FINAL-SWC-SEED-MTE_Report-24-11-2016

Supporting Enabling Environment for Development

Implemented by Search for Common Ground

Mid-Term Evaluation Report January 2013 – May 2016

Submitted by

Kishor Pradhan, Team Leader Shushma Khadka, SWC, Team Member

Shova Pokharel, Team Member, MoWCSW Sudip Dahal, Financial Expert

Submitted to Social Welfare Council

Lainchour, Kathmandu, Nepal

September 2016

SEED, Mid-Term Evaluation Report

Page 1 of 58

ACRONYMS C-PAC Central-Project Advisory Committee CDO Chief District Officer D-PAC District-Project Advisory Committee DAO District Administrative Office DDC District Development Committee DEO District Education Office DPO District Police Office FGD Focus Group Discussion GA General Agreement GESI Gender Equality and Social Inclusion GoN Government of Nepal INGO International Non Governmental Organization LEY Leadership Engaging Youth MoWCSW Ministry of Women, Children, and Social Welfare MTE Mid-Term Evaluation ODF Open Defecation Free PA Project Agreement PO Project Objective PT Project Theme SEED Supporting Enabling Environment for Development SFCG Search for Common Ground SWC Social Welfare Council TDS Tax Deductible at Source TEA Total Estimated Amount TG Third Gender ToR Terms of Reference UN United Nations USAID United States Agency for International Development VDC Village Development Committee WDO Women Development Officer WCDO Women and Children Development Office YNPD Youth Network for Peace and Development


Page 2 of 58

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS On behalf of the MTE Team we would like to first of all thank SWC for giving us this wonderful opportunity to carry out this interesting assignment. The field and central office staff members, particularly the SEED project staff members of SFCG Nepal are to be thanked for their coherent cooperation and for smoothly organizing the fieldworks. Similarly the SEED project’s central and local level partners, district level line agencies and participants in various activities of SEED project are to be thanked for organizing the consultations, interviews, FGDs, and observations. Kishor Pradhan, Team Leader/Thematic Expert Shusma Khadka, SWC, Team Member Shova Pokharel, MoWCSW, Team Member Sudip Dahal, Financial Expert September 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal


Page 3 of 58

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................................... 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 5

SECTION I INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 7 1.2 PROJECT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 7 1.5 DONOR INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................... 9 1.6 PROJECT COMPOSITION ................................................................................................................................ 9 1.7 FINANCING ARRANGEMENT .......................................................................................................................... 10 1.8 OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION ................................................................................................................ 11 1.9 SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION ........................................................................................................................ 12 1.10 EVALUATION RESEARCH QUESTIONS ........................................................................................................... 12 1.11 EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION ................................................................................................................ 13 1.12 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY REPORT ....................................................................................................... 13

SECTION II METHODOLOGY OF EVALUATION ................................................................................................... 14 2.1 STUDY APPROACH ...................................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 SELECTION OF THE PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................................................... 14 2.4 STUDY INSTRUMENTS/TOOLS FOR DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................. 15 2.5 MECHANISM FOR FIELD WORK ..................................................................................................................... 15 2.6 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES ....................................................................................... 15 2.7 WORK SCHEDULE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................................ 15 2.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................................................... 16

SECTION III DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... 17 3.1 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 17 3.2 KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................. 17 3.2.1 TARGETED OUTPUTS VERSUS ACHIEVEMENTS ............................................................................................. 17 3.2.2 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION DATA ............................................................................................................... 19 3.2.3 KEY CONSULTATIONS WITH SFCG/SEED STAFF/PARTNERS AND LINE AGENCIES ......................................... 20 3.2.4 CASE STUDIES ............................................................................................................................................ 21 3.2.5 GESI IN SEED ACTIVITIES .......................................................................................................................... 22 3.2.6 FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE .............................................................................................................................. 28 3.2.7 PROJECT AGREEMENT COORDINATION COMPLIANCE ................................................................................... 34

SECTION IV SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 39 4.1 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................... 39 4.2 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 40 4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 40

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 43

ANNEX 1: GENERIC CHECKLIST .......................................................................................................................... 44

ANNEX 2: TENTATIVE FIELD VISIT PLAN ............................................................................................................. 46

ANNEX 3: FGD PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................................................................. 47

ANNEX 4: COMPLETE LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED ....................................................................................... 50

ANNEX 5: SEED PROJECT C-PAC MEETING MINUTES, 2012, 2014, AND 2015 ............................................... 51


Page 4 of 58

List of Tables Table 1: Theme/Objective Wise Project Outcomes ...................................................................................... 8

Table 2: Theme and Project Objective Wise Activities ............................................................................... 10

Table 3: Administrative and Program (Activity) Estimated Budget ............................................................. 10

Table 4: Year Wise Administrative and Program (Activity) Budget ............................................................. 11

Table 5: Partner Wise Yearly Allocated Budget .......................................................................................... 11

Table 6: Theme and Objective Wise Outputs Versus Achievements as of 31/05/2016 ............................. 17

Table 7: Data on FGDs ............................................................................................................................... 19

Table 8: Data on Key Consultations ........................................................................................................... 20

Table 9: Gender Wise CLS Participant Data .............................................................................................. 23

Table 10: Social Inclusion Wise CLS Training Participant Data ................................................................. 23

Table 11: Seed Grant Activities Gender Disaggregated Data .................................................................... 24

Table 12: Leaders Engaging Youth (LEY) Participants .............................................................................. 28

Table 13: Youth Participation in Development (The Peace Building Initiative Project 2013) ...................... 28

Table 14: Budget Versus Actual Expenses as of 31/05/2016 ..................................................................... 29

Table 15: Program Versus Admin Cost as of 31/05/2016 .......................................................................... 29

Table 16: Fiscal year Wise Comparison ..................................................................................................... 30

Table 17: Spending by Partner Organizations ............................................................................................ 30

Table 18: Partner Budget and Actual Expenses ......................................................................................... 31

Table 19: Project Agreements Other Than PA Partners ............................................................................. 32

Table 20: Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of other than PA Partners Organization .................. 33

Table 21: Project Agreement with Partners Beyond the PA with SWC ...................................................... 34


Page 5 of 58

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • SFCG had entered into a General Agreement with the Social Welfare Council to work in Nepal in

2006, which has been renewed twice in 2009 and 2013. Currently SFCG operates in Nepal under the General Agreement 2013 and the Project Agreement titled ‘Supporting Enabling Environment for Development’ effective for 5 years from 4 January 2013.

• The overall goal of the SEED project is to support an enabling environment for development in Nepal. Four specific objectives are to : i) build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; ii) provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project; iii) provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media programs; and, iv) foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges.

• The total estimated budget for the SEED project for 5 years is NRs. 199,054,531.00 or USD 1,895,757.00. Financing or funding sources for the project was sought from multiple donors for various thematic activities. As mentioned in this report under section ‘1.5 Donor Information’ in the PA with SWC it was mentioned that funding would be sought from 8 donors. Budget estimate for 5 years (in NRs) administrative and program (activity) wise is as given below.

Budget Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sub-total % Administrative 8, 183,200 7,912,690 7,28,721 6,788,699 6,280,044 36,449,354 18% Program/ Activity

35,546,000 35,546,00 33,768,700 30,391,830 27,352,647 162,605,177 82%

Total 43,729,200 43,458,690 41,053,421 37,180,529 33,632,691 199,054,531 100%

• Under the PT: Youth participation in Development and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project; the target achievement in average has been 67.8%%.

• Under the PT: Women and Girls Empowerment and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project; the target achievement in average has been 80%.

• Under the PT: Media in Development and PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media programs; the target achievement has been in average 79%.

• Under the PT: Leadership in Development and PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges; the target achievement has been 83%.

• The overall target achievement has been 77.45% of the entire project period in terms of budget spending and delivering outputs and services

• From some of the sample data of the SEED project it was found that gender wise in the Civic Leadership School (CLS) activities in general aggregate the participation of male was 58%, female 40% and third gender (TG) 2% (see Table 6). Social inclusion wise in the CLS activities it was found the inclusion of the social groups: Madheshi was 40%; Janajati 16%; Dalit 5%; Brahmin/Chettri 20%;


Page 6 of 58

Muslim 5%, OBC 2%; and, others 6% (see Table 7). Under the Seed Grant Activities it was found that the participation of male was 72%, female 26%, and TG 2% (see Table 8). Similarly, under the Leaders Engaging Youth activities the gender participation was male 72%, female 24%, and TG 4%.

• Discrepancies have been observed in the budget management, expenses, and partnerships, which are not in compliance with the PA with SWC.

• Regarding funding and financial management the SEED project, as per the PA with SWC the project

had budgeted for NRs. 199,054,531 for five years (January 2013 – December 2017). As of carrying out the MTE (May 2016) the project has overspent by NRs. 80,179,700 or about 40% more. Given that the overall target achievement of the project has been around 77.45% and budget overspent by 40% this needs to be sorted by SFCG with SWC.

• Excess expenses have been incurred from the first year of the project. In 2013 the project has

incurred Rs. 56, 778, 360 as against budgeted amount of Rs. 43, 729,200; in 2014 it has incurred Rs. 57, 070, 421 as against budget amount of Rs. 43, 458, 690; and Rs. 117, 328, 896 was incurred in 2015 as against budget amount of Rs. 41, 053, 421.

• Some partner organizations have overspent their agreement amount. While, the overall budget of the PA with partner organizations is Rs.102, 491, 673 and the budget upto May 2016 is Rs. 74, 076, 531.Actual expenses upto May 2016 is Rs. 29, 789, 925 resulting in under spending by Rs. 44, 286, 608 which reflects only 40% budget utilization with the PA partner organizations.

• While reviewing the contract with partner organizations we observed partnership agreement amounting to Rs. 212, 441,153 were made, which were the partner organizations other than as mentioned in the signed PA with SWC. The total amount of the PA is Rs. 199, 054, 531 but SFCG has committed to provide Rs. 212, 441, 153 with other partner organizations.

• Some of the partner organizations were not provided with budget according to the PA, but SFCG has entered into contract with these organizations and incurred expenses amounting to Rs. 84,619,897 upto May 2016.

• While reviewing the partner organization contracts, we observed instances of agreement done beyond the PA period with three partner organizations that are not the partner organizations as per the signed PA.

• As per the GA and PA regulations SFCG is required to inform SWC and make amendments in the PA

in case of any changes in the project budgets or activities, or partnerships.

• It is recommended that the SEED project or SFCG: Amend the changes in the project budgets/donors, activities, partners; Organize C-PAC field visits for 2016; Improve/Speed up the implementation of activities that have to date achieved less than 50% target; Organize C-DAC and D-PAC regularly and undertake proper documentation; and Revise the budget of the project and keep it updated donor, theme, activity, partner wise.


Page 7 of 58

SECTION I Introduction

1.1 Project Background Search for Common Ground (SFCG) is an independent, not-for-profit, none-political, international non-governmental organization (INGO) working in 30 countries in four continents with headquarters in Brussels, Belgium and Washington DC, USA. Founded in 1982 SFCG works on conflict transformation by adopting means that is away from adversarial approaches but towards collaborative problem solving. SFCG had entered into a General Agreement (GA) with the Social Welfare Council (SWC) to work in Nepal in 2006, which has been renewed twice in 2009 and 2013. Currently SFCG operates in Nepal under the General Agreement 2013 and the Project Agreement (PA) titled ‘Supporting Enabling Environment for Development (SEED)’ effective for 5 years from 4 January 2013. SFCG Nepal’s activities in Nepal are focused around four thematic program areas of:

• Youth participation in development; • Women empowerment and development; • Media in development; and • Leadership in development.

1.2 Project Goal and Objectives The overall goal of the SEED project is to support an enabling environment for development in Nepal. Four specific objectives are to: 1. build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an

enabling environment for development;

2. provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project;

3. provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media programs; and

4. foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges.

1.3 Intended Outcomes/Outputs of the Project According to the PA with SWC theme wise and objective wise intended outputs/outcomes of the project are as given below in Table 1.


Page 8 of 58

Table 1: Theme/Objective Wise Project Outcomes Project Themes (PT)/Objectives (PO) Outputs/Outcomes (Target) PT: Youth participation in Development PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community Based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project.

• 2000 youth trained in collaborative leadership and development in the selected working districts.

• Seed grants ranging from NRs. 5,000 to 50,000 provided to 100 youth groups in the selected working districts to implement community development initiatives.

• 100 youth-led community activities and projects implemented in the selected working districts.

PT: Women and Girls Empowerment PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project.

• 1000 women and girls trained in collaborative leadership and development in the selected working districts.

• Seed grants ranging from NRs. 5,000 to 50,000 provided to 100 women and girls groups in the selected working districts to implement community development initiatives.

• 100 women-led community activities and projects implemented in the selected working districts.

PT: Media in Development PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media programs.

• 300 media professionals trained in conflict-sensitive common ground journalism.

• 15 FM stations supported to produce and broadcast quality common ground radio programs.

• Radio drama around the theme of promoting constructive role of youth and women is produced and broadcast.

• One 13-episode television series produced and broadcast.

PT: Leadership in Development PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges.

• 200 local leaders (from political parties, civil society and government) will be trained on leadership, inclusive development and creating enabling environment for development.

• 100 multi-stakeholder dialogues will be held in the selected working districts to facilitate collaborative problem solving to address social and development challenges at the local level.

Source: SFCG documents. 1.4 Intended Beneficiaries of the Project In general, the indirect intended beneficiaries of the project are the people and communities of the selected project districts to have access to development. Specifically the direct intended beneficiaries of the projects in the project districts are: i) Youths and youth groups; ii) Women/girls and women/girl groups; iii) Local media organizations, specifically the FM stations in the districts and the TV at the central (Kathmandu) level; and, iv) Local leaders (from political parties, civil society and government).


Page 9 of 58

1.5 Donor Information As per the PA with SWC the SFCG anticipated funding from 8 donors for implementing the SEED project. The anticipated donors included: 1) Royal Danish Embassy; 2) USAID; current donor 3) US Government; 4) UK Foreign and Common Wealth Office (FCO); 5) UK Aid; current donor 6) UN Agencies; current donor 7) National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – current donor; and, 8) European Commission – current donor.

1.6 Project Composition As per the PA the SFCG’s SEED project is a five-year project (January 2013 – December 2017) with a budget estimate of NRs. 199,054, 531 (USD 1,895,757). Regarding the funding sources the SEED project anticipated funding from multiple donor sources. The project intends to cover two clusters in eastern and western Nepal including 13 districts. In the eastern cluster Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusha, Mahotari, and Parsa are included. In the western cluster, Dang, Banke, Bardiya, Kailali, Doti, and Bajhang are included. As per the PA with SWC the anticipated project partners or executing agencies for the project included:

1. Samagra Jana Utthan Kendra, Siraha 2. New World (NW), Sunsari 3. Youth Initiative (YI), Dang 4. Alliance for Peace, Kathmandu 5. Youth Network for Peace and Development, Bardiya 6. District Youth Club Network, Banke 7. Youth Network for Peace and Development, Dang 8. Youth network for Peace and Development, Kailali

Media partners include FM radio stations that SFCG has worked in the past. In the PA it is included that SFCG has worked with 16 FM radio stations.

Besides the specifically mentioned anticipated project partners it is stated in the PA that in addition other local partners (including FM radio stations) would be actually identified and involved in the actual implementation process of the project.

In line with the SFCG’s SEED project’s thematic areas of work and objectives, themes and objective wise specific planned activities as per the PA with SWC are as given below in Table 2.


Page 10 of 58

Table 2: Theme and Project Objective Wise Activities Themes Project Objectives (PO) Activities 1. Youth participation in

development;

PO 1 and 2 • Capacity building training and workshops for youths

• See grants to youth groups • Youth and community dialogue

2. Women and Girls Empowerment

PO 1 and 2 • Capacity building training and workshops for women and girls

• See grants to women groups • Women and community dialogue

3. Media in development PO 1 and 3 • Capacity building training and coaching of media professionals

• Radio programs • Radios dramas • Television programs

4. Leadership in Development

PO 1 and 4 • Capacity building training to local leaders • Multi-stakeholder dialogues

Source: SFCG SEED project PA with SWC documents.

1.7 Financing Arrangement The total estimated budget for the SEED project for 5 years was NRs. 199,054,531.00 or USD 1,895,757.00. Financing or funding source for the project was sought from multiple donors for separate thematic activities. As mentioned in this report under section ‘1.5 Donor Information’ in the PA with SWC it was mentioned that funding would be sought from 8 donors. Budget estimate for 5 years (in NRs) administrative and program (activity) wise is as given below.

Table 3: Administrative and Program (Activity) Estimated Budget Budget Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sub-total % Administrative 8, 183,200 7,912,690 7,28,721 6,788,699 6,280,044 36,449,354 18% Program/ Activity

35,546,000 35,546,00 33,768,700 30,391,830 27,352,647 162,605,177 82%

Total 43,729,200 43,458,690 41,053,421 37,180,529 33,632,691 199,054,531 100% Source: SFCG SEED project PA with SWC documents. Detail year wise administrative and program (activity) wise budget allocation is as given below.


Page 11 of 58

Table 4: Year Wise Administrative and Program (Activity) Budget Budget Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total A. Operation 8,183,200 7,912,690 7,284,721 6,788,699 6,280,044 36,449,354 1. HR 5,410,200 5,139,690 4,625,721 4,163,149 3,746,834 23,085,594 2. Administration 2,773,000 2,773,000 2,659,000 2,625,550 2,533,210 13,363,760 B. Program/Activity 35,546,000 35,546,000 33,768,700 30,391,830 27,352,647 162,605,177 1. Youth Participation in Development Program

8,364,000 8,364,000 7,945,800 7,151,220 6,436,093 38,261,118

2. Women Empowerment and Development

6,434,000 6,434,000 6,112,300 5,501,070 4,950,963 29,432,333

3. Media in Development 20,454,000 10,454,000 9,931,300 8,938,170 8,044,353 47,821,823 4. Leadership in Development

9,329,000 9,329,000 8,862,550 7,976,295 7,178,666 42,675,511

5. Monitoring and Evaluation

965,000 965,000 916,750 825,075 742,568 4,414,393

Grand Total (A+B) 43,729,200 43,458,690 41,053,421 37,180,529 33,632,691 199,054,531 Source: SFCG SEED project PA with SWC documents. Partner wise budget allocation is as follows.

Table 5: Partner Wise Yearly Allocated Budget Partner 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sub-total Samagra Jana Utthan Kendra 4,005,000 4,005,000 3,804,750 3,424,275 3,081,848 18,320,873 New World 6,272,400 6,272,400 5,958,780 5,362,902 4,826,612 28,693,094 Youth Initiative 3,358,440 3,358,440 3,190,518 2,871,466 2,584,320 15,363,184 Alliance for Peace 2,238,960 2,238,960 2,217,012 1,914,311 1,722,880 10,332,123 Youth Network for Peace Bardia

1,331,820 1,331,820 1,265,229 1,138,706 1,024,835 6,092,410

District Youth Club Network Banke

1,109,850 1,109,850 1,054,358 948,922 854,030 5,077,010

Youth Network for Peace and Development Dang

1,021,062 1,021,062 970,009 873,051 785,546 4,670,730

Youth Network for Peace Kailali

976,668 976,668 927,835 835,051 751,546 4,467,768

FM Radio Station Partners 2,090,800 2,090,800 1,986,260 1,787,634 1,608,871 9,564,365 TOTAL 22,405,000 22,405,000 21,374,751 19,156,318 17,240,488 102,581,557 Source: SFCG SEED project PA with SWC documents.

1.8 Objectives of the Evaluation Objectives of the MTE were in line with the ToR: 1. Explore the level of progress/changes made by the project and analyze the extent to which the

achievements have supported program goal and the objectives;

2. Evaluate the project effectiveness — longitudinal effect and continuities of the project activities/services as well as the scope and extent of institutionalization of the project;

3. Explore the cost effectiveness of the project activities;

4. Identify the target and level of achievements as specified in the project agreement;

5. Explore the coordination between the project line agencies in the project districts;


Page 12 of 58

6. Find out the income and expenditure in compliance with the project agreement and proportion of programmatic and administrative cost incurred by the project;

7. Examine the financial regularities/disciplines in accordance with the prevailing rules and regulations and fixed assets purchased in duty fee privileges and locally; and

8. Assess the good lessons to be replicated in other projects and aspects to be improved in the days ahead.

1.9 Scope of the Evaluation The scope of the MTE in line with the objectives of the study mentioned-above explored the achievements by the project in line with its specific objectives. The achievements were quantified as far as possible against the target set by the project as under Section I, Sub-section 1.3 Intended Outcomes of the Project under Table 1 (Page 6). Or the framework for the MTE was as per Table 1. The timeframe for the MTE was 45 days from the date of holding the pre-evaluation meeting organized by SWC. The MTE has specifically focused on the following levels as per the ToR for the MTE. Strategic level • Analysis of project's context • Planning and documentation • Partnership and networking

Implementation level • Sufficiency and quality of resources mobilized • Reporting monitoring and evaluation system • Compliance with project agreement and organizational policy document Organizational level • Effectiveness of organizational management system • Effectiveness of program/management system

1.10 Evaluation Research Questions Evaluation research questions (checklists) were formulated in line with the three specific project objectives (POs) and the expected results (ERs). Complete set of generic research questions/checklists that were used for conducting the interactions, interviews, and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) is included as Annex 1.


Page 13 of 58

1.11 Evaluation Team Composition The MTE Team composed of: 1. Kishor Pradhan, Team Leader/Thematic Expert 2. Shushma Khadka, Director, SWC, Team Member 3. Shova Pokharel, Team Member, MoWCSW 4. Sudip Dahal, CA/Financial Expert

1.12 Organization of the Study Report The Study Report is organized into six parts as: 1. Prefatory Part 2. Section I, Introduction 3. Section II, Methodology of Evaluation 4. Section III, Data Presentation and Analysis 5. Section IV, Summary, Consultations, and Recommendations 6. Supplementary Part (References, Annexures and Appendices).


Page 14 of 58

SECTION II Methodology of Evaluation

2.1 Study Approach Participatory: The study approach was participatory in the sense that the diverse stakeholders from SFCG, SEED project activity partners NGOs, participants of in the activities, government line agencies and other service providers took part in the evaluation processes. Consultative: The study was consultative as the related SFCG personnel, national and local level partners in the districts and various other stakeholders of the projects were consulted in collecting information and data. GESI: The study tried to evaluate GESI diversity of the SEED project’s activities in terms of nature of participation in its various activities such as trainings, recipient of seed grants, dialogues etc. Thematic, Objective, Target Achievement, and Result Framework: The study approach was based on the framework of the project’s thematic areas, objectives and target achievements. The approach has tried to quantify objectively the achievements of the project against the targets as far as possible in terms of results. 2.2 Study Design The study design was in line with the ToR for the MTE and a framework as described above. In line with the four themes and the underlying activities and sub-activities, four specific objectives, and achievements of the targets in line with the four themes and objectives as described under 1.6 Table 2, it was designed to collect information and data on achievements of the set targets by the project to meet the objectives and achieve the project goal. The study design thus was more based on achievements against the targets set by the project. It was thus more exploratory and descriptive in data collection and analysis against the target set by the project. Key research generic questions more in the form of checklists were formulated respectively for different informants, FGDs and observations for data collection.

2.3 Selection of the Participants Since the study approach was participatory, participants in the evaluation process were selected in close consultation with SFCG Nepal. Participants included consultations in Kathmandu and the districts with SFCG Nepal (project’s program and management); in the districts consultations with the youth and women groups; representatives of partner NGOs and line agencies.


Page 15 of 58

2.4 Study Instruments/Tools for Data Collection Generic checklists in line with the framework of SEED project’s theme, objectives, and targets were developed for the consultation and data collection processes. The details checklist is attached as Annex 1. Besides the checklists the study instruments included the following. Literature reviews: Various related project documents such as project agreements, progress reports, data bases, income tracking reports, M&E reports, finance statements and reports were reviewed. KIIs: Key informant interviews were conducted with key informants from SFCG, partner NGOs, participants of training activities, line agencies, and others. FGDs: Focus Group Discussions were conducted with various stakeholders of the project such as the youth groups, women groups, and radio program listeners’ group. Altogether 6 FGDs were conducted and details of which are presented under Section III Data Presentation and Analysis. Project/Field Site Visits: Project/Field visits in the eastern cluster’s four districts of Dhanusha, Mahotari, Saptari, and Siraha were conducted. Besides organizing the key consultations, FGDs, in-situ and participatory observations of the project activities and beneficiaries were conducted.

2.5 Mechanism for Field Work The fieldworks in the four districts were conducted from 18 - 21 August 2016. SFCG Nepal prepared tentative fieldwork itinerary in consultation with SFCG’s field offices, partners, and the MTE Team. In the fieldwork besides interacting with various stakeholders of the projects including the beneficiaries and the local partner NGOs, interaction was also carried out with related line agencies in Dhanusha. See Annex 2 for the tentative itinerary for the fieldwork.

2.6 Data Presentation and Analysis Techniques Information and data were collected from various secondary sources such as project documents, project progress reports, baseline survey etc. Primary data were collected from the fieldwork consultations, KII, observations and FGDs. Data analysis has been carried out basically comparing the achievements against the targets (with data) set by the project as described under Table 2. Secondary data has also been subject to Gender Equity and Social Inclusion (GESI) analysis in terms of participants in specific project activities such as trainings, seed grants, dialogues etc.

2.7 Work Schedule of the Study The total study period was of 45 days from the date of pre-evaluation meeting, which took place on 27 June 2016. The pre-evaluation filed work was delayed due to the monsoon flood situation in the Terai and difficulties for the stakeholders to attend the MTE meetings. As well as it was not possible for the MTE team to visit the field during the monsoon in Terai.


Page 16 of 58

2.8 Limitations of the Study Limitations of the study include that not ample time could be spent in the field study. And the field study was conducted in only four districts of the eastern cluster of the SEED project. No field study was conducted in the western cluster of the project. The fieldwork planning had to be postponed due to monsoon and when the actual field study was conducted between 18 - 21 August 2016, all the planned field works for consultations and FGDs could not be carried out as planned as the expected participants were pre-occupied with the festival of Rakshabandhan. Cross-verification of data and information collected from the field was also carried out with official documents from SFCG. The findings and information collected from the field was triangulated with KII and FGDs in four sampled districts chosen purposively.


Page 17 of 58

SECTION III Data Presentation and Analysis

3.1 Data Presentation and Analysis

Data collected for the MTE are presented in line with the specific themes, objectives and respective targets (as under Table 2) and scope of the study. Data were collected from secondary sources (literature reviews, databases) and primary sources. Primary data/information and case studies were collected from the field through consultations, KII, observations and FGDs. The data collected have been presented first descriptively, GESI disaggregated, in narratives and tables, as case studies, followed by key analysis in line with the objectives of the MTE, four specific objectives, and the targets set the SEED project.

3.2 Key Findings

3.2.1 Targeted Outputs Versus Achievements The key findings or the achievements against the targeted or planned key outputs for the period 1 January 2013 – 31 May 2016 were as given in the table below.

Table 6: Theme and Objective Wise Outputs Versus Achievements as of 31/05/2016 Project Themes (PT)/Objectives (PO)

Targeted Outputs Achievements as of 31 May 2016

PT: Youth Participation in Development PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project

• 2,000 youth trained in collaborative leadership and development in the selected working districts.

• 1,356 local youth trained in collaborative leadership and development (67.8%)

• Seed grants ranging from NRs. 5,000 to 50,000 provided to 100 youth groups in the selected working districts to implement community development initiatives.

• Seed grants support ranging from 5,000 to 50,000 provided to 26 youth groups (26%)

• 100 youth-led community activities and projects implemented in the selected working districts.

• 45 youth led community activities implemented (45%)

PT: Women and Girls Empowerment PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide

• 1,000 women and girls trained in collaborative leadership and development in the selected working districts.

• 425 women and girls were trained on collaborative leadership and development (42%)


Page 18 of 58

seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project

• Seed grants ranging from NRs. 5,000 to 50,000 provided to 100 women and girls groups in the selected working districts to implement community development initiatives.

• Seed grants support to 150 conflict affected women (150%)

• 100 women-led community activities and projects implemented in the selected working districts.

• 48 community led initiatives implemented in the project districts (48%)

PT: Media in Development PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media programs

• 300 media professionals trained in conflict-sensitive common ground journalism.

•

• 132 media professional trained in conflict-sensitive common ground journalism (44%)

• 15 FM stations supported to produce and broadcast quality common ground radio programs.

• Radio drama around the theme of promoting constructive role of youth and women is produced and broadcast.

• 14 FM stations supported to produce and broadcast quality CG program (93%)

• One 13-episode television series produced and broadcast.

• One 13-episode TV series produced and broadcast. (100%)

PT: Leadership in Development PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges

• 200 local leaders (from political parties, civil society and government) will be trained on leadership, inclusive development and creating enabling environment for development.

• 112 local political leaders and 142 social leaders trained (127%)

• 100 multi-stakeholder dialogues will be held in the selected working districts to facilitate collaborative problem solving to address social and development challenges at the local level.

• 40 multi-stakeholder dialogues conducted (40%)

Source: Various SEED project documents and the data sets as provided by SFCG Nepal.

• Under the PT: Youth participation in Development and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project; the target achievement in average has been 67.8%.

• Under the PT: Women and Girls Empowerment and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project; the target achievement in average has been 80%.


Page 19 of 58

• Under the PT: Media in Development and PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media programs; the target achievement has been in average 79%.

• Under the PT: Leadership in Development and PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges; the target achievement has been 83%.

• The overall target achievement has been 77.45%.

3.2.2 Focus Group Discussion Data Altogether 6 FGDs were organized. The details of the FGDs are given in the table below.

Table 7: Data on FGDs

FGD No.

Location/Date District Type of FGD Number of participants

Project Theme/Activity

1. Suga (19/05/2016)

Mahottari Mahila Chamata Bikash Shanti Samittee (Women’s Group)

15 (all female) Training and seed grant to women

2. Youth Network for Peace and Development (YNPD), Jaleswore (19/08/2016)

Mahottari Youth Leadership Training and Youth Group/Network

18 (11 male; 7 female) Youth leadership training and seed grant to youth group

3. Welcome Hotel, Janakpur (19/08/2016)

Dhanusha Youth leadership trainees

11 (2 female; 9 male) Youth leadership training

4. Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan (20/08/2016)

Siraha Youth Engagement partner organization and radio program listener group

10 (3 female; 7 male) Youth leadership development and media development

5. Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan (20/08/2016)

Siraha Radio program ‘Sanghor’ listerner group

9 (3 female; 6 male) Media development

6. Sabal Nepal, Rajbiraj

Saptari Your leadership trainees and youth group seed grant

18 (4 female; 14 male) Your leadership development and seed grant

Source: Field visit, 18-21 August 2016. See Annex 3 for the complete list of FGD participants and other details.


Page 20 of 58

3.2.3 Key Consultations with SFCG/SEED Staff/Partners and Line Agencies Key consultations were organized with following SEED project partners and beneficiaries.

Table 8: Data on Key Consultations SN Location/Date/

Type of Consultation Partner/Participants Nature of

Partnership/Purpose of Consultation

1. SFCG Office; 27/07/2016; Meeting in person

SFCG SEED project and admin team and MTE SWC Team

• To discuss requirements for the MTE

• To discuss and plan the field visit

2. SFCG Eastern Regional Cluster Office, Janakpur, Dhanusha; 19/08/2016

SFCG Eastern Regional Cluster Office team and MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the Regional Cluster Office’s activities and coordination with SFCG Head Office (Kathmandu)

• To discuss field project activities, partners and field plans

3. District Women Office, Janakpur, Dhanusha; 19/08/2016

Nirmala Mishra, DWO and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the DWO’s partnership with SFCG SEED project

4. Chief District Office, Janakpur, Dhanusha; 19/08/2016

Dilip Kumar Chapagain, CDO, Dhanusha, and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the D-PAC and SFCG/SEED partnership and activities in Dhanusha district

5. District Police Office, Janakpur, Dhanusha; 19/08/2016

Nahakul Pokharel, DSP, DPO, Janakpur, Dhanusha

• To discuss SFCG/SEED partnership and activities with DPO

6. Ward 15, Jaleswore Municipality, Mahotari; 19/08/2016

Mahila Chamata Biakash Shanti Samittee, Sunaina Thakur and other women and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the leadership training and seed grant to women groups activities

7. YNPD Office, Siraha; 19/08/2016

YNPD staff, CSL trainees, seed grant recipients, and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the CSL and LEY, and seed grants to youth groups

• SEED’s partnership with YNPD

8. Hotel Welcome, Janakpur, Dhanusha

CLS trainees and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the CLS training

9. Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan, Siraha; 20/08/2016

Samagra Janautthan Kendra staff and board members, and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss SEED/SFCG partnership and activities with Samagra Janautthan Kendra

10. Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Sanghor listerners’ group and • To discuss the SEED


Page 21 of 58

Lahan, Siraha; 20/08/2016 SFCG/MTE SWC Team media activity radio program Sanghor

11. Sabal Nepal Office, Rajbiraj, Saptari; 20/08/2016

Sabal Nepal staff members, CLS trainees and seed grant recipient group, and New Generation Youth group members, and SFCG/MTE SWC Team

• To discuss the CSL training and see grants to youth groups

12. SFCG Office, Lazimpat, Kathmandu

SFCG SEED/Management Team and MTE SWC Team

• To review field visit and discuss pending issues

Complete list of people consulted is included in Annex 4.

3.2.4 Case Studies Case Study 1: Mahila Chamta Bikash Shantee Samitee, Women Leadership and Seed Grant, Ward 15, Jaleswore, Mahottari The Mahila Chamta Bikash Shantee Samitee was started about 8 years ago after Sunaina Thakur received a woman leadership training from SFCG. Sunaina was just 18-year-old when she was married. She is 28 now and is an upcoming women development leader in her community.

FGD with Sunaina and Mahila Chamta Bikash Shantee Samitee Member, Jaleswore

Sunaina said she is currently the chairperson of the Samitee and her group has 10 board members. The women groups have trained about 90 women on women leadership and 65 women on Maithili Art Painting. There was no women group in Sunaina’s ward before the intervention by SFCG and with the women in her community now being trained on Maithili Art Painting there has been remarkable empowerment of women economically. Through the Samitee they registered two years ago a saving and credit group, and currently it has about 350 members and a capital of about NRs. 300,000. They give loan to women in the villages to start small businesses and produce Mithila Art works. The Samitee received a seed grant from the SEED project and with that money they started the Maithili Art Painting entrepreneurship. Now they produce Mithila Arts and sell it to customers who visit the village and to vendors in Janakpur and Kathmandu. Sunaina says the Mithila Art they produce still has market problem and there are challenges like giving employment to all the women they have trained on Maithili Art.


Page 22 of 58

Case Study 2: Ayush Shrestha, 31, Rajbiraj Municipality, Saptari District Ayush Shrestha is a 31-year-old youth who was born and brought up in Rajbiraj municipality. He took part in the 7-day Civil Leadership School training imparted under the SEED project in Rajbiraj some years ago. He is currently pursuing his post-graduate education in Sociology. He says that after the CLS training his confidence as a youth leader has improved and he is more confident in public speaking and organizing youth and social activities now in Rajbiraj. Along with Ayush the youths who took the CLS training have formed an informal youth group called New Generation Group in Rajbiraj and through it have organized several social leadership activities for youths such as training on foreign employment and youth entrepreneurship. Ayush and his groups received two installment seed grants of NRs. 40,000 and 10,000 under the SEED project. The first grant they sent it for earthquake relief work in Rajbiraj municipality, and with the NRs. 10,000 they organized an awareness campaign on Open Defecation Free (ODF) zone. They organized awareness raising video shows on ODF in several locations in Rajbiraj municipality. In addition Ayush’s youth group collected locally about NRs. 10,000 and provided water and food to families displaced by the recent earthquake in Nepal in 2015. Ayush says that the CLS training also helped the youths in Rajbiraj whether from Terai or Mountain (Pahad) communities to work unitedly and collectively as youth groups without any geographical differences. He added that the political leadership earlier used to pressure them to include their political party youth leaders in their activities but their persistence not to politicize their activities have been respected by the local political parties and leadership these days. Ayush says SFCG should organize a refresher training on CLS for them to be able to work more in VDCs (rural areas) and give larger grants to youth groups like his to carry out social and community development activities more in the rural areas.

3.2.5 GESI in SEED Activities From some of the sample data of the SEED project it was found that gender wise in the CLS activities in general aggregate the participation of male was 58%, female 40%, and the third gender (TG) 2% (see Table 6). Social inclusion wise in the CLS activities it was found the inclusion of the social groups: Madheshi was 40%; Janajati 16%; Dalit 5%; Brahmin/Chettri 20%; Muslim 5%, OBC 2%; and, others 6% (see Table 7). Under the Seed Grant Activities it was found that the participation of male was male 72%, female 26%, and TG 2% (see Table 8). Similarly, under the LEY activities the gender participation was male 72%, female 24%, and TG 4% (see Table 9).


Page 23 of 58

Table 9: Gender Wise CLS Participant Data Districts

Venue

Date

Participants

Male Female TG Total

Dhanusha Janakpur 7-11 September, 2014 27 (55%) 22 (45%) 0 49

Siraha Chohrwa 13-17 September, 2014 30 (56%) 23 (44%) 0 53

Mahottari Red Cross Building 8-12 November, 2014 29 (58%) 21 (42%) 50 Rautahat Judha Higher

Secondary School Gaur

15-19 November, 2014 28 (58%) 20 (42%) 0 48

Sarlahi Krishna Jantaa Secondary School Sarlahi

24-28 November 2014 28 (56%) 22 (44%) 0 50

Morang Faith In Christ Church Hall, Biratnagar, Morang 12-16 February, 2015 30 (56%) 21 (39%) 2 (5%) 53

Sunsari District Teachers' Training Centre, Inurwa, Sunsari 05-09 February, 2015 33 (62%) 20 (38%) 0 53

Saptari District Teachers' Training Centre, Rajbiraj, Saptari 28 Jan-01 Feb, 2015 33 (66%) 17 (34%) 0 50

Total 239 (58%) 164 (40%) 2 (2%) 406 Source: SFCG; TG = Third Gender

Table 10: Social Inclusion Wise CLS Training Participant Data Districts Madhesi Janajati Dalit Brahmin/

Chhetri Muslim OBC Others

Total

Dhanusha 14 7 5 13 3 0 7 49 Siraha 22 9 5 10 1 3 3 53 Mahottari 17 14 0 10 5 4 50 Rautahat 15 6 2 13 4 4 4 48 Sarlahi 37 7 0 6 0 0 0 50 Morang 17 7 5 13 3 0 8 53 Sunsari 19 9 5 9 2 2 7 53 Saptari 25 10 2 8 5 0 0 50 Total 166 (40%) 69 (16%) 24 (5%) 82 (20%) 23 (5%) 9 (2%) 27 (6%) 406

Source: SFCG; OBC= Other Backward community


Page 24 of 58

Table 11: Seed Grant Activities Gender Disaggregated Data District Date, Activity, Achievements Collaboration

with Participants No.

M F TG Total Saptari February 11, 2016

Interaction about the role of youth and present condition Rajbiraj • Young political leaders from

various different political parties with different ideologies expressed committed to unite for issues of youth and development of Saptari.

Youth of Political parties

33 6 1 40

March 5, 2016 Awareness rally and interaction against drugs in Rajbiraj • The President of Saptari Red

cross, social worker Jogendra Bhagat provided 6 bigha Land for the drug rehabilitation center

• District Youth Task Force expanded its coordination with different stakeholders.

• Renewed commitment from police and administration to prevent the use of drugs.

Nepal Police, Nepal Journalist Federation and different schools and colleges

NA NA NA 500

April 6, 2016 Interaction program on industrial areas and situation of industries • Participants committed to

advocate for proper running of the industrial areas.

• They would bring the situation of the industries to the notice of the government

Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industries (FNCCI), Rajbiraj

40 4 0 44

Siraha February 7, 2016 Orientation against drugs addiction and trafficking in Golbazar • Students were informed

about the disadvantage of drug addiction.

• Discussed about the affect of drug addiction in the society.

• Interaction between youth, students and police.

Area Police Office (APO), Golbazar

43 6 0 49

February 21, 2016 Interaction on gender

Women Human Rights

25 11 0 49


Page 25 of 58

discrimination: violence against women and means of solution - Bariyarpatti • Men and women promised to

raise voice against violence against women.

• Participants informed about women rights.

Defenders, Siraha APO, Bariyarpatti

February 23, 2016 Orientation against drugs addiction and trafficking in Madar • Committed to raise

awareness against drugs and alcohol.

• Committed to start campaign to close illegal alcohol centers.

• Interaction between police and youth on drugs and alcohol.

District Police Office, Siraha

63 51 0 114

April 27, 2016 Installment of information hoarding board on hygiene and cleanliness in Lahan

Lahan Municipality

NA NA NA NA

Dhanusha February 10, 2016 Orientation on drugs addiction in border side areas - Nagarain VDC

Police Post officers, local youth clubs, local schools

47 0 0 47

February 12, 2016 Orientation on drugs addiction in Highway area in Godar village

Local youth clubs

46 0 0 46

April 29, 2016 Hording Board establishment for sensitization on drugs addiction and trafficking at Nagarain VDC Nagarain VDC

District Police office, Dhanusha

NA NA NA NA

April 29, 2016 Installment of information hoarding board for sensitization on drugs addiction and trafficking - Godar village

District Police Office, Dhanusha

NA NA NA NA

Mahotari February 28, 2016 Interaction program against drugs addiction and flex board distribution to school - Jaleswer • The students of several

schools took initiatives to prevent use of intoxicating

District Police Office, Mahotari

97 38 NA 135


Page 26 of 58

objects in schools April 26, 2016 Unseasonal vegetable farming training for youth self-employment in Ekrahiya village • The participant will be able to

produce vegetables professionally.

District Agriculture Office, local youth clubs, cooperative office

19 1 NA 20

Sarlahi February 4, 2016 Interaction program against drugs addiction and Flex board distribution to schools in Malangwa • Young people informed about

the misuse of drugs and alcohol, and about provisions in low about the same

District Police Office, Sarlahi

NA NA NA 444

March 6, 2016 Awareness session in schools/ colleges to reduce misuse of drugs in Malangwa, Gamhariya, Barhatwa villages

District Police Office, Sarlahi

24 16 2 42

March 9, 2016 Interaction program on Youth engagement in local resources and development at Janki Family Hotel

DDC Sarlahi 23 16 2 41

Rautahat April 20, 2016 Interaction on skill-based and vocational education system in Gaur • Stakeholder realized about

the need of skillful education. • Helped in creating

environment for collaboration between youth and education stakeholder.

• Youth and local champions called upon the relevant government bodies to provide skills to develop entrepreneurship.

District Education Office, Rautahat

46 5 NA 51

April 21, 2016 Rally and Orientation against drug addiction in Gaur • Students were informed

about the disadvantages of use of drugs.

• Discussed about the affect of

District Police Office, Rautahat

56 28 0 84


Page 27 of 58

drug addiction in the society. • Youth, students and police

interacted together. April 26, 2016 Interaction program on Youth engagement in local resources and development at DDC Seminar Hall in Gaur • District Development

Committee Rautahat agreed to coordinate with the Youth Task Force in their action plan.

• District Education Office promised to coordinate for skill-based education.

DDC office 27 4 0 31

Morang December 21, 2015 Orientation on Drugs addiction and trafficking at Federal of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ) Hall in Biratnagar

District Police Office, Morang

24 20 0 44

January 26, 2016 Orientation to young people on Human Rights and Gender Violence at Hotel Mahendra in Biratnagar

National Human Rights Commission, NHRC, Women and Children Office & District Youth Network, Morang

44 31 1 76

February 8, 2016 Orientation on Cyber Crime for youth FNJ Hall in Biratnagar

District Police Office, Morang

35 9 1 45

Sunsari January 12, 2016 Round Table program on preparation of drugs addiction reduction action plan at Hotel Fulbari in Inaruwa

District Police Office, Sunsari District Development Committee, Sunsari

20 0 0 20

March 13, 2016 Orientation against drug addiction and trafficking in high schools at Haripur & Kaptangunj villages

District Police Office, Sunsari

57 53 0 110

TOTAL 802 (72%) 299 (26%) 7 (2%) 1108*

Source: SFCG; TG = Third Gender; * Includes only activities with complete data


Page 28 of 58

Table 12: Leaders Engaging Youth (LEY) Participants

Source: SFCG; TG = Third Gender

Table 13: Youth Participation in Development (The Peace Building Initiative Project 2013) SN

Activity

Male Female Total Youth Adult Youth Adult Youth Adult

1 Training on Radio for peace building (Radio Journalist) 31 5 14 2 45 7

2 ToT on Consensus building and dialogue with decision makers (Local Leaders)

2 8 0 1 2 9

3 Training on engaging youth in decision making and peace building (Govt. Official)

3 43 1 2 3 45

4 Training on consensus building and leadership skills (National Leaders)

6 29 1 7 7 36

5 Training on various peacebuilding tools (Youth) 429 0 181 0 610 0

6 ToT to facilitate youth and peace building workshops (Youth)

16 0 8 0 24 0

Total (Capacity building) 487 85 205 12 691 97

7 Seed grants to youth networks/clubs for peace building/ dialogues, in cooperation with local decision makers ( 19 Seed grant events)

1,233 0 233 1,466 0

3.2.6 Financial Compliance 3.2.6.1 Comparison with Actual and Committed Support The overall budget of the Project is Rs.199, 054, 531 and the budget upto May 2016 is Rs.143,733,198. The actual expenses up to May 2016 has been Rs. 279, 234, 232, resulting into overspent by Rs.135, 501, 034 and overspent by Rs. 80,179, 700, as compared to Overall Budget of five years period. See Table 14 below.

Districts

Venue

Date

Participants Male Female TG Total

Dhanusha Janakpur Dham 31-32 Aug, 2014 18 6 1 25 Siraha Chohrwa 3-4 Sep, 2014 21 6 1 28 Saptari Rajbiraj 18-19 Sep, 2014 16 6 1 23 Mahottari Jaleswor 22-23 Sep, 2014 20 5 1 26 Rautahat Gaur 3-4 Nov, 2014 23 10 1 34 Sarlahi Malangwa 5-6 Nov, 2014 17 7 1 25

Morang Hotel Everest, Biratnagar 5-6 Jan, 2015 18 6 1 25

Sunsari Hotel Phulbari, Inaruwa 7-8 Jan, 2015 19 5 1 25 Total 152 (72%) 51 (24%) 8 (4%) 211


Page 29 of 58

Table 14: Budget Versus Actual Expenses as of 31/05/2016

Recommendations • It is recommended to oversee the project budget and contract regularly to compare the expenses with

budget balance, and further it should be linked with activities to be performed.

• The project management is recommended not to exceed the budgeted amount, if exceeds then required to obtain the approval from the appropriate authority without any delay.

3.2.6.2 Comparison of Budgeted and Actual Program and Administrative Cost Analysis of program cost amounting to Rs. 240,033,588 and admin cost amounting to Rs. 39,200,644 reflects that 86% of total expenses incurred has been spent on program and remaining 14% has been spent on admin cost up to May 2016. See Table 15 below.

Table 15: Program Versus Admin Cost as of 31/05/2016 Nature of Expense 5 Year Total

Budget Total Budget Upto May 2016

Total Expenses Upto May 2016

Budget Actual Comparison

Percentage

Program Cost 162,605,177 117,523,963 240,033,588 (122,509,625) 86% Administrative Cost 36,449,354 26,209,236 39,200,644 (12,991,409) 14% Grand Total 199,054,531 143,733,198 279,234,232 (135,501,034) 100%

3.2.6.3 Fiscal Year Wise Comparison Excess expenses have been incurred from the first year of the project. In 2013 the project has incurred Rs. 56, 778, 360 as against budgeted amount of Rs. 43, 729,200; in 2014 it has incurred Rs. 57, 070, 421 as against budget amount of Rs. 43, 458, 690; and Rs. 117, 328, 896 was incurred in 2015 as against budget amount of Rs. 41, 053, 421. These reflect over expenses in comparison to year wise budgeted

SN Thematic Program Pillars

5 Year Total Budget

Total Budget Upto May 2016


Budget Vs. Actual Comparison

Budget Vs. Actual (Overall)

1. Youth Participation and Development

38,261,118 27,653,475 49,560,439 (21,906,964) (11,299,321)

2. Women Empowerment and Development

29,432,333 21,272,413 26,579,566 (5,307,154) 2,852,767

3. Leadership in Development

47,821,823 32,369,788 40,158,747 (7,788,959) 7,663,076

4. Media in Development

42,675,511 33,037,756 53,396,521 (20,358,764) (10,721,010)

5. Monitoring and Evaluation

4,414,393 3,190,531 10,076,895 (6,886,364) (5,662,502)

Total Program 162,605,177 117,523,963 179,772,168 (62,248,205) (17,166,990)

6. Administrative cost 36,449,354 26,209,236 39,200,644 (12,991,409) (2,751,290)

Total l Expenses

199,054,531 143,733,198 218,972,812 (75,239,614) (19,918,280)

7. Other Initiatives / New Projects

- - 60,261,420 (60,261,420) (60,261,420)

Grand Total 199,054,531 143,733,198 279,234,232 (135,501,034) (80,179,700)


Page 30 of 58

amount. See Table 16 below.

Table 16: Fiscal year Wise Comparison

Recommendations • The project management is required to oversee the budget and expenses regularly in order not to

exceed the actual budget.

• The project has exceeded more than 30% in year wise comparison, so it needs to obtain reasonable approval from appropriate authority.

3.2.6.4 Expenses Reporting by Partner Organization

During our review we noticed some partner organizations have overspent their agreement amount, which are listed in Table 17 below.

Table 17: Spending by Partner Organizations Partner

Organization Budgeted Amount (NRS)

Agreement Amount (NRS)

Expenses Recorded as

Per SFCG Remarks

Samagra Jana Utthan Kendra

18,320,873 11,032,335 6,730,892

New World 28,693,094 8,365,150 8,104,179 Youth Initiative 15,363,184 8,688,400 8,846,688 Overspent by Rs. 158,280

Alliance for Peace

10,232,123 2,067,300 1,915,232 Contract Amount is only 20% of the committed amount in 3.5 years out of 5 years Project Period.

Youth Network for Peace Bardia

6,092,410 550,000 318,000 Contract Amount is only 9% of the committed amount in 3.5 years out of 5 years Project Period.

District Youth Club Network Banke


Youth Network 4,670,848 645,000 250,000 Contract Amount is only 14% of the


Page 31 of 58

for Peace and Development Dang

committed amount in 3.5 years out of 5 years Project Period.



FM Radio Station Partners

9,564,365 3,392,300 3,045,934 Contract Amount is only 14% of the committed amount in 3.5 years out of 5 years Project Period.

TOTAL 102,481,675 35,919,485 29,789,925

Recommendations

• The project management should strictly follow the terms and conditions of the signed Project Agreement with SWC and if there are deviations it should be discussed with SWC and secure approval.

3.2.6.5 Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Project Agreement Partner Organizations The overall budget of the PA with partner organizations is Rs.102, 491, 673 and the budget up to May 2016 is Rs. 74, 076, 531. However, the actual expenses up to May 2016 is Rs. 29, 789, 925 resulting in under spending by Rs. 44, 286, 608 which reflects only 40% budget utilization with the PA partner organizations. See Table 18 below for details.

Table 18: Partner Budget and Actual Expenses Partner Organizations 5 Years Total

Budget Total Budget

up to May 2016 Total Expenses Upto May 2016

Actual Comparison

Alliance for Peace 10,242,123 7,402,562 1,915,232 5,487,330 District Youth Club Network Banke

5,077,009 3,669,442 250,000 3,419,442

FM Partners 9,564,365 6,912,708 3,045,934 3,866,774 New World 28,693,094 20,738,123 8,104,179 12,633,944 Samagra Jana Utthan Kendra

18,320,873 13,241,531 6,730,892 6,510,639

Youth Initiative 15,363,184 11,103,842 8,846,688 2,257,154 Youth Network for Peace and Development Dang

4,670,848 3,375,886 250,000 3,125,886

Youth Network for Peace Bardiya

6,092,411 4,403,330 318,000 4,085,330


4,467,768 3,229,109 329,000 2,900,109

Total 102,491,673 74,076,531 29,789,925 44,286,608

Recommendations • PA partner organizations have underspent the allocated budget amount.

• It is recommended to assess the capacity and effectiveness of partner organizations before including

them into project agreement.


Page 32 of 58

• Project partnership agreement further needs to be monitored and reviewed regularly, and if there are irregularities in capacity of the partner organization to fulfill the project agreement requirements then in consulting with and with approval from SWC change the partner.

3.2.6.5 Agreement Entered Other than Project Agreement Partner Organization

While reviewing the contract with partner organizations we observed partnership agreement amounting to Rs. 212, 441,153 were made, which were the partner organizations other than as mentioned in the signed PA with SWC. The total amount of the PA is Rs. 199, 054, 531 but SFCG has committed to provide Rs. 212, 441, 153 with other partner organizations. The list of partner organizations, their contract amount, expenses reported, and expenses as per SFCG record are as given in Table 19 below.

Table 19: Project Agreements Other Than PA Partners

Partner Organization Contract Amount Expenses Reported Expenses Recorded

as Per SFCG Antenna Foundation 8,632,510 8,107,511 8,564,332 AYON 4,217,000 4,216,411 3,795,300 Bikas Kalagi Pahilaharu Nepal 503,500 498,018 494,018 Community Development Centre Doti

503,500 503,642 503,500

Centre for Legal Research & Resource Development 121,767,269 17,277,980 29,229,176

Centre for Security and Justice Studies

8,982,885 715,567 1,841,864

Dhanusha District Football Association

1,526,300 - 591,400

Himalayan Human Rights Monitors 895,388 836,476 836,476 Human Rights Protection and Legal Service Centre 1,678,525 1,629,255 1,699,255

HUCODAN 58,557,863 4,875,709 11,481,207 Jagriti Child And Youth Concern Nepal

503,500 509,740 503,500

Jan Jagaran Youth Club 1,016,638 815,975 965,975 Rural Women's Unity and Development Centre

1,727,775 1,597,503 1,597,503

Youth Netwok for Peace Development

503,500 508,000 503,500

Association of Community Radio Broadcaster

385,000 - 385,000

Women's Ability and peace Development Committee 635,000 357,000 635,000

Nepal Forum for Environmental Journalists

405,000 - 405,000

TOTAL 212,441,153 42,448,787 64,032,006 Recommendations • The project management is strongly recommended to strictly follow the ToR according to PA with

SWC and the include only the PA partner organizations.


Page 33 of 58

• If new partners are to be included in the project then prior discussion with and approval from SWC is required, and if necessary amendments in the PA are to be made.

3.2.6.6 Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Non PA Partner Organizations

Following organizations were not provided with budget according to the PA, but SFCG has entered into contract with these organizations and incurred expenses amounting to Rs. 84, 619, 897 up to May 2016. Details are given in Table 20 below.

Table 20: Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of other than PA Partners Organization Partner Organizations 5 Years

Total Budget

Total Budget Upto May 2016


Actual Comparison

Ad Media Pvt Ltd - - 3,881,919 (3,881,919) Antenna Foundation Nepal - - 8,564,332 (8,564,332) Association of Community Radio - - 385,000 (385,000) Association of Youth Organizations Nepal (AYON)

- - 3,795,300 (3,795,300)

Bikash Ka Lagi Pahilaharu Nepal - - 494,018 (494,018) CeLRRd - - 29,229,176 (29,229,176) Center For Security and Justice Studies

- - 1,841,846 (1,841,846)

Community Development Center, Doti

- - 503,500 (503,500)

District Football Association, - - 591,400 (591,400) Federation Of Nepali Journalists - - 80,000 (80,000) Himalayan Human Rights Monitor - - 836,476 (836,476) Human Rights Protection And Legal Service Center

- - 1,699,255 (1,699,255)

HUCODAN - - 11,481,207 (11,481,207) Jagriti Child And Youth Concern Nepal

- - 503,500 (503,500)

Jan Jagaran Youth Club - - 965,975 (965,975) Janakpur Women's Development Center

- - 21,500 (21,500)

Kalika Self-reliance Social Center - - Mila Productions Pvt.Ltd. - - 13,600,538 (13,600,538) Nepal Television - - Nepal Forum Of Environmental J - - 405,000 (405,000) Paritran Risk Management Consultancy And Training Institute Pvt.

- - 568,135 (568,135)

Rural Women's Development and - - 1,597,503 (1,597,503) Shanti Tatha Bikash Ka Lagi Yuwa Sanjal

- - 503,500 (503,500)

Southasia Institute of Advanced Studies

- - 2,435,817 (2,435,817)

Women's Ability and Peace Development

- - 635,000 (635,000)

Total - - 84,619,897 (84,619,897)


Page 34 of 58

Recommendations

• The project management is recommended to disburse the project fund only to the project partners as per the PA with SWC.

3.2.6.7 Agreement Entered beyond Project Agreement period

While reviewing the partner organization contracts, we observed instances of agreement done beyond the PA period with three partner organizations that are not the partner organizations as per the signed PA. Details are given in Table 21 below.

Table 21: Project Agreement with Partners Beyond the PA with SWC Partner Organizations Contract

Amount PA Period Expenses

Recorded as Per SFCG

Centre for Legal Research & Resource Development

121,767,269 Jan 04, 2013 to Jan 03, 2018

Feb 01, 2015 to Dec 31, 2018

Centre for Security and Justice Studies

8,982,885 Jan 04, 2013 to Jan 03, 2018

June 15, 2015 to Dec 31, 2018

HUCODAN 58,557,863 Jan 04, 2013 to Jan 03, 2018

Aug 01, 2015 to July 31, 2018

TOTAL 189,308,017 Recommendations • The project management is recommended to strictly follow the project’s cycle time line.

3.2.7 Project Agreement Coordination Compliance As per the PA with SWC for the SEED Project SFCG Nepal is required to fulfill several coordination compliances at the central and district levels. At the central level it is required to form a Central-Project Advisory Committee (C-PAC) and at the district level District-Project Advisory Committee (D-PAC). The D-PAC is required to meet every six-month and the C-PAC once a year. Further in central level coordination it requires monthly updates and periodic consultative meetings with the MoWCSW. Similarly, joint review with MoWCSW and donors needs to be organized through six monthly review and reflection workshops and joint monitoring visits to the project’s working areas.

According to the Annual Progress Report 2013 submitted by SFCG to SWC in 2013 D-PAC meetings were held in all the project districts. Though the reporting mentions that feedbacks were received in the D-PAC meetings regarding coordinated implementation of the project with the government, it is silent about what were the specific feedbacks. The 2013 Annual Report also states SFCG invited under the UN Women funded project (PT: Women and Girls Empowerment, and PO 1 &2) the Director and Focal Person of Women and Children Department of MoWCSW for implementing the National Action Plan on UNCSR 1325 and 1820 as resource persons in the orientation and workshops of the project in Doti, Bajhang, and Kailali districts. However, there is no reporting to be found regarding C-PAC of the SEED project in 2013.

Similarly, regarding D-PAC and C-PAC meetings in 2014, the study team could not access any document that would give evidence to have held such meetings.


Page 35 of 58

According to a copy of a hand written meeting minutes received from SFCG, in 2015, attended by 11 people C-PAC meeting was held on 13 December 2015 on the chairpersonship of SWC the then incumbent Director Subhadra Dahal, at SFCG Office in Lazimpat, Kathmandu. This C-PAC meeting had discussed and decided the following points: 1) Meena Sharma, Project Manager from SFCG made the presentation on the progress of the SEED project. It was followed by discussion and suggestion and advices given by the participants; 2) It was agreed and decided to add new districts and partnerships in the project. For this there will be a need for amendment in the PA; 3) It was suggested to present the budget of the project with a breakdown; 4) It was decided to organize a field observation visit for the concerned persons from the central level; and, 5) The project’s objective should be able to have a link to good governance and government’s policies. See Annex 5.

Regarding compliance with government policies and plans regarding youths, girls and women, SEED projects has organized orientations and workshops in Doti, Bajhang, and Kailali districts National Action Plan on UNCSR 1325 and 1820.

3.2.8 Partnership and Performance Partnership under the SEED project has been basically on the basis of project’s four themes and objectives. The project activities planned and agreed to under the PA with SWC have been executed through various partners, as activity implementing partners and service providing partners.

SEED project has worked with all the partners planned in the PA in implementing activities such as leadership training and seed grants through partners such as YNPD, Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Youth Initiative, and others.

In case of seed grants to women and youth groups the partnership has been through both formal and informal groups formed after the leadership trainings provided under the SEED project. A case study of a women’s group Mahila Chamata Bikash Shanti Samitee revealed that it has been able to expand the work started by the leadership training and seed grant provided by the SEED project. The women’s group has been doing Maithili Art production by women for income generation and has created a saving and credit group also. This organization has been recently awarded by SFCG HQ as women innovation entrepreneurship for promoting local culture for peace and social harmony in a worldwide context. Under the media in development theme SEED project has worked with service providing partners such as FM radios in the districts, radio production NGO such as Antenna Foundation, and for the television program with Mila Production. Regarding the youth participation in development and leadership in development thematic activities there has been responses and assertions such as the perception of the youth regarding the state and vice versa has changed; youths earlier divided along geographical identity lines have united, more organized to be engaged in development; and political leadership respects the independent role of youths’ in development. But there is a lack of tangible, quantifiable, empirical evidences, and data to support these. The informal youth groups formed after the CLS and LEY trainings have received the small grants and their expectation is that the size of seed grants would be increased by the project so that the youth groups can implement larger community development activities. Partnership with line agencies such as the DWO, DPO, and CDO has been also observed to be effective and appreciated. The line agencies are observed to have been informed and communicated regularly about the SFCG project activities in the districts and invited to participate. However, the Chief District Officer who has been appointed in Janakpur, Dhanusha district recently have not observed the field activities of SFCG SEED projects. Similarly, the District Superintendent of Police in Janakpur suggested


Page 36 of 58

to SFCG to implement more rural activities on fighting social problems like dowry, violence against women etc. Regarding partnership and selection of partners there have been additional districts and 17 new partners in implementing the project activities. These districts and partners are separate from the tentative partners identified in the PA. Though to add new districts and partners was agreed and decided in the 13 December 2015 C-PAC meeting, the new districts and partners were added prior to securing the approval from SWC.

3.2.9 Analysis • To date the target achievements specifically under the PT: Youth participation in Development and

PO 1 & 2 in average has been only 67.8%; under the PT: Women and Girls Empowerment and PO 1 & 2 it has been 80%; under the PT: Media in Development and PO 1 & 3 has been in average 79%; and, under the PT: Leadership in Development and PO 1 & 4 the target achievement has been 83%. The overall target achievement has been 77.45% of the total project target

• Though the target achievements in average of 77.45% and cent percent and excess achievements in some themes (such as under media in development’s TV program; seed grant support to conflict affected women; leadership in development’s) by 41 months of the 60 months (January 2013 – December 2017) of the project life is notable and reasonable, in some of the thematic activities such as in youth participation in development the momentum of activities needs to be increased in order to achieve the target by the end of the project.

• The target achievement of 77.45% only under the youth participation in development theme has been relatively weak. Achievements under specific activities under this theme, viz, youth leadership development training has been only 26%; seed grants to youth groups has been only 45%; and youth led community activities has been only 19%.

• Similarly, the target achievements under the media in development theme for the two activities or component of producing radio and TV program have been completed. But the capacity building activity of providing training to journalists has been only 44%.

• In order to achieve the set targets under the four themes/objectives which have achieved to date less than 50% of it’s target, with only about 15 months remaining period of the project, implementing the activities needs to be speeded up, or a realistic or achievable target needs to be reset by amending the PA with SWC.

• Regarding the youth participation in development and leadership in development thematic activities

there has been responses and assertions such as the perception of the youth regarding the state and vice versa has changed; youths earlier divided along geographical identity lines have united, more organized to be engaged in development; and political leadership respects the independent role of youths’ in development. But there is a lack of tangible, quantifiable, empirical evidences, and data to support these.

• Most of the CLS and LEY trainees consulted demanded refresher training and one FGD demanded

rather than general leadership training more specific existing problem solving leadership trainings. In general the trainee respondents said they need leadership trainings to be able to implement community level development activities in the rural areas. One respondent opined that the SEED activities to youths have been more confined to urban municipality areas.


Page 37 of 58

• The seed grants of NRs. 5,000 - 50,000 have been given to women and youth groups through official invoices issued by SFCG, for formalizing such monetary transaction a proper and legal means is observed to be of imperative.

• The informal youth groups formed after the CLS and LEY trainings have received the small grants

and their expectation is that the size of seed grants would be increased by the project so that the youth groups can implement larger community development activities.

• Gender wise participation of women in key activities of the project such as CLS has been around

40%. It may be improved by having criteria in organizing such activities that ensures increased participation of women.

• Since the young women’s social/development and political leadership issues vary from men’s

leaderships issues, and are influenced by various social and cultural factors, in addition to the mixed gender leadership trainings, separate leadership training activities focused on specific women leadership issues and challenges can attribute to improving youth women’s leadership. This may apply for leadership development of youths from marginalized communities such as Dalits and Janjatis.

• Regarding the Sangoor radio program the listerners’ group said that it was interesting in the beginning

but later it tried to address too many issues and could not give a clear information and message. Need for radio programs that give information on the issue/problem (like drug use by youths) and a clear message from every episode.

• Lack of consistency is observed in organizing, documenting, and reporting the D-PAC and C-PAC

meetings. • Regarding funding and financial management the SEED project, as per the PA with SWC the project

had budgeted for NRs. 199,054,531 for five years (January 2013 – December 2017). As of carrying out the MTE (May 2016) the project has overspent by NRs. 80,179,700 or about 40% more. Given that the overall target achievement of the project has been around 77.45% and budget overspent by 40% this needs to be sorted by SFCG with SWC.

• Discrepancies have been observed in the budget management, expenses, and partnerships, which

are not in compliance with the PA with SWC.

• The overall budget of the Project is Rs.199, 054, 531 and the budget upto May 2016 is Rs.143, 733,198. The actual expenses upto May 2016 has been Rs. 279, 234, 232, resulting into overspent by Rs.135, 501, 034 and overspent by Rs. 80,179, 700, as compared to Overall Budget of five years period. See Table 14 below.

• Analysis of program cost amounting to Rs. 240, 033, 588 and admin cost amounting to Rs. 39,200,644 reflects that 86% of total expenses incurred has been spent on program and remaining 14% has been spent on admin cost upto May 2016.

• Excess expenses have been incurred from the first year of the project. In 2013 the project has incurred Rs. 56, 778, 360 as against budgeted amount of Rs. 43, 729,200; in 2014 it has incurred Rs. 57, 070, 421 as against budget amount of Rs. 43, 458, 690; and Rs. 117, 328, 896 was incurred in 2015 as against budget amount of Rs. 41, 053, 421.

• During our review we noticed some partner organizations have overspent their agreement amount, which are listed in Table 17 below.


Page 38 of 58

• The overall budget of the PA with partner organizations is Rs.102, 491, 673 and the budget upto May

2016 is Rs. 74, 076, 531. However, the actual expenses upto May 2016 is Rs. 29, 789, 925 resulting in under spending by Rs. 44, 286, 608 which reflects only 40% budget utilization with the PA partner organizations.

• While reviewing the contract with partner organizations we observed partnership agreement amounting to Rs. 212, 441,153 were made, which were the partner organizations other than as mentioned in the signed PA with SWC. The total amount of the PA is Rs. 199, 054, 531 but SFCG has committed to provide Rs. 212, 441, 153 with other partner organizations.

• Some of the partner organizations were not provided with budget according to the PA, but SFCG has entered into contract with these organizations and incurred expenses amounting to Rs. 84,619,897 upto May 2016.

• While reviewing the partner organization contracts, we observed instances of agreement done beyond the PA period with three partner organizations that are not the partner organizations as per the signed PA.

• As per the GA and PA regulations SFCG is required to inform SWC and make amendments in the PA

in case of any changes in the project budgets or activities, or partnerships.

• As per the policy of the government and SWC for INGOs to work in Nepal, it is required to uphold development transparency to the stakeholders (in terms of programs and budgets). There has been inconsistency in adhering to transparency of the project. Activities such as public audit, social audit, and social hearings have not been organized by the SEED Project to date.

• There has been a delay in undertaking the SEED project MTE. It should have taken place around mid

of 2015. This may have been due to the earthquake in Nepal in April 2015.


Page 39 of 58

SECTION IV Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations 4.1 Summary Adhering to the PA between SWC and SFCG Nepal regarding the SEED Project, an independent MTE was required to be carried out. The ToR for the MTE was developed by SWC in consultation with SFCG Nepal and independent team of consultants was hired to carry out the task. The overall goal of the MTE was to primarily evaluate in the mid-term that the project has been able to achieve the targets set and other compliances as per the agreement such as financial managements and obligations (tax etc.), central level coordination, reporting have were adhered to or not. Simple participatory approach and methodology was used to conduct the study. Methodology included desk research (literature reviews), consultations, or interviews with key informants, FGDs with various stakeholders and beneficiaries, specific generic checklists for secondary and primary data collection and analysis were used. Undertaking the SEED project MTE may have been delayed due to the earthquake in Nepal in April 2015. To date the overall target achievement of the SEED project has been around 77.45%. Some of the thematic activities that have target achievements of less than 50% need to be speeded up in order to achieve the set goal in about the remaining 15 months project life. Though the project has achieved about overall 77.45% set targets, the budget has been overspent by 40% in new initiatives. How this needs to be adjusted or amended needs to be discussed and decided by SWC and SFCG. Assessments of the project in terms of best practices or lessons learned are as follow. • The SEED PA with SWC unlike other projects does not have specific confirmed donors and budget.

The SEED project has secured funds from multiple donors as the project has progressed over the five year of its life cycle. With such multiple or co-funding mechanism, it is important to keep the financial arrangement and management accurately for purposes like MTE.

• In such SEED project where the exact donors and funding (financing mechanism) is not predetermined, regular communications and meetings between such the concerned INGO and SWC is required in order to maintain timely updating.

• The capacity building activities of the project such as the CLS and LEY have definitely imparted skills to youths, political, civil society, and government personnel for collaborative leadership. However, documenting and making the results measurable objectively/tangibly is necessary.

• The mechanism of determining seed grants or the amount should not be predetermined by the project, and even if done so, it should be done more systematically/scientifically with market surveys and so on. It is better to determine the size of the seed grant on the basis of the action plan and activities developed by the CCLS and LEY trainees as a group.

• The women or youth groups formed after the CLS and LEY trainings should be formalized as far as possible so that the institutional capacity at the community level is built, and it is convenient and legitimized for projects like SEED to administer seed grants.


Page 40 of 58

4.2 Conclusions • For a project like SEED with multiple donors it is better to have a predetermined or confirmed donors

and budget. Budget should be planned more accurately and overspending should be avoided as far as possible.

• The time plans, set targets, and budgets, for projects like SEED should be realistic and achievable as the SEED project with about 15 months left has an overall achievement of about 77.45%, whereas the budget expended has crossed more than 40% than the actual.

• The PA for projects with SEED’s nature (in terms of funding/donors and activities) should have provisions for more meetings with SWC so that consistency is maintained in PA stipulations and amendments.

• Administration and amount of seed grants by projects like SEED should not be pre-determined but

supported by more legitimate partnership and aligned to actual action plan requirements.

4.3 Recommendations 4.3.1 Program Activities and Compliance 4.3.1.1 Though the target achievements in average of 77.45% and cent percent and excess

achievements in some themes (such as under media in development’s TV program; seed grant support to conflict affected women; leadership in development’s) by 41 months of the 60 months (January 2013 – December 2017) of the project life is notable and reasonable, in some of the thematic activities such as in youth participation in development the momentum of activities needs to be increased in order to achieve the target by the end of the project.

4.3.1.2 The target achievement of 77.45% only under the youth participation in development theme has been relatively weak. Achievements under specific activities under this theme, viz, youth leadership development training has been only 26%; seed grants to youth groups has been only 45%; and youth led community activities has been only 19%.

4.3.1.3 Similarly, the target achievements under the media in development theme for the two activities or component of producing radio and TV program have been completed. But the capacity building activity of providing training to journalists has been only 44%. In order to achieve the set targets under the four themes/objectives which have achieved to date less than 50% of it’s target, with only about 15 months remaining period of the project, implementing the activities needs to be speeded up, or a realistic or achievable target needs to be reset by amending the PA with SWC.

4.3.1.4 From some of the sample data of the SEED project it was found that gender wise in the CLS. In activities in general aggregate the participation of male was 58%, female 40%, and the third gender (TG) 2%. Social inclusion wise in the CLS activities it was found the inclusion of the social groups: Madheshi was 40%; Janajati 16%; Dalit 5%; Brahmin/Chettri 20%; Muslim 5%, OBC 2%; and, others 6%. Gender wise participation of women in key activities of the project such as CLS has been around 40%. It may be improved by having criteria in organizing such activities that ensures increased participation of women.

4.3.1.5 Since the young women’s social/development and political leadership issues vary from men’s leaderships issues, and are influenced by various social and cultural factors, in addition to the mixed gender leadership trainings, separate leadership training activities focused on specific


Page 41 of 58

women leadership issues and challenges can attribute to improving youth women’s leadership. This may apply for leadership development of youths from marginalized communities such as Dalits and Janjatis.

4.3.1.6 Regarding media program activities (radio and TV) it is recommended to have regular audience survey and incorporate the feedbacks from the targeted audiences/viewers in media program production.

4.3.1.7 Though the D-PAC and C-PAC meetings have been organized documentation of the meetings need to be consistent and the decisions made in such meetings need to be translated into tangible actions. For example in the C-PAC meeting held on 11 December 2015, amongst others, it was decided and agreed to: add new districts and partnerships in the project and there would be a need for amendment in the PA; to organize a field observation visit for the concerned persons from the central level; and, the project’s objective should be able to have a link to good governance and government’s policies. To date there has been lack of congruency in taking actions.

4.3.1.8 Complacencies have been observed in complying to the decisions made by the December 2015 C-PAC meeting like without approval from SWC the SEED Project has added districts and partners to implement the activities.

4.3.1.9 Though it was discussed and decided in the C-PAC December 2015 meeting, the project has added new districts and 17 new partners without proper approval from SWC. This needs to be sorted out between SFCG and SWC.

4.3.1.10 Regarding alignment of the SEED project with government’s policies and plans regarding youth, girls, and women, there have been activities which have alignment, such as the project organized orientation and workshops in Doti, Bajhang, and Kailali districts National Action Plan on UNCSR 1325 and 1820. SEED project has imparted training to youth for development leadership and political engagements such as the CLS and LEY. However, it is recommended that in project progress reporting to SWC it should tangibly report which activities of the project have contributed specifically to the government’s policies and plans regarding youth, girls and women.

4.3.1.11 Regarding transparency of the project, as per the policy of the government and SWC for INGOs

to work in Nepal, it is required to uphold development transparency to the stakeholders (in terms of programs and budgets). There has been inconsistency in adhering to transparency of the project. Activities such as public audit, social audit, and social hearings have not been organized by the SEED Project to date. It is recommended that SFCG organize national and district level SEED project transparency activities as soon as possible.

4.3.2 Financial Management 4.3.2.1 Regarding Comparison of Budget with Actual and Committed Support of the project it is

recommended that the project management to oversee the project budget and contracts regularly to compare the expenses with budget balance, and further it should be linked with activities to be performed; and not to exceed the budgeted amount, if exceeded then it is required to obtain the approval from the appropriate authority without any delay.

4.3.2.2 Regarding Fiscal Year Wise Comparison the project management is required to oversee the

budget and expenses regularly in order not to exceed the actual budget. The project has exceeded more than 30% in year wise comparison, so it needs to obtain reasonable approval


Page 42 of 58

from SWC.

4.3.2.3 Regarding Expenses Reporting by Partner Organizations the project management should strictly follow the terms and conditions of the signed PA with SWC and if there are deviations it should be discussed with SWC and secure approval.

4.3.2.4 Regarding Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Project Agreement Partner Organizations PA partner organizations have underspent the allocated budget amount. It is recommended to assess the capacity and effectiveness of partner organizations before including them into project agreement. Project partnership agreement further needs to be monitored and reviewed regularly, and if there are irregularities in capacity of the partner organization to fulfill the project agreement requirements then in consulting with and with approval from SWC change the partner.

4.3.2.5 Regarding Agreement Entered Other than Project Agreement Partner Organization the project management is strongly recommended to strictly follow the ToR according to PA with SWC and include only the PA partner organizations. If new partners are to be included in the project then prior discussion with and approval from SWC is required, and if necessary amendments in the PA are to be made.

4.3.2.6 Regarding Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Non PA Partner Organizations the project management is recommended to disburse the project fund only to the project partners as per the PA with SWC.

4.3.2.7 There have been project agreements signed beyond the project life. The project management is recommended to strictly follow the project’s time line.

4.3.2.8 Since the project has already overspent and further budget is required for implementing the

remaining activities of project in about 18 months’ project period, it is recommended that SFCG inform SWC about the additional budget sources and if required inculcate necessary amendments in the PA.

4.3.2.9 Regarding the overall discrepancies in the financial management, additional partnership

agreements and budgets, it is recommended that SFCG discuss with SWC and make the necessary arrangements and amendments in the incumbent PA.


Page 43 of 58

REFERENCES • General Agreement Between SWC and SFCG, Belgium, 6 April 2012

• Project Agreement Between SWC and SFCG, 4 January 2013

• Annual Progress Report 2013, Submitted to SWC by SFCG

• SEED Annual Progress Report 2014

• Minute of C-PAC Meeting, SFCG Office, Lazimpat, Kathmandu, 13 December 2015

• SWC general Scope of Work for Mid-Term Evaluation of Supporting Enabling Environment for

Development, Supported by SFCG, June 2016

• Grant Contract, External Actions of the European People, IFS-RRM/2013/329-365

• The Isabel Allende Foundation, Reference Grant Name: 2014 Esperanza Grant, 18 April 2014

• Project Cooperation Agreement between The United Nations Entity for General Equality and The Empowerment of Women and Search for Common Ground, 26 July 2013

• USAID Nepal, Cooperative Agreement No. AID-367-A-14-00001, 19 December 2013

• BRS Neupane & Co., Independent Auditors’ Report, 4 November 2015

• Other SEED project secondary data and information documents provided by SFCG


Page 44 of 58

Annex 1: Generic Checklist Supporting Enabling Environment for Development Project (SEED) Implemented by Search for Common Ground (SFCG) Mid-Term Evaluation by Social Welfare Council Evaluation Period: January 2013 -July 2016 Evaluation Period Budget: NRs. 128, 241, 311 DRAFT Generic Checklist (for field assessment) ___________________________________________________________________________________ 1. Project Background Project Goal • The overall goal of the project is to support an enabling environment for development in Nepal.

Project Objectives 1. To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting

an enabling environment for development; 2. To provide seed grants support to Community Based Organizations (CBOs) for community

development projects; 3. To provide technical support to local organisations for production and broadcast of awareness raising

and behaviour change media programs; and 4. To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social

and development challenges. Thematic Areas/Activity Focus i) Youth participation and development ii) Women empowerment and Development iii) Leadership in development iv) Media in Development ___________________________________________________________________________________ 2. CHECKLISTS: • Project Objective (PO) and Thematic Areas/Key Results(TA/KR) Wise • To be administered commonly and contextually in terms of SEED’s nature of partnership. ________________________________________________________________ 2.1 Key Informant Interviews/KII (organizations/individuals) Date: Name: Organization: Designation: District: VDC/Municipality: KEY QUESTIONS Organization (executing partners) 1. What is the mission/aim of your organization? 2. What activities your organization has done/doing in the district?


Page 45 of 58

3. What are the requirements, objective/activities of your organization under the SFCG SEED project partnership?

4. What has worked, what has not worked, what can be done better, and what are the challenges under the SEED project? (SWOT)

5. How do you communicate (program+finance) with SFCG under the SEED project? 6. How do you think can be/will be the activities started under the SEED project sustained by you or your

organization? 7. Any other comments? Individual (Beneficiary) 1. What do you know about the SEED project? 2. In which activities of the SEED project have you participated? 3. How have you benefitted from the SEED project? 4. What do you think are the strengths/weaknesses/challenges of the SEED project? 5. Do you have any suggestions to make the SEED project more effective? 6. Any other comments? ___________________________________________________________________________________ 2.2 Focus Group Discussion/FGD (districts/VDCs/municipalities) Date: District/VDC/Municipality: Participants (Full Name/Gender/Address/Contact): KEY QUESTIONS 1. What do you know about the SEED project? 2. How have you participated in/benefitted from the SEED project? 3. What do you think are the strengths/weaknesses/challenges of the SEED project? 4. How do you think the SEED project’s activities can be sustained? 5. Are there any suggestions you would like to make regarding the more effectiveness of the SEED

project? 6. Any other comments? ___________________________________________________________________________________ 2.3 KII/FGD (districts, DDCs, DAOs, DEOs, DCOs, DWOs)

(individual/organization/FGD) Date: District (VDC/municipality): Name (individual)/Designation/Organization/List of Participants (if FGD): 1. What do you know about the SEED project? 2. What is the nature of partnership/relation of your organization with the SEED project? 3. In what/which activities of the SEED project have you participated/benefitted? 4. What do you think are the strengths/weaknesses/challenges of the SEED project? 5. How do you think the activities started by the SEED project can be sustained? 6. Do you have any suggestions to make the SEED project more effective? 7. Any other comments?


Page 46 of 58

Annex 2: Tentative Field Visit Plan

SWC mid- term evaluation of SEED project 18 – 21 August 2016

Day 1 District Time Responsible/ Venue

August 18 Dhanusha 11:10 Travel to Janakpur August 19 August 19th 9:00 am Meeting with regional team Alok Janakapur

10-12 Am Meeting with Line agencies (WDO,

CDO, LDO) Anjana

Lunch 12-1 Alok Travel to

Mohattari 1-2

Suga 2 -2:45 PM Meeting with Women's group in Suga Bijay YNPD office,

Jaleswer 3-30 PM Meeting with Youth Network Bijay

Jaleshwor 3:30-4 PM Meeting with FM station ( Sangor/ GGSD)

Bijay Rudrakshya Fm

Back from Mahotari

4-5 PM

Janakpur 5-6 PM Meeting with Sangor Listener And CLS team

Anjana/Bijay Welcome Hotel

Janakapur 6-7 PM Ghanshyam Mishra (KhullaDharti) (Radio Partner)

Anjana Radio Mithila

August 20 Travel to Siraha

7 AM

Lahan 9 AM-10 AM Meeting with Local Partner Samagra Sunil/Ram Bharosi Lahan 10:30 -

11:30AM Meeting with women groups Sunil/Ram Bharosi

Lunch 12:00-1:00 PM

Golbazar

Siraha 1:30-2:30 Meeting with seed grants support participants/CLS Team

Sunil/Ram Bharosi

Siraha 2:30-3:30 PM Meeting with government officials(DDC,LPC,NYC,DPO-DSP)

Sunil/Ram Bharosi

Return Back from Siraha

3:30 -4:30 PM

Lahan 4:30 PM-5:30 PM

Meeting with Sangor listners Sunil/Ram Bharosi

Lahan Meeting with SD audience Sunil/Ram Bharosi Reflection with the team August 21 7:30 AM Travel back to Kathmandu Travel to

Rajbiraj on the way of Biratnagar

8:30 AM – 9:30 AM

Meeting with CLS/TFC member about organizing District Youth Assembly collaboration with multi-stakeholders donor agencies and Government Offices in Saptari district.

Rajesh & Sunil


Page 47 of 58

Annex 3: FGD Participants FGD 1: Mahila Chamata Bikash Shanti Samittee (Women’s Group), Jaleswore, Mahottari, youth

leadership training and seed grant; 19/08/2016 SN Name Gender Age 1. Sunaina Thakur F 28 2. Rinku Thakur F 25 3. Kalpana Karn F 21 4. Dulari Devi F 22 5. Gulab Devi F 16 6. Banarasi Devi F 30 7. Jyoti Devi Paswan F 35 8. Malti Devi F 35 9. Sushila Thakur F 35

10. Kishor Pradhan M 40 11. Shobha Pokhrel F NA 12. Sushma Khadka F NA 13. Sudip Dahal M NA 14. Meena Sharma F NA 15. Kalpana Karn F 22

FGD 2: Youth Network for Peace and Development (YNPD), Jaleswore, Mahottari, youth leadership training and seed grant to youth group; 19/08/2016 SN Name Gender Age Name of Organization 1. Nagendra Kumar Kama M 32 NA 2. Md Mohamad Ansari M 20 NA 3. Puja Kumari F 18 NA 4. July Thakur F 18 NA 5. Kamni Chaudhary F 28 NA 6. Bipin Kumar Sah M 25 NA 7. Satyendar Yadav M 27 YNPD 8. Jyoti Kri M 20 Student 9. Deepika Sah F 23 FNJ 10. Chandra Bhusan Yadav M 19 YIC 11. Suresh Thakur M 34 YNPD 12. Sushil Kumar Raut M 34 YTF 13. Kishor Pradhan M NA SWC 14. Sushma Khadka F NA SWC 15. Shobha Pokhrel F NA SWC 16. Sudip Dahal M NA SWC 17. Bijay Jha M 29 SFCG 18. Meena Sharma F NA SFCG


Page 48 of 58

FGD 3: Welcome Hotel, Janakpur, Dhanusha, CLS Trainees, 19/08/2016 SN Name Gender Age Organization Name 1. Ashok Sah M 23 Youth Initiative 2. Saroj Mishra M 34 Youth Initiative 3. Batuk Nath Jha M 29 Youth Initiative 4. Pravakar Prasad Saha M 28 Teach For Nepal 5. Om Prakash Sah M 34 Youth Initiative 6. Dev Kumar Mahato M 23 HRDYI) 7. Gobind Mahato M 23 Sanchar 8. Rinku Mishra Gayatry F 23 TV today 9. Sudip Dahal M 33 SWC

10. K. Pradhan M 49 SWC 11. Anjana Saha F NA SFCG

FGD 4: Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan, Siraha, youth leadership development and media

development, 20/08/2016 SN Name Gender Age Organization Name 1. Bhairab Prasad Gelal M NA APEC 2. Ram Bhansi Mahato M 37 APEC 3. Sunil Kumar Sah M 38 SFCG 4. Shusma Khadka F 41 SWC 5. Shova Pokhrel F 39 MOWCSW 6. Sudip Dahal M 33 SWC 7. Surendra Shrestha M 50 NA 8. Madan Kumar Mandal M 45 APEI 9. Dev Raj Pokhrel M 41 SAMAGRA

10. Mundrika Mandal F 30 APEC FGD 5: Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan, Siraha, radio program ‘Sanghor’ listerners’ group 20/08/2016

SN Name Gender Age 1. Tej Narayan Yadav M 17 2. Jibachha Prasad Sah M 18 3. Ritesh Kumar Yadav M 22 4. Prameshar Kumar Thakur M 19 5. Teju Maithali M 22 6. Md Javed Ali M 26 7. Shusma Khadka F 41 8. Shova Pokhrel F 39 9. Mundrita Mandal F 30


Page 49 of 58

FGD 6: Sabal Nepal, Rajbiraj, Saptari, youth leadership trainees and youth group seed grant, 20/08/2016 SN Name Gender Age Organization Name 1. Ayush Shrestha M 32 Sabal Nepal 2. Sanjeev Yadav M 25 Student 3. Birendra Mandal M 32 Student 4. Bol Krishna Mandal M 21 Student

5. Mohan Kumar Yadav M 29 New Generation Group 6. Shrawan Kunar Das M 32 NA 7. Sushma Khadka F 41 SWC 8. Bandana BK F 20 Sabal Nepal 9. Sudip Dahal M 33 SWC 10. Pramemshwore Jha M 33 Sabal Nepal 11. Ashok Kumar Sah M 32 Sabal Nepal 12. Jitendra Mandal M 30 Sabal Nepal 13. Prabhat Singh M 40 Sabal Nepal 14. Rajesh Kumar Lohani M 36 SFCG 15. Bhupesh Kumar Sah M 25 Sabal Nepal 16. Dhanesh M 45 Sabal Nepal 17. Kishor Pradhan M 49 SWC 18. Mahesh M 28 Sabal Nepal


Page 50 of 58

Annex 4: Complete List of People Consulted SN Name Designation Organization 1. Alok Thakur Regional Manager Eastern Regional Office, SFCG 2. Anjana Saha Associate Field Officer Eastern Regional Office, SFCG 3. Ayush Shrestha CLS Trainee Rajbiraj, Saptari 4. Bhariab Prasad Golal Chairperson Samagra Jana Utthan Center,

Lahan, Siraha 5. Bhola Prasad Dahal Country Director SFCG, Kathmandu 6. Bijay Kumar Jha Associate Field Officer Eastern Regional Office, SFCG 7. Dilip Kumar Chapagain Chief District Officer CDO, Janakpur, Dhanusha 8. Kiran Shrestha Finance and Grants Manager SFCG, Kathmandu 9. Meena Sharma Project Manager SFCG, Kathmandu

10. Nahakul Pokharel District Superintendent of Police DPO, Janakpur, Dhanusha 11. Niresh Chapagain DME & A Manager SFCG, Kathmandu 11. Nirmala Mishra District Women Officer DWO, Janakpur, Dhanusha 12. Ram Bharoshi Mahato Program Manager Samagra Jana Utthan Center,

Lahan, Siraha 13. Satish Jungh Shahi Executive Director Antenna Foundation, Kathmandu 14. Sunaina Thakur Chairperson Mahila Chamta Bikash Shanti

Samitee, Jaleswore, Mahotari 15. Sweta Pradhan HR and Admin Manager SFCG, Kathmandu 16. Yubakar Raj Rajkarnicar Program Director SFCG, Kathmandu


Page 51 of 58

Annex 5: SEED Project C-PAC Meeting Minutes, 2012, 2014, and 2015 C-PAC Meeting Minute: 14 December 2012


Page 52 of 58

cf,- ~ ...... (\ "' ~

q1,. )_(SI-§; ~/i/f\ -~.:::i "t;.,\_ "".S'l1ri ;up .. o__) ~~ ( ) ..--.....

'\16'(TJ G1 11 r::;:11 £ ~~16'/ fft,J,,,1a - 9 '(' -- . Z/Of /

) ./

~\~ ~·" \ ·~ 1! ~p,f ""' z, < ---=-- \

... I


Page 53 of 58

C-PAC Meeting Minute: 27 March 2014

- ... L--~~~~~~~~-=----=-__:__:_:~,L_~~t+--~~~~~=--=-----~~~ - L---~~---::~~~~~~~~~~tr-~~~-\T-~~~v--~~

-~ 1---~----:;;;;--~---.~=----==3~--=-=~~~~~~~~==--~~~- =-......__--=;=----'""'

}\\

(f ~, ~ eif .,_g • 9Jf ~ ·-~~-~~'<-"-±-~· t91 'i'.M "1,41 =-

-


Page 54 of 58

""

..,..., ::i 15:.5 ~ ~

!--------U~

I' D ,-.-

") - k:\ s-'1 \:5 Ji!'\ ::>) ei f3 \c\'.· 1(1 \_2) %?.:fc ) ;ru I ,.4 ;"\" -

5 :£: 3"@~~9Jt -:i<~'ijJ).fR? £i)t71i\ ~:

1-------.:--.--~ "%1 ~)'\ .,-=-; ~~<\,.:;;s ;1:JDJl("IM!t -

ci'l11 "');z ~' '\?j 'n~ \ '.'.!)~"!.~ :::'7 gQ YI~

----- t!:)

~··

- 1----~--9--=---\S_-Jt_L_ ~.________It!_i!.=-'L.:....V\'-1-\ __ / _

C\Z--11\= ~"!):2\A ~1


Page 55 of 58

Gi 1hl

t

\-----------

~ I_, r-~~~~~---.~~~~~~~~-:;=~~~~-'--~~~--\--~~~

'--~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----"'-~~~~~----'"~~~~~~, t---------J

' 23:_ .;:\ I ("'\ ""'

-q z:i nb

3.'ll-L- r-o..c-2 d ~ ~ .. ~ g ~ · -~--· · e-"' ~111 -s1@'l'i)"' ~ -v,((i'\ 1 r n 1 ;{\ Q 2'1 ", ::> ~'

'-

qu \I\ 03 °' \CA\ VOl=i)

r-- t---

. c:


Page 56 of 58

L---------~----------1,-.

•


Page 57 of 58

C-PAC Meeting Minute: 13 December 2015

X\\[

D Q

. (\


Page 58 of 58

l

1--~~-~~M~,~~---=·'lf1~~.=--9~~~~~-'M4-A~~~~!f-~.-;;;;i~~1~11~~:--.t~4~~-~~,,~T-----;-k~.~~~l~~<~~,,,;r-~,,..-:--~~~q~1~-.--~ ~l

tht 6'1-j e~') c\ \ ~=Pr"'\ :> l~ 7\ , "l L\ l.f x, ~) 1'1 ?V>Y) q I "- Y) \..J) if o )~ i--~~~~~,~n~~)n\1~~'~@J"?t'~-~~ill-~~·~,aF.~~~~--~dJ..-~~4~u·~~~~~~ci~r=-1r-~~~~~~-~~

S<d5 z-tYJ\'°'11 .) rr 4-' r-m'fi1 rdt~<'IOJ6 9,if <'"') r("bci~ -:.i~

1~ ~~ <~ <-t C"l"ILl.dl IT .(···6'(\~)11 .>14-)

"h~'4 ?h"Y)"~ ~ ~~if 9 h:; er· 3\ \ ·~~~Jt 1-11 ~ 01-)) i-f? 1) >7 e1 sr ;._=1 }"'.6\ :U- ~ ~ e1 ' ~ i5" Y ':f c-; "'1l z;

=

FINAL-SWC-SEED-MTE_Report-24-11-2016

Documents

Transcript of FINAL-SWC-SEED-MTE_Report-24-11-2016