Evaluation Report of - Mercy...

Food Crisis Cash Transfer Project - Mercy Corps Nepal – Final Report

Annex 3: External Evaluation Report

Evaluation Report of

FOOD CRISIS CASH TRANSFER PROJECT (FCCTP), Expansion Stage (June 2009 – June 2010)

Gopi K Sedhain, Ph D

Freelance Consultant

Shankhamul, Kathmandu

Submitted to:

Mercy Corps Nepal,

Lalitpur, Nepal.

June 2010

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page ii

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

ADB Asian Development Bank

CBO Community Based Organization

CFW Cash for Work

CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement

DDC District Development Committee

EC European Commission

EMPOS Emergency Management Organization Management

FCCTP Food Crisis Cash Transfer Project

FFW Food for Work

FGD Focused Group Discussion

GFFP Global Food Facility Project

GFP Guiding Future Project

HDI Human Development Index

IDP Internally Displaced Person

IWM Improved Water Mills

KII Key Informant Interview

LGA Local Government Act

MC Mercy Corps

MHP Micro-hydro Plant

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NPR Nepalese Rupees

NRCS Nepal Red Cross Society

PDME Program, Design, Monitoring and Evaluation

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

PRROs Protracted Relief and Rehabilitation Operation

UC User Committee

UK United Kingdom

UNDAF United Nation Development Aid Fund

US United States

VDC Village Development Committee

WFP World Food Program

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page iii

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ................................................................................................ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... v

5.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... viii

5.2 Lessons Learned .................................................................................................................... xi

5.3 Recommendations for Guiding Future Projects ................................................................... xii

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Food Crisis Cash Transfer Project (FCCTP) ............................................................................ 2

1.2.1 Overall Project Goal ........................................................................................................... 2

1.2.2 Project Purpose .................................................................................................................. 2

1.2.3 Purpose of the Evaluation .................................................................................................. 2

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Country context ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Food for Work (FFW) ............................................................................................................. 6

2.3 Cash Transfer Programs in Nepal .......................................................................................... 7

2.4 Cash for Work (CFW) ............................................................................................................. 8

3. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................ 10

3.1 Briefing about CFW Program............................................................................................... 10

3.1.1 Review of Project Documents and Reports ......................................................................... 10

3.1.2 Literature Review ................................................................................................................. 10

3.1.3 Finalization of Work Plan and Data Collection Tools ........................................................... 11

3.2 Field Trips ............................................................................................................................ 11

3.3 Data Collection .................................................................................................................... 11

3.3.1 Focus Groups Discussions .................................................................................................... 11

3.3.2 Key Informants’ Interviews .................................................................................................. 11

3.3.3 Direct Observations ............................................................................................................. 11

3.4 Data Compilation and Analysis............................................................................................ 11

3.5 Organization of Evaluation Report ...................................................................................... 12

3.6 Limitation of Study .............................................................................................................. 12

4. MAJOR FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................... 13

4.1 Relevance of CFW for Nepal ................................................................................................ 13

4.1.1 Effectiveness of cash transfer programming for facilitating post-crisis recovery ............... 13

4.1.2 Effectiveness of CFW for Mitigating the Effects of Food Crisis ........................................... 14

4.2 Increased Food Purchasing Capacity of Food Insecure Households ................................... 15

4.3 Impacts of CFW on Food Security of Target Community .................................................... 17

4.3.1 Household Level ................................................................................................................... 17

4.3.2 Community Level ................................................................................................................. 18

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page iv

4.4 Availability and Food Prices in Local Markets ..................................................................... 20

4.4.1 Recovery from the Effects of Increased Food Insecurity and Natural Disaster ................... 21

4.4.2 Mitigating harmful coping strategies for food insecurity by households ........................... 22

4.5 Sustainability of Community Assets Created in the Community ........................................ 23

4.5.2 Implementation Process and Collaboration with other Stakeholders ................................ 24

4.6 Replicability of CFW Approach in Future ............................................................................ 24

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 27

ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................... 28

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background

Mercy Corps has been working in Nepal since 2005. Mercy Corps is working in 9 districts in

Nepal with the goal to strengthen, protect and expand access to productive livelihoods for the

poor. Mercy corps Nepal focuses on the sectors of Agriculture & Food Security, Microfinance,

and Disaster Risk Reduction with the inclusion of youth and disadvantaged groups as a cross-

cutting theme.

Mercy Corps designed a Global Food Crisis Response (GFCR) program in Kailali, Baitadi and

Dadeldhura districts in which "Cash for Work" (CFW) was one of the components that provided

cash transfers to highly food insecure households through wage labor opportunities for 2213

extremely vulnerable households, including 992 households affected by the September 19th

flood of the Mohana river in Kailali district and an additional 1,221 chronically food insecure

households in Hilly VDCs of Kailali, Dadeldhura, and Baitadi districts. After the successful

implementation of CFW under GFCR, an expansion stage – termed as "Food Crisis Cash Transfer

Project" (FCCTP) has been implemented with financial support from WFP covering about 15,295

food insecure households in 27 VDCs of Kailali, Dadeldhura and Baitadi districts with the goal of

providing immediate relief for food insecure households affected by rising food prices, while

supporting projects that improve longer-term food security prospects. This project was

implemented in partnership with the Nepal Red Cross Society and community-based User

Committees, with some additional inputs provided by local government agencies. The

evaluation report pertains to the expansion stage only, and not to the pilot stage, which was

evaluated earlier by Mercy Corps using Participatory Impact Assessment methodologies.

Food Crisis Cash Transfer Project (FCCTP)

Mercy Corps implemented the 13 month FCCTP expansion stage (hereinafter referred to as

“FCCTP”) in three districts of Far-western region from June 2009 through June 2010. The

project was implemented in two phases capturing two agricultural lean seasons prevalent in

the project districts. Mercy Corps used a Cash for Work approach to transfer the cash to the

needy vulnerable households of the selected project VDCs. The beneficiary households were

provided employment opportunities for 50 days and paid Rs. 140 per day, arriving at a total

transfer of Rs 7,000 for each beneficiary household. Mercy Corps and WFP jointly conducted

the Mid-term Assessment of the project after completion of phase-I and reported that FCCTP

was highly successful in achieving its stated goal and purpose in terms of transferring the cash

to food insecure target households and creating productive community infrastructures with

active participation of target community mostly the women and disadvantaged groups in the

project areas.

Evaluation Methodology

Although the overall performance of FCCTP was found to be successful in meeting its basic goal,

objectives and targets, Mercy Corps intended to carry out a final evaluation of project by hiring

an external consultant. Detailed Terms of References was prepared by the Project Team of

Mercy Corps to carry out the evaluation exercise. The evaluation consultant used participatory

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page vi

tools and techniques for collection of relevant information and data both from secondary and

primary sources. Primary data was collected mainly through PRA tools and techniques. The

study was conducted from 11 May through 04 June 2010. The evaluation team visited sample

project sites in three project districts and physically observed some of the community

infrastructures rehabilitated and or constructed in the VDCs visited. Information was collected

mainly through FGDs and Key Informants' interview with concerned stakeholders, project

partners, field staffs, of beneficiaries and members of the sample Users' Committees.

Altogether, 8 FGDs were held, about a dozen schemes observed and about 20 Key Informants

were interviewed during field study.

Key Findings

The key findings of the present evaluation study are briefly summarized below:

Implementation Process

The FCCTP was implemented in partnerships with respective district chapters of Nepal Red

Cross Society (NRCS) of the project districts. A comprehensive baseline survey was conducted

to assess the socio-economic conditions, especially focusing on food security status of the

target households so that comparison could be made with end-line data and control groups in

the project VDCs. The 27 VDCs (11 in Kailali, 8 VDCs each in Dadeldhura and Baitadi) were

selected based upon the PRRO priorities and other indicators like presence of other WFP

funded agencies, feasibility of cash delivery, loss of wheat crop due to winter drought in

2008/09, and presence of disadvantage groups etc in the VDCs. After selecting the VDCs in the

project districts, wards/clusters were further prioritized to implement the project activities. An

orientation program was organized in each project ward/cluster to create awareness to target

groups about the project goals, purpose, processes of identification and prioritization of

community schemes supported by the FCCTP, implementation process, and monitoring of the

program activities undertaken by the communities. The project schemes were identified and

prioritized based on the community needs by the users themselves, with a focus on schemes

that supported agricultural livelihoods. However, technical feasibility and financial resources

available with the project were also taken into consideration while finalizing the schemes.

Formation of Users' Committees

It was reported that altogether 178 Users Committees (UCs) have been formed and over 350

different schemes completed under the FCCTP in two phases. Formation of Users' Committees

(UC) was mandatory to implement the project activities under the FCCTP. The Cash for Work

implementation process explicitly defined the procedure of formation for Users' Committees in

each project ward/cluster. The process of formation of UCs should be transparent, democratic,

and inclusive and there should be 50 per cent women members in the UC and at least two

women members in decision making positions (Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Secretary or

Treasurer of the committee) to ensure women participation in the decision making process in

the groups. Interactions with members of sample UCs showed that considerable women

members had served as Chairperson or Secretary in the Users' Committees.

Targeting and Selection of Households

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page vii

Mercy Corps used a blanket coverage approach for selecting the target households in the

project wards/clusters. It was argued that given the short period of project and vulnerability of

the households toward food insecurity and food price volatility in the selected project areas,

every household was allowed to work in the community schemes. Interactions with participants

of FGDs held at 8 sites showed that more than 90 percentage beneficiary households in the

project wards/clusters, except few clusters, in Kailali are vulnerable to food insecurity and the

blanket approach used by FCCTP may be justified. The study also reveals that blanket approach

adopted by Mercy Corps has been appreciated and the communities had equally participated in

the schemes selected by the community in all VDCs visited; however, the evaluation also found

that blanket coverage may not be the best targeting methodology for projects longer in

duration than FCCTP given the need to allocate scarce resources among the most vulnerable.

Impact of CFW Program

Impacts of CFW program could be viewed from two perspectives namely: i) Providing

immediate relief to food insecure target communities by transferring cash through fixed days of

employment opportunities; ii) Support vulnerable communities to improve their food security

situations in the medium term through rehabilitation and or creation of productive community

infrastructures using local resources. FCCTP achieved impacts at both of these levels to varying

degrees, as described below.

Individual Household Level

The present study shows that the FCCTP had immediate impacts on the individual households

as the majority of these households earned considerable cash through working in various

community schemes for 50 days. Interactions with sample beneficiaries present in the FGDs

reported that more than 80 per cent target households purchased food for at least 3 months

from the Cash for Work program during the critical period of time when the people normally

had no access to wage employment in the villages, particularly for women. Considerable

households would have to adopt other harmful coping strategies to purchase foods if the

project had not provided this employment opportunity in the village. About two-thirds of the

households participating in FGDs were of the view that due to opportunity for working in the

Cash for Work program, at least one male members of the family did not go to India this

season. Many households would have had to sell their livestock, or sell other assets such as

ornaments or utensils to buy foods if they had not obtained these employment opportunities in

the village. Some of the community members also reported that their bargaining power has

increased with foods grains suppliers in the villages, and that they were able to buy foods at

lower prices than they would have had to pay if purchasing the same food items on credit.

Community Level

The study also reveals that overall women's participation in community development activities

has improved as a result of the project. They have gained considerable experience while

working together in group, and while handling cash (cash transfers were provided to females

only whenever possible), which has increased their confidence levels. It could be expected that

provision of providing the cash to the women and control over cash by the women has

increased and women are expected to make better use of the cash for managing households'

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page viii

consumption requirements. Another important contribution of the FCCTP in the project

districts is equal pay for women. It was reported that women are generally paid less for the

similar types of work performed by them in the village. Equal pay for the similar jobs performed

by men and women in the schemes supported by the Cash for Work program should have

positive impacts on other stakeholders using similar approach for community infrastructures in

the project districts.

Another important impact of the Cash for Work program in the project districts was the

creation of a wide range of productive community assets in a very short period of time. Review

of cumulative project information sheet shows that over 350 community-based schemes were

completed with project supports within a 13 months period. It was reported that the project

has supported communities to expand irrigation facilities for about 500 ha area in the three

districts. This will definitely help improve food security of more than 2,000 target households as

both the cropping intensity and productivity of crops, mainly cereals will increase considerably

due to construction or rehabilitation of irrigation facilities. Studies have proven that just by

expanding irrigation facilities, food production generally increases by more than 30 per cent.

Moreover, the Cash for Work program has indirectly helped communities to improve access to

safe drinking water (37 Schemes), electricity (3 MHPs & 2 IWMs), access to markets by

rehabilitating agricultural roads/trails (about 430km) and construction of

Community/Cooperative Marketing Centers (59 Numbers) in most of the project VDCs.

The FGD participants expressed the views that by working together for 50 days in the group,

level of understanding among the households has improved in the village and they had been

feeling togetherness and interested to take the ownership of the schemes constructed in the

community. Although community members demonstrated commitment to, and ownership of

completed schemes, the implementing partner representatives opined that additional time

after the project period is required to gauge whether communities maintain and expand assets

without external support. It is also clear that while an impressive number of schemes were

completed in a short period of time, which was appropriate for a community-based and relief-

oriented project such as FCCTP, a similar approach is unlikely to be appropriate for larger-scale,

higher-quality infrastructure development projects requiring complex construction and

comprehensive operations and maintenance requirements.

5.1 Conclusion

A comprehensive evaluation of Cash for Work program implemented by Mercy Corps with

financial assistance from World Food Program in two phases from June 2009 to June 2010 for

13 months was conducted from 11 May through 04 June 2010 by the external consultant. The

field study was conducted in 7 sample VDCs of three districts namely: Kailali-3, Dadeldhura-2,

and Baitadi-2. Based on the review of relevant project documents, reports and field

assessments, following conclusion have been drawn and recommendations made for future

projects:

Relevance of CFW Programming

• Cash for Work program is relatively a new approach in Nepal to provide emergency relief

for food security affected by natural disasters and food price volatility and help improve

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page ix

food security situations of the vulnerable communities in medium term. Interactions with

project beneficiaries and concerned project stakeholders, including implementing partners,

reveals that among similar programs implemented by other agencies in the project districts,

CFW program implemented by Mercy Corps is more transparent and effective in mobilizing

additional resources for creating small-scale productive infrastructures in the communities

and addressing the food needs in a time of food security crisis.

• Cash for Work program implemented by Mercy Corps for providing emergency relief to the

vulnerable communities affected by natural disasters and food price volatility could be

equally effective to improving the food security situations in the Hills and Mountain regions

of Nepal provided the areas are accessible by road transport, and schemes selected by

community directly contribute to improve food security situation of vulnerable

communities through increased productivity and production of agricultural crops in the

medium and longer terms.

Implementation Process and Beneficiary Households Selection

• Despite many advantages of blanket coverage of households, it could be considered less

effective for longer-term projects as other more vulnerable households in other

wards/clusters in the same project VDCs might have been excluded due to limited resources

available with the project. The present evaluation also shows that about 10 per cent

beneficiary households in the communities were less vulnerable to food security, and would

have been excluded from the project had household-level targeting been applied.

• The experience of FCCTP shows that despite the possibility of exclusion of more vulnerable

households in the neighboring VDCs, the blanket coverage approach to a great extent

reduced conflicts among the communities and insured participation of every household

irrespective of socio-economic status of the users in creating productive infrastructures in

the community.

Effectiveness of the FCCTP

• Cash for Work program is relatively a new approach in Nepal to provide emergency relief

for food insecure households affected by natural disasters and food price volatility, and to

help improve the food security situation of the vulnerable communities in the medium

term. Interactions with project beneficiaries and concerned project stakeholders, including

implementing partners, reveals that among similar programs implemented by other

agencies in the project districts, CFW program implemented by Mercy Corps was more

transparent and effective in mobilizing additional resources for creating productive

infrastructures in the communities and also in addressing food security needs in a time of

food security crisis.

• Observations of sample community schemes constructed in project areas and interactions

with beneficiaries shows that communities were happy with what has been done with

project supports and contributed extra labor to accomplish the selected schemes in the

community. This indicates that communities were fully involved in selecting the schemes

and the selected schemes were based on community needs.

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page x

• Review of FCCTP information sheet indicates that about half of project funds were spent for

rehabilitation and or creation of community assets which will directly contribute to increase

foods production through protecting agricultural lands, increasing access to irrigation, and

improving market access in the project VDCs. It could be expected that in the medium term,

food security situations of about 50 per cent beneficiary households who would have access

to irrigation and marketing facilities due to project interventions.

• Interactions with senior officials and field staffs of implementing partners and other project

stakeholders, and review of infrastructures constructed and or rehabilitated with project

supports reveals that project outcomes could have benefited from additional training at

community level on construction and scheme operations and maintenance, although it is

understood that the structure of the project (350 varied schemes over 13 months) would

have made this challenging.

Efficiency of the Project

• Analysis of allocated budgets for CfW clearly shows that FCCTP is efficient project as more

than 80 per cent of project budget has been spent for providing wage employments and

purchase of construction materials for selected schemes.

• Despite adequate technical manpower provisioned, the structure of the project (350

schemes involving over 15,000 unskilled labors over short 50-day implementation periods)

allowed only for basic community infrastructure but not more sophisticated infrastructure

schemes. From this, it can be said that scheme quality could have been improved if the

project had focused on a lower number of more focused schemes.

Impact of FCCTP on Mitigating Food Crisis at Household Level

• The Cash for Work program supplemented incomes for more than 80 per cent target

households to purchase foods for at least 3 months during the critical period of time when

the people normally had no access to wage employment in the villages, particularly, for the

women. Interactions with participants of FGDs reveals that the majority of the beneficiary

households used the cash earned through working in community schemes for purchasing

basic food items mainly coarse rice and wheat flour and limited amount for pulses, oils,

potatoes, spices etc.

• The study shows that provision for making payment to women member of the beneficiary

households had helped better utilization of cash for fulfilling the family priority needs and

control over cash by women has also increased in most of the communities.

• The CFW program directly helped to mitigate many harmful coping strategies for purchasing

foods by the target households in the project VDCs such as selling fixed assets, livestock,

removing children from school, migrating temporarily for wage employment outside village

if the Mercy Corps had not provided this employment opportunity in the village.

• Mandatory provision of 50 per cent women members in the Users' Committees has

contributed to the empowerment of women in general and increased self confidence of the

women in the project VDCs as considerable women also served as Chairperson and

Secretary of the Users' Committees.

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page xi

5.2 Lessons Learned

Beneficiary Households Selection

• The experience of FCCTP shows that despite possibility of exclusion of some more

vulnerable households in the neighboring VDCs, the blanket coverage approach seems to

facilitate reduced conflict among the communities and insure participation of every

household irrespective of socio-economic status of the users in creating productive

infrastructures in the community. This will further develop a sense of ownership of the

community assets and increase the sustainability of the assets provided the community is

well mobilized prior to implementation of the programs.

Community Participation

• Review of implementation process adopted in CfW program and interactions with

concerned stakeholders and beneficiaries during field visits reveals that transparency in

operation is a pre-requisite to ensure peoples' participation in the community development

schemes. Despite its relatively wide geographic scope, the project maintained transparency

systematically. Among other approaches adopted by different development agencies, the

CFW approach could be considered one of the most effective and efficient for mitigating the

harmful coping mechanisms and improving the food security situations of the vulnerable

communities in the medium term.

Suitability and Replicability of CFW Programming

• The concept of cash for work is relatively a new approach for developing productive

infrastructures through peoples' participation in Nepal. The present study clearly indicates

that the CFW program could be replicated widely in other accessible districts of Nepal

where there is potential for improving food security situations through improved access to

productive infrastructures such as irrigation, marketing centers and rural access roads.

• Under the present situation of Cash for Work program implementation guidelines of Mercy

Corps, larger schemes requiring external inputs such as skilled labor, technical manpower to

design and supervision of works done by communities and purchased materials such as

cements, steel, and asbestos sheet etc. are not feasible under CFW. It was observed that

the simpler community-based schemes may be more appropriate for the community, and

more sustainable in terms of community management in the longer term. If larger schemes

are the community needs then alternative sources of funds should be ensure before

approval of the schemes, and an alternative implementation methodology must be utilized.

• The evaluation study indicates that CfW program could be replicated widely in other

accessible districts of Nepal where there is potential for improving the food security

situations through improved access to productive infrastructures such as irrigation,

marketing centers and even rural access roads.

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page xii

• The study shows that provision for making payment to women member of the beneficiary

households had helped better utilization of cash for fulfilling the family priority needs and

control over cash by women has also increased in most of the communities.

5.3 Recommendations for Guiding Future Projects

Based on the findings of the evaluation study and on our own experience following

recommendations have been made to improve the performance of the similar projects and

programs implemented in the future:

Effectiveness and Efficiency of CFW Programming

• In order to cover both landless poor and other members in the community, community

infrastructures should be categorized into two broad categories namely: i) Those directly

contributing to increase production like construction of irrigation canals, ponds, marketing

centers, rehabilitation of agricultural lands etc.; and ii) Another improving the basic services

such as drinking water, road, electricity, flood control, forest conservation etc. to the

community as a whole. In each project ward/cluster, at least two users committees may be

formed based on wealth rank order of the households. The households with some cultivable

lands (5 Ropani (0.25 ha in Hills and 10 Kattha (0.33 ha in Tarai) in the target ward/cluster

should be organized in one Users' Committee and provided necessary supports to develop

productive assets so that their food security situation could be improved through increased

productivity and marketing facility in the village. A separate Users' Committee may be

formed with households having smaller landholding size or landless and provided wage

employment opportunity for about 90 days for developing community infrastructures which

are not directly helpful to increase production. This approach would improve the access to

basic services to the community and effective to developing sense of ownership of the

community assets created through project interventions in the community.

• Although Mercy Corps has its own CfW implementation guidelines and wage rates are often

kept 5 - 10% lower than prevailing wage labor rates in the area to avoid distorting labor

markets, it is recommended that the wage rates may be revised based on prevailing rates in

district for skilled and unskilled labors and also for cost of living differentials between the

Hills and Plains regions.

Sustainability of the Impacts

• Some of the schemes observed during field visits have already utilized Operation &

Maintenance funds for purchasing materials and skilled labors necessary for completion of

the selected schemes. Therefore, it is recommended that either the schemes requiring

more skilled labors and purchased materials should not be approved or the project should

provide adequate budget to complete the schemes as per estimates.

• The initial maintenance fund contribution from beneficiary households is not sufficient.

Therefore, it is recommended that each User Committee should be encouraged to develop

a suitable strategy and mechanism to generate necessary funds from the real users of

schemes based on "users to pay principle" before the schemes are approved for its

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page xiii

sustainability; however, it is recognized that this is more feasible in a longer-term project

than in a relief-oriented project.

• Given the geo-climatic conditions in the Hills and Mountain regions of Nepal, the majority of

the households cannot achieve food self sufficiency even in long term with existing cropping

pattern and agricultural infrastructures. In order to help them improve the food security

situations in the permanently food deficit region, one or more agricultural commodities

needs to be identified and promoted with all necessary infrastructures for developing the

value chain as well.

• Majority of the food insecure families were also suffering from nutritional deficiency

throughout the country. Therefore, there is an urgent need for changing food habits of the

food insecure communities through targeted awareness and educational programs. It is

advised that Mercy Corps design a comprehensive nutritional awareness and educational

packages either through separate Cash for Kitchen Gardening or integrated with on-going

livelihood development program.

Project Evaluation Report- FCCTP Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Mercy Corps is an international, non-governmental humanitarian relief and development

agency. Mercy Corps works in 40 countries across the globe Mercy Corps has long experience of

using cash transfer approach to provide emergency relief and improving longer term food

security for the vulnerable communities. Mercy Corps has been present in Nepal since 2005

focusing on agriculture and food security, microfinance, and disaster risk reduction, with

inclusion of youth and disadvantaged groups as a cross-cutting theme. MC works primarily to

strengthen, protect, and expand access to productive livelihoods for the poor in Nepal.

Food security situation over the past few years has been worsening in Nepal due to various

reasons. Nepal has been ranked 144th position on human development index (HD I- 2009). The

national food statistics indicates that annual production at par with annual population growth

resulting the country a net food importer. Furthermore, Nepal has been facing severe food

insecurity situations in the recent past due to devastating effects of natural disasters such as

drought, earthquakes, landslides, fire, epidemics, etc. due to geo-climatic conditions and

human factors. The international disaster database shows that about 311,000 peoples have

been affected by floods in Nepal from 2002 to 2009.

The Three-Year Interim Development Plan was also linked to its peace building agenda. The

Interim Plan put its emphasis on relief, reconstruction, and reintegration; the creation and

expansion of employment opportunities; infrastructure; governance; basic social services with a

focus on basic education and health services. In 2008 and 2009, Nepal was high on the list of

countries where rising food and commodity prices was expected to have a huge impact on the

population. According to the Nepal Development Research Institute (NDRI) and WFP,

approximately 2.5 million people in rural Nepal were in immediate need of food assistance at

the time and a further 3.9 million were at risk of becoming food insecure due to higher food

prices (NDRI/WFP Unpublished Report, 2009).

Among other agencies, WFP is the major UN organization providing support to cope with

emergency needs for the population facing food insecurity in Nepal. According to the WFP 2000

Country Strategy Outlines the main activities included: school feeding, assistance to rural

infrastructure which evolved over time from food for work to community asset creation, and

support to Bhutanese refugees. The Outline identifies three main priorities for the new Country

Program:

• Increased focus on areas most vulnerable to food security (Hills and Mountains);

• Increased focus on nutrition intervention for mothers and infants; and

• Increased attention to synergies and decentralization of implementation.

WFP has been working with government of Nepal and other bi-lateral donors, I/NGOs/CBOs to

provide both emergency supports and improve longer term food security for the vulnerable

rural communities, mainly in the Hills and Mountain regions which are considered permanent

food deficit.


In order to provide immediate assistance, Mercy Corps designed a Global Food Crisis Response

(GFCR) program with the goal of improving immediate and medium-term food security, while

laying groundwork for longer-term solutions in vulnerable communities in Kailali, Baitadi and

Dadeldhura districts. Under the GFCR, Cash for Work (CFW) was one of components that

provided cash transfer to highly food insecure households through wage labor opportunities for

2,213 extremely vulnerable households, including 992 households affected by the September

19th flood of Mohana river in Kailali district and an additional 1,221 chronically food insecure

households in Hills VDCs of Kailali, Dadeldhura, and Baitadi districts. After the successful

implementation of CFW under GFCR, MC designed a second Cash for Work project, the Food

Crisis Cash Transfer Project (FCCTP), covering about 15,500 food insecure households in

selected 27 VDCs in three project districts mentioned above.

1.2 Food Crisis Cash Transfer Project (FCCTP)

Based on the success of this pilot stage, Mercy Corps and WFP expanded CFW activities from 10

to 27 VDCs: 11 in Kailali, 8 in Dadeldhura, and 8 in Baitadi district, selected with reference to

WFP’s Protracted Relief and Rehabilitation Operation (PRRO) rankings. Furthermore, priority

was given to VDCs where wheat crop was severely affected by the winter drought of

2008/2009; and, VDCs suggested by local Government of Nepal stakeholders. FCCTP is a 13

months project implemented from June 2009 to June 2010 has targeted to cover about 15,500

households and 95,000 individuals as project beneficiaries. In addition to User Committees

(UC), the CFW activities were implemented in partnership with the respective District Chapters

of Nepal Red Cross Society (NRCS) of Baitadi, Dadeldhura and Kailali Districts. The feasibility of

cash delivery and market access was also considered while selecting the target VDCs. As per the

project document, the goal, purpose, and objectives of the FCCTP have been narrated as

follows:

1.2.1 Overall Project Goal

To provide immediate relief for food insecure households affected by rising food prices, while

supporting projects that improve longer-term food security prospects.

1.2.2 Project Purpose

The overall purpose of the FCCTP as mentioned in the ToR is narrated as below:

1. To bolster the resilience of food insecure households to the devastating effects of rising food

prices and natural disasters; and

2. To support schemes that provide opportunities for increasing food production while reducing

food security shocks.

1.2.3 Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of the consultancy is to evaluate the effectiveness, impact and efficiency of the

Food Crisis Cash Transfer Project, which used cash transfers as a crisis mitigation measure. In

addition, the study aimed to assess the project performance in terms of the relevance of

results, sustainability, shared responsibility, and accountability.

2.3 Scope of the Work

As per ToR of the evaluation, the study aims at answering the following questions:


1. In the Nepal context, is cash transfer programming an effective means of facilitating post-

crisis recovery? [Note: here communities affected by the Kailali flooding can be considered]

2. In the Nepal context, is cash transfer programming an effective means of mitigating the

effects of an ongoing crisis? [Note: here communities affected by food price volatility can be

considered]

3. What are the major impacts brought about by the project to the individual and community

in relation to its targeted goal and objective?

A. Individual level: (Equity in wages in the communities, and Women empowerment at both

household and community levels)

B. Community level: (Increased in production/productivity in selected crops due to irrigation

facilities, Change in cropping patterns and cropping intensity in irrigated area, increase in

supply/accessibility of food items due to improved road access, rustic stores, and marketing

centers, protection of River bank and fencing and trenching of cultivated land etc; Change in

prices of food items in local markets)

4. Does available evidence suggest that the project helped families to overcome the effects of

food price volatility?

5. Does the available evidence suggest that the project helped families to recover partially or

fully from the effects of increased food insecurity and/ or natural disaster?

6. Does available evidence suggest that the project helped families to avoid or mitigate

harmful coping strategies that they might otherwise have adopted due to food insecurity? If

so, which coping strategies and to what extent?

7. Does available evidence suggest that the project supported the creation of maintenance of

productive assets at the community level, and that the community has a reasonable level of

ownership over these assets?

8. Where the project implementation procedures followed sufficient to ensure sound

stakeholder management:

9. Should this approach be replicated in future? If so, in which contexts?

10. What are the lessons learned? and

11. Recommendations for guiding future projects?


2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The Consultant collected available relevant literatures on cash transfer in general and Nepal

specific programs in particular. However, due to limited scope for the assignment detailed

literature review was not possible. The relevant literatures reviewed during the course of this

study and its key issues are briefly described below:

2.1 Country context

Nepal has a population of 28.6 million1, increasing every year by more than 2 per cent. The

landscape of the country is divided in to three ecological regions: Mountains, Hills and Plains, of

which the latter, the Tarai makes up 23 per cent of the total area. The geography of the country

renders access to market and services very challenging. The ratio of population to arable land is

one of the highest in the world estimated about 8:1 (8 person per hectare of arable land). The

majority of people are subsistence farmers highly dependent on rain-fed agriculture. About 31

per cent of the population is living below the poverty line2.

Natural Disasters

Nepal is considered highly vulnerable to various types of natural disasters such as drought,

earthquakes, landslides, fire, epidemics, etc. due to geo-climatic conditions and human factors.

Among above disasters occurrence, floods is more common and considerable people have been

affected annually. The EM-DAT shows that the floods in Nepal were unpredictable in the

current decade. In addition, the recent years have seen a combination of winter drought (2006

and 20093) with extensive summer flooding. The number of people affected by category of

natural disasters is summarized in Table-1:

Table 1: Main natural disasters and estimation of people affected

Year Natural disasters People affected

2009 Epidemics 52,000

2008 Flood 180,000

2007 Flood 641,000

2006 Flood 200,000

2005 Flood 30,000

2004 Flood 800,000

2003 Flood 60,000

2002 Flood 266,000

Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED international disaster database

Poverty Level

Nepal is a low-income, food deficit country, ranks 144th on the 2009 Human Development

Index (HDI). According to UNICEF4, the gross national income per capita was US$ 340 in 2007.

1 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/ on Nepal

2 http://devdata.worldbank.org/AAG/npl_aag.pdf

3 WFP, 2009, ‘The cost of coping: a collision of crises and the impact of sustained food security deterioration in

Nepal’. 4 http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/nepal_nepal_statistics.html


According to the Asian Development Bank (ADB)5, “An emerging concern is the sharp rise in

inequality - in terms of the Gini coefficient, inequality increased from 0.34 in 1995/96 to 0.41 in

2003/04”. Inequalities have many sources of explanations, according to the latest national

human development report6, Nepal’s wide differences in the living conditions of its population

are mainly due to unequal gender relations, caste differentials due to social stratification, caste

and ethnicity differences, linguistic discrimination, religious differences, spatial exclusion, and

geo-political discrimination.

Food Security7

Nepal has been hit by a collision of crises since more than a decade and confronted with a

declining food security. The country is now facing repeatedly food deficits due to combination

of population growth, stagnating food production and a declining proportion of public

expenditure in agriculture. The ability of households to purchase food has become significantly

more difficult due to impact of high food price crisis. The proportion of the undernourished

population is about 22.5 per cent both in urban and rural areas. Populations in the Hills and

Mountain districts of the Far and Mid-Western regions are the ones who suffer most from food

insecurity. The rate of underweight in children under 5 is estimated at 39 per cent with an

average rate up to 48 per cent in the mountain areas.

Compared with neighboring countries Nepal has been particularly hit by the global food crisis

and experienced steep food price inflation from the end of 2007 through 2008. There is wide

variation in food prices between three ecological regions of the country. Study has shown that

the average food prices in the Hill and Mountain Regions are estimated three times more than

in the Tarai. High food prices, combined with drought and winter crop losses, limited access to

food of almost 3.4 million people during the first quarter of 2009 (WFP Project Report, 2010).

Study has also shown that during 2006/07 to 2007/08 migration rates of people from rural

areas was increased by about 13 per cent and the remittances contributed nearly 17 per cent of

the National Gross Domestic Product. A further risk that might affect food security and the way

in which people cope with their situation is the potential drop in remittances due to the global

financial crisis8.

Government Strategy9

The Three-Year Interim Development Plan was totally linked to its peace building agenda. The

Interim Plan put its emphasis on relief, reconstruction, and reintegration; the creation and

expansion of employment opportunities; infrastructure; governance; basic social services with a

focus on basic education and health services.

5 ADB, DFID, ILO, 2009, ‘Highlights. Nepal: critical development constraints’

6 UNDP, 2009, ‘Nepal Human Development Report 2009. State Transformation and Human Development’.

7 WFP, 2009, ‘The cost of coping’, Nepal Food Security Monitoring system. WFP, 2009, ‘A sub-regional hunger

index for Nepal, Nepal Food Security Monitoring System. 8 FAO/WFP, 2009, ‘State of food insecurity in the world 2009’.

9 Government of Nepal, National Planning Commission, 2007, ‘Three-Year Interim Plan’.


International Assistance

After signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the major political alliance

and Maoist in 2006, international assistance increased considerably (by more than 40 %

between 2005 and 2007) to support the country’s peace building and development efforts. The

main donors are the ADB, United Kingdom (UK) and Japan. The 2008-2010 UNDAF, extended

until 2012, prioritizes peace consolidation, quality of basic services, sustainable livelihoods,

human rights, gender equality, and social inclusion.

However, the humanitarian assistance represents less than 10 per cent of total aid, it is

regularly increasing reflecting needs in the food security sector due to combination of national

and international issues confronting the country as discussed above. Donor funding seems to

prioritize food security and nutrition over other humanitarian requirements10. The main

external donors in the humanitarian sector are the United States (US), the European

Commission (EC), and the UK.

In 2008 and 2009, Nepal was high on the list of countries where rising food and commodity

prices was expected to have a huge impact on the population. This is because Nepal relied

heavily on food and oil imports and had a high level of chronic food insecurity (41% population

is under-nourished) and poverty (31%). Moreover, on an average, the Nepalese population

spent more than half its income on food, a situation exacerbated by increases of 20 to 30 per

cent in food prices. As a result, food intake among the poor households was decreasing, a

situation that would quickly lead to higher malnutrition rates. According to the Nepal

Development Research Group and WFP, approximately 2.5 million people in rural Nepal were in

immediate need of food assistance at the time and a further 3.9 million were at risk of

becoming food insecure due to higher food prices.

2.2 Food for Work (FFW)

WFP is present in Nepal since 1963 with 51 operations for a total budget of about US$400

million to date. More than US$ 252 million (63 % of the total) have been budgeted over the last

eight years.

According to the WFP 2000 Country Strategy Outlines the main activities included: school

feeding, assistance to rural infrastructure which evolved over time from food for work to

community asset creation, and support to Bhutanese refugees. The Outline identifies three

main priorities for the new CP:

• Increased focus on areas most vulnerable to food security (Hills and Mountains);

• Increased focus on nutrition intervention for mothers and infants;

• Increased attention to synergies and decentralization of implementation.

WFP Portfolio in Nepal

Review of WFP Portfolio activities undertaken between 2002 and 2009 in Nepal shows that

WFP undertook 15 operations investing about US $ 348 million. The review shows that of the

total portfolio about one-third was spent on different development programs followed by 31

10

UN-OCHA, 2009, ‘Humanitarian transition appeal – mid-year review’.


per cent in Relief and Recovery operations, 27 per cent in Relief and Recovery of Bhutanese

Refugees, and 7 per cent in five emergency Operations during the reporting period.

Objectives and Activities of WFP

The objective-wise distribution of WFP activities outlined in the 2008 - 13 strategic plans

shows that it operates under main four strategic objectives namely: 1) Save lives and protect

livelihoods in emergencies; 2) Prevent acute hunger and invest in disaster preparedness and

mitigation measures; 3) Restore and rebuild lives and livelihoods in post-conflict, post disasters

or transition situations; and Reduce chronic hunger and under nutrition.

Distribution of WFP Portfolio in Nepal

The main activities are GFD (39%) mainly in EMOPS and PRROS for refugees and FFW/FFT (30%)

mainly through the CP and PRRO for conflict affected population. Nutrition issues are recurrent

across the portfolio mainly through FFE (14%), MCHN (11%), supplementation act (5%), and

retention package (1%) ( WFP projects documents)

Access to food is a major issue in Nepal. The most food insecure areas are also the least

accessible. Population is scattered, which represents major logistic challenges for WFP

operations and therefore extremely variable. Landside transport storage and handling cost per

metric cost varying from US$ 24 per metric ton to US$ 594 metric ton according to the

operations. To support local markets WFP’s first option is local purchase and therefore local

markets are closely monitored. Local procurement is however a challenge especially when

natural disasters, such as the recent drought, strike and prices increase. In this context, timely

delivery or adequate rations constitute a major challenge for the efficiency and effectiveness of

the portfolio activities.

Resource Flows

Annual allocation of WFP funds by program categories in Nepal shows that funding for

development activities in Nepal has consistently decreased since 2004, while funding for relief

and rehabilitation programs has dramatically increased since 2006 following the peace

agreement (WFP, Directed multilateral contributions 2004-2009).

Geographical Focus

WFP has been operating across the entire country. However, the volume of WFP operations

shows that almost half of the volumes of business is concentrated in the Eastern region (45%)

followed by Mid-west (24%), Far-west (19%), Central region (11%) and one percent in Western

region. The WFP focus indicates most of the food has been delivered in the Eastern Region

(mainly due to support to refugees in two Districts (Jhapa and Morang). The other main regions

where WFP is active are the Far and Mid Western Hills and Mountains districts (WFP CO).

2.3 Cash Transfer Programs in Nepal

The concept of cash transfer programming is not new for Nepal although it is not clearly spelled

out in the development literatures in the past. Analysis of Local Governance Act -1992, clearly

says that the community shall be involved in local development projects implemented by VDCs,

Municipality and DDC. This is a broader legal framework to directly involve the community for


speeding up development process in a transparent and cost-effective manner through their

participation at all levels of program implementation. However, the LGA does not give any

priority for transferring cash to the community for securing foods and livelihood needs of the

poorest among poor households in the community rather it focuses mainly on creating basic

community infrastructures essential for development such as construction and rehabilitation of

rural roads, trails, school and community building, rural electrification, small and micro

irrigation, marketing/ collection centers etc in the villages by the communities themselves.

Despite well defined guidelines of the government to implement the LGA, the participation of

community in local development programs has been gradually diluted since the role of Users'

Committee, which is mandatory by law, superseded the concept of meaningful participation of

the community users in these programs. Various studies conducted by different agencies and

individuals have reported that the local development schemes undertaken by the local

government bodies (VDC/Municipality and DDC) are often legally controlled by major political

parties and local elites at the local level. The process of project selection, implementation, and

monitoring and evaluation process is not transparent and financial mismanagement is

widespread.

Against the above backdrop, majority of the bi-lateral and multi-lateral donor agencies

supporting infrastructural development projects in Nepal has been adopting the community

participation approach with some modifications to suit their own needs. In most of the cases,

the donor agencies work in collaboration with the government line department, local

government bodies, NGOs, and CBOs. Review of operational modalities of these development

agencies indicate that considerable cash has been transferred to local communities through

implementing partners. In most of the cases, beneficiary users have no control over the

decision on project selection, implementation and monitoring and evaluation although every

body now-a-days advocates peoples' participation and transparency through public auditing.

However, the LGA has gradually decentralized the authority to local government bodies and

provides an opportunity to mobilize the local resources for their own development.

2.4 Cash for Work (CFW)

Building on the experience from Cash for Work pilot phase implemented from November 2008

to June 2009, Mercy Corps designed another FCCTP to be implemented in selected VDCs of

same three districts of Far Western Development Region of Nepal. The available literatures on

cash transfers show that this approach can stimulate markets. Cash has a stimulating effect on

markets with households spending cash in local markets, increasing business, but without

raising prices. No short term difference was found in food security between beneficiaries and

non-beneficiaries of CFW. However, it has an indirect effect on food security in the long run as

people generally do not deplete current resources/ assets in order to meet current needs, so

their livelihoods – which finally support food security – remain stronger. During the project

period, CFW cash represented a significant proportion of cash circulating in the local economies

in the months of project implementation. The Joint Mid-term Review of CFW conducted by

Mercy Corps/WFP reported that, on an average, about 28 per cent cash circulated in local

market in Baitadi district was contributed by CFW. However, the CFW substitutes for other

forms of income, particularly the income earned through migration. CFW could have a positive

impact in Karnali but wage rates would have to be set higher to reflect higher food prices (and it


would be difficult to anticipate the right rate in advance) and complementary measures to

ensure traders are able to supply the demanded quantities would be needed (Francesca et.al,).

According to WFP's study, CFW seems more feasible in those districts which are connected with

fair weather roads and foods are easily accessible to the people in local markets.

The CFW approach, used widely by Mercy Corps in various countries, but generally in the

context of post-crisis recovery and, to a lesser extent, in crisis mitigation scenarios, creates

short term employment opportunities for the extremely vulnerable households by building

community economic infrastructures. Mercy Corps, with both financial and technical support

from WFP piloted the first phase of Cash for Work (CFW) schemes in three districts of the Far

Western Development Region of Baitadi, Dadeldhura and Kailali in Nepal between November

2008 and June 2009. The purpose of these CFW schemes were two-folds: i) First and primarily,

to provide cash transfers to mitigate the effects of food price volatility on food insecure

communities and prevent harmful coping strategies; and, ii) Second, to support the

rehabilitation and or creation of productive community assets that can contribute to longer-

term food security improvements. In the pilot stage, CFW schemes enabled participating

communities to construct and/or repair 96 infrastructures projects that contributed to improve

local food and agriculture systems while reducing the risk of future food security shocks

through supporting to improve agricultural roads, irrigation systems, and flood mitigation

works in the project VDCs.


3. METHODOLOGY

The evaluation study was undertaken from 11 May through 04 June 2010. The study was

conducted into three phases namely: i) Preparatory phase, ii) Field study phase, and iii) Report

preparation phase. Given the nature and scope of evaluation study was based primarily on

qualitative methodology for collection of information required for validating the objectives. The

Evaluation Process used a combination of qualitative and quantitative tools for collection of

data from both secondary and primary sources. Among others, a set of Participatory Rural

Appraisal (PRA) tools and techniques such as Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), Key Informant

Interviews (KII), Consultative Meeting and Personal Interviews/Interaction with concerned

Stakeholders in each project district were conducted. In addition, the evaluation team visited to

sample sites to observe community infrastructures constructed and or rehabilitated with

project supports. Considerable data and relevant information were collected and reviewed

from secondary sources available from FCCTP sources to gain insights about the FCCTP prior to

proceeding to the field study.

3.1 Briefing about CFW Program

The senior management team of Mercy Corps briefed on Mercy Corps Nepal’s CFW – FCCTP to

the Consultant at the country office in Kathmandu and again discussed the goal, purpose,

objectives and implementation process of the FCCTP. The Consultant prepared detailed data

collection methodology for the evaluation in close coordination with the Project Team and

M&E Team. The methodological steps followed in the evaluation process are briefly described

hereunder:

3.1.1 Review of Project Documents and Reports

The Consultant collected and reviewed relevant project documents and reports to

conceptualize the process of Cash for Work in general, and FCCTP implemented by Mercy

Corps, in particular. Among others, following documents and reports were collected from

Mercy Corps for review before development and finalizing evaluation methodology and data

collection tools:

• FCCTP Work Plan;

• FCCTP Concept Paper;

• Monthly Reports;

• Cash for Work Participatory Impact Assessment;

• WFP Joint Monitoring Report;

• Projects and Organization Fact Sheets; and

• Other reviews of WFP Cash Transfer Activities in Nepal.

3.1.2 Literature Review

The Consultant collected available project specific literature including literature on general cash

transfer, and literatures on other forms of crisis mitigation or post-crisis recovery assistance

provided in Nepal.


3.1.3 Finalization of Work Plan and Data Collection Tools

One-day workshop was organized at Mercy Corps' Regional Office in Dhangadi. The Consultant

in the presence of concerned FCCTP staff and DME Manager drafted the data collection tools.

After discussions with participants of workshop, the evaluation methodology including field

schedule and data collection tools were finalized by incorporating their relevant suggestions

and feedbacks. The Work Plan and Data Collection Tools are attached in Annexes I and II,

respectively.

3.2 Field Trips

The Consultant along with DME Manager, concerned district Project Officers visited sample

project sites to observe the project interventions made in the communities in three districts as

suggested by Project Team. The Field Visit Schedule is annexed in Annex-III.

3.3 Data Collection

The necessary data was collected mainly using qualitative methods. Among others, information

was collected using following Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools:

3.3.1 Focus Groups Discussions

Information were mainly collected through FGDs. Altogether, 8 FGDs with beneficiary groups

including the women, men, and Dalits households of the groups in 7 project VDCs.

3.3.2 Key Informants’ Interviews

In addition to above 8 FGDs, information was also collected through KII with selected

individuals representing different beneficiary groups, service providers, project stakeholders

during the field study. Altogether, 12 Key Informants representing district line agencies,

cooperative leaders, and beneficiary representatives were interviewed and their views were

recorded, analyzed, and used in the report. Details about FGDs' participants is attached in

Annex-I.

3.3.3 Direct Observations

Observation is considered one of the most powerful tools to capture the true pictures of the

process, outcomes/results and even impacts of the any development project interventions

implemented in the field. All members of evaluation team observed the existing situations in

the field while conducting FGDs and recording the views expressed by individual respondents at

the discussions in each VDC. In addition, the evaluation team along with representatives of

users visited some of the schemes completed with project supports in the study VDCs. This has

helped consultant to gain insights about the project activities undertaken at the community

level. The list of schemes observed by VDCs and district is attached in Annex-IV.

3.4 Data Compilation and Analysis

A debriefing session was organized to share the preliminary findings/observations of the

Consultant based on the information collected from the field during the field visits. The study

team also collected the feedbacks based on their own experience while working in their

respective district. The information collected through FGDs and KIIs was analyzed by using


simple descriptive statistics such as mean, frequency and percentage, where applicable. The

views expressed by the FGDs participants and KIIs have been used to dichotomize the

responses on key issues documented from the study.

3.5 Organization of Evaluation Report

The report has been divided into six chapters. The first chapter describes the background of

CFW, purpose and scope of the evaluation assignment. In the second chapter, a brief

introduction of country context with respect to poverty, food security, government strategy

and international investment in Nepal and brief review of available literature on food for work

and cash for work programs has been presented. The third chapter describes the

methodological approach used in the evaluation study. The forth chapter describes major

findings of the evaluation. Finally in the sixth chapter, based on the consultant based on the

evaluation process, has drawn some conclusions, lessons learned, and made few

recommendations to be considered while implementing the similar project in the future.

3.6 Limitation of Study

The Evaluation Report is primarily based on the qualitative information collected through FGDs

and Key Informants' Interview and physical observations of sample infrastructures created with

project support in limited project VDCs (7). The responses of the FGDs' participants and KII

respondents may not be completely free from the personal bias and prejudice towards the

project and implementing partners and field staff. Despite above common limitation of social

science research, the consultant assures that this report correctly depicts the true picture of the

project implementation process and observable outcomes/impacts of the FCCTP implemented

by Mercy Corps on improving the food security and livelihood of target communities in three

project districts in general and the target communities, in particular.


4. MAJOR FINDINGS

Key findings of the evaluation of CFW implemented by Mercy Corps in three districts of Far-

Western Development Region have been presented as follows:

4.1 Relevance of CFW for Nepal

4.1.1 Effectiveness of cash transfer programming for facilitating post-crisis recovery

Nepal is considered highly vulnerable to various types of natural disasters such as drought,

earthquakes, floods, landslides, fire, epidemics, etc. due to geo-climatic conditions and human

factors. Among above disasters occurrence, floods are more common and considerable people

are affected annually. The EM-DAT shows that the floods in Nepal were unpredictable in the

current decade. In addition, the recent years have seen a combination of winter drought (2006

and 200911) with extensive summer flooding. The number of people affected by category of

natural disasters is summarized in Table-1:

Table 1: Main natural disasters and estimation of people affected

Year Category of Natural disasters Number of People affected

2009 Epidemics 52,000

2008 Flood 180,000

2007 Flood 641,000

2006 Flood 200,000

2005 Flood 30,000

2004 Flood 800,000

2003 Flood 60,000

2002 Flood 266,000

Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED international disaster database

The data in above table shows the number of people directly affected by various natural

disasters in Nepal since 2002. Among others, the frequency of floods is more common and

considerable people, particularly in the plains were more affected. Depending upon the

magnitude of floods, besides human and animal casualties, the affected community completely

lost all the means of livelihoods. For instances, thousands of people in Sunsari, Morang, and

Kailali districts were affected by the floods of Koshi River in the East and Mohana River in the

West. Many floods affected communities in Sunsari and Morang districts are yet to be settled in

their villages due to devastating floods. Although, the magnitude of flood in Kailali district was

lower compared to Koshi River in the East, majority of the flood victims of Kailali are still taking

shelter in the open safe public and forest lands near by villages. On the one hand, the floods

affected communities want to rehabilitate their flood damaged property immediately and on

11

WFP, 2009, ‘The cost of coping: a collision of crises and the impact of sustained food security deterioration in

Nepal’.


other hand, necessary preventive measures need to be taken to protect the community from

likely occurrence of floods in the future. Therefore, the government and other development

agencies have been implementing wide range of rehabilitation programs in the flood affected

communities so that the lives of the people could be brought to normal by rehabilitating the

damaged infrastructures.

In this regard, among other approaches for supporting the affected families, cash transfer

approach could be one of the most appropriate one. The present study of FCCTP in selected

VDCs in Kailali district shows that communities are not only enthusiastic to rehabilitate the

floods damaged community infrastructures but also willing to work together to protect their

villages from the floods in future. The FCCTP interventions process adopted by Mercy Corps has

been highly appreciated by the communities, concerned stakeholders, and government line

agencies in the district. Therefore, it is safely concluded that the Cash for Work programming

could be widely used to implement the post crisis recovery interventions packages for flood

affected communities throughout the plain regions of Nepal.

4.1.2 Effectiveness of CFW for Mitigating the Effects of Food Crisis

The available literatures on development models and program implementation approaches

used by different agencies involved in Nepal indicate that no single model or approach is

applicable to different regions of the country. A combination of models or methods mix would

be required based on the community needs, availability of resources, and more importantly,

willingness and commitment of the beneficiaries concerned. Analysis of the decentralized

community development approached advocated by different development agencies working in

Nepal have shown that small and medium scaled community development projects requiring

minimum external resources (both technical and materials) are effectively implemented by the

communities provided the communities are mobilized in a transparent manner.

Nepal has been hit by a collision of crises since more than a decade and confronted with a

declining food security. The country is now facing repeatedly food deficits due to combination

of population growth, stagnating food production and a declining proportion of public

expenditure in agriculture. The ability of households to purchase food has become significantly

more difficult due to impact of high food price crisis. The proportion of acute undernourished

population is about 22.5 per cent both in urban and rural areas. Populations in the Hills and

Mountain districts of the Far and Mid-Western regions are the ones who suffer most from food

insecurity. The rate of underweight in children under 5 is estimated at 39 per cent with an

average rate up to 48 per cent in the Mountain areas (WFP Project Document, 2010).

After signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the major political alliance

and Maoist in 2006, international assistance increased considerably (by more than 40 percent

between 2005 and 2007) to support the country’s peace building and development efforts. The

main donors are the ADB, United Kingdom (UK) and Japan. The 2008-2010 UNDAF, extended

until 2012, prioritizes peace consolidation, quality of basic services, sustainable livelihoods,

human rights, gender equality, and social inclusion.

However, the humanitarian assistance represents less than 10 per cent of total aid, it is

regularly increasing reflecting needs in the food security sector due the combination of national


and international issues confronting the country as discussed above. Donor funding seems to

prioritize food security and nutrition over other humanitarian requirements12. The main

external donors in the humanitarian sector are the United States (US), the European

Commission (EC), and the UK.

In 2008 and 2009, Nepal was high on the list of countries where rising food and commodity

prices was expected to have a huge impact on the population. This is because Nepal relied

heavily on food and oil imports and had a high level of chronic food insecurity (41% is

undernourished) and about one-third of the population living below poverty (31%). Moreover,

on an average, about 50 per cent population spent more than half of their income on food, a

situation exacerbated by increases of 20 to 30 per cent in food prices. As a result, the food

intake among the poor households was decreasing, a situation that would quickly lead to higher

malnutrition rates. According to the study conducted by NDRI/WFP, approximately 2.5 million

people in rural Nepal were in immediate need of food assistance at the time and a further 3.9

million were at risk of becoming food insecure due to higher food prices.

The development process in Nepal was stagnant during the past one decade due to Maoist

conflicts in the country. However, Nepal has steadily progressed in communication, education,

and more recently in transport sectors. It has been reported that out of 75 districts, the district

headquarters of 69 districts of the country have been connected by fair-weather road tracks. It

is expected that the headquarters of the 6 districts (one District of Far-western, 3 districts of

Mid-western and 2 districts of Eastern Development Regions) are yet to be connected by road

tracts. In most of the districts connected by road, people have access to foods and other daily

essentials commodities in the district headquarters.

The World Food Program is the major agency providing food security assistance to Nepal for

protecting lives of people in needs of emergency through its various country programs has also

changed its operational approach from Food for Work (FFW) to Cash for Work (CfW) in the

areas where availability of foods is ensured due to opening road tracts to many food deficit

districts. The current WFP country program has emphasized to provide emergency supports as

well as post crisis re-establishment of livelihoods of disasters affected communities through its

PRRO and a social safety net and helping vulnerable communities to create or preserve assets.

4.2 Increased Food Purchasing Capacity of Food Insecure Households

Mercy Corps, with financial assistance from WFP piloted the first phase of Cash for Work (CFW)

schemes in three districts of Far-Western Development Region namely: Baitadi, Dadeldhura and

Kailali in Nepal between November 2008 and June 2009. The purpose of the pilot CFW project

was two-folds: i) First and primarily to provide cash transfers to mitigate the effects of food

price volatility on food insecure communities and prevent harmful coping strategies; and ii)

Secondly, to support rehabilitation or creation of productive community assets that can

contribute to longer-term food security improvements. In the pilot stage, CFW schemes

enabled participating communities to construct and/or repair 96 infrastructures projects that

contributed to improve local food and agriculture systems while reducing the risk of future food

security shocks through supporting to improve agricultural roads, irrigation systems, and flood

12

UN-OCHA, 2009, ‘Humanitarian transition appeal – mid-year review’.


mitigation works in the project VDCs. Building on the successful implementation of this pilot

CFW program, Mercy Corps designed a FCCTP for the same three districts of Far-western region

from financial and technical support from WFP under its PRRO. The FCCTP was implemented in

two phases capturing two lean periods of agricultural seasons covering about 15,295

households through provision of 50 days wage employment @ Rs. 140 per day.

Review of project information sheets and progress report reveals that altogether, 15,295

households from 164 wards of 27 VDCs (7,902 households of 86 wards in the first phase and

7,393 households from 78 wards in second phase) were directly benefited by working in over

350 schemes supported in three project districts. The Joint Monitoring Report showed that the

project had positive impacts on the food security situations of target beneficiary households

across all the 27 VDCs covered by project as more than 50 per cent of cash paid to the

households was used for purchasing food grains mainly coarse rice and wheat by the majority

of beneficiary households who participated in the FCCTP. Besides, direct income supplement to

the targeted households, many basic community assets have been created and or rehabilitated

in the project areas with the project supports.

The number of schemes supported, households benefited and number of users' committees

formed by district is presented in Table-3.

Table 3: Number of Schemes Completed in FCCTP by District

District

FCCTP Phase-I FCCTP Phase—II

To

tal b

en

efi

cia

ry

Ho

use

ho

lds

# o

f Sc

he

me

s

# o

f W

ard

s

# o

f U

Cs

form

ed

# o

f

Be

ne

fici

ary

Ho

use

ho

lds

# o

f Sc

he

me

s

# o

f W

ard

s

# o

f U

Cs

form

ed

# o

f b

en

efi

cia

ry

Ho

use

ho

lds

Kailali 63 21 25 2779 51 16 21 2663 5442

Dadeldhura 86 26 30 2492 40 29 31 2381 4873

Baitadi 83 39 38 2631 32 33 33 2349 4980

Total 232 86 93 7902 123 78 85 7393 15295

Source: Various Project Information Documents

The table 3 clearly shows that quantitative target of transferring cash to the intended families

has been comfortably achieved by the project as 15,295 households worked for 50 days in

various community schemes and earned Rs. 6,500 per household even after deducting the

maintenance fund contribution from the original earning of Rs. 7,000 per household. The study

reveals that FCCTP has been effective in achieving the project goals in the following ways:

• Contributing directly to recovering from post crisis of food insecurity for both flood affected

vulnerable communities in Kailali plains and draught affected communities in Hills region;

• FCCTP contributed to achieve medium terms goals of the three-year Interim Development

Plan of the government through contributing creation of productive community

infrastructures in project districts; and


• More importantly, FCCTP has demonstrated a transparent and inclusive participatory

approach in community development which was aimed by every agency engaged in local

development sectors in Nepal.

4.3 Impacts of CFW on Food Security of Target Community

The CFW program was implemented for about 13 months covering two agricultural lean

seasons from June 2009 through June 2010. Since an adequate post project time period must

pass to document the medium-term impacts of the project, attempt was made to document

the perception of target beneficiaries, project implementing partners, and concerned

stakeholders about the project implementation process and observed immediate results in the

target areas both at individual households and community level. The perceived outcomes and

results of the program by the beneficiaries and other stakeholders are briefly presented below:

4.3.1 Household Level

The present study reveals that the Cash for Work program has directly helped to the target

communities in many ways. Out of 144 participants present in 8 FGDs held at 7 project VDCs

about 96 per cent were of the opinion that cash earned through working in different projects

supplemented family incomes. All the participants' of the FGDs were of the opinion that

participation of households in community development activities has increased followed the

cash income supported the children's education (86%), increased control over cash by the

women (92.36%), reduced work load of women (84.72%), improved market access for the

community (59.72%), and increased production of foods (36.11%).

Table 4: Distribution of FGDs' Participants by Perceived Impacts of CFW Program at

Households Level by VDC

SN

VD

C

To

tal

Ca

sh

Inco

me

Sup

po

rte

d

Ch

ildre

n's

ed

uca

tio

n

Re

du

ced

Wo

me

n's

'

Wo

rklo

ad

Incr

ea

sed

con

tro

l

ove

r ca

sh

by

Wo

me

n

Incr

ea

sed

Foo

d

Pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

rove

d

Ma

rke

t

Acc

ess

C

om

mu

nit

y

Pa

rtic

ipa

tio

n in

1 Bhajani 11 5 2 6 11 11 11 11

2 Lalbhoji 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22

3 Sahajpur 19 19 15 12 19 0 19 19

4 Chaukham 15 15 15 15 15 0 0 15

5 Shikharpur 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9

6 Bhadrapur 17 17 17 17 17 0 0 17

7 Jogbudha 27 27 20 21 16 10 10 27

8 Jogbudha 24 24 24 20 24 0 24 24

Total 144 138 124 122 133 52 86 144

% 100 95.83 86.11 84.72 92.36 36.11 59.72 100.00

The evaluation study indicates that the FCCTP has direct impacts on the individual beneficiary

households in the following ways:

• Increased food purchasing capacity of 15,295 target beneficiary households;


• Increased access to cash income to women;

• Better utilization of cash for purchasing foods and education of children;

• Reduced work load of women, particularly for the poorest among the poor households of

the project VDCs; and

• Protected the households from adopting harmful coping strategies for purchasing foods by

vulnerable households - e.g. dropping children from school, seasonal migration, selling of

livestock and fixed assets etc.

4.3.2 Community Level

The study shows that among different community infrastructures rehabilitated and or created

with project supports, construction of community ponds, and rehabilitation of irrigation ponds,

river bank protection works, and fencing or trenching of cultivated land are considered directly

contributing to increase the productivity and production of foods in the communities. Review

of schemes completed during the two phases shows that during the first phase of the schemes

undertaken by the majority of the communities were rehabilitation and or construction of

school and community buildings, access roads and trails, drinking water schemes, micro-hydro

plants and a few irrigation canals and ponds. The types of community infrastructures

rehabilitated and or created with project supports by category and district is presented in

Table- 5:

Table 5: Types of Schemes Completed during FCCTP Phase-I by District

SN Schemes Category Unit Kailali Dadeldhura Baitadi Total

1 Construction and rehabilitation of canals Km 13 55 6.3 74.3

2 Construction and rehabilitation of Ponds Number 4 7 2 13

3

Construction and rehabilitation of river bank

protection Meter 6100 499 0 6599

4 Construction and rehabilitation of rural roads Km 60.6 1 0 61.6

5 Construction and rehabilitation of trails Km 15 197.5 74.5 287.0

6

Construction and rehabilitation of

community bridges Number 9 7 2 18

7 Plantation works Hectare 3 5 0 8

8 Agricultural Land Improvement Hectare 0 2 0 2

9


community building Number 8 6 37 51

10

Construction and rehabilitation of school

facilities Number 6 18 15 39

11

Construction and improvement of micro

hydro scheme Number 1 0 2 3

12 Construction and rehabilitation of water mill Number 0 0 2 2

13

Construction and rehabilitation of drinking

water schemes Number 0 12 14 26

Source: Project Cumulative Information Sheet


However, in the second phase, number of schemes directly contributing to increase agricultural

production and improve access to marketing of surplus produces in the project VDCs was

higher. It was reported that most these community schemes were just completed and users

had not harvested any crops yet after the completion of those schemes at the time of

evaluation. Therefore, the beneficiaries had not yet observed the exact impacts of these

schemes on the productivity and production of food crops in the project areas. The number of

community schemes completed during phase-II has been summarized in Table-6:

Table 6: Types of Schemes Supported in FCCTP Phase-II by District

SN Schemes Category Unit Kailali Dadeldhura Baitadi Total

1 Construction and rehabilitation of canals Hectare 33 15 191 239

2 Construction and rehabilitation of Ponds Hectare 2 (No.) 5.5 39 46.5

3

Construction and rehabilitation of river

bank protection Meter 9945 200 0 10145

4

Construction and rehabilitation of rural

roads Km 19.2 19 0 38.2

5 Construction and rehabilitation of trails Km 5 18 21 44

6

Construction and rehabilitation of school

facilities Number 13 21 10 44

7


community bridges Number 6 0 0 6

8


community building Building 1 1 6 8

9


drinking water schemes and toilet Number 1 7 3 11

Source: Project Cumulative Information Sheet

The number of different community infrastructures developed in two phases of CFW program

shows that there was a significant shift in the types of schemes selected by the communities in

the second phase. In the second phase, most of the schemes undertaken by the communities

are expected to contribute significantly to increase the food production. It could be expected

that both the productivity and production of major foods crops will be increased in the areas

where the irrigation facility has been extended due to rehabilitation or construction of new

irrigation canals and ponds, construction of river protection structures etc. in the project VDCs.

The participants were also asked to mention other significant impacts of CFW program at

community level. Based on the perceived impacts of the programs at community, the

distribution of participants of the FGDs is presented in table -7

Among various positive impacts of the CFW program, 100 per cent participants opined that

both the women and disadvantaged community groups were empowered in the community

and actively participated in decision making process of community development activities.

Both the women and weaker members in the community have received equal opportunity to


work in the project and received equal wages for the work. This has given a clear message to

the other agencies, particularly to the employers providing wage employments to the women

in other informal sectors where women are usually paid less for similar jobs done by men in the

villages.

Table 7: Participants Perception on Impacts of CFW at Community Level

SN V

DC

To

tal

Wo

me

n/

Dis

ad

van

tag

e

d E

mp

ow

ere

d

Re

du

ced

ge

nd

er

dis

pa

rity

Ow

ne

rsh

ip o

f

com

mu

nit

y In

cre

ase

d

pro

du

ctio

n/

Pro

du

ctiv

ity

Incr

ea

sed

cro

pp

ing

Inte

nsi

ty

pri

ces

vola

tilit

y

Imp

rove

d

Co

mm

un

ity

Co

nfi

de

nce

Incr

ea

sed

Co

llab

ora

tio

n

1 Bhajani 11 11 11 11 11 0 11 11 11

2 Lalbhoji 22 22 22 22 0 0 22 22 22

3 Sahajpur 19 19 19 19 0 0 19 19 19

4 Chaukham 15 15 15 15 0 0 10 15 15

5 Shikharpur 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

6 Bhadrapur 17 17 17 17 0 0 0 17 17

7 Jogbudha 27 27 27 27 10 10 27 27 27

8 Jogbudha 24 24 24 24 0 0 24 24 24

Total 144 144 144 144 30 19 122 144 144

% 100 100 100 100 20.83 13.19 84.72 100 100

The FGD participants expressed the views that by working together for 50 days in the group,

the level of understanding among the households has improved in the village and they had

been feeling of togetherness and increased ownership of the community assets built in the

communities.

About 20 per cent participants believed that productivity of major food crops has increased and

another 13 per cent participants said that production of major crops has increased due to

extended irrigation facility. The present study concludes that the FCCTP had direct impacts on

the community in the following ways:

• Improved access to basic services for target communities through rehabilitation and or

construction of more than 350 community-based schemes;

• Increased confidence of community for their own development;

• Reduced discrimination against gender and weaker section of community as a result of

equal wage rates for men and women and older or disables;

• Increased productivity and production of foods through increased irrigation facility,

protection of river banks and crops from wild animals etc. and

• Improved marketing system through construction of marketing centers.

4.4 Availability and Food Prices in Local Markets

Various studies conducted elsewhere have revealed that injection of relatively large amount of

cash in a short period usually increases the prices for essential foods items in local markets due

to high demand and limited supplies. Interactions with beneficiaries and retailers in the villages


did not show such phenomenon. However, prices for major food items in the local markets

have increased considerably since past few years at 10 to 15 per cent due to other reasons. The

responses of the FGDs participants on volatility on foods prices and availability of food items in

local markets and changes in dietary composition of foods of the beneficiaries have been

summarized in Table-8:

Table 8: Food Price Volatility of Major Foods in Local Markets

SN VDC Total

Increased Prices of

Common Food

Items

Availability/Supply of

Food Items in Market

Changes in Dietary

Composition of HHs

1 Bhajani 11 11 11 0

2 Lalbhoji 22 22 22 0

3 Sahajpur 19 19 19 0

4 Chaukham 15 14 15 0

5 Shikharpur 9 9 9 9

6 Bhadrapur 17 17 17 0

7 Jogbudha 27 25 27 0

8 Jogbudha 24 24 24 0

Total 144 141 144 9

% age 100 97.92 100.00 6.25

Almost all the participants of FGDs expressed the view that prices for main foods items (rice,

wheat, pulses etc) have been increased in the local markets over the year, however, foods were

available in the local markets. Despite increased in food prices, dietary composition of the

beneficiary households has not changed much over the year and only about six per cent

households reported that they had to adjust the food habits (both frequency and composition

of meals) due to increased food prices. The study concludes that the FCCTP has directly

contributed to reduce the price volatility of foods in the local markets in the following ways:

• No visible negative impacts on food prices in local markets;

• Improved availability of foods in local markets due to cash injection by CFW program;

• Improved bargaining capacity of beneficiaries due to cash on hand to purchase foods from

local markets; and

• Created demands for foods items which encourages both local production and increased

supply of foods in local markets.

4.4.1 Recovery from the Effects of Increased Food Insecurity and Natural Disaster

Both food habits and quality of foods consumed depend largely on the households' income.

Increased family income has positive impact on the types of foods purchased and quantity of

foods consumed by the households. The study reveals that about 88 per cent participants of

the FGDs reported that they purchased coarse rice followed by 54 per cent wheat (Dadeldhura

and Baitadi), 76 per cent oils/ghee, 38 per cent pulses, 15 per cent eggs/meat and 100 per cent

spices from the cash received from CFW program. This indicates that the beneficiary

households are vulnerable to food insecurity in all project VDCs irrespective of castes/ethnicity

of the beneficiaries in all three project districts. It was interesting to note here that none of the


participants' household purchased seasonal vegetables and fruits. The distribution of

participants using cash for purchasing different foods items is presented in Table-9:

Table 9: Utilization of Cash by Beneficiary Family

SN VDC Total Rice Other

Cereals

Pulses Oils/Ghee Eggs/Meat Spices

1 Bhajani 11 5 0 11 11 11 11

2 Lalbhoji 22 22 0 0 22 0 22

3 Sahajpur 19 19 0 19 0 10 19

4 Chaukham 15 6 5 0 0 0 15

5 Shikharpur 9 6 7 0 9 0 9

6 Bhadrapur 17 17 17 0 17 0 17

7 Jogbudha 27 27 25 0 27 0 27

8 Jogbudha 24 24 24 24 24 0 24

Total 144 126 78 54 110 21 144

% 100 87.50 54.17 37.50 76.39 14.58 100.00

4.4.2 Mitigating harmful coping strategies for food insecurity by households

Various studies have reported that food insecure households have been adopting different

copping mechanism for mitigating the food insecurity situation for their family. Participants in

the FGDs were asked to mention how they would have cropped with food insecurity if the CFW

project was not implemented for them. Their responses were recorded. The distribution of

participants on the basis of their responses has been shown in Table-10:


Table 10: Distribution of FGDs' Participants by Types of Copping Mechanism Used for

Mitigating Food Insecurity of Households

SN VDC Number of

Participants

Borrowing

Cash from

Money

Lenders

Borrowing

Foods from

Neighbors

Sales

of

Assets

Sales of

L/Stock

Left

Home for

Wage

Labor

Dropped

Children

from

School

Migrated

Outside

Village

1 Bhajani 11 2 0 0 0 11 0 0

2 Lalbhoji 22 0 3 0 0 16 7 0

3 Sahajpur 19 2 0 0 0 16 1 0

4 Chaukham 15 15 0 5 10 13 0 0

5 Shikharpur 9 9 0 0 0 9 0 0

6 Bhadrapur 17 14 0 0 0 15 0 0

7 Jogbudha 27 0 0 1 0 0 0 4

8 Jogbudha 24 24 0 0 10 11 5 0

Total 144 66 3 6 20 91 13 4

% 100 45.83 2.08 4.17 13.89 63.19 9.03 2.78

The data in Table-10 shows the types of coping strategies explained by the participants in the

community. Among 144 participants present in the FGDs, about 63 per cent told that they

would have gone outside village, mostly India for wage employment followed by borrow money

from local money lenders and or purchase foods in credit from local merchants (45.83%), sales

of livestock (13.89%), drop children from school (9.03%), sales of other assets (4.17%), migrated

permanently from village (2.78%), and borrow foods from neighbors or relatives (2.08%)

4.5 Sustainability of Community Assets Created in the Community

Sustainability of the community infrastructures is a major concern for most of the donors

assisted projects in Nepal. However, there are many successful examples elsewhere since

communities have been effectively utilizing the infrastructures developed with external

supports. Development experts have developed set of criteria for assessing the likelihoods of

community assets provided the community has a reasonable level of ownership over these

assets and developed explicit mechanism for utilization and collection of funds necessary for

timely repair and maintenance of the completed structures. The present study indicates that

most of the schemes supported by the project were selected by the users committees and

based on their community needs and expected to be used by the community concerned.


4.5.1 Ownerships of Community Assets

In two phases, 15,295 households worked for 50 days on different community schemes, which

provided them with income generating opportunities at the rate of Nepalese Rupees (NPR) 140

per person per day. Interactions with concerned users and members of the Users Committees

reveal that the community schemes were selected by the communities. Users committees are

committed for repair and maintenance of the built infrastructure in their communities through

the coordination with local government and other agencies and contributing labor days.

However, in some cases, more work is required by the User Committees to arrive at operations

plans that can work effectively in the long term.

4.5.2 Implementation Process and Collaboration with other Stakeholders

Despite some shortcomings in the design of project, which could have benefited from a more

focused set of schemes with complementary community level trainings on scheme operations

and maintenance, overall implementation process of the CFW has been appreciated by all the

stakeholders in the project districts. None of the participants of the FGDs and stakeholders

expressed their dissatisfaction over the process of cash transfers to the communities. It was

observed that most of the bigger schemes undertaken by the communities have been

completed in collaboration with other agencies working in the district. It was reported that

number of other government and bi-lateral projects had contributed generously to complete

schemes identified by the communities such as rehabilitation of irrigation canals, micro-hydro

plants and likely to be supported even if additional supports were required for the continuation

of the schemes.

4.5.3 Management of Repair and Maintenance Funds

Review of project information sheets shows over 350 schemes have been completed in 27

VDCs. Among the completed schemes, most of the schemes are rehabilitated through repairing

older and damaged structures which were constructed with supports from external agencies.

This clearly indicates that despite mandatory requirement for the Users Committees to keep a

fixed amount of funds (Rs 10 per day per labor) in the Operation and Maintenance account,

some of the UCs interacted during field visits told that they had already used the amount for

purchasing materials and/or paying wages to the skilled labor to complete the schemes. Based

on the existing situation of O & M funds and interaction with the users committees indicates

that some of the UCs would face financial crisis to undertake repair and maintenance works if

they do not develop a sound system of collecting funds from the users.

4.6 Replicability of CFW Approach in Future

Present study clearly indicates that CFW approach could be replicated to those areas where

potentiality for increasing food production exists with helping community to develop small-

scaled community-based infrastructures requiring only unskilled labors and local resources. In

other words, the CFW approach could be integrated with other livelihoods development

programs to create productive community infrastructures using locally available resources in a

more cost effective manner. The CFW approach may not be appropriate unless CFW projects

are structured in such a way that allows for longer labor periods with significant resources for


materials and technical oversights. Rehabilitation/construction of surface irrigation canal, water

harvesting ponds, rehabilitation/protection of river bank, terrace improvement using Slopping

Agricultural Land Technology (SALT), improvement of rural access roads/trails, etc are some of

the feasible schemes for the community under CFW program.


REFERENCES

Guide to Cash For Work Programming, Mercy Corps

Getting the Point: Improving Food Security Interventions in Emergencies, A Meeting hosted by

the Overseas Development Institute, 111 West minister Bridge Road, London.

ADB, DFID, ILO, 2009, ‘Highlights. Nepal: critical development constraints’

UNDP, 2009: Nepal Human Development Report 2009. State Transformation and Human

Development.

WFP, 2009: The cost of coping: a collision of crises and the impact of sustained food security

deterioration in Nepal’.

WFP, 2009: Concept Note FCCTP

WFP (2010): Cash for Assets (CFA) Program Monitoring Report, March 2010

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/ on Nepal

http://devdata.worldbank.org/AAG/npl_aag.pdf

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/nepal_nepal_statistics.html


ANNEXES

Annex-I: Distribution of FGDs Participants by Sex and VDCs

SN District VDC Category of

Community

Schemes Observed

Total

Beneficiary

Households

FGDs' Participants

Male Female Total

1 Kailali Bhajani School Building and

Irrigation Pond

102 7 4 11

2 Kailali Lalbujhi Check Dam and

Flood Control Works

295 12 10 22

3 Kailali Sahajpur Collection Center 111 11 8 19

Bayala Cooperative Building

& Agriculture Road

175

4 Baitadi Chaukham-

1, 2, &3.

Micro-hydro 152 7 8 15

5 Baitadi Shikharpur -

8

Repair and

Maintenance of

Irrigation Canal

60 7 2 9

6 Dadeldhura Bhadrapur-

5

Irrigation Pond 128 10 7 17

7 Dadeldhura Jogbudha-6 CDC Building,

Community Building/

Collection Center/

Bridges

430 15 12 27

8 Dadeldhura Jogbudha-6 Playground/School,

Agriculture Road,

and River Training

Works

245 13 11 24

Total 1294 82 62 144

% 56.94 43.06 100.00


Annex-II: Persons Interacted and Organization Visited

SN Name Position Organization District

1

Dabal Bahadur Kadayat Chairperson Shree Sahajpur

Krishi Sahakari

Limited

Kailali

2

Suresh Bahadur Bohara Chairperson of

School

Management

Committee

Talital Dadeldhura

3 Bhan Bdr Damai UC, Chairperson Talital Dadeldhura

4 Govinda Raj Joshi Hort Dev Officer DADO, Kailali

5 Gokarna Prasad Sharma LDO DDC Kailali

6 Harina Sahu SM Mercy Corp Dadeldhura

7 Hariram Chaudhary UC, Chairperson Kailali

8 Hira Budha Motivator NRCS Kailali

9 Kalpana Devi Sunar UC, Chairperson Lalbhoji Kailali

10 Dhanasara Bohara UC, Treasurer Lalbhoji Kailali

11 Ram Singh Pant UC, Chairperson Baitadi

12 Tej Shanker Bhatta Minister Elect NRCS Kailali

13 Phanindra Raj Joshi Vice Chairperson NRCS Kailali

14 Bishnu Gotame Program Manager Ox Fam Dadeldhura

15 Kiran Pal Team Leader WFP Dadeldhura

16 Rabindra Chand CFW Focal Person WFP Dadeldhura

17 Hikmat K Shrestha ADO DADO Dadeldhura

18 Ram Prasad Pandey Planning Officer DDC Dadeldhura


Annex-III: WFP Portfolio 2002 – 2009 by Program Category

WFP Portfolio in Nepal No. of

operations

Total cost (US$ )

as per latest SPR

Weight of various types

of operations (%)

Development 1 121,206,395 35

Emergency operations 5 23,990,415 7

Relief and Recovery 1 106,975,146 31

Relief and Recovery (refugees) 6 94,309,726 27

Special operations (including a

global SO)

2 1,368,825 -

Total 15 347,750,507

Sources: Project documents and SPR

Annex-IV: Financial Allocation of the FCCTP (US $)

Project Budget Heads Allocation %

a. Personnel 119,611 6.19

b. Fringe Benefits 31,142 1.61

c. Travel 36,080 1.87

d. Program Activities 1,592,400 82.46

e. Supplies 26,754 1.39

f. Other 33,157 1.72

g. Total Direct Charges 1,839,144 95.24

h. Indirect Charges 91,957 4.76

i. TOTALS 1,931,101 100

Sources: FCCTP Document

Evaluation Report of - Mercy...

Documents

Transcript of Evaluation Report of - Mercy...