Asociación SHARE De Guatemala Annual Results Report Fiscal Year 2008
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
USAID Office of Food for Peace Multi-Year Assistance Programs/Development Activity Programs Asociación SHARE de Guatemala Annual Results Report Fiscal Year 2008 Submission Date: November 14, 2008 CS HQ Contact Information: CS Country Office Contact Information: David Arrivillaga Tobin Nelson Executive Director Director of Development Cantón Reforma, Callejón Ismatul, Cantón Reforma, Callejón Ismatul, Casa #8 Casa #8 San Lucas Sacatepequez, Guatemala San Lucas Sacatepequez, Guatemala Tel. (502) 7828-2626 Tel. (502) 7828-2626 Fax: (502) 7828-2627 Fax: (502) 7828-2627 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Acronyms Report Outline Narrative: 1. Annual Results 2. Proposed Modifications to the M&E Plan, IPTT, and/or Work Plan 3. Success Stories 4. Lessons Learned 5. Closeout Status Attachments: 6. Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT) 7. Standardized Annual Performance Questionnaire (SAPQ) 8. Summary Request and Beneficiary Tracking Table 9. FY 2008 Expenditure Report 10. Monetization Tables 11. Baseline, Mid-Term or Final Evaluation Reports 12. Proposed Modifications to the M&E Plan, IPTT, and/or Work Plan 13. Supplemental Materials LIST OF ACRONYMS FANTA Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance FFP Office of Food for Peace FFP/W Office of Food for Peace-Washington FFW Food for Work FSIP Food Security Improvement Program FY Fiscal Year GOG Government of Guatemala IMDI Institución Mam de Desarrollo Integral IPTT Indicator Performance Tracking Table LOA Life of Activity MAGA Guatemala Ministry of Agriculture MCNH Mother and Child Nutrition and Health MOH Guatemala Ministry of Health MT Metric Ton MYAP Multi-Year Assistance Program NRM Natural Resource Management PREP Pipeline and Resource Estimate Proposal PVO Private Voluntary Organization SAPQ Standardized Annual Performance Questionnaire SESAN Guatemala Food Security Secretariat USG United States Government USAID United States Agency for International Development (AID) USDA United States Department of Agriculture November 14, 2008 Page 1 NARRATIVE: 1. Annual Results Asociación SHARE de Guatemala (SHARE) and USAID signed Cooperative Agreement # FFP- A-00-07-00010 on October 31, 2006, and the end of FY08 marked the close of the second year of operation of SHARE’s MYAP, the Food Improvement Security Program (FSIP). FY07 suffered from an extremely long Congressional Resolution, but FY08 saw nearly full levels of implementation in all program areas due to full funding from the start the FY. After supporting a total level of beneficiaries of around 23,500 in FY07, FY08 witnessed huge increases in program participants, with a year-end total of 118,567 beneficiaries. These included mothers of children less than 36 months of age, pregnant women, farmers, micro-business owners, groups of entrepreneurial women, community development councils, and communities interested in improving their basic infrastructure. Operationally and financially, the FY faced serious difficulties when the Government of Guatemala (GOG) rescinded its counterpart funds for the year. A new administration was elected at the start of the year, and the support that SHARE had previously enjoyed was no longer guaranteed despite having signed documents from the previous administration. This left SHARE with a considerable budget shortfall, but fortunately FFP/W approved the use of monetization funds to cover the gap. Meanwhile, SHARE held many meetings with government officials during the year and does not expect there to be any additional issues with GOG counterpart funds in FY09 and beyond. All effect indicators, with the exception of exclusive breastfeeding, surpassed the goals for the year. Both positive and negative deviances in the indicators are explained in greater detail in Section 2. Process indicators were also very positive, surpassing targets in nearly every intervention. The startup of field-level activities was slower than expected (due to the late start in FY07), but by the end of the FY numbers were back on track. At this point in the MYAP there are few trends that can be interpreted, but SHARE expects to start to observe patterns during FY09. Out-year revisions have not affected the IPTT or the Beneficiary Tracking Table. If anything, original dates to roll out certain interventions were slightly pushed back to account for the late start in FY07, but these were minimal. With the inclusion of the Market Access activity, there was an upward revision of planned beneficiaries in the Agriculture/NRM technical sector (as included in SHARE’s FY09 PREP). The implementation strategy for MCNH activities underwent a modification during FY08 as a response to the lack of GOG counterpart funds; this exercise has made the intervention more efficient and effective. It should be noted that SHARE spent a considerable amount of time and resources with regard to a shipment of pinto beans that was found to have exceedingly high levels of mycotoxins. After alerting FFP/W of the problem, a team from USDA was sent down to inspect SHARE’s warehouses, which were found to be in excellent condition. Samples of the suspect commodity were taken and analyzed by USDA, and FFP/W informed SHARE that the beans were not apt for human consumption. The commodity – approximately 200 MT in total – was disposed of as November 14, 2008 Page 2 organic fertilizer. The US vendor in this case clearly was at fault for deliberately sending a product that did not comply with the commodity specifications. Looking forward to FY09, SHARE envisions a slight increase in total participants for MCNH activities, and an increase of almost 1,000 families participating with household gardens to bring this intervention up to full programmatic levels. The FY will also witness the first half of the Market Access program, an exciting activity that will connect groups of farmers to the export market and significantly increase incomes. SHARE also plans to introduce additional inputs for participating farmers and support several new micro-businesses. With regard to community capacity building, SHARE will be placing an emphasis on developing disaster mitigation plans and early warning systems. Demand for FFW rations for community infrastructure projects is expected to remain high. From a financial standpoint, nearly every intervention will benefit from additional funds to increase the potency and quality, resulting in better mid- and long-term results for participating rural families. What circumstances or factors led to exceeding or falling short of expected targets? Were targets too high or too low? If so, why? How will problems be corrected? How will experiences of past years be incorporated into next year’s implementation to improve performance? A first glance at SHARE’s IPTT seems to indicate that targets were set too low, because SHARE surpassed nearly every goal. This came as a result of the baseline study design, and Section 2 explains in greater detail the reasons behind why this was an expected occurrence. For two of the indicators related to agricultural production, data was not collected (and therefore not reported) because of starting the interventions late in the 4th quarter of FY08, but the intervention itself is advancing well at this point. SHARE’s health activities were originally designed to be carried out in conjunction with Guatemala’s Ministry of Health, whereby MOH staff would focus on the delivery of vaccinations and other curative treatments. SHARE staff would be incorporated into the same MOH teams and would expand services to include preventative MCNH activities. Unfortunately, the health team leaders from the MOH were unwilling to add services beyond the Ministry’s priorities and focus on preventative services or provide a high level of quality. In the end, the decision was made to separate MCNH activities from the MOH; they are now being implemented directly by SHARE. The MOH and SHARE still coordinate closely to facilitate a smooth working environment. How did customer (participant/beneficiary) feedback influence the CS's thinking on accomplishing the objective? Did this feedback confirm the program is on track, or are there issues which must be addressed? In SHARE’s annual evaluation of internal clients, local implementing partners were dissatisfied with the length of time it took to provide key inputs for field activities in FY07. SHARE explained that the late receipt of program resources from the USG was the main reason behind the delay, and the full level of funding for FY08 allowed SHARE to correct this issue. Internal November 14, 2008 Page 3 evaluations for FY08 are currently being collected at the field level and will be presented at an all-staff meeting in early December. How has program management been influenced by partnering among various actors (among non-governmental organizations, governmental actors, the private sector, host government, etc.) and changes in the institutional and policy framework? The most significant issue arising from outside actors was the lack of GOG counterpart funds, mentioned earlier. Much work was done on an institutional level to reestablish a governmental commitment, and SHARE is hopeful that the Guatemala USAID Mission will provide director- level support to bolster positive relations throughout the LOA. The Market Access activity originally began through discussions with the Mission, SESAN, and the Guatemalan cooperative Cuatro Pinos. SHARE will locate groups interested in producing for the export market, in which Cuatro Pinos will