UNITED NATIONS DEVELOMENT PROGRAMME FINAL EVALUATION OF THE COMMUNITY AGRICULTURE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROJECT – CAWMP FINAL REPORT V2 TEAM: VINCENT LEFEBVRE RAKHMON SHUKUROV MAY 2009 May 2009 Page 1 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AEC Agro-Ecological Centre CAP Community Action Plan CIG Common Interest Group CP Country Programme CAWMP Community Agriculture Watershed Management Project FO Facilitating Organization GEF Global Environment Funds GOV Government of Tajikistan HR Human Resources IDA International Development Agency IGA Income Generating Activity JDC Jamoat Development Centre JRC Jamoat Resource and Advocacy Centre LOGFRAME Project’s Logical Framework MLF Micro Loan Funds MOA Ministry of Agriculture NGO Non Governmental Organisation OM Operational Manual PAD Project Appraisal Document PCU Project Coordination Unit PMU Project Management Unit PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal RF Revolving Funds RRF Results and Resources Framework SLSC State Level Steering Committee TOR Terms Of Reference UNDP United Nations Development Programme WB World Bank WDC Watershed Development Committee May 2009 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROGRAM BACKGROUND & CONTEXT ....................................................................................... 9 2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................... 11 2.1. IMMEDIATE & DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM ............................................. 12 2.2. MAIN STAKEHOLDERS ........................................................................................................... 13 2.3. PROBLEMS THAT THE PROGRAM SEEKS TO ADDRESS ......................................................... 14 3. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION ................................................................................................ 15 4. KEY QUESTIONS & SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION ..................................................................... 16 5. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY OF THE EVALUATION ........................................................... 17 5.1. APPROACH ............................................................................................................................ 17 5.2. METHODOLOGY OF THE EVALUATION ................................................................................... 18 6. FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................. 20 6.1. PROGRAM OUTCOME INDICATORS ........................................................................................ 20 6.2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AS PER INITIAL PROPOSAL ............................................................... 21 6.3. SUBPROJECT RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 23 6.3.1. WATERSHED APPROACH ................................................................................................... 24 6.3.2. A1 SUBPROJECTS : FARM PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT ............................................... 25 6.3.3. A2 SUBPROJECTS : LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT .................................................... 26 6.3.4. A3 SUBPROJECTS : RURAL INFRASTRUCTURES .............................................................. 28 6.3.5. COMMON INTEREST GROUPS - CIGS ............................................................................... 30 6.3.6. REPLICATION / MULTIPLICATION EFFECT .......................................................................... 32 6.4. PROJECT PLANNING .............................................................................................................. 33 6.5. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................. 34 6.5.1. FO’ EFFECTIVENESS IN PROJECT EXECUTION .................................................................. 34 6.5.2. FO’S MONITORING OF SUBPROJECTS ............................................................................... 37 6.5.3. FO’S TECHNICAL CAPACITY .............................................................................................. 39 6.5.4. EXTERNAL FACTORS AND RISK ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS ................................................. 39 6.5.5. PROJECT FINANCE ............................................................................................................. 41 7. SUMMARY AND EXPLANATION OF FINDINGS & INTERPRETATIONS .......................................... 43 8. CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 46 9. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 47 9.1. TO IMPROVE THE RESULTS OF THE CURRENT PROJECT ....................................................... 47 9.2 TO ENHANCE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CURRENT JAMOATS ............................................ 49 9.3 FOR EXPANSION IN OTHER JAMOATS .................................................................................... 50 10. LESSONS LEARNED ............................................................................................................... 51 11. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS ......................................................................................................... 53 12. LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... 53 13. LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................... 53 ATTACHMENT 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE ....................................................................................... 54 ATTACHMENT 2: ITINERARY & LIST OF PERSONS INTERVIEWED .................................................... 64 ATTACHMENT 3: QUESTIONNAIRES USED & DATA RECOVERED ..................................................... 68 ATTACHMENT 4: LIST OF SUBPROJECTS WITH DETAILED DATA ................................................... 152 ATTACHMENT 5: MAP OF PROJECT AREA ..................................................................................... 156 ATTACHMENT 6: INITIAL LOGICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................................................... 158 ATTACHMENT 7: CURRICULUM VITAE OF EVALUATORS ................................................................ 160 ATTACHMENT 8: SAMPLED DATA STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ............................................................ 176 ATTACHMENT 9: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF A2 SUBPROJECT AREAS ........................................ 179 ATTACHMENT 10: PROJECT FINANCIAL REPORT .......................................................................... 188 ATTACHMENT 11: LIST OF SUBPROJECTS WITH DETAILED DATA ................................................. 191 May 2009 Page 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The objectives of the Community Agriculture and Watershed Management Project are to improve the productive assets of rural communities through increased production and land degradation reduction, and to protect ecosystems through sustainable land use and biodiversity conservation. This project is being implemented by the Government of Tajikistan in 4 watersheds, including the Surkhob watershed with Government, World Bank and GEF fundings. It is being executed by local NGOs ‘Jamoat Resources Centres’ with the support of UNDP as a Facilitating Organization in this particular watershed. 47 villages in 8 jamoats were covered in the Surkhob watershed corresponding to nearly 6.600 households (38.000 people). The project has been set up in 3 participatory phases: 1. Community awareness activities to explain the objectives of the project and set up community action plans (CAP) in order to capture small grants made available to communities; 2. Preparation of subprojects by farmers organized into “Common Interest Groups” (CIG) according to the community priorities and donor requirements; 3. Implementation of the subproject by the beneficiaries with most stakeholders support. The exact implementation details were made public during participatory rural appraisals to CIG which decided according to certain project rules (available funds per village and per CIG member as per each type of subprojects) to apply for specific grants (up to 50.000$). The project has had duration of 3 years & 3 months (2 years’ initial contract + 1 year’s extension + 3 months’ no-cost extension) The objective of this final evaluation is to reflect on the results of this type of pilot-project, assess whether the adopted approach enabled completion of the planned activities (effective implementation of subprojects by CIG and benefits resulting from these) and resulted in achieving the project initial objectives (improved rural production and land degradation reduction). 3 types of subprojects have been funded to “Common Interest Groups”: 1. “farm productivity improvement”; 2. “land management”; 3. “rural infrastructures” through small scale grants being handed over to ‘Common Interest’ Groups’ (mainly farmers). Key findings: - 4 outcome indicators were defined: 1. “80% of farm productivity investments are successful”: over 78% of subprojects are likely to be sustainable. 2. “50% of households participate in some part of the rural production”: max 49% of project area households are indeed participating although it must be lower because of double counting. 3. “Participants living above the poverty line increase