Comprehensive Community Initiative: Evaluation of a transformation system in Mhakwe community in Zimbabwe

References

• Aronson, RE, Wallis, AB, O'Campo, PJ, Whitehead, TL & Schafer, P, 2007. Ethnographically informed community evaluation: A framework and approach for evaluating community-based initiatives. Maternal and Child Health Journal 11, 97–109. doi: 10.1007/s10995-006-0153-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barton, J, Stephens, J & Haslett, T, 2009. Action research: Its foundations in open systems thinking and relationship to the scientific method. Systems Practice and Action Research 22, 475–88. doi: 10.1007/s11213-009-9148-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, HS, 2001. How should we evaluate community initiatives? Journal of the American Planning Association 67(2), 147–58. doi: 10.1080/01944360108976225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, D, 2007. Systemic action research: A strategy for whole system change. The Policy Press, Bristol.
   Google Scholar
• Chaskin, RJ, 2001. Building community capacity: A definitional framework and case studies from a Comprehensive Community Initiative. Urban Affairs Review 36(3), 291–323. doi: 10.1177/10780870122184876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connell, JP & Aber, L, 1995. How do Urban Communities Affect Youth? Using social science research to inform the design and evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives. In Connell, JI, Kubisvh, A, Schorr, LB & Weiss, CH (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods and contexts. The Aspen Institute, New York. pp. 93–125.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, JW & Clark, VL, 2011. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage, London.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, B, 2011. Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Promising directions for ‘wicked’ problems? Horizons Policy Research Initiative, Wellensley Institute, Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, B, Lalani, N & Plamadeala, C, 2010. Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Lessons, potential and opportunities moving forward. Wellesley Institute, Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• Harford, H & LeBreton, J, 2009. Farming for the future: A guide to conservation agriculture in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe Conservation Agriculture Task Force, Harare.
   Google Scholar
• Kubisch, AC, 2005. Comprehensive community building initiatives – ten years later: What we have learnt about the principles guiding the work. New Directions for Youth Development 106, 17–26. doi: 10.1002/yd.115
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kubisch, AC, Auspos, P, Bown, P & Dewar, T, 2010. Community change initiatives from 1990-2010: Accomplishments and implications for future work. Community Investments 22(1), 8–36.
   Google Scholar
• Labonne, J & Chase, R, 2009. Who is at the wheel when communities drive development? Evidence from the Philippines. World Development 37(1), 219–31. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lafferty, CK, & Mahoney, CA, 2003. A Framework for evaluating Comprehensive Community Initiatives. Health Promotion Practice 4(1), 31–44. doi: 10.1177/1524839902238289
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lyndon, N, Moorthy, R & Selvadurai, S, 2011. Native understanding of participation and empowerment in community development. Journal of Social Sciences 7(4), 643–8. doi: 10.3844/jssp.2011.643.648
   Google Scholar
• Makhoul, A, & Leviten-Reid, E, 2010. Determining the value of Comprehensive Community Initiatives. The Philanthropist 23(3), 313–8.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, M, 2010. Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 11(3), 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Messinger, L, 2004. Comprehensive Community Initiatives: A rural perspective. Social Work 49(4), 535–46. doi: 10.1093/sw/49.4.535
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy-Berman, V, Schone, C & Chambers, JM, 2000. An early stage evaluation model for assessing the effectiveness of Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Three case studies in Nebraska. Evaluation and Program Planning 23, 157–63. doi: 10.1016/S0149-7189(00)00010-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, MQ, 2002. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks.
   Google Scholar
• Platteau, J & Gaspart, F, 2003. The risk of resource misappropriation in community driven development. World Development 31(10), 1687–703. doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00138-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, G, 2003. NGOs and poverty reduction in a globalizing world: Perspectives from Ghana. Progress in Development Studies 3(2), 131–45. doi: 10.1191/1464993403ps057ra
   Google Scholar
• Rusinga, O, Chapungu, L, Moyo, P & Stigter, K, 2014. Perceptions of climate change and adaptation to microclimate change and variability among smallholder farmers in Mhakwe Communal Area, Manicaland province, Zimbabwe. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management 7(3), 310–8. doi: 10.4314/ejesm.v7i3.11
   Google Scholar
• Tashakkori, A & Teddlie, C, 2003. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Sage, Thousand Oaks.
   Google Scholar
• Walakira, EJ, 2010. Reflective learning in action research: A case on micro-interventions for HIV prevention among the youth in Kakira-Kabembe, Jinja, Uganda. Action Research 8(1), 53–70. doi: 10.1177/1476750309335210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WK Kellogg Foundation Africa Program, 2005. Expanding on the zoom site process model and integrating knowledge generation and the regional centre's role in the program. Memio, Pretoria.
   Google Scholar
• Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency, 2012. Census report. Government Printing Office, Harare, Zimbabwe.
   Google Scholar
• Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency, 2013. Poverty, income, consumption and expenditure survey, 2011/2012 report. Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency, Harare, Zimbabwe.
   Google Scholar