EVALUATION OF TtIE A. I. D. -FUNDED PVO DEVELOP~TASSISTANCEPROGRAM IN THE WEST B-D GAZA CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES (CRS) Rural Development Program Evaluation Re~ort September 1984 Agency for International Development Washiuston, D.C. The views and interpretations expressed in this report are those of the authors a1.d should not be attributed to the Agency for International Development. -WEST BANKIGAZA PVO PROGRAM EVALUATION Catholic Relief Services (CRS) -- Rural Development Pro.ject (I & 11) SUMMP,.%Y AND ASSESSMENT 1. The CRS rural Development Project is an excellent participatory, community-building program. The subprojects themselves are almost all successes in that they are completed, needed, wanted, used, maintained and relevant to the village situation. They also are the vehicle for CRS's main task of building commui?ity morale and improving local capability to deal with local problems. 2. A major reason for the success of the program is the leadership and dedication of CRS's senior local staff. 3. Another reason is that the program sticks close to tried and true activities with which both CRS and villagers are familiar: roads, water systems, primary schools, community centers and clinics. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The CRS Rural Development Project should continue with the same type of village development and construction activities it has been successfully performing for the past nine years. There is a great need for this work with villagers on projects of this size and type. This service to the villagers of the West Bank and Gaza should continue. Rarely does the Americm A.I.D. program accomplish so much with so few of its dollars. We recommend the expansion of these activities with the addition of another field supervisor. 2. The Rural Development actvities should be expanded in Gaza, The most important impact of this program is when it gives hope for the first time to villages where very little has ever come their way. Many Gaza areas seem to be places in need of both basic rural services and hope. 3. CRS should set up a full office in Gaza vith a resident expatriate head. Cgza is very different fror. the West Bank in terms of the nature of the villages and topography, the psychology and politics of the people, the nature of the occupation and the legal system. A successfu1 Gaza program needs someone with the same sort of close lcnowlcdgc that CRS personnel hove of all areas of the West Rank. Since CRS has inherited the CAKE Gaza office and Tiele IT program, CRS should utilize this opporturlity to expand the office to i-nclude rurnl development, health education and handicapped programs. 4. As part of the preparation of the next proposal, CKS should conduct the sort of full rethinking of its overall rural developmerlt strategy as was carried out for the health education activity. The current Rural Development strategy has been unaltered since 1975. The situation iq the occupied territories has changed much since 1975 as a result of the Israeli settlements and the general economic decline. The subprojects of the program, successful as they are, need to be placed within a broader strategy. Wi.thin this strategy, other types of village activities should be considered for inclusion along with the construction subprojects. A program to support individual small income-producing activities, perhaps for women who are no longer hauling water, should be added to the subproject mix. This would build on the construction projects already completed and at the same time address some issues of the growing economic downturn. I. BACKGROUND A. General. CRS is a U.S. private voluntary organization (PVO), regmed with AID, and has been implementing rural development self-help activities in the West Bank and Gaza with AID funding under two separate projects since 1975. These projects are the subject of this evaluation report. CRS also has received two separate grants from AID, totaling $2,170,000 for nutrition and health education programs. Over 10,000 persons have benefitted directly from these programs. AID assistance is due to terminate in January, 1985, but CRS has submitted a proposal to continue the program for an another three years. The evaluation team feels that continued assistance is warranted. In conjunction with this program, CRS has received over $6.5 million in Food for Peace commodities in the past nine years, which have benefitted o.ver 400,000 peop1.e. The program recently expanded significantly as CRS assumed the responsibility for programs previous ly undertaken by CARE. Approximately 100,000 persons will be ass isted nnnua lly under this expanded program (see PVO Program Overview Zeport for additional comments). AID recently also approved a grant of $1.8 million for CRS to undertake a project for handicapped persons in the West Bank and Gaza. This project wiJ.1 be initiated in September, 1984, as the lead activity of a larger, comprehensive program in which the Community Development Fmndation, the Society for the Care of Handicapped Children and others will take part with AID funds. Besides these activities that are supported by AID, CRS, with funds a.nd donated commodities from other sources, undertakes other self-help development activities and provides relief assistance for those in need. B. Program. CRS's rural development project began in 1975 with a program to carry out village self-help projects -- construction of roads, schools, water systems, clinics, community centers and electricity systems -- in partnership with village leaders and villagers. The second rural development project began in 1973 and continues the same program at roughly the same level until this time. The philosophy of this program is to build facilities and ser-,(ices to improve the well-being of villagers. CRS sees these activities falling, into four areas: agriculture, health/sanitation, education and electric power. In addition to the development resulting from the activities themselves, CRS emphasizes the importance of the process of villagers working together with CRS tfi identify and solve their own problems. CliS a cleve1oprnc~nt: personnel cmphasi-ze that the cons cruction proje~:ts are tho means toward ren 1 vil 1 age development: che positive changes in villagers' attitudes and in their increased capability for pragmatic accomplishment. A total of $2,287,166 was provided by AID, under two separate agreements, to com lete 96 subproject:^ valued at $5:;:7,206 (Subproject lists? breakdown ut Attachment A). C. Accomplishments. CRS has completed n total of 82 of the 96 rural development subprojects to date, and these have directly benefitted almost 200,000 vi 1lagers, approximately one quarter of the rural population of the West Hank where most CKS subprojects are located. The evaluation team visited 36 out of the 82 completed subprojects as well as 10 others yet to be completed. Five site visi.ts were in Gaza, the rest were in the West Bank (Map at Attachment B). 11. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY. See PVO Program Overview Report. 111. ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL Within the CRS organization, each project operates with considerable autonomy in terms of personnel, budget, reporting, etc. The Rural Development unit staff consists of six full-time people ; project supervisor, field supervisor, accountant, field worker, clerk, and secretary. This team, especially the senior members, have been working together on these projects for many years, and they form an efficient and coordinated unit. Additionally , they are people of considerable dedication for whom this is not just a job hut their life's work. They work out of the CRS projects' office in East Jerusalem, but for the field staff, their reel offices are the blue CRS vans. They are well known to villagers and civil servants throughout the West Bank, and their long reputation is one factor in their success in wfnning village cooperation. IV. PROJECT SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES A. Selection. The specific -~illage subprojects are not identified in the grant agreement with AID. Because they are well- known out in the field, CIiS staff are often approached by village leaders who request a road, school, etc. There are more requests than those CRS is able to fulfill, and the field staff excercises their judgement in deciding which requests to pursue and which ones to defer. This decision is btised on many factors - relative worthinesr of the proposed activity in terms of the improvement it will bring about, the practicality of the project in terms of the village nLi1it.y to pay its share and cooperate, the possibility of approval by tk~c nuthori ties, and the distribution of subprojects by type and 1ocati.on. When CKS and village leaders reach a general agrc-emrmt, CRS writes up a brief subproject pcoposal for submission tn the authorities. CRS in\rolves representatives of the responsible departments (social welfare, water, education, etc.,) early on in the process and this helps at least the initial stages of the approval process. B. Implementation. CRS draws up a preliminary unofficial ugreement-inArabic with the responsible village representatives of the project. Because final approval ' is generally delayed six months, this provides a written record of the agreements regarding cost -sharing and other responsibilities of the village. The projects are con:;truction projeccs of one kind or another, and they all Involve the preparation o.f tenders and selection of contractors. For the prepu~:ation of tenders, CKS works with the responsible technical department xho does the technical planning and estimates. At the meeting for opening the bi.ds and selecting the contractors, CRS, village representatives, social welfare representatives, and a representative from the appropriate technicai department are present. On all of its subprojects, CRS and the village council. or commLttee work together as t I general contractor", sub-contracting out the labor and materials to two contractors.