Adoption of the Parish Development Model (PDM) for Socio-Economic Development of Ugandans: A Case Study of Banda and Kyambogo Upper Estate Parishes

Abstract

Background: The escalating burden of poverty in Uganda, disproportionately affecting youth, prompted government initiatives like Emyooga and Entandikwa. However, mismanagement and misuse of funds hindered their effectiveness. In response, the Government of Uganda introduced the Parish Development Model (PDM) in February 2022, aiming to eradicate poverty and accelerate socio-economic transformation. The PDM is built on seven pillars, including production, infrastructure, financial inclusion, social services, community data, governance, and attitude transformation. These pillars promote collaboration between public and private sector actors, ensuring sustainable development. The government has doubled funding for PDM, allocating UGX 200 million per parish to promote economic growth at the grassroots level. While the PDM shows promise, its success depends on effective implementation, transparency, and accountability. Addressing concerns surrounding mismanagement and misuse of funds is crucial to ensuring resources reach intended beneficiaries and contribute meaningfully to poverty alleviation. Objective: To examine the benefits of the Parish Development Model among the beneficiaries for socio-economic transformation. Methods: This study utilized a qualitative research paradigm, incorporating a case study methodology to investigate the benefits of the Parish Development Model (PDM) among purposively selected groups in Banda and Kyambogo Upper Estate parishes. A strategic sampling framework was employed to select 50 beneficiaries from diverse groups, ensuring the capture of nuanced perspectives and experiences. Participants were drawn from specialized groups, including Snack A and B, the Mushroom Group, the Tomato and Vegetable Group, and the Hard Corn Group. Data collection entailed focus group discussions, which yielded rich, contextualized insights into participants' lived experiences with PDM. Thematic analysis was employed to deconstruct the data, facilitating the identification of salient themes and patterns pertinent to the benefits and challenges encountered by participants. This methodological approach afforded a comprehensive understanding of the PDM's impact on these communities, illuminating areas for potential enhancement and informing avenues for future research. Findings: The empirical evidence suggests that the Parish Development Model (PDM) funds have yielded significant positive outcomes, including enhanced financial inclusion, augmented agricultural productivity, job creation, poverty alleviation, empowerment of marginalized groups, improved infrastructure, strengthened social capital, and localized economic growth. However, a notable disparity persists between beneficiaries who have received funding and those awaiting disbursement, with the latter experiencing undue delays despite investing considerable resources in the application process. These delays have impeded progress toward achieving the program's objectives, underscoring the need for expedited fund disbursement. Nonetheless, optimism prevails that timely access to funds will catalyze socio-economic transformation, augment quality of life, and foster community development. Conclusion and Recommendation: The Parish Development Model (PDM) has demonstrated significant progress over its two-year implementation period, facilitating beneficiaries' ability to consolidate their projects and attain enhanced economic stability. Nevertheless, persistent challenges undermine the program's efficacy, particularly the perceived politicization of the PDM. Beneficiaries underscored the imperative of decoupling political interests from the program to ensure its seamless operation, foster a paradigm shift in mindset, and guarantee equitable access for all eligible participants.