporting.
- Research and Evidence Generation: Support studies to inform policy and program design.
8.5 Long-Term Sustainability Strategies
- Institutionalization of CWACs: Integrate CWACs into formal local governance structures for continuity.
- Diversified Funding Sources: Encourage public-private partnerships and community-based financing models.
- Capacity Development: Continuous training for CWAC members and local leaders on emerging child protection issues.
- Policy Review Mechanisms: Establish periodic policy reviews to adapt to changing social dynamics.
- Community Empowerment: Promote income-generating activities for families to reduce child vulnerability.
Chapter 9: Conclusion
9.1 Summary of Key Findings
This study set out to examine the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in the implementation of social protection programmes in Masaiti District, Zambia. Guided by the objectives of assessing CWAC effectiveness, exploring household perceptions, and identifying institutional challenges, the research generated a number of important findings that contribute to both academic debates and policy practice.
First, the study confirmed the centrality of CWACs as grassroots actors in Zambia’s social protection system. CWACs were consistently described as the first point of contact for vulnerable households, responsible for identifying beneficiaries, monitoring programme delivery, and liaising with government and NGOs. Their embeddedness in local communities gave them legitimacy and trust, reinforcing the idea that community-based structures are indispensable in reaching marginalized populations. However, this legitimacy was fragile, as households also expressed concerns about favouritism and exclusion, highlighting the tension between proximity and fairness.
Second, the findings revealed persistent resource and capacity constraints that undermine CWAC effectiveness. Members reported operating without transport, allowances, or adequate training, which limited their ability to reach remote households and maintain accurate records. These constraints not only reduced efficiency but also contributed to delays in programme delivery. The reliance on unpaid volunteers raised questions about sustainability, echoing broader critiques of community-based welfare models in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Third, the study highlighted a significant gap between policy commitments and implementation realities. While Zambia’s National Social Protection Policy (NSPP), the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), and Vision 2030 emphasize community participation, the practical support provided to CWACs was inconsistent and insufficient. This disconnect created frustration at both household and committee levels, with CWACs often blamed for systemic bottlenecks beyond their control. The findings therefore underscore the need for stronger alignment between national frameworks and local realities.
Fourth, household perceptions of CWACs were complex and sometimes contradictory. On one hand, households valued CWACs’ proximity and knowledge of local conditions. On the other, they criticized the lack of transparency in beneficiary selection and expressed mistrust when excluded from programmes. This duality reflects the “participation paradox,” where community involvement is both celebrated and contested. Importantly, the study found that communication gaps rather than deliberate bias often fuelled perceptions of unfairness, suggesting that improved transparency could strengthen trust.
Fifth, the research uncovered an under-recognized advocacy role played by CWACs. Beyond their formal mandate as implementers, CWACs were seen by households as intermediaries who could “speak for the poor” to higher authorities. This advocacy function, though informal, highlights the potential of CWACs to act as bridges between communities and the state, reinforcing the social contract even in contexts of limited material support.
Finally, the study emphasized the influence of contextual factors such as geography, infrastructure, and seasonality. Long distances, poor road networks, and seasonal barriers significantly shaped programme delivery, often exacerbating delays and limiting outreach. These contextual realities must be factored into both policy design and practical implementation strategies.
9.2 Contributions to Knowledge
This study makes several contributions to knowledge in the field of social protection and community-based welfare systems, with implications for theory, policy, and practice.
Theoretical Contributions
- The study enriches the literature on community-based social protection by providing empirical evidence from Zambia, a context where CWACs have been under-researched.
- It advances understanding of the “participation paradox” (Hickey & Mohan, 2005), showing how CWACs are simultaneously trusted as grassroots actors yet constrained by systemic underinvestment and governance gaps.
- By triangulating household, community, and institutional perspectives, the study demonstrates the value of mixed-methods approaches in capturing the complexity of community-based welfare delivery.
Policy Contributions
- The findings highlight the gap between Zambia’s policy commitments (e.g., National Social Protection Policy, 7NDP, Vision 2030) and the realities of implementation at community level.
- The study provides evidence that can inform policy reforms aimed at strengthening CWAC capacity, clarifying institutional roles, and improving accountability mechanisms.
- It underscores the importance of aligning NGO interventions with government frameworks to ensure sustainability and avoid fragmented, project-based support.
Practical Contributions
- The study identifies specific operational challenges faced by CWACs, including resource shortages, training gaps, and community mistrust, offering actionable insights for practitioners.
- It provides recommendations for capacity-building, supervision, and community sensitization, which can directly improve CWAC performance and community trust.
- By documenting household experiences of welfare outcomes, the study gives voice to vulnerable populations, ensuring that their perspectives inform programme design and delivery.
9.3 Limitations of the Study
While this study provides valuable insights into the role of Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) in the implementation of social protection programmes in Masaiti District, several limitations should be acknowledged.
9.3.1 Scope and Generalizability
The study was conducted in a single district, Masaiti, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other districts in Zambia. Although the results provide important lessons, variations in socio-economic conditions, institutional capacity, and community dynamics across districts mean that caution should be exercised in applying the findings nationally.
9.3.2 Sample Size and Representation
The household survey covered 120 households, complemented by focus group discussions and key informant interviews. While this mixed-methods approach enhanced depth and triangulation, the relatively modest sample size may not fully capture the diversity of experiences within the district. In particular, marginalized groups such as persons with disabilities or child-headed households may have been under-represented.
9.3.3 Self-Reported Data
Much of the data relied on self-reported information from households, CWAC members, and institutional stakeholders. This introduces the possibility of recall bias, social desirability bias, or under-reporting of sensitive issues such as favouritism or corruption. Although triangulation helped mitigate these risks, they cannot be entirely eliminated.
9.3.4 Temporal Limitations
The study was cross-sectional, capturing perceptions and experiences at a single point in time. As such, it does not account for seasonal variations in food security, changes in programme implementation, or evolving community perceptions over time. A longitudinal design would provide deeper insights into how CWAC effectiveness and household welfare outcomes change.
9.3.5 Resource Constraints
The study was conducted within limited time and financial resources, which constrained the breadth of data collection and the ability to conduct more extensive comparative analysis across multiple districts.
9.4 Recommendations for Future Research
- Comparative studies: Conduct research across multiple districts to compare CWAC effectiveness and identify best practices that can be scaled nationally.
- Impact evaluations: Assess the long-term impact of CWAC-facilitated social protection on household welfare, particularly in relation to food security, education, and health outcomes.
- Gender dynamics: Explore the gendered dimensions of CWAC membership and household vulnerability, given the high proportion of female-headed households and female CWAC members.
- Community perceptions over time: Undertake longitudinal studies to track how community trust in CWACs evolves as reforms and capacity-building measures are implemented.
References
1. Coady, D., Grosh, M., & Hoddinott, J. (2004). Targeting oftransfers in developing countries: Review of lessons and experience. World Bank.
2. Devereux, S., & Sabates-Wheeler, R. (2004). Transformative social protection. IDS Working Paper 232. Institute of Development Studies.
3. Ellis, F., Devereux, S., & White, P. (2009). Social protection in Africa. Edward Elgar.
4. Hickey, S., & Mohan, G. (2005). Relocating participation within a radical politics of development. Development and Change, 36 (2), 237-262.
5. Platteau, J. P. (2004). Monitoring elite capture in community-driven development. Development and Change, 35 (2), 223-246.
6. Slater, R., & Farrington, J. (2009). Targeting of social transfers: A review for DFID. Overseas Development Institute.
7. Tembo, F. (2019). Community structures and social protection delivery in Zambia. Journal ofAfrican Social Policy, 6 (1), 45-62.
8. Government of the Republic of Zambia. (2014). National Social Protection Policy. Ministry of Community Development, Mother and Child Health.
9. Government of the Republic of Zambia. (2017). Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP)2017-2021. Ministry of National Development Planning.
10. Government of the Republic of Zambia. (2006). Vision 2030: Aprosperous middle-income nation by 2030. Ministry of Finance and National Planning.
Appendix A: Household Survey Questionnaire
Section 1: Household Demographics
- Respondent name (optional):
- Age:
- Gender: □ Male □ Female □ Other
- Marital status: □ Single □ Married □ Widowed □ Divorced
- Household size:
- Number of dependents:
- Head of household: □ Male □ Female □ Child-headed □ Elderly-headed
Section 2: Economic Status
(a) What is your main source of income? □ Farming □ Business □ Employment □ Remittances □ SCTP □ Other:
(b) Monthly household income (approximate): ZMW
(c) Do you own any productive assets (e.g. livestock, tools)? □ Yes □ No
(d) Have you experienced food shortages in the past 6 months? □ Yes □ No
Section 3: SCTP Participation
(a) Are you currently receiving SCTP? □ Yes □ No
(b) If yes, how long have you been receiving SCTP? years/months
(c) How do you use the SCTP funds? (tick all that apply) □ Food □ School fees □ Health □ Business □ Savings □ Other:
(d) Has SCTP improved your household’s wellbeing? □ Yes □ No □ Not sure
(e) Do you feel SCTP has made your household more self-reliant? □ Yes □ No
Section 4: Sustainability Perceptions
(i) Do you believe SCTP can lead to long-term poverty reduction? □ Yes □ No
(ii) What challenges do you face in sustaining improvements after SCTP?
(iii) What support would help you become more independent from SCTP?
Appendix B: Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Guide
Opening Questions
(i) What are your general views on the SCTP in your community?
(ii) Who benefits most from SCTP and why?
Core Themes
(iii) How has SCTP affected household income and food security?
(iv) Have you noticed any changes in school attendance or health access?
(v) Do beneficiaries feel empowered or dependent?
(vi) What are the community’s views on the long-term sustainability of SCTP?
(vii) What additional support is needed to make SCTP more effective?
Closing
(viii) What recommendations would you give to improve SCTP in Masaiti?
Appendix C: Key Informant Interview (KII) Guide
Respondent Role: □ District Welfare Officer □ Community Leader □ NGO Representative □ Health Worker □ Other:
Interview Questions
(a) What is your role in SCTP implementation?
(b) How effective is SCTP in improving household welfare?
(c) What challenges do you observe in programme delivery?
(d) Are there mechanisms to ensure sustainability beyond cash transfers?
(e) What partnerships exist to support SCTP beneficiaries?
(f) What policy changes would enhance SCTP’s long-term impact?
Appendix D: Ethical Clearance and Consent Forms
Includes:
- Approval letter from the University Ethics Committee
- Community entry permission from Masaiti District Office
- Sample informed consent form (English and local language)
- Confidentiality assurance statement
- Voluntary participation clause
Appendix E: Sample Coding Framework
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Appendix F: Data Analysis Process Narrative
- Quantitative data analysed using SPSS
- Qualitative data coded manually and with NVivo
- Triangulation used to validate findings
- Mixed-methods approach ensured depth and breadth
- Data cleaning involved checking for missing values and inconsistencies
Appendix G:
- Research Timeline and Budget Summary
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
- Research Budget Summary
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Biography
Maliro Ngoma is a visionary academic and development practitioner whose career seamlessly bridges the disciplines of education, computer science, and development studies. His intellectual journey is marked by a profound commitment to interdisciplinary learning, innovation, and transformative social impact.
He began his academic path with a Bachelor of Education from the Zambian Open University, establishing a strong foundation in pedagogy, curriculum design, and educational leadership. Motivated by a passion for technological advancement, he pursued a Master of Science in Computer Science at the prestigious Lomonosov Moscow State University in Russia, where he mastered advanced computing, systems analysis, and digital problem-solving.
Recognizing the critical role of inclusive development and policy-driven change, Maliro expanded his expertise with a Master of Arts in Development Studies from the University of Lusaka. His work in this field explores the nexus of technology, education, and socio-economic development, with a focus on empowering communities through knowledge systems and innovation.
Currently, Maliro is a PhD candidate in Education Management and Administration at the Zambian Open University, where his research centers on Strategic leadership in educational institutions, Policy formulation and implementation, Institutional governance and accountability and Digital transformation in public service delivery.
With a rare blend of technical acumen, policy insight, and educational expertise, Maliro Ngoma is uniquely positioned to drive meaningful change across Zambia’s development landscape and beyond. His academic versatility, global perspective, and unwavering commitment to lifelong learning make him a thought leader in educational reform, digital empowerment, and sustainable development.
[...]
Buy now
- Quote paper
- Maliro Ngoma (Author), 2025, Assessing the Effectiveness of Social Cash Transfer Programs (SCTPs) in Building Long-Term Resilience in Masaiti District, Zambia, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1669876
