Signs of Transformation
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Signs of transformation Evaluation report of Discipleship Centre’s post-tsunami development projects and housing project in MGR Nagar (funded by Tearfund UK) [ Timmo Gaasbeek together with Kavitha Gunalan Uma Devi R. Vasanthi Shanmugam Kolappan Tamilkumar November 2008 Signs of Transformation Evaluation of DC’s post-tsunami development projects and housing in MGR Nagar November 2008 Executive summary Introduction This report documents the findings of an evaluation of the post-tsunami development projects that Discipleship Centre (DC) implemented (with funding from Tearfund UK) in Pethankuppam and Kanniyakumari, as well as a housing construction project that was implemented in MGR Nagar. The evaluation took place in June 2008, in Pondicherry/Cuddalore and Kanniyakumari. The evaluation team consisted of a team leader and three co-evaluators, who were ably assisted by the staff and animators of DC in Pondicherry and Kanniyakumari. The objective of the evaluation was: 1. To inform the parties on what has been achieved by DC and to allow the parties to meet the information needs of the different stakeholders in United Kingdom and India. (accountability) 2. To allow the two parties to learn and make decisions on future improvements in their work 3. To assess the role of Tearfund UK and the work done by DC. 4. To assess the activities of DC on aspects such as effectiveness and impact. The projects implemented by DC were evaluated looking at relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability, focus on marginalised groups, and gender-related issues. Apart from that, DC itself was evaluated looking at organisational capacity, DC’s capacity to learn, co-ordination and coherence, and compliance with standards for humanitarian practice. Lastly, the relationship between DC and TFUK was examined briefly. This evaluation builds on the larger evaluation of DC’s post- tsunami projects that was done in June 2007 by the same team leader. Methodology The evaluation started with preparatory document study. This was followed by a workshop to prepare the field work. The actual fieldwork took place over a period of 5 days, in three teams: one team looking into the social aspects of the evaluation in Pethankuppam and MGR Nagar, one team looking into the social aspects of the evaluation in Kanniyakumari, and the team leader looking into project management issues, technical aspects of the housing projects, and specific data analysis. After the fieldwork was over, debriefings were held with the district teams and with DC’s management. A draft report was written subsequently. Feedback from DC and Tearfund UK (TFUK) were incorporated in the final version of the document which lies before you. For the evaluation, the following methods were used: • (limited) document study • interviews with DC staff, animators and key outsiders who were involved in the project (such as Fr. Joseph Justus in Kolachel and Mr. Julian and Pastor Joseph Salathraj and his wife in Pethankuppam) – mostly semi-structured and semi-formal, but with DC staff also many unstructured and very informal conversations were held, • conversations by e-mail with Mr. George Samuel, • focused group discussions individual family visits were discussed with those present • on-site observation and verification quantitative data analysis Findings 1: the development project in and around Pethankuppam The development project in Pethankuppam originally started in one village, but parts of the activities spread to five other villages after June 2007, which is a sign of the efficiency with which the project was implemented. The health and hygiene activities are a continuation of activities that were started under the livelihood project. In terms of knowledge and health practices, clear changes could be observed. People are healthier, and the village is much cleaner than it used to be. In order to stimulate people to live good lives, DC organised sessions for children, youth and adults in which topics related to family life and values were discussed. These sessions are very popular, and seem to have really given people tools to work on themselves. A key issue for many villagers was their low self-esteem, caused by their status as dalits. Particularly among the youth, who have been i Signs of Transformation Evaluation of DC’s post-tsunami development projects and housing in MGR Nagar November 2008 organised in a ‘Boy Power’ and a ‘Girl Power’ group, changes can be seen. It was very impressive to see the new-found self-confidence of the people we spoke to. The tuition classes (which have spread to five villages) seem to be bearing fruit: but particularly the weakest students benefit. There are some concerns however over the sustainability of the classes in Pethankuppam, now that DC has stopped paying the tuition teachers. In the other villages, the teachers were volunteers from the start, and sustainability seems not to be a problem. Computer classes only started in January 2008, but have the potential of changing the lives of many of the youth. One major consequence of the improved incomes and the enhanced awareness on the importance of education has been that more and more children are going to private schools outside Pethankuppam. Originally, the plan was to set up 20 SHGs. However, when DC realised that other NGOs were also supporting SHGs in the village, the target was reduced to six. DC provided a lot of training, and towards the end of the project a paper bag manufacturing line was set up that involves several dozen women in Pethankuppam and surrounding villages. This seems to have seriously taken off after the evaluation was over, and as long as a market is available, this has good potential. The family diaries that were distributed have ended, but about 25% of the families still continue keeping household cashbooks. Many beneficiaries said that the diaries had helped them to understand their income and expenditure patterns better, and to spend their money more wisely. 137 youth completed various skills trainings. Of these, 24 had found jobs by the time the project ended, and more are expected to find jobs in the near future (because they only finished their courses close to the end of the project). Nine of the girls who completed tailoring training have joined a tailoring unit in the village. At the time of the evaluation, this unit was running well, but marketing remained an issue. If a bigger market for the products can be developed, incomes will increase. Cows were distributed to each family under the livelihoods project. While cattle rearing has potential for generating income, it was found that not everybody is equally capable at doing it. By the end of the project, only about 40% of the cows were remaining, but those families that still had cows were looking after them well. This seems to have been a process of self-selection, and those who still have cows are likely to benefit from them. The disaster preparedness work started under the livelihood project continues. The Disaster Management Team is active and maintains its state of readiness by engaging in mock drills and by helping in village festivals. In the original proposal, it was planned to introduce biogas plants into the village. However, this activity was cancelled due to lack of funds, and because the state government promised everybody a gas connection for cooking. The Village Information Centre has been completed, and is still being developed. Once the local government appoints someone to be responsible for the centre, it is expected that it will be used even more intensively than it is. The project is considered relevant by those involved. Since DC started working in Pethankuppam, a visible transformation has taken place that is very impressive, and that has radiated to some extent to the surrounding villages. It is expected that part of the project activities will be able to continue after the project finishes, but for some activities that require funding, a cost-benefit analysis is required so that detailed phasing out strategies can be worked out. Findings 2: the housing project in MGR Nagar Because fewer houses were built in Pethankuppam than was originally planned, DC expanded its housing construction programme to other sites. The last of these was MGR Nagar, where 92 houses and a community hall were built for families of the Irular scheduled tribe. These families had been basically living under the trees for decades, and belong to the most vulnerable families in Tamil Nadu. At the time of the evaluation, the houses were still under construction; construction finished in October 2008. Apart from the construction of the houses and a community hall, 45 families received a goat for income generation. ii Signs of Transformation Evaluation of DC’s post-tsunami development projects and housing in MGR Nagar November 2008 The house design was thoroughly revised based on discussions with the beneficiaries, and is definitely the most appropriate house design that DC built in Tamil Nadu after the tsunami. The beneficiaries were highly appreciative of the lay-out, and of the fact that they had been involved in the design process. The construction was found to be generally solid. The project is extremely relevant to the beneficiaries, who will have a proper house for the first time in their lives. It would have been good if DC had had been able to implement more income generating activities, but funding limitations prevented this. In Kanniyakumari, construction at two housing sites was not completed yet due to problems with the contractors, and in one case due to inter-caste tensions. At the time of the evaluation, construction had just started again, and the houses were expected to be completed soon. For these sites, the findings are the same as those that were documented in the 2007 evaluation report.