Evaluation Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EVALUATION REPORT Program for Emergency Seed support (PESS) project in Wag Himra Zone of Amhara Region Submitted to Food for the Hungry (FH) Karamara Consultancy Service Samuel Lemma February 2021 +251 911 455938; +251 922 785412; +251 984 000804 Addis Ababa Website: http://www.karamaraconsultancy.com Email: [email protected]; [email protected] P.O. Box 4674, Addis Ababa, Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENT........................................................................................................... iv ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................. v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 2. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION............................................... 3 2.1 Purpose and general objectives of the Evaluation.......................................................... 3 2.2 Specific Objectives: ....................................................................................................... 3 3. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION ...................................................................................... 3 3.1 Programme Focus........................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Geographical Focus ........................................................................................................ 3 4. EVALUATION APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY .................................................. 5 4.1 Study Design ................................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Sampling Techniques ...................................................................................................... 5 4.2.1 Sampling for quantitative data collection – Beneficiary’s Survey .............................. 5 4.2.2 Sampling for qualitative data collection...................................................................... 6 4.3 Data source mapping....................................................................................................... 6 4.4 Data collection instruments............................................................................................. 8 4.5 Data Management and Administration ........................................................................... 8 4.5.1 Recruitment and Training for Data Collection ............................................................ 8 4.5.2 Data Entry, Analysis and Quality Control .................................................................. 9 5. EVALUATION FINDINGS............................................................................................. 10 5.1 Demographic Characteristics ........................................................................................ 10 5.2 PESS project performance towards objectives and set Indicators ................................ 10 5.3 PESS Project Performance towards Evaluations Criteria ............................................. 15 5.3.1 Relevance .................................................................................................................. 15 5.3.2 Effectiveness ............................................................................................................. 16 5.3.3 Efficiency .................................................................................................................. 17 5.3.4 Impact ........................................................................................................................ 17 5.3.5 Sustainability ............................................................................................................. 18 5.3.6 Integration, synergy and complementarities ............................................................. 19 5.3.7 Cross Cutting Issues .................................................................................................. 19 6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 21 6.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 21 6.2 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 22 7. ANNEXES........................................................................................................................ 24 ii Figures Figure 1 Study Woredas with number of Survey sample size, and FGD, KII and Case Study 4 Figure 2 Food Self-sufficiency ................................................................................................ 11 Figure 3 Figure 3 Number of months of HH food self-sufficiency as a result of seed system security programming .............................................................................................................. 11 Figure 4 Percentage of HHs with access to sufficient seed to plant ........................................ 13 Figure 5 Previous and Current Year's Average Crop Production by Woreda ......................... 15 Figure 6 Scores of evaluation criteria ...................................................................................... 20 Tables Table 1 Table 2 Household Participation per Target Woredas .................................................. 6 Table 2 List of Participants of KII ............................................................................................. 7 Table 3 Number of FGD by Woreda and Kebele ..................................................................... 7 Table 4 Demographic Information of Interviewed Households. ............................................. 10 Table 5 Major Types of Vulnerability of Household Head ..................................................... 10 Table 6 Summary of findings vs. baseline and Target by indicators ....................................... 15 Table 7 Comparison of Crop Seed Purchase Plan vs Accomplishment .................................. 17 Table 8 Evaluation criteria of measurements........................................................................... 19 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENT The evaluation team would like to extend its most sincere thanks to the community members of sample kebeles and the government line offices of Wag Hemra Zone for their active participation and relevant inputs. The team also extends its heart-felt thanks to Food for the Hungry (FH), especially to the team members of Wag Hemira Program for Emergency Seed support (PESS) project and the Head Office who supported this evaluation process regardless of all the inconveniences and the additional burden. Particularly, our special thanks and sincere appreciation goes to EshetuAnito, TilahunGebru and HakuJemal for their unreserved support throughout the evaluation process. iv ACRONYMS ACF Action against Hunger AGFS Agriculture and Food Security CMDRR Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction DAC/OECD OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) DFSA Development Food Security Activity DRR Disaster Risk Reduction FGD Focus Group Discussion FH Food for the Hungry, Inc. FHE Food for the Hungry Ethiopia FHH Female Headed Households KCS Karamara Consultancy Service KII Key informant interview JEOP Joint Emergency Operations Plan NGO Non-governmental Organization PESS Program for Emergency Seed Support PSNP Productive Safety Net Program QT Quintals RNA Rapid Needs Assessment ToR Term of Reference USAID/BHA USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A USAID/BHA funded project named Program for Emergency Seed Support (PESS) has been implemented by Food for the Hungry (FH) as of June 8, 2020 and proceeded up to the end of January 2021. This is an emergency support project designed to ensure food security and build resilience among the communities in the 8 woredas of Wag Himra zone. FH targeted Kebeles by providing seed to farmers who, because they had lost crops in the previous season’s drought, did not have it in the 2020 cropping season. The main goal/objective of the project is to improve food security of the vulnerable disaster affected farming households, building their resilience and enhancing early recovery. As per the TOR, the purpose of the evaluation is to determine the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the FHE Program for Emergency Seed Support (PESS) project interventions and the progress made towards achieving the planned activities that have been implemented since June 2020 in SekotaZuria, Sekota town, Sahila, Dehana, Ziquala, Tsagbiji, Gazgibla and AbergeleWoreda of Wag Himra administration Zone, Amhara regional state. The evaluation used both quantitative household survey with a sample size of 288 households (in Sekota Town, SekotaZuria, Ziquala, Gazgibla and DahanaWoredas) and qualitative data collection through conducting 10 key informant interviews with relevant partner government offices including Agriculture office; Early Warning/DRR management Office and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with PESS project implementing staff. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were conducted with women and men beneficiaries at selected sample Kebeles. In addition case studies were done with sample beneficiaries of women and men targets to provide personal data on the context of the beneficiary before project