Nov 09 marked the end of a highly successful food aid response to 21 000 of the most vulnerable people in the war-affected areas of eastern DR Congo.

If you have read any of my previous posts on the subject, you have already heard of my first of three visits to the region, during a visit into Nindja, we spent 8 hours on the road. That got us to and from a one-and-a-half hour meeting.  The total distance we travelled was probably about 269 kilometers - 130 km each way, and about 9 in climbing in and out of potholes.

During our drive to the community, at first we passed other four-by-fours, large transport trucks with crowds seated on top of the mass of products, and small Toyotas with the suspension about to burst.  Eventually the vehicles dwindled down to the occasional motorcycle, until finally we met no other car on the road, no one passed by, except on foot.  Later we discovered that we were the fourth vehicle into the region that year.

We passed some of the most beautiful country in the world, gentle mountains, lush and green, gave way to groves of banana, tea, pine and countless small farms.  The hillsides were alive with countless women, men and children, each hard at work with worn shovels and smoothed hoes.  The observable evidence of a return to normal cultivation is on the rise.

Still, the problems of DR Congo are significant; the security situation is in constant flux.  While Kimya II, the recent military campaign to rout out the rebel forces has struck a significant blow at the leadership, in many cases the rebels have now decentralized and moved into the communities. While this is a positive reduction in the overall force of the rebels, it has also created a destabilizing influence at the local community level. Over the summer, I was able to interview several beneficiaries in Kaniola (one of the distribution sites), after asking what war meant to each of them, one woman clarified that this was not a philosophical exercise as she had been forced from her home by rebel combatants in the last week.

Other significant problems include the high prices for many goods, while payment for labour remains very low.  Corruption is endemic – border officials, unofficial road crews, numerous check stops, and army protection – all demand payment.   Government resources are limited and are not trusted by the majority of the population.  Even in the regional capital Bukavu, I found that the electricity, internet connection and water supply were infrequent at best.

For outlying areas, the situation is even more difficult.  As a region, Sud Kivu has borne more than its share of pain.  Constant war, subsequent displacement and numerous acts of violence and aggression have continually forced the population out of the normal routines of planting and harvest.  Food security is tenuous for most, and for those on the edges; the ill, elderly, widowed and orphaned, the situation is even worse.  As people have returned home, they have had to start over with nothing, for some, this displacement has happened numerous times.

Against these challenging circumstances, and ably mobilized by the local project manager, Pastor Raha Muzibao has gathered a capable and honest team to accomplish some substantial goals. 7000 families in five remote areas were identified to receive a substantial monthly food package.  The food would prove a decrease in malnutrition, allow people the time and energy to cultivate their own plots, free people to engage in psychosocial support and re-engage children back to school.  Pastor Raha’s nondescript office wall reveals the important results; during an informal poll review, the village leadership revealed a 98% success rate of the project for the 21 000 beneficiaries.

The project leaders respect and appreciation of the principles of good practice was obvious and enthusiastic.  Even where we found occasional misunderstanding, Raha’s collaborative process of learning and improving was not short-circuited.  There was no abandonment of project principle for expediency or personal advantage, instead integrity was rigorously maintained and consistent and significant advances forward were made in terms of capacity development.

For the most vulnerable, exhausted by the continual terror of displacement and war, this ERDO/CFGB feeding program was initiated and proven very successful.  The consistency and quality of the food package was often a source of pride by the participants.   I observed that beneficiaries showed a marked improvement in health.  Standards of impartiality were maintained and all partners unanimously reported a very high degree of satisfaction.  The only requests that remain are for future projects to new, even-more remote and impoverished communities, as well as the desire  for supplementary food security projects to the communities that the project had served.

Mark Crocker

Short-Term Missions teams often get the benefit of preparation, Long-Term people have to go through a process, but our Mid-Term Missionaries (individuals who participate in international work for 2 months to 2 years) often fall through the gaps in the process.

I recently developed a new process to bring them to the field in the best possible way, as well as developed the new teaching material for the process.

The PAOC (Canada’s largest evangelical denomination) has recently picked it up as the way that they are sending all of their future mid-termers. My colleague Matt Janes and I are presently working with a number of people who have begun the process (close to 30 people at one stage or another – from initial interest to complete training).

If you are interested in Mid-Term Missions (Individuals, not teams, that plan to engage in international work for 2-24 months) … Check out the MTM link at the top of the page!

Mark Crocker

Yes, it is possible, if they meet some policy requirements … (IE.  no bling) and if you check out this link you can see the document for yourself.

Mark Crocker

Then why is it considered optional to train for international short-term missions work?

There are some who say that this is an obvious overreaction, after all we do not need to train for a party, or for a walk, we do not train for a vacation – there are many things in life we do not have to prepare for. Additionally, many people go every month on a short–term trip, they meet at the airport, and they seem all right.

These, of course, are often the same people who return angry at the world, there two weeks has convinced them that they have seen the light and now know how international ministry is supposed to work. I have met countless short-term missions participants who return, depressed and upset.

Too many others return with the impression that they have ‘done their duty’, they have accomplished the missions thing. I would beg to differ, a focus or mission should not be activity, it should not simply be a once-in-a-lifetime goal – like sky-diving, or a return to my college weight.

I once trained a team that was working in Southern Africa, they got together 12 times before they departed, one of the team members lived in another province – a one-way six hour drive – guess who was on time every week? As far as I remember, she only missed one training event – due to a blizzard

Compare her to the more awkward occasions when people, who promise the world in order to get on the team and then do not bother to show up for 1/2 or more of the training (always for very, very good reasons). If I remove them from the team at this point, I am accused of being a controller. But in EVERY occasion when they have come on the team, they have been a problem, never fully part of the group, the loudest complainers, and involved in the most destructive forms of participation.

In my view, team preparation is non-optional. To expect a very high degree of participation in the process is neither unreasonable nor unwarranted. We are, after all, not tour guides, nor activity directors. We are calling teams to real commitment, and significant participation. STM is no longer simply jr. high teams arriving with their skits and puppet shows .

Once a team leader explains the requirements, some potential team members will immediately counter with the reasons why it is impossible to meet those requirements: work, busy-ness, family obligation, conflicting schedule with another ministry, they are all great reasons but the list is endless. It is important that a team leader does not reduce their expectation. Team leaders need to commit to the tough work of team preparation, even to be ready to disappoint others as they say ‘no’ to people for a team, who cannot commit to prepare with the team. The kind of participants who find the time to prepare, are the people who work in effective short-term mission. Experience is a tough teacher, no one is doing a team leader a favour by coming along.

For those who feel my high expectations too unrealistic, all I can say is that the teams that engage in a full training process, prior to going, do better. They complain less, work harder, accomplish more, harm the situation less, and missionary hosts want them back.

Missionaries know the difference, they might not say it to you because they might not want to offend a possible support stream, but they want you to do a better job. You can, if you are willing to work at it.

Mark Crocker

Hands at Work in Africa.
One day George Snyman decided to see for himself, and so this African IT worker left his computer and went for a walk – across the bottom of a continent. Over the next few weeks and months he visited the mud huts of hundreds of people. George was forced to face the realities of AIDS not as a concept, but as individual men and women with names and stories. Eventually he stopped in Masoyi and decided to take responsibility for what he was not responsible. He created Hands at Work in Africa

Hands at Work has developed an inspiring model of community development. Caring for 14,000 orphans: No orphanages. Children are directly cared for in their homes by mobilizing local volunteers and simple community resources where the pandemic has hit the hardest.

The incredible advantage to Home-Based Care is that it does not further split orphans from extended family members thereby increasing their orphan dislocation. Instead the children are supported in their childhood homes and remain close to their aunts and uncles, grandparents and friends. At present, Hands At Work is caring for over 14 000 children at a resource level that might not care for a tenth of that number in an orphanage.

Come with us
Who owns the orphans of Swaziland? Whose kids are they? Not mine of course!? I did nothing to create the problem, I do not live there!

We are right of course. They are not our responsibility. Still, Jesus invites us to takes responsibility for that which we are not responsible. As followers of the sacrificed king, we are given opportunity to make that most beautiful of choices, to answer as Jesus answered. We may step out and match his stride.

This spring the Short Term Missions Network is taking Canadian leaders to the front lines of the global AIDS pandemic. Stop feeling helpless. Grow your awareness and expertise with us. Join us to see how your short-term teams can participate in long-term results.

Details: As a Canadian leader you are invited to begin your participation at the 2009 Hands at Work International Conference. This conference is a chance for you to be inspired. Find out how you can bring a successful team to participate in solutions, and learn from the lavish mistakes of others. Leaders from around the world will gather with African leaders in order to dream possible dreams.

AIDS may be the defining social, justice and health issue of our generation, walk with those who have lived the solutions. Following the three-day conference, you will be immersed in the local community projects in order to discover what you can – and cannot – do to get involved. The remainder of the trip will find us in the community for:

• Orphan care training events
• Time spent in Child-Headed Households
• Feeding programs
• Walking the dusty roads to assist Community Volunteers
• Connecting with Schools and Churches
• HIV/AIDS relief
• Training from Hosts on Relief & Development best practices
• African Safari

Where: 15 days – 3 countries. South Africa – Zambia – Swaziland.

Dates: March 24 – April 8, 2009 (15 days)

Cost: $3850 per person includes all flights and transfers, ground transportation, accommodation, guides and meals. (prices may change according to Canadian city of departure)

Click here to request more information.

Feel free to forward this invitation to other leaders who could participate with us. If you would like a pdf file to print a poster, just ask.
Mark Crocker

PASSION FOR MISSION
The STMnetwork is committed to working with local churches to help them build confident leaders, stronger teams, and life-changing experiences for their people in short-term mission.

With that in mind, here are my thoughts on five important questions:

1. What needs to be on the application form to give me the most meaningful information?

Much depends on your purpose for the application process. I often think of an initial application as the first step for someone to express interest, there are no guarantees at this point that they will be part of the team. Many people will talk of their interest in ‘Going’, but someone who takes that first step and fills in the form … they might mean it!

Years ago I met a team applicant who looked great on the surface (some details are changed to protect his identity), he worked in a church, had his finances in order, and seemed like a real asset to the team. In the past, he had even volunteered to help out with some of the previous teams preparation.
It was only when we began to look a little deeper that some disturbing details began to arise. This candidate had recently suffered a moderate emotional break-down and was being treated for depression. Co-workers recognized the instability that he would have brought to a team, but because they liked him, at first they did not want to give the actual details of the situation to the team leader.
In the end, the candidate was not allowed to participate, and that was when his true colours came out in an ugly tirade and threats to go to a pastor to force a position on the team.

The questions cannot give you a full sense of a person, but they can give you a theme to follow up on during an interview. The questions should be persistent enough to let potential team members recognize the openness that they may be required to participate in.

The questions should take more time than a quick credit card application in a mall. Someone who is not willing to take 30 minutes to reflect on why they want to go, may not be the best candidate to take on your team!

The questions should reveal a seriousness to your task, enough for a participant to carefully consider whether or not they are able or willing to work within a team.

Ask Questions about:

• Physical and mental health
• A criminal record
• Willingness to submit to a police check
• A faith background
• References

The question about a faith perspective, (IE ‘Are you a Christian’, or ‘Share your testimony’ are by no means a requirement for all mission-sending organizations. Many churches and agencies are willing to accept participants who do not self-identify as a Christian, so long as they are willing to work within the priorities and requirements of the agency. In fact, some churches feel it is important to bring ‘non-believers’ onto the field with the express opinion that if people are brought to where God is at work, then they may meet Him there.

References are limited by the fact that the person supplying them will often only select people that will give a glowing report. It is important that the team leader uses all resources available to get a clear picture of the possible candidate. Phone the pastor to find out how they know the person, or if they know them. Check to see how they work in community (or not). Many a team leader has only found out after the fact, that a possible team member would have received a number of red flags to watch out for it only the leader had contacted the most obvious sources.

In my mind, a primary purpose of an application is to let participants know that this process will involve commitment, and authentic openness. Ask personal questions, and expect direct and complete answers.

Over the next while, I want to answer Five questions about the application process. If you are wondering how to do this better, come back and check out my further thoughts, or subscribe to my RSS feed (on the right) in order to have them automatically sent to your reader when they are posted.

Getting ready to GO!

Mark Crocker

The only way in which I feel I might truly face the realities of the AIDS pandemic across Africa is through some sort of participation. There are many ways to do so, but here is my favourite.

Hands at Work in Africa. The individuals that make up Hands work very hard at starting Home Based Care initiatives in the small communities across the continent. Home Based Care does what it says, it keeps orphans in their homes while mobilizing the community to care for their needs.

The incredible advantage to home-based care is that it does not further seperate orphans from extended family members – instead the children remain closer to their aunts and uncles, grandparents and friends. Secondly the cost to maintain a child in their home environment is far less than the cost to remove them to an orphanage. At present, Hands At Work is caring for over 14 000 children at a resource level that would not care for 1400 in an orphanage.

It does not hurt that George Snyman, the director of Hands at Work, is an inspiring fellow. A former IT guy, a white South African, he one day went for a walk – over the next few weeks and months he visited the mud huts of hundreds of individuals and faced the realities of AIDS not as a concept, but as individuals. If you watch this video you can hear the story for yourself. Heather Yourex, a Canadian Mid-Term Volunteer and Journalist recently put this together:

One by One from Heather Yourex on Vimeo.

To me, the answer is simple. This is the relationship of a boss and an employee. A one-way street of authority and direction.

Strangely, in some circles, this exchange of resources for receipts is often known as ‘partnership’. Perhaps you also receive the same emails and direct mail campaigns that cross my desk every week or so; all seem intent in offering a strange version of ‘partnership’ with all kinds of people from Sudan to Sarnia.

Yesterday, as one of three guest panelists for a World Vision event, I was in sunny Vancouver. The organizers of the event offered a breakfast meeting in order to present some expertise on what effective partnership may actually look like.

My fellow panelists were the author Dr. Harold Percy and pastor in an Anglican parish in Streetsville, Ontario; as well as Ernest Fraser from South Africa who presently works as World Vision’s Partnership Coordinator out of Swaziland.

I loved the topic – International Partnerships,and we spent a great couple of hours telling the inspiring, frustrating and often funny stories of Short Term Mission teams attempting international partnerships.

From emotional promises to dashed expectations. Short-termers who saw through the sepia-toned glasses of epic and enourmous personal achievement, to the hilarious cultural gaffes that are ever-present in any exchange around the globe, this word partnership definitely revealed a wide range of response, both good and bad!

I really enjoyed the give and take, as well as the informed and important questions. Important realities were discussed and some awkward versions of the world were refocused into newer and healthier perceptions.

One issue I shared during the course of the morning was my thoughts on the questions we ask before we engage with others, here are some of my notes …

For a long time, our process was to simply bring in our resources to help with the percieved needs of others – this was our goodwill attempt to answer the question, “What do they need?” Although this is the right question to ask in terms of relief work – aid for people who will otherwise die today – in terms of development, this tends to strip the person of dignity as they stand as recipients only. Additionally, they must take what we give, which positions us as benefactors and eventually corrupts us. This relationship quickly ceases as entitlement and power corrupt both sides – recipients may be ungrateful as they receive cast-offs and grow dependant, all while benefactors feel misused and an ungrateful attitude.

Eventually this process changed, the new question was “What do you need?” Agencies simply began to ask what the community required. This was a much better process, people began to take ownership for their projects, volunteers began to come forward. Still, the position of benefactor and patron allows for inequality. People are subtly told that they cannot meet their own needs, others must solve their problems for them. Benefactors take on a hero role. The process may take longer, but this question also leads to a subtle dependency.

Recently, the question has again adapted, now some agencies are asking, “What are your dreams?” As the answer to this question promotes the individual, other questions may also help get us to the heart of the question. “What kind of community do you want your children to grow up in?” This question positions the community as primary drivers and care-givers. The community takes on sole responsibility, and we are honored to assist in their responsibility.

As my friend Julio from Honduras explains, “If I have to have a heavy table in my house, I may need to ask for help. It is my responsibility, because I own the table, but I may need a friend to give me a hand. The key to remember is that when you let go of your end, you do not own the table, it is still my table. In the same way, I own the problems of my community, I may ask for a hand, but I know that the responsibility for the ownership is my own”

I love Julio’s thoughts, and I love how I learned from him. How else have you received from others through international engagement?

If we are truly willing to engage in mutual partnership, I believe that what is of real importance, is that we allow our international partners to also ask us that third question. Are we prepared to begin to position ourselves as receivers as readily as we position ourselves as providers?

Mark Crocker

The very nature of a short-term trip often spells out an unspoken version of the world. A version that suggests that resources and/or information is the basic commodity missing from the situation, discover the problem and fix it and all should be well. We operate like a large appliance repairman, “ we enter with a certain expertise and set of tools, find the problem and fix it – ˜good as new”! That version may best be illustrated by the common phrase spoken by most short and mid-term missions participants: “Why don’t they just…

The attitude is this: the problem is significant, but through resources, hard work and modern insight, we should be able to promote long-term solutions. In short, It is simply the prerogative of the short-termer to aid in the discovery of the root of the issue, develop some solutions, articulate and clearly teach those solutions to local peoples, and finally follow up to see how they are following through on the process. Much of this version of the world may only be true simply because the short-term worker has a clearly defined (short) time frame in which they can work.

Missionaries of every type have had to face these issues. In essence the question comes down to more than the resources we hold in our hands, the better question may be, “As we prepare to go, what do we need to bring, and what should we leave behind?”

What do you refuse to take on short-term missions?

Mark Crocker

At times, as I have heard people attempt to teach the way of Christ they have faced into a depressing failure. In some cases I hear those same people justify their failure in this way “Scripture suggests that the Gospel is offensive. If I share my thoughts and it turns people off – the problem is their own. They are at fault.”

In some cases, the strange reality is this, the person who is assured that the Bible is what offended others, is often offensive in many other areas of life.

The offense of the gospel was never intended to be an offensive tactic or a way for us to release ourselves from our obligation to others. Even a cursory glace at Scripture will reveal who was offended by the Gospel.

It did not seem to offend Roman Centurians, and Samaritans (for a modern day comparison think of a business foreman, and a Mormon). It did not seem to offend the average guy or girl who spent their day at work, and came home to a drink and chat with friends. Really, the only record of offense we regularly find in Scripture is the offense of theologians and other community spiritual leaders.

The gospel is offensive, because it offends me.

• It offends what I wish to do, it offends my philosophy and pharisetical love for being right and instead thrusts me to the centre stage of life to relationship.
• It offends my notion in a territorial god, smaller than the God of all people, who blesses me and me alone.
• It disallows religious certitude and instead forces us to the higher standards of love

Perhaps the text of Galatians 5:11, “The offense of the cross” has too long been used as a club. Somehow the meaning has been transmogrified into a shortcut thought: if I simply provide the 4-spiritual laws, then I have done my duty. If it fails then this is simply because the gospel is offensive to some. We let ourselves off the hook because we proof text our way to righteous indignation – well, after all, this gospel is offensive.

Mark Crocker