Ramechhap Community Development Project
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Ramechhap Community Development Project United Mission to Nepal Participatory Evaluation of the Ramechhap Community Development Project July 1998 - April 2004 Keith Jeddere-Fisher April, May 2004 CONTENTS Acronyms and abbreviations iii Executive summary iv 1. Purpose, process and methodology of the evaluation 1 1.1 Background to the evaluation 1 1.2 Evaluation team 1 1.3 The Ripple Model 2 1.4 The evaluation process 3 1.5 Study limitations 6 1.6 Report layout 7 2. Background to the Ramechhap Community Development Project 8 2.1 Historical context 8 2.2 Vision and objectives 8 2.3 Approach and philosophy 9 2.4 RCDP working processes 10 2.5 Key results 13 2.6 Implementation and phasing of CAP cycles 15 2.7 Evaluations and reports 15 3. Presentation of main findings 16 3.1 The quality of RCDP’s organisational capacity enhancement and technical 16 training activities 3.1.1 Gender, equity and focus on poor and marginalised communities 16 3.1.2 Effectiveness of the community group formation process 18 3.1.3 Effectiveness of the post-formation support and institutional strengthening 18 3.1.4 Effectiveness of institutional strengthening training 19 3.1.5 The effectiveness of the technical training programmes 20 3.1.6 Process and effectiveness of RCDP forming partnerships with local 21 organisations 3.1.7 How RCDP has fulfilled RCDP’s Vision, Mission and Values 21 3.1.8 How do DDC and VDC officials understand the RCDP intervention approach? 22 3.1.9 RCDP’s relationships and coordination with district-level organisations 23 3.2 The impact of RCDP’s organisational capacity enhancement activities on the 24 CBOs, NGOs, and VDCs 3.2.1 The changes in the organisational capacity of CBOs 24 RCDP final evaluation, April 2004 i 3.2.2 Changes in organisational capacity of VDCs, NGOs, FUGs, SMCs that have 25 received OD training 3.2.3 The impact of the partnership process on partners 26 3.2.4 The impact of technical training on organisations/groups 27 3.2.5 The status of gender and caste representation of CBOs and effect of project on 27 marginalised and women 3.2.6 Organisational linkages and networking between CBOs, LNGOs and others 29 3.2.7 The sustainability of the CBOs 30 3.2.8 Mobilisation of resources for productive development by CBOs 32 3.3 The impact of RCDP on the community members 32 3.3.1 Changes in material wealth 33 3.3.2 Changes in community services 34 3.3.3 Changes in human capital/social wealth (awareness and capacity) 34 3.3.4 Changes in political capital/empowerment 36 3.3.5 Gender, equity and focus on poor and marginalised communities 37 3.4 The development context 37 4. Summary and lessons learnt 38 4.1 Summary 38 4.1.1 Project planning 38 4.1.2 Project implementation 38 4.1.3 Project impact 39 4.2 Good practices 40 4.3 Lessons learnt 40 Appendix 1 Terms of reference 42 Appendix 2 Matrix of evaluation objectives, indicators, information needed 46 and their source Appendix 3 Summaries of key result and CDS evaluations 50 Appendix 4 References and documents consulted 56 Appendix 5 People, groups and organisations consulted 56 Appendix 6 Summary of RCDP training activities 61 Appendix 7 RCDP awareness raising programme in focus VDCs 62 Appendix 8 Representation of women and Dalit in CBOs and committees 63 Appendix 9 Record of district workshop discussion groups 64 RCDP final evaluation, April 2004 ii Abbreviations CAP Community Awareness Programme CAT Community Awareness Team CBO Community-based organisation CDP Community Development Programme CDS Community Development Society CODE A way of reflecting communities generative themes through role-plays & pictures etc. CTEVT Council for Technical Education & Vocational Training DADO District Agriculture Development Office DDC District Development Committee DEO District Education Office DFO District Forest Office DLSO District Livestock Service Office FECOFUN Federation of Community Forest User Groups Association Nepal FUG Forest user group GMC Group Mobilisation Committee HMG His Majesty’s Government HRD Human resource development IGA Income generation activity INGO International non-government organisation KR Key result LDO Local Development Officer LNGO Local non-government organisation MC Main committee MLD Ministry of Local Development NGO Non-government organisation OD Organisational development PMC Project Management Committee PS Prayash Samuha PSKK Pahadi Samaj Kalyan Kendra RCDP Ramechhap Community Development Project RDD Rural Development Department RMIDP Resource Management for Interdependency Development SAHAS Group of Helping Hands SMCs School Management Committee TKSS Tama Kosi Sewa Samiti TNAs Training need assessment ToR Terms of reference UMN United Mission to Nepal VAHW Village animal health worker VDC Village Development Committee RCDP final evaluation, April 2004 iii Executive summary The objectives of the evaluation are: to identify the strengths, weaknesses and areas of improvement of RCDP’s organisational development and capacity building activities and technical training, and to identify the impact of these activities on the client organisations and their communities. Effective practices and lessons learnt are identified. The evaluation was facilitated by an independent external consultant. The twelve evaluation team members represented interested stakeholders, and in teams of four visited the field areas of the project. Due to security restrictions it was only possible to visit 5 of the 12 focus VDCs, and these represent those worked in most recently. 4 were selected to be visited for this evaluation and information was obtained from 2 others. This limited the lessons that could be learnt on the longer-term impact of the CAP process. RCDP has carried out CBO formation for capacity building of poor and marginalised communities in 12 selected VDCs of Ramechhap district since 1998. It has also implemented organisational and technical training across the whole of the district. There are areas of synergy but also of conflict between the objectives of these two activities. The focus VDCs and focus communities have been effectively selected in cooperation with the DDC and VDCs based on agreed criteria of poverty and marginalisation. Appropriate changes were made to the selection of the 3 VDCs in the 4th CAP cycle. The OD and the technical training activities have had 66% male participation. There is no data on Dalit participation. Some of the reasons for this are out of the control of the project. Effective community group formation has been completed in 9 out of 12 focus VDCs. In 4 of these VDCs the CAP cycle was carried out by a local NGO. 138 groups have been formed, having clear visions and implementing action plans based on the use of internal and external resources. The CAP process uses a high input of human resources. The withdrawal of the VDC-based staff happens over a short period of time. Main Committees have been established in the 9 VDCs at the end of the CAP process. Support to them from the project has been limited due to security restrictions. The organisational capacity of the community groups has been maintained where the CAP process was completed nine months ago. It was not possible to obtain information on groups formed earlier. The groups have formed good networks with other organisations within the district. Community groups have carried out a large number of development activities through the mobilisation of their own internal resources and have also been able to access external resources from a variety of organisations. Organisational training has been implemented using the training cycle and has been effective in strengthening local NGOs, School Management Committees and VDCs. 47 courses have been run for 808 participants. This has been more effective in the focus VDCs where it is part of an overall process and all members of the community are aware of the development principles. Changes in the operational capacity of many of these organisations were reported. RCDP final evaluation, April 2004 iv 52 courses for 839 participants representing 48 VDCs have been conducted in various technical subjects, mainly with the objective of promoting income generation. Trainee selection was based on need and interest and these courses mainly provided economic empowerment for slightly better off farmers. The training cycle was used effectively and trainers were of a high standard. Important services provided to the community by technical trainees are the prevention and treatment of livestock diseases and improved management of community forests. RCDP worked in partnership with local NGOs for the implementation of some aspects of the project. This was part of the project design but was used more than originally planned due to the security restrictions on external staff and organisations. The process was effective. RCDP worked according to clear values. This was recognised by the communities and district officials who realised that it contributed to the effective implementation of the project. District level officials and NGOs see RCDP predominantly as an awareness raising project and recommend that such a project should provide material support to the focus communities. Community group members see that the project has empowered them through the sense of belonging and respect that comes from group membership, by developing a realisation of the resources that they already have and enabling them to make demands for external resources. RCDP has developed effective relationships with district offices and NGOs, and has been an example of effective coordination and mutual support for other organisations in the district. Membership of different castes in the community groups was close to their proportion in the focus community. Membership of the groups in all CAP cycles was equally balanced between men and women. Women’s representation in the GMCs is about 42% and in the MCs about 34% showing a gradual drop in participation in the higher level decision-making bodies.