Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

M.Ed. / With the democratic government in place in 1994, many donor agents put a lot of money into rural community development. This was done with the hope of addressing disparities that were caused by the apartheid era. Yet the availability of funds for rural communities has often not resulted in development as anticipated. This study looks at how community development projects should be planned, implemented and monitored. A case study of the Boschkop sanitation project has been used. In this case interviews, documents and observations (to a limited extent) were used to gather information. Two members of the Regional Sanitation Task Team, three Project Steering Committee members, three community members and two trainers were interviewed. Documents, ranging from the business plan to the closure report, were used. The data were analysed using the constant comparative method. From the data analysis it became apparent that the Boschkop sanitation project was not successful. The project was implemented over a very short period of time. There was not sufficient education on the project as the participants were not afforded the opportunity to apply what they had learned immediately. The community was not involved in making decisions and somehow they do not think they own the project. The study shows that reckless disbursement of money is not necessarily a solution to a problem. For rural community development projects to be successful there should be sufficient time allowed, a period of at least twelve months, to allow the participants to be actively involved right from the inception of the project to its evaluation. During the planning phase all the stakeholders have to indicate what it is they would like the project to achieve. Indicators of success have to be agreed upon