‘Hoe kijkt coördinator Mussa Nyirenda terug op het project?’

De partner vertelt... van 24 januari 2025 door Mussa Nyirenda

Elk jaar vragen we onze partner hoe het project is gegaan en welke lessen de partner heeft geleerd.

Reporting period
19.08.2024 - 20.01.2025

Report prepared by

Mussa Nyirenda

Date of submission
20-01-2025

Questions 1-3 to be answered no later than one month after the departure of the group, and where relevant to be revised no later than four months after the departure of the group

1. Describe the context in which the project was implemented, including any relevant information about the community, district, or country which affected activities carried out.
For example:
General issues, concerns, or developments in the education sector, or changes in the school year.
Insufficient number of teaching staff or health care staff, or delayed payment of salaries.
Diseases, conflicts, political instability, or socio-economic factors affecting operations in the community or country.
Food security issues.

The project was generally implemented in a good environment because it did not experience any challenges regarding the implementation. the community was well mobilized as evidenced by the huge turnup of the community who had their specific roles in the project such as drawing water, mixing mortar, bricklaying as well molding of the pressed bricks. despite the country experiencing a severe drought which led to most Malawians experiencing hunger but the community managed to withstand the situation and worked tirelessly to make the project a success. The school was also experiencing a sharp decrease in the number of staff as there were only three teachers against 8 grades during the implementation of the project. the forth teacher was on maternity leave,

2. Describe the original plan/idea for the project. Has the project been executed as planned? If changes were made, which changes and why?

The plan was to construct two teachers houses and two  staff toilets and was executed according to the same plan. no change was made to the original plan.

3. Give a general description of the implementation of the project. What was done, how was it done, who did what, when was it done, why was it done.

The project involved the construction of two teachers houses and two toilets using the pressed bricks also known as cement blocks. The women from the local community were mainly involved in the drawing of water and ferrying bricks close the construction site. most of the times there was a line where the locals and the participants together would pass on the bricks to each other on the line thereby promoting interaction and the spirit of working side by side. Men were responsible for mixing mortar and ferrying sand from the river to the construction site and this was also done together with the participants. the skilled builders were responsible for bricklaying together with the participants who were also being taught how to do the bricklaying.

Questions 4-6 to be answered no later than one month after the departure of the group, and where relevant to be revised no later than four months after the departure of the group

4. Buildings worked on.
a. What was constructed exactly (classrooms, water tanks, latrines, …)?

The buildings constructed were two teachers houses and two staff toilets

b. How was the building constructed? What construction methods were used? What kind of materials?

The buildings were constructed through bricklaying using cement blocks as opposed to the previous method of using burnt bricks which were causing alot of damage to the the environment through cutting down of trees for burning the bricks. The materials used were cement for making cement blocks as well as for bricklaying, plastering and skirting, planks for the shutter and making of the trusses/ beams, iron sheets for the roof, Y12 reinforcement bars for the ring beam and also quarry stones for the ring beam but also for filling the holes in the cement blocks.

c. Who was the contractor? Where is he/she from?

Grenger Mithi is the contractor with vast experience as he has been on world servants since 2007 up to date. he is from Kamilaza in kasungu North district

d. Were labourers hired from the community? If yes, for what kind of tasks (skilled, unskilled)? If not, why not?

The skilled labourers were hired from the community to work under the supervision of the contractor from CCAP. They were involved in the bricklaying and all the construction works such as plastering, skirting as well as ring beam. they will also be involved in flooring, pointing and drainage construction.

e. Is there a building code? If yes, was it applied/what parts were applied?

The government has a standard plan for rural houses and our blue print falls within the government standards. further more our standards are already more advanced because we are already using cement blocks for construction in the rural areas where it is still aloud by the government to use burnt bricks.

f. How were government authorities involved in planning, implementation, and quality control?
The government is currently involved through the Primary Education Advisor (PEA) who is incharge of the primary schools at a zone level and he is the one who gives updates to the District Education Manager at District level.

g. How was the quality of construction ensured? What should be done to improve the quality of construction, if anything?

The quality of the construction is ensured through the contactor who supervises the work and is always available on the construction to make sure that all the quality measures are adhered to. we also make sure that the bricklayers who are hired are skilled to do a good job. we also make sure that we buy quality materials which are durable and of high standards. We just need to continue improving our standards by maintaining the standards and looking for more new technologies for the future such as learning on how to start using iron bars for the roof in the near future when wood becomes scarce.

h. How does this construction compare to other buildings of the same kind?

The construction of the buildings in this community are very unique in the sense that all other structures are of poor quality and these teachers houses when completed will be outstanding in the community as well as in the zone. In short these teachers houses can not be compared with the other buildings at the school.

i. What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

The things that went well were the construction of the structures because there was great cooperation and team work throughout the construction. what did work well well was the molding of bricks which took the community a long time to finish because the underestimated time to complete the molding of the bricks. most of the cement blocks were being molded while construction was underway. Next time we will do physical counting of the cement blocks to make sure that there are enough cement blocks before the participants arrive.

5. Construction activities.
a. What construction activities were done before the group arrived? What was done with the group?

before the group arrived the community had already started molding of the bricks and already erected the foundation of  both teachers  houses. when the group arrived they started working on the super structure together with the community members and also helped with molding of the remaining cement blocks.

b. What tasks remained to be done after the group left? Which of these tasks are still remaining at the time of submission of this report?

The tasks that remained were beam filling, plastering, skirting, drainage, flooring, pointing, painting and fixing of doors. currently the community has done beam filling, skirting and plastering. The rest of the work is still in progress.

6. Planning and operations.
a. When did construction start? When was construction completed?

construction started in june and it ended early october. The tasks done during this period was building the foundation , raising the walls, roofing, plastering, flooring, painting, pointing and drainage.

b. When was the building first used? What is it used for? Who uses it?

The teachers houses were occupied on 20th October, 2025. teachers are occupying the teachers houses which have been allocated to the Head teacher and Deputy Head teacher.

c. Who is responsible for management, maintenance, and operational costs?

The school management Committee (SMC)  will oversee the management and maintenance of the teachers houses.

Questions 7-10 to be answered no later than one month after the departure of the group

7. Children’s programme.
a. When and where was the children’s programme organised?

The childrens program took place on the sorrounding of the school and also at the soccer field from Monday to Friday everyday beginning at 10.00 hrs in the morning until 12.00 noon.

b. What was done and who did what?

During the childrens work programme the participants led by the chldrens work leader Silke organized a number of activities such as stories from the bible, singing songs, dancing, shading witg crayons, playing games and football. The participants were being assisted with translations by two teachers one male and one female. There was also a female learner mentor who was actively involved in the translations as well.

c. Which groups of children were invited and participated? What was the experience like for the children who participated? Were any children excluded? How many children participated?

all children of school going age participated in the activities and they had a great time with the participants. this was evidenced by the children always following the participants even after the childrens program was over but also they were staying within the school surrounding up to late in the evening wanting to play with the participants. on average about 100 learners participated in the activities despite that the activities took place during the time when the schools were on holiday.

d. How was the experience for the teachers? How many teachers participated?

two teachers and one learner mentor teacher participated and they also enjoyed the activities. they were amazed by the techniques that the participants used to attract the learners to like the activities. it was also a learning opportunity for them on how to capture the attention of learners so that they are more involved in the activities but also they learnt new games to use during school times.

e. Is there anything that either teachers or students learned during the children’s programme that they still use/continue to do?

teachers learnt new skills on how to handle learners by engaging them in different activities such as games. the learners leant creative ways of shading and playing games.

f. Do you have any suggestions for future children’s programmes (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

Childrens work keeps learners get connected to the participants through the various games and other activities such as bible story telling and these are the activities that make a great impact on the learners. there should be a way of creating a separate chilldrens work in the afternoon.

8. Cultural and touristic activities.
a. What activities were done to stimulate interaction and to get to know the culture?

There were so many cultural activities that were lined up such as home visits to different families but also working side by side promoted more interactions between participants and locals. during the welcoming ceremony organised by the locals there were also traditional dances which were danced by locals and participants joined as well. the hike to the mountain was also done together with the community and equally promoted interaction.

b. How do you value the cultural aspects of this project? Was there mutual respect?

throughout the project implementation there was a high degree of mutual respect between the participants and the locals. there was also good understanding of the differences in culture and it also helped so much to have a successful project.

c. Do you have any suggestions for cultural activities in future projects (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

The home visits should continue being promoted because the provide the participants with indepth understanding of the way of the life for the community more especially where the home visits are split into different categories of the community members such as the old family, widows, orphans, very poor family, family with a special need child etc. in general the cultural activities were a success because all the lined tasks were performed.

9. Life Skills programme (if applicable).
a. When and where was the life skills programme organised? How many sessions were held? How many people attended each session? Was it the same group of people for each session?

The life skills program was organised  at the school playing field because of privacy. three sessions were organised consecutively and the same group attended all the sessions

b. What topics were discussed?

Topics on Forgiveness, problem solving, dicision making , menstruation and why do people indulge in bad behaviour

c. Who was invited and who participated? How were they invited? What motivated them to participate?

Girls and boys within the age range of 12 to 21 were invited and the maximum number was 5 for boys and 5 for girls. they were motivated by the presence of the participants.

d. How did the youth experience the programme? Is there anything they learned or changed based on these exchanges?

The youth found the program interesting more especially because the issues tackled were directly affecting them in their lives so it was great to share experiences.

e. How do you value the life skills programme?

The life skills programme is a good initiative and needs to be maintained because it opens up the youth on how to tackle issues affecting them using an interactive approach

f. Do you have any suggestions for future life skills programmes (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

The challenge so far has been consistence on the part of turn up because some of the youth are not learners from the school as they are older for primary school.  There is just need for the communities to be identifying youth who can also inspire others.

10. Football4Water (if applicable).
a. When and where was the football4water programme organised? How many training sessions and matches were held? How many people attended each session? Was it the same group of people for each session?

football4water took place at the school playing ground and two sessions were made one from kantheska and one from chasefu including the final match on

b. Who was invited and participated (including other schools/villages)? How were they invited? What motivated them to participate?

The community members were actively involved together with the learners. the other school was invited through their respective head teachers to take part and they were motivated to participate because the participants went to hold a coaching session at their school and they were so excited.

c. How did those attending the events experience the programme? Is there anything they learned or changed based on these exchanges? Was there an interest in the hygiene promotion part, or were people mostly interested in soccer?

To some it was so special to learn about sanitation and hygiene using a football game and they enjoyed lessons from the health surveillance Assistant. others were more interested in the football games

d. Was there a local nurse or hygiene agent involved? How do you value the football4water programme and the input of Dutch participants as well as the input of the local nurse/hygiene agent, where relevant/applicable?

yes there was a Health Surveillance Assistant who was responsible

e. Do you have any suggestions for future football4water programmes (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

We need to incorporate issues that affect the communities such as early marriages, childrens rights and drop outs.

Questions 11-17 to be answered no later than one month after the departure of the group, and where relevant to be revised no later than four months after the departure of the group

11. Leadership team World Servants.
a. How was the contact with the leadership team before they arrived? Do you need more/less interaction? Is anything missing?

The contact with the leadership team was okay more especially considering that partners were also in the Netherlands and met the groups during the preparation weekend. i also already visited the group at their church and spent a night in their place which gave me time to already discus a number of issues before hand. before the group arrived there were also whatsapp conversations going on where a number of questions were raised and a whatsapp group was also created to discus about the project. it should also be promoted to have the whatsapp groups between the staff and the coordinator but also to include the set up members because its easy to discuss issues before hand.

b. How was the collaboration with the leadership team during their stay with you? Do you have any observations about their collaboration towards you as a partner, and towards the community?

This being a new group and being the first time on a world servants project it was a learning point for them so they depended so much on the leadership of the coordinator and they coped up so well with the way of implementing the projects the world servants way. they really adapted so well to the system and did a great job as staff as well as participants. they enjoyed their stay in the community and shed tears of joy on their departure.

c. Do you have any suggestions for better collaboration with future leadership teams (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better? Please also feel free to let us know if you think any of the leaders are not fit to be a leader.

I have learnt that there is need for constant communication through whatsapp group which should have the staff, setup team and the coordinator where updates can be made prior to the coming of the group.

12. Collaboration with World Servants.
How did you experience the partnership with World Servants in the preparation and execution of this project? What were your expectations? Were these expectations met? How or how not?

The preparations for the projects went on very well because of the world servants prepares the projects. the setup team equally did a good job by visiting the communities and assuring them that the projects will take place. the level of communication regarding the execution of the project is of high standards because all information regarding the projects is always available and handy.

13. Local leaders / key persons.
a. Who were the key persons involved locally? How were they involved? 

The traditional leaders were responsible for sending their subjects to take part in the development work at the school, The SMC/PTA/VDC/Mother group worked in collaboration with traditional leaders also known as the chiefs in making sure that community members were available to take part in the construction work at the school. they were also responsible for arranging the members by giving them special tasks to do such as molding cement blocks, ferrying sand, drawing water and mixing mortar.

b. How was the collaboration with them?

There was good cooperation amongst all stakeholders and this helped the implementation of the project to be a success.

c. Do you have any suggestions for better collaboration with local leaders/key persons in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

Local leaders are very key to the success of the whole project so we always use them. they mobilised their subjects well and that is why there was good interaction at the construction site as well as during home visits. The collaboration has always been very good and can be maintained.

14. Community.
a. How was the community involved? How did they participate in construction? In cultural exchange? In other areas?

the community was very much involved from the start of the project such as molding of cement blocks and digging foundation and during the implementation they were able to work side by side together with the participants such as carrying bricks, drawing water, ferrying sand and quarry. the cultural exchange was also good because there was good interaction amongst the community members and participants such as singing traditional songs, dancing and home visits. there were also visits to the mountain which was another good experience.

b. How was it for the community to host a group? What are the advantages and disadvantages for the community of hosting a group?

The community was very excited to host a group of Dutch volunteers more especially for them to stay with the locals. the advantages of staying with the community are that there is a lot of exchange of skills and knowledge which are gained through interactions.

c. How was the collaboration between the community, the partner, and the group? Was there mutual respect?

Throughout the implementation of the project there was mutual respect for each others culture and way of life. this really helped to foster a spirit of togetherness.

d. Do you have any suggestions for better collaboration with a community in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

So far there is very good collaboration with the community and we can not expect it much better than this. in this community there were more people on the construction with different tasks assigned to each group

15. Beneficiaries.
a. Who are the beneficiaries? How were they involved? How was the collaboration with them?

The beneficiaries are the learners themselves and they collaborated well with the participants.

b. Do you have any suggestions for better collaboration with beneficiaries in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

the collaboration was good and it just needs to be maintained.

16. (Local) government.
a. Which government authorities were involved? How were they involved? How was the collaboration with them?

the primary education advisor was involved through his presence at the school and providing leadership to the teachers. the collaboration with ccap was good and it continues to be good.

b. Do you have any suggestions for better collaboration with government authorities in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

we just need to make sure that we work together and keep each other well informed on. This being a new group without any experience i would say they did their best to lead the participants and to work together with the ccap leadership.

17. Unlimited project (if applicable).
a. Is there a difference between hosting a regular group and an unlimited group? If yes, in what sense?


b. How did you experience hosting a group that included persons with disabilities? What were the expectations beforehand and how did these compare to the actual experiences?


c. What does it mean for you and for the community to host a group that includes persons with disabilities?


Questions 18-21 to be answered no later than one month after the departure of the group

18. Accommodation.
a. How was accommodation arranged (space for sleeping, meals, meetings, latrines, showers)?

everything was well arranged according to the malawian standards. classrooms were used as accommodation and dining room. local bathrooms made from grass and poles

b. Do you have any suggestions to improve accommodation arrangements in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

the accommodation in rural areas will remain a challenge as the only options available are classrooms or churches.

19. Food.
a. How was food arranged? Were the cooks from the community or from outside the community? Did they cook local food or ‘foreign’ food?

food was arranged in the by the ccap chefs who were being assisted by women from the community. the food prepared was both local and foreign.

b. Did any of the participants assist with cooking? If so, was this considered positive or negative? Did the cooks feel respected/appreciated?

yes they went in the kitchen and assisted with the cooking together with the locals.

c. Did anybody get sick with food poisoning? If yes, did few people get sick or many?

we did not receive any issues to do with food poisoning or some participants being sick. the leaders commended the kitchen staff for the good food.

d. Do you have any suggestions to improve food arrangements in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

as long as the leaders team and the kitchen work together on managing hygiene and sanitation there  will always be good health for everyone

20. Transportation.
a. How was transportation arranged? What types of transportation were used where?

The bus and the jeep were used to carry participants while the lorry was used to ferry sand, bricks and sometimes luggages.

b. Were there any technical or other issues? If yes, what issues? How were these addressed?

On our way back from the national park we had a flat tyre but it was replaced within 20 minutes and we proceeded with the journey without problems.

c. Was the location accessible by vehicle?

yes it was very much accessible

d. Do you have any suggestions to improve transportation in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

with the vehicles we used we are of the view that transport was well arranged.

21. Safety.
a. What precautions were taken to prevent safety issues? Were these effective?

the participants were advised to follow instructions from the leaders during the day as well as during the night. they were also advised on how to handle themselves at the construction site.

b. Were there any safety issues or incidents? If yes, which ones and how were they addressed?

No safety issues were brought to our attention

c. Do you have any suggestions to improve safety measures in the future (what to do or what not to do)? What went well, what did not go well, what could be done better?

The best way is to make sure that both the partner and the leaders collaborate well to avoid incidents that would jeopardize the safety of the participants.

Questions 22-26 to be answered no later than four months after the departure of the group

22. Which partner staff was involved and how was each of them involved?


23. How is monitoring done? What tools are used? Who is involved in follow-up?


24. Were there any unforeseen impacts, either negative or positive?


25. Were there any challenges? If so, how did you handle these?
For example, challenges can relate to conflicts, impact of weather conditions, inflation, transportation, socio-political situation, ...


26. Lessons learned.
Describe the lessons your organisation learned from organising the project within this community. In other words: what would you do the same next time and what would you do differently?


27. Do you have any feedback or suggestions for World Servants to improve future projects?


Questions 27-28 to be answered no later than four months after the departure of the group

28. Did you use any funding from other donors/sources or own funding for the construction process? If yes, from whom? Who contributed what?
Please also include this information in the financial report.


29. Is there any other information you would like to share?


Share personal stories of beneficiaries, community members, partner staff, local authorities, etc. (See guidelines.) These can be students, teachers, health care staff, patients, parents, construction workers, cooks, representatives of local government, colleagues from your organisation, etc.


Please provide the logframe as a separate attachment, with disaggregated data (male/female, ages, grades, …).