Zimbabwe and South Africa Support Botswana Federation

By Kwanele Sibanda, CORC, South Africa



The Republic of Botswana is a landlocked country located in Southern Africa. It is bordered by South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe. It is a mid-sized country of just over two million people. Environmentally, Botswana faces two major problems: drought and desertification. Despite its middle-income status, Botswana continues to grapple with significant social challenges including unequal distribution of wealth, high levels of poverty, unemployment and HIV/AIDS prevalence. On health issues, the prevalence of HIV/AIDS was estimated at 24% for adults in 2006. In the fight against the disease the government of Botswana solicited outside help in fighting HIV/AIDS and received early support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.


The federation of Botswana was mobilized by the Zimbabwean federation and established in 2011 in Francistown and it has since expanded to Gaborone, Selibe, Maun and Phikwe. The NGO; Trust for Community Initiatives (TFCI) was registered on the 31st of May 2012 as a trust. There are currently 3 board members and two staff members working for the NGO.


In June 2014 the federation of Botswana was selected by the Francistown City Council as a community based organization that has one of the best practices in fighting poverty. The Minister of Local Government and Rural Development (Peter L. Siele) therefore made a proposal of visiting the federation in Francistown on the 17th of October 2014. Since the Botswana federation is still at its early stages of development, it therefore requested the support of the Zimbabwean and the South African federations.


A four day schedule was set for the exchange and that was between the 16th and 19th of October 2014. The 16th and 19th were set as days of arrival and departure respectively. On the morning of the 17th, prior to the commencement of the meeting with the Honourable Minister, a brief planning session was held with the hosts to look into the program and also strategize on key objectives intended to be achieved from the exchange. During the planning session the Zimbabwean and South African delegates were encouraged to focus their presentation more on savings, partnerships and projects. The 17th was scheduled as following:

  • Presentation to the Minister by the Botswana local federation
  • Zimbabwean presentation that covered where and what the SDI alliance does and then a more focused presentation on the Zimbabwean federation.
  • South African presentation.
  • Response from the Minister
  • Site visits with the Minister
  • End of day one

On day two of the exchange, there were no government officials and the federations had the chance to engage around internal alliance issues of interest. The Botswana federation felt that they needed a lot of support around understanding what the Urban Poor Fund is all about.  The programme was set for a full day discussion around UPF and then ending with an evaluation of the exchange.  The day was therefore structured as indicated below:

  • Botswana federation members – individual expression of UPF understanding.
  • Formation of three groups (Botswana, Zimbabwe and South Africa). For group discussions Zimbabwe and South Africa were requested to write key points that relate to UPF in their respective countries. Botswana was on the other hand requested to list what they have so far been using as principles around UPF.
  • Presentation per country followed by questions and answers
  • Advise for Botswana on guidelines that they should agree upon as principles around UPF.
  • Exchange evaluation
  • Closure



Federation of Botswana – Francistown, Maun, Gaborone, Selibe and Phikwe

Trust for Community Initiatives (Botswana support NGO) – Goitsemang B. Maano and Mark

Zimbabwe Homeless People’s Federation– Sekai Catherine Chiremba, Sazini Ndlovu, R. Ncube.

Dialogue on Shelter (Zimbabwe support NGO) – Beth Chitekwe and Givemore Nyamaponda

South African Federation of the Urban Poor (FEDUP) – Maureen, Sophy and Sarah

CORC (South African support NGO) – Kwanele Sibanda 

Officials: Minister of Local Government and Rural Development – Peter L. Siele, Town Clerk – L. Israel, Office of the District Commissioner – Opelo, Head of Community Development – Mrs Phama, Deputy Mayor of Francistown – Mrs Phama 

The meeting was chaired by Dambe, a representative of the Botswana federation. A welcome note was made. While introductions were made individually for the officials, South African and Zimbabwean delegates; the Botswana federation was introduced according to saving schemes. The programme was announced as indicated above. 


  • Due to challenges they face on a daily basis, they established savings groups to support one another.
    • The federation started in April 2011 in Francistown and has since expanded to Selibe, Phikwe, Gaborone and Maun.
    • Key focus has been on mobilization since they have just started and savings as well.
    • The groups practice daily savings and they have a good recording system for accountability.
    • They hold weekly meeting were they share knowledge, account for savings, recruit new members, discuss projects, and show each other love and unity.
    • There are 42 saving schemes and the total number of active members is 1126 (1036 females and 90 males)
    • Their total daily savings to date is P257 807.91 and their Urban Poor Fund is P20 834.85.
    • Women are at the forefront of the process because they are the most affected by the day to day challenges.
    • As opposed to being beggars, they are resourceful members who have united to assist one another in using resources at their disposal.
    • The health component is one of their priorities.
    • They have conducted development projects such as installation of water taps, electricity and flush toilets.
    • They also have income generating projects such as poultry and catering.
    • Indicated that councillors and chiefs in their respective places of residence understand what they are doing and give them support were they can.
    • To scale up the work that they have started, they requested a formal working relationship with the government starting with the Minister of Local Government and Rural Development.
    • They acknowledged support that they have been receiving from the Francistown City Council especially around transport to undertake their activities.


  • SDI breakdown – 8 countries in the Southern African HUB
  • Active in 34 countries
  • Showed a lot of appreciation of the Minister’s act of coming closer to the people.
  • They have organized themselves, saved and conducted enumerations so that they engage their government with facts.
  • They approached their government, proved to them that they have good poverty alleviation tools, agreed on a partnership and established a City Fund in five cities.
  • Emphasized that it is crucial for the Minister to consider working closely with such organized groups who do not approach the government empty handed.
  • Spoke about the Urban Poor Fund and indicated how they had used it to undertake projects of their interest.
  • Went on to request the Minister to give a pledge that will support that will add onto and support the Urban Poor Fund of the Botswana federation.
  • Elaborated that they use their Urban Poor Fund in a sustainable way that enables many people to benefit and that is done by making it a revolving fund that is replaced once used.
  • Concluded by inviting the Minister to an SDI exchange which he shall be informed of in the near future.


  • When we mobilize community members our main aim is to change the mind-set of the people from dependency to self-sustenance.
  • Savings and enumerations are a priority for us. When we engage with the officials we present information that reflects high level of commitment for a better life.
  • To enhance our work so as to support more communities, we create partnerships with government at different level for example we have an MOU with the Department of Human Settlement and with that; we have been able to build over 30 000 quality houses by ourselves for ourselves as poor people of South Africa. In working with the government we always emphasize that the Batho Pele (People First) principle must be applied.
  • The processed that we undertake ensure that we empower each other.
  • We work closely with our NGOs that act as finance administrators and also offer technical assistance in the various projects.
  • We believe and practise a continuous process of learning and sharing knowledge. Our presence as South African and Zimbabwean federation in Botswana is one of our ways of sharing knowledge as experience with the local federation and government officials.
  • The South African federation is in eight regions, has a membership of 26 490 members, R2 424 376.25 and R245 512.09.


  • The Minister described the Zimbabwean and the South African federation members as real neighbours that are concerned about the well-being of others.
  • He likes the concept of Batho Pele (People First) as described by South African federation and furthermore indicated that the government of Botswana also has a television and radio program that enhances the dissemination of community initiatives and government programs and it is called Batho Pele.
  • What the federation of Botswana is working on is actually fulfilling what the President of Botswana said about strategies of poverty eradication.
  • Communities should strive for partnerships in line with what they are doing.
    • The minister assisted the Botswana federation by outlining some of the programs that different government departments are offering in line with what the federation is doing.
    • He furthermore encouraged them to take advantage of funds such as those offered by the Ministry of Labour and Home Affairs (MLHA). The Women’s Affairs Department is mandated to facilitate mainstreaming of Gender Issues in the development process. As a way of empowering women’s CBOs, the Government of Botswana allocates funds to the Women’s Affairs Department annually in order to assist the organisations.


  • The Minister witnessed three projects that the federation members do: traditional attires and baskets, poultry and a cool drink making business. The minister and his team were taken around while the project leaders explained how the businesses are conducted.

DAY TWO OF EXCHANGE     18/10/2014

Attendees: Botswana, Zimbabwean and South African federations as well as their support NGOs

The focus on day two was that of discussion UPF related issues. The programme started off with Botswana federation members being given the opportunity to express their knowledge and how they have been dealing with UPF issues. Points made were noted as indicated below:

  • We are savings for land, to build houses as well as other projects.
  • We are contributing UPF so that we can give each other loans
  • We had an incident were some group members contributed towards UPF, but the treasure did not deposit the money.
  • It is difficult for me to distinguish between daily savings and UPF
  • We started the UPF contributions after an exchange to Gwanda in Zimbabwe; however after report back and starting not many members understood the concept.

After the individual contributions it became apparent that there is need for continuous support around UPF.

Three groups were formed according to countries. For group discussions Zimbabwe and South Africa were requested to write key points that relate to UPF in their respective countries. Botswana was on the other hand requested to list what they have so far been using as principles around UPF.



  • Each member is required to make a contribution of R750 and it is contributed at a pace based on each member’s ability.
  • The contribution is regarded as a membership fee that gives the respective member the privileges offered by the alliance.
  • R5 contribution per month or R60 per year is required from each member as a way of sustaining their main fund.
  • We pre-finance some of our housing projects using our UPF
  • We give loans for income generating projects.
  • Our fund is managed by our local NGO (Utshani Fund); however our daily savings are kept in our respective saving scheme accounts.
  • For accountability purposes, recording books are used during collections at a saving scheme level and Utshani Fund is required to produce a bank statement on a monthly basis.
  • UPF has its own structure. (Saving scheme, regional and national representative).
  • We also use our UPF to attract other funds.



The Zimbabwean UPF is called Gungano


  • Federating saving schemes in the country.
  • Demonstrates federation capacity and capabilities to the government, donors and other partners.
  • Leverage financial resources as well as other in kind contribution from Government and donors.
  • Give out loans for big projects to federation saving schemes.


  • One dollar per month in perpetuity.

Type of loans:

  • Land purchase
  • Infrastructure/water, sanitation, plumbing
  • Housing/building material/labour/drawing of plans
  • Business projects

Terms and conditions

  • Loans are given to saving schemes and not individuals
  • Saving scheme should be in good standing
  • Currently the interest is at 12% p a
  • Time frame depends on type of loan (Business: 6 months; Housing infrastructure: 2 years)

The agreement made was that individuals can access loan from their respective saving schemes while the savings schemes access loans from Gungano.


–       Beth from Dialogue on Shelter mentioned that what is being presented are ways in which the two named countries are using their UPF. She further emphasized that principles around Botswana UPF have to be tailor made for the needs of the Botswana UPF beneficiaries. She concluded by saying that “if you have your own resources and manage them well, it becomes easy to be assisted”.

–        As a way forward it was agreed that a final decision of principles around UPF cannot be taken in the particular meeting because consultation first has to be made from a savings scheme level; however an agreement was reached on what the respective saving schemes have to input towards a final national UPF policy.

–       Below are the guidelines:

  • Name to be given to the UPF
  • What is the purpose of the fund?
  • How much should be the monthly contribution per member towards the total amount?
  • How much should be the total amount?
  • How manages the fund?
  • How much should we have before giving out loans or making any other form of use of the fund?
  • How much interest should be charged in the event of a decision of giving out loans?
  • What recording system should be put in place?
  • How often should saving schemes have access to the bank statement?


–       The evaluation of the exchange took two forms.

  1. Open platform for federation members to express their views.
  2. NGO group evaluation

–       Below are points made by the various federation members:

  • I am so grateful for the exchange has enlightened me on many federation issues especially the Urban Poor Fund.
  • We feel motivated by the presentations made by the federations that have been doing the work for many years and we are inspired to grow our federation the same way.
  • We are proud of what we are doing and for the fact that our Minister has come to us makes us even happier.
  • What we are doing is well recognised and that it why day one of our activity was broadcast on national radio.
  • As South African this is so important for us and that is why we say ‘Funduzufe’ (Learn until you die).
  • We as Zimbabweans see a bright future ahead of you and this is based on the cooperation we have noticed from your Minister, Chiefs and Local Municipality. It is now up to you to continue with the good work.

–       Below are various points made as an evaluation and support for the local NGO:

  •     Need to follow-up on processes for example the UPF task left with the communities.
  •     Consider setting up a website and update work done for more publicity.
  •     Identification of government programmes that are in line with federation activities and find means of taping into local resources.
  •     Establish community documentation teams to write stories about their activities.
  •     Follow up on issues put forward by the Minister. Write a letter thanking the Minister and also outlining what the federation requests are.


Reflections on the Southern African HUB Meeting: Lusaka, Zambia

Southern African HUB: Lusaka, Zambia

By Noah Schermbrucker, SDI Secretariat 

HUB meetings are gatherings that bring affiliates together to collectively set the agenda for the region. They are used as a mechanism to share collective learning, devise targeted support strategies (e.g. exchanges) for individual countries and concretize planning, on a regional scale, for the next period. The Southern African HUB recently took place in Lusaka, Zambia. Delegations from South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, Botswana and Malawi attended the 3-day meeting. A team from Uganda, who had recently hosted the East African HUB, participated in order to promote continuity. Ghana was also invited as the West African HUB has been indefinitely postponed due to the Ebola outbreak. 

Below find my reflections on the meeting. I hope that they provide some insights not only into SDI processes at a regional level but also the “nuts and bolts” of which this process is comprised. This is hence not an exhaustive description of the meeting but aims to give the reader a “practical flavor” of SDI’s work as it plays out in the interactions between slum dwellers, support professionals and government.

Day 1: Engagement with Ministry of Local Government, field visit to Garden Park community under threat of eviction (only some delegates) and meeting at Lusaka City Council (LCC).

The Zambians were clear that the first day’s agenda was about taking their process forward, especially in terms of achieving tangible outputs from government. South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Malawi and Ghana all stressed the actual outputs of their relationship with government to both the Ministry of Local Government and LCC. As was noted, “ An M.o.U with government is just a piece of paper unless it has actual tangible outputs attached”. 

Making the first day about taking the Zambian process really orientated us within local challenges and used the HUB as an instrument to open space with government for the Zambians (which they are now following up on). The Southern African HUB has previously been very “talk” orientated and not substantively relevant to the local process so this shift was refreshing to see. A trick that we missed out on was not inviting government officials from the countries attending as the Zambians felt that this would have deepened the impact in these engagements with government. As a federation member noted “governments like to talk to other governments”. 

Through the site visit to Garden Park, evictions were placed on the table as a key issue with the HUB committing (on the final day) that each federation will draft guidelines on evictions sharing their experiences and strategies used (this emerged out of a separate federation only session) 

Women from Garden Park, Lusaka, Zambia

Women from Garden Park meet to discuss eviction threat

Day 2: New Secretariat systems (L,M&E, New Secretariat structures) 

Day 2 was spent at the Zambian federation’s resource center in George compound with significant participation from the Zambian federation. Mara (from the SDI Secretariat) and Muturi (from the Core Team) did a fantastic job in taking everyone through some of the new systems developed by The Secretariat including the L, M &E worksheet and call for support. There was a vibrant discussion about these new systems and some very important suggestions made as to how they could be refined (e.g. definitions of certain terms such as “secure tenure” need to be clarified). These issues were noted and will be shared with the secretariat team.

A very critical issue was raised around the learning center and its role within the HUB, a number of people felt that the HUB itself was serving as the learning center. We need to think carefully about how the learning center fits into the HUB-especially in the case of Southern Africa were conditions and experiences in Cape Town are quite different to the rest of the countries. People felt strongly that different countries had different strengths (e.g. Namibia and Zimbabwe around collection of their savings number & indicators).

 Day 3: HUB Business

The day was focused on collecting country reports that were compiled previously by each country. These will be used to aggregate a set of Southern African HUB figures that can be taken to the Board & Council (B&C) meeting. Each country handed in their reports but then spoke about the “burning issues” and what support was needed. This led to suggestions for further exchanges that have been noted. The HUB also discussed progress made on exchanges decided at the B&C. In general this approach was well received as countries did not use up time providing long lists of figures but rather focused on the key issues that they wished to raise. The exact role and nature of the CORE team was also explained at length. 

Throughout the meeting the participation of members from Kenya, Uganda and Ghana was extremely helpful. Their insights were valuable and contributed to the discussions with government. The continuity between the East African HUB and this HUB was definitely beneficial and something that we could take forward.

An issue that emerged from some was how we can include more “voices” in the HUB and encourage everyone to participate and speak more fully. It seemed that when we broke into country teams it allowed for more even discussion and participation as opposed to just a few people speaking in the bigger forum.

A HUB report is currently being drafted by Zambia and will be shared shortly. 

Carrying Water Home in Chazanga, Lusaka

“Carrying” water home in Chazanga, Lusaka