FINAL EVALUATION REPORT the Haiti Title II Multi Year Assistance Programs (MYAP) Final Evaluation Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Pa FINAL EVALUATION REPORT The Haiti Title II Multi Year Assistance Programs (MYAP) Final Evaluation Report January 2014 This publication was prepared at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by Bechir Rassas, Louis Herns Marcelin, Bernard Crenn, and Felipe Tejeda, International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI), with Interuniversity Institute for Research and Development (INURED) as sub-contractor COVER PHOTO Credit: ACDI/VOCA Mothers' Club Focus Group, Southeast Dept. THE HAITI TITLE II MULTI YEAR ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS (MYAP): FINAL EVALUATION REPORT January 2014 AID-RAN-I-00-09-00016, Order No. AID-521-TO-13-00001 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. CONTENTS ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................. I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... II EVALUATION PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS .................................................................... 1 Evaluation Purpose .................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Evaluation Questions .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Program Background ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2 EVALUATION METHODS & LIMITATIONS .................................................................. 11 Evaluation METHODOLOGY and limitations .............................................................................................................................. 11 Organization of the report .................................................................................................................................................................... 14 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 14 QUESTION 1: HOW DID THE FOOD SECURITY STATUS OF THE POPULATION CHANGE? ........................... 14 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................................................. 23 QUESTION 2: DID THE PROGRAM ADDRESS THE MOST CRITICAL PROBLEMS OR CONSTRAINTS TO FOOD SECURITY AND RESILIENCY FOR THE MOST VULNERABLE? ............................................................................ 24 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 QUESTION 3: ARE THE CONSTRAINTS FACED BY THE TARGET BENEFICIARIES AS OUTLINED IN THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT STILL RELEVANT? .............................................................................................................................. 31 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 QUESTION 4: TO WHAT EXTENT DID THE PROGRAM’S THEORY OF CHANGE CONTRIBUTE TO THE MYAPS ACHIEVEMENTS IN TERMS OF PROJECT RESULTS AND OUTCOMES? ..................................................... 35 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................................................. 42 QUESTION 5: HAVE WOMEN AND OTHER DISADVANTAGED POPULATION GROUPS WHO PARTICIPATED BEEN DIFFERENTLY AFFECTED (POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY) BY THE PROJECT? ............... 43 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 43 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 47 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................................................. 47 QUESTIONS 6-7: IS THERE ADEQUATE EVIDENCE SUGGESTING THAT THE PROJECT OUTCOMES ARE LIKELY TO BE SUSTAINED? WHAT WERE THE MAJOR FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCED THE ACHIEVEMENT OR NON-ACHIEVEMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROJECT? ............................................... 48 FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 48 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 56 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................................................. 57 QUESTION 8: TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE VARIOUS MOTHERS’ CLUBS MODELS IMPLEMENTED BY WV, CRS AND ACDI/VOCA COST EFFECTIVE?................................................................................................................................ 57 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1: MYAP General Information 2 Table 2: Geographic areas targeted by the ACDI/VOCA MYAP and program beneficiaries 3 Table 3: Results Framework and Major Project Activities 4 Table 4: Geographic areas targeted by the CRS MYAP and program beneficiaries 6 Table 5: CRS MYAP Results Framework and Major Project Activities 7 Table 6: Geographic areas targeted by the World Vision MYAP and program beneficiaries 9 Table 7: World Vision Results Framework and Major Project Activities 10 Table 8: Coverage Estimates for Key Indicators: by Intervention (baseline, mean 2013; Confidence Intervals and percent change 2008-2013) 16 Table 9: Coverage Estimates for All Indicators Measured: All MYAP and by Cooperating Sponsor (mean 2013; % change 2008-2013) 17 Table 10: CSs’ Contributions to MYAP Achievements in Agricultural Productivity, Environmental Management and Market Linkages (2008-2012) 36 Table 11: CSs’ Contributions to MYAP Achievements in MCHN (2008-2012) 37 Table 12: Key CRS and World Vision program activities and outputs in support of vulnerable groups 44 Table 13: MYAP Gender-Disaggregated Indicators 46 Table 14: Population Changes in Selected Indicators among Mothers' Care Groups, Mothers' Clubs and Mixed Over Time 62 Table 15: Cost per unit, change or improvement in the MCHN composite index 63 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Haiti iii Figure 2: ACDI/VOCA geographic areas 5 Figure 3: CRS MYAP Geographical Distribution 7 Figure 4: World Vision geographic areas 9 Figure 5: Extent of Qualitative Research and Numbers of Persons providing Evidence 12 Figure 6: Total MYAP Program: Child and Household Hygiene 18 Figure 7: Child Nutrition across all Three Cooperating Sponsor Populations 20 Figure 8: Total MYAP: Anthropometric Indicators in View of Other Data 20 Figure 9: Total MYAP Populations: Household Food Security Measures 21 Figure 10: Total MYAP: Adoption of New and Sustainable Agricultural Production Practices 22 Figure 11: Total MYAP Population: Family Planning and Antenatal/Postnatal Care 23 Figure 12: Awareness of CS Food Security Efforts 27 Figure 13: Activities with the Greatest Benefits Identified by Key Informants 28 Figure 14: Focus Group Reactions as to Who Should Participate in MYAP Activities 30 Figure 15: How Gender was Monitored in the Programs 44 Figure 16: Perceptions of which Achievements were Resilient 48 Figure 17: Perceptions about Constraints Inhibiting Sustainability Post Program 55 Figure 18: Number of Mothers’ Clubs Implemented by CS 59 Figure 19: Evolution Over time of the