Government of Yemen (2002): Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper … · 2015-07-07 · 5.3.1 SWOT...
Transcript of Government of Yemen (2002): Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper … · 2015-07-07 · 5.3.1 SWOT...
Evaluation Report
of
tdh and BMZ
financed project
Walter Aschmoneit
Phnom Penh / Osnabrück, April 2014
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
2
Table of Contents
1 OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT ...................................................................................... 6
2 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Overall assessment ...................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Assessment by five classical evaluation criteria .......................................................... 7
2.2.1 Relevance ............................................................................................................. 7
2.2.2 Efficiency ............................................................................................................. 7
2.2.3 Effectiveness ........................................................................................................ 8
2.2.4 Impact and Sustainability ..................................................................................... 8
2.3 Assessment by component........................................................................................... 9
2.4 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 10
3 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 11
4 Framework and conditions of project implementation .................................................... 13
5 Five criteria for the evaluation ......................................................................................... 13
5.1 Relevance ................................................................................................................... 13
5.1.1 Needs of poor households .................................................................................. 13
5.1.2 Climate change ................................................................................................... 14
5.2 Efficiency ................................................................................................................... 14
5.2.1 The competency of the staff ............................................................................... 14
5.2.2 Budget by overhead and programme ................................................................. 16
5.2.3 Planning of the project ....................................................................................... 16
5.2.4 Timeliness of implantation of the activities ....................................................... 17
5.3 Effectiveness .............................................................................................................. 17
5.3.1 Component 1: Community Forest ...................................................................... 17
5.3.2 Component 2: Sanitation & Hygiene ................................................................. 20
5.3.3 Component 3: Livelihood (SHG) ....................................................................... 22
5.3.4 Component 4: Ecological child rights ................................................................ 25
5.3.1 SWOT analysis ................................................................................................... 28
5.4 Impact and Sustainability .......................................................................................... 29
5.4.1 Change of behaviour patterns ............................................................................. 29
5.4.2 Networking with other NGOs ............................................................................ 29
5.4.3 Anchoring in institutions .................................................................................... 29
6 Conclusions and recommendations .................................................................................. 31
6.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 31
6.1.1 Social strata and benefits .................................................................................... 31
6.1.2 Best Practices ..................................................................................................... 31
6.1.3 The overall assessment ....................................................................................... 32
6.1.4 Completing community forests .......................................................................... 32
6.2 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 32
7 ANNEX ............................................................................................................................ 34
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
3
7.1 Itinerary – ToR - Documentation .............................................................................. 35
7.1.1 Terms of Reference for the evaluation ............................................................... 35
7.1.1 References .......................................................................................................... 38
7.1.2 Itinerary .............................................................................................................. 40
7.1.3 List of interviewed persons ................................................................................ 41
7.2 Additional Budget Request for Community Forestry................................................ 42
7.2.1 Letter of Santi Sena Organization ...................................................................... 42
7.2.2 Budget Plan for using on Community Forest ..................................................... 42
7.3 Evaluation Tools ........................................................................................................ 44
7.3.1 Target Groups by communes ............................................................................. 44
7.3.2 Cooperation with other NGOs............................................................................ 45
7.3.3 SWOT ................................................................................................................. 45
7.3.4 Time table: Activities planned- actually implemented ...................................... 47
7.3.5 Budget by overhead / programme ...................................................................... 48
7.3.6 Staff table 2014 .................................................................................................. 53
7.4 Debriefing notes ........................................................................................................ 55
7.5 Relevant texts, tables and legal documents ............................................................... 67
7.5.1 Excerpts of Audit Report 2013 ........................................................................... 67
7.5.2 Criteria for selecting beneficiaries in the project ............................................... 68
Criteria concerning farmers ................................................................................... 68
Criteria for institutions (health centres, schools) ................................................... 71
7.5.3 SEA Project List ................................................................................................. 73
7.5.1 Map of Project Region ....................................................................................... 74
Graphs – Photos – Tables – Text Fields
Graph 1 Organizational Structure of Santi Sena Organization ................................................ 15
Graph 2 Budget Analysis ......................................................................................................... 16
Graph 3 Share of the poor in comparison ................................................................................ 24
Graph 4 SWOT Statements ...................................................................................................... 28
Graph 5 SWOT Statements clustered by topics ....................................................................... 28
Table 1 tdh Projects in Southeast Asia ..................................................................................... 11
Table 2 Component 1: Targets planned and achieved ............................................................. 17
Table 3 Community Forest: Villages and Area ........................................................................ 18
Table 4 Tree planting ............................................................................................................... 20
Table 5 Component 2: Targets planned and achieved ............................................................. 20
Table 6 Small Water Filters by Communes ............................................................................. 20
Table 7 Latrines by cCommunes and Poor Households .......................................................... 21
Table 8 Component 3: Targets planned and achieved ............................................................. 22
Table 9 SHG and the share of poor households ....................................................................... 23
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
4
Table 10 Project villages and the share of poor households .................................................... 24
Table 11 Share of the poor in comparison ............................................................................... 24
Table 12 Component 4: Targets planned and achieved ........................................................... 26
Table 13 Children’s Groups active in ecological child rights .................................................. 27
Table 1 tdh Projects in Southeast Asia ..................................................................................... 11
Table 2 Component 1: Targets planned and achieved ............................................................. 17
Table 3 Community Forest: Villages and Area ........................................................................ 18
Table 4 Tree planting ............................................................................................................... 20
Table 5 Component 2: Targets planned and achieved ............................................................. 20
Table 6 Small Water Filters by Communes ............................................................................. 20
Table 7 Latrines by cCommunes and Poor Households .......................................................... 21
Table 8 Component 3: Targets planned and achieved ............................................................. 22
Table 9 SHG and the share of poor households ....................................................................... 23
Table 10 Project villages and the share of poor households .................................................... 24
Table 11 Share of the poor in comparison ............................................................................... 24
Table 12 Component 4: Targets planned and achieved ........................................................... 26
Table 13 Children’s Groups active in ecological child rights .................................................. 27
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
5
Abbreviations
CARDI Cambodian Agricultural Research And Development Institute
CBO Community-based Organization
CCWC Commune Commitees Women and Children
CFM Community Forest Member
CFMC Community Forest Management Committee
CSFP Cambodia Saving Firewood Project
ECR Ecological Child Right
FA Forest Administration Division
FAC Forestry Administration Cantonment
FACK Forest Administration Cantonment Kampong Cham
FAS Forest Administration Sub-Division
FFS Farmer Field School
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HRD Human Resources Development
ICS Improved Cook Stove
IDE International Development Enterprise
IEC Information, Education and Communication
IPM Integrated Pest Management
LA Local Authorities
NBP National Bio-digester Program
NCDD National Committee for Sub-National Democratic Development
NGO Non Government Organization
PDA Department of Agriculture
PDRD Provincial Department of Rural Development
VDC Village Development Committees
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
6
1 OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT
Overview
1 Project No. Project Nr.: 2012.1571.4 (Bengo Nr: 4998)
2 Project title Strengthening of Adaptation Capacities of Peasants to Climate
Change to Ensure Sustainable Livelihood
3 Sponsoring
organization
Tdh / BMZ
4 Coordinating
organization
Tdh Cambodia
5 Implementing
organization
Santi Sena Organization - SSO
Wat Prey Chlak, Svay Rieng district and province
Tell: 044 66 66 403, 011 26 34 77, 016 64 03 53
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.santisena.org
6 Location Province Svay Rieng / Cambodia (66 villages and 10 communes
locating in Chantrea and Kampong Ro district of Svay Rieng
province)
7 Implementation
period
01.07.2012 - 30.06.2015 – 36 months
8 Total Budget 387.236,- EURO (467,999.00 USD)
9 Target groups Poor families in 66 villages in two districts of Svay Rieng Province
10 Project staff 11 staff (3 female)
11 Principal
orientation
Poverty reduction, climate change
12 Funded by: terre des hommes and BMZ
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
7
2 Executive Summary
2.1 Overall assessment
The project combines measures to reduce poverty of the rural population of 62 villages in two
districts of the province Svay Rieng with measures to mitigate climate change by afforestation
and energy saving alternative methods (kitchen stoves, biogas system). The performance of
the project can be rated between very good and excellent when looking more closely at the
four components ((i) Community Forestry, (ii) Sanitation & Hygiene, (iii) Livelihood and
Agriculture, (iv) Ecological Child Rights.
2.2 Assessment by five classical evaluation criteria
2.2.1 Relevance
The project is responding to the needs of poor households and to the negative effects of
climate change. The population in the Province Svay Rieng has a poverty rate of 45,9 % and
is ranking in midway among the 15 provinces in Cambodia. – In terms of climate change the
deforestation activities had a devastating effect on the forests of the province: Only 1.000
hectare- and mainly bush land and not even trees - have been left out of 15.000 hectare in
1985. The project has been planned to respond to this situation in a systematic and balanced
way (poverty reduction, climate change).
In a discussion of the evaluation team and Mr. Ros Sam An with the governor of Svay Rieng
Province, His Excellency Cheang Om, the governor appreciated the good achievments of
Santi Sena Organization and expressed the wish that more national and international NGO
may come to assist the province in poverty reduction and in mitigating the effects of climate
change.
2.2.2 Efficiency
The question whether the project is working in a cost-efficient way is assessed by discussing
the competency of the staff, an analysis of the budget and the timeliness in implementing the
activities. The competency of the 11 staff is very high. The staff is mixed concerning age and
experience ranging from 22 year old staff to 57 year old leader. The staff had relevant
trainings on result based management and monitoring. Further trainings are needed and also
wished by the staff.
When looking at the budget with the view which budget item can be listed under “overhead”
and which under “program” the result is that 14 % only is spent for the overhead – an
excellent proportion. – In terms of implementing the activities as planned, the project has
been within the planned framework with the exception of establishing the community forests
and the organizing of children in “ecological child rights groups” and their training. In both
cases the delays are due to external factors: The Cambodian Government has changed the
procedures to establish community forests from 8 to 11 steps; and the late project approval
has also delayed the organization and training of the children.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
8
2.2.3 Effectiveness
Whether the project has met the immediate needs of the target groups is analysed (a) by
comparing the planned targets (mid-term values) with the actual achieved targets and (b) by
the self-assessment of the staff in a SWOT exercise
Planned targets and achieved at mid-term: The activities of all four components have been
listed by the project staff in 37 targets of which 28 have been reached (11 targets have been
reached even by the project end values; 5 targets have been over-fulfilled and 13 targets have
been met for the mid-term values). Eight targets have been met only partially (concerning the
mid-term values). The staff however is confident that by project end all targets can be
achieved. In most cases external factors (Forestry Department has changed personnel) are the
cause of the delay, in other cases the late start of the project is the cause.
C1 There are about 8,000 people (40% women) from 12 villages living around the community
forests benefit from the forests.
C2 There are 22,000 people (12,000 women) and 5,500 children (3,000 female) in poor
households have access to sanitation and hygiene and have now a better primary health status.
C3 There are 680 very poor families who are organized in Self Help Groups and have
concrete and direct benefit in the saving and loan schemes and 700 families have improved
their living conditions by practising integrated agriculture.
C4 Although the activities with children started later than planned and therefor the target
achieved at midterm is just about 18 % (700 actual, 3.500 target by mid-term, 7.000 by the
end of the project) the staff of the project is confident to achieve the target by project end.
SWOT self-assessment:
The 51 written statements show that the staff has a balanced view on the positive (25
statements) and critical aspects (26 statements) of the project. Concerning the topics
“community” and “local government” 44 statements have been expressed and only 5 about
themselves (staff), one about NGOs and one about donors. The self-assessment of the project
staff is more or less confirming the assessment of the evaluation team. It is to the credit of the
staff that they are more critical than the evaluators.
2.2.4 Impact and Sustainability
The long term benefits for the target groups (impact) as well as the continuation of project
activities after the end of financing can be assessed by looking at (i) the change of behaviour
patterns particularly of the natural leaders, (ii) networking with other organizations and (iii)
anchoring the activities in the agenda of institutions.
Concerning the change of behaviour the training of natural leaders in various leading
positions is the best contribution to the sustainability of the project. Santi Sena Organization
has trained children in leading positions in the Child Rights Groups, women in positions of
chairwomen, cashiers and secretaries of the Self Help Groups and men and women in leading
positions of the Community Forest management Committees. The project is encouraged to
intensify the training of these natural leaders – the backbone of the project!
Santi Sena is networking on the provincial and national level with six other NGOs.
The close cooperation with the provincial, district and local (commune and village) level is
presently a valuable asset of the project, particularly the cooperation with the Provincial
Department of Forestry and the Department of Agriculture has resulted in joint actions within
the project area and the extension of these actions into other districts where the project is not
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
9
active. The close cooperation is overwhelmingly positive – the other side however is that a
change in policies and personnel can affect negatively the project.
2.3 Assessment by component
C1: Establishment of management systems for the sustainable conservation of three
communal forests and for natural resources protection and use of the community forest by the
communities – mainly the poor households...
From the nine targets differentiated in this component 1 seven have been achieved either the
planned quantity for mid-term (3 “yes”), or more than planned for mid-term (1 “over”), or
even the target planned for project end (3 “all”); two targets have not been reached concerning
the community forests.
The change in government policies to establish community forests has been announced after
the project has started; the new stipulations making an inventory of the forests, delimiting the
plots by GPS could not be met by the budget planned before these changes. An additional
budget is needed and the request of Santi Sena Organization for an additional amount of US
$ 9.605,00 has the full support of the evaluation team.
Achieved targets: About 8,073 people (40% women) from 12 villages who are living around
the community forests are direct beneficiaries and at least 7,000 people are indirect
beneficiaries through learning and sharing information.
C2: Adults and children have access to good drinking water, have improved, hygiene, and
sanitary facilities and therefore suffer less from diarrhoea and other diseases.
From the seven targets differentiated in this component 2 five have been achieved either in
the planned quantity for mid-term (2 “yes”), or even the target planned for project end (3
“all”); two targets have not been reached concerning the community forests (see below). The
two targets not reached by midterm concern the water user groups and the water wells. The
staff is confident to catch up and reach the targets by project end
Achieved targets: About 22,307 people (12,604 women) and 5,621 children (2,930 female)
who have been living in conditions without access to sanitation and hygiene are the direct
beneficiaries and have improved their primary health status.
C3: Agricultural production is diversified in an environmentally friendly manner and self-help
groups have been established.
From the eleven targets differentiated in this component 3 eight have been achieved either the
planned quantity for mid-term (5 “yes”), or more than planned for mid-term (2 “over”); three
targets have been reached only partially concerning the SHGs, integrated agricultural
production and fish production.
Achieved targets: About 684 very poor families are direct beneficiaries and have increased
their income; abbot 700 families are indirect beneficiaries through extension of good practice
in agriculture productions.
C4: Children and monks are active as multipliers for ecological rights of children and are
committed in their schools and communities to promote integrated agriculture and the
conservation of natural resources.
From the ten targets differentiated in this component 4 nine have been achieved either the
planned quantity for mid-term (3 “yes”), or more than planned for mid-term (1 “over”), or
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
10
even the target planned for project end (5 “all”); one target has been reached only partially
(18 %) concerning the training of children in ecological rights.
Achieved targets: From the targeted 7,830 primary school children (3.412 female) and 16,200
adults (40% girl and women) only about 700 children have been reached at mid-term which is
about 18 % calculated on the bases for the mid-term value being half (about 3.800 children)
2.4 Recommendations
Staff: - One leader should be working entirely (100 %) for this project only; this persons
should also be competent in processing data with Excel and reporting in English language.
The gender balance should also be improved since most of the target groups are women and
children.
- Further trainings of the staff on result based management, processing data with Excel,
analysis of the data and reporting is recommended.
Recommendations for all components:
- Continue to pay attention to the different social groups: Very poor and poor households,
other low income households, middle income and well off households; focus on the very poor
and poor without excluding other households wishing to participate and active for the
community.
- Continue to promote the natural leaders in all activities; they are the main actors in the
project and they are the personalities who will continue the activities after the financing
period has come to a close.
C1 (Component 1): - To check the users of the community forest (as registered in the CF
Register Book) with the list of ID Poor I and II available at the Commune office. The
assumption of the Management Committee can thus be verified that the vast majority of CF
users are poor households.
- To describe the type of trees in terms of use in environmental protection and benefit for the
people and prioritize the type of trees most useful.
- To finalize the establishment of the three community forests on the basis of the new
government policy (11 step procedure) with an additional budget.
C2: - To increase the share of the poor (concerning small water filters and latrines) to about
80 % (ID Poor I to 40 %).
C3: - For emergency cases and funeral ceremonies the activities of the SHG can be listed in
table format. The item “sharing experiences” could be reported by describing examples.
- To promote the natural leaders in the SHG. There are always five persons with functions in
the SHG (president, vice-president, cashier, two book keepers) mostly chosen because they
are respected by the fellow villagers for their technical competency and their sense of the
community. It is an investment in the future, a guarantee of sustainability to promote these
natural leaders by training workshops, exchange and exposure visits. To keep track of these
natural leaders through a database would be a further opportunity.
C4: To emphasize more quality than quantity: This means to promote the natural leaders, the
peer-educators among the school children in special training workshops, in exchanges
between different schools and in exposure trips. These natural leaders will ensure that the
activities begun in the project period will continue beyond project end.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
11
3 Introduction
Evaluation team: The evaluation team was composed of Dr. Walter Aschmoneit (team
leader) and Mr. Suon Sokheng (national expert).
Acknowledgments
The evaluation team acknowledges the assistance and cooperation of Ms. Christiane Urban
(tdh Germany), Mr. Bert Cacayan (tdh Germany South East Asia Coordinator), Mr. Tou
Vantha (tdh Germany Cambodia Country Coordinator) Mr. Ros Sam An (Santi Sena
Organization, Project Director) and his valuable team: All have been very cooperative and
helpful.
Context of tdh projects
The German NGO terre des hommes is currently financing 53
projects in Southeast Asia, nine of which in Cambodia. The project
evaluated is the second largest in Cambodia according to the
volume. The regional coordinator Mr. Bert Cacayan is in charge of
all tdh projects in Southeast Asia. And the country coordinator Mr.
Tou Vantha is responsible for the nine projects in Cambodia.
Table 1 tdh Projects in Southeast Asia
Project structure
Under the project objective “Poor families from 66 villages in the
districts of Chantrea and Kompong Ro have improved their livelihood through an
environmentally oriented and resource conserving agriculture, and through improved
measures of hygiene, and are engaged, together with their children, the main actors for
change in the community, to strengthen the ecological rights of children” there are four
components: (i) Community Forestry and protection of natural resources, (ii) Livelihood and
health of children and adults, (iii) Agricultural production in an environmentally friendly
manner and self-help groups , (iv) Ecological rights of children.
Project area and population
The project is active in 66 villages of 10 Communes and two Districts (Srok Kampong Ro
and Srok Chantrea) of
Svay Rieng province.
These villages have a
population of which
59.934 persons in 13.503
households of which 647
(or 5 %) are in the
category “very poor (ID
card Poor I) and 1.011
households (or 7 %) are
“poor” (ID Card Poor II).
There are three different
areas where community
forests are established.
Photo 1 Map of Project
area
tdh projects SEA
Southeast Asia Region 3 Cambodia 9 Indonesia 2 Laos 2 Myanmar 8 Philippines 14 Thailand 5 Vietnam 10 TOTAL 53
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
12
Text Field 1 Sub-targets of project proposal
Reason and objective of the evaluation
The evaluation is timed at mid-term of the project period: “It is a formative and creative
evaluation which intends to initiate participatory processes of learning.” (ToR). The
evaluation takes the five classical criteria (relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and
sustainability) as guidelines.
Evaluation Mission and Methodology
The evaluation has been carried out in the time between March 27th
and April 7th
2014. The
methods used in the evaluation were a SWOT exercise of the NGO staff, focus group
discussion with Self-Help-Groups, interviews with leading personnel in village, and commune
administrations, topical discussions with experts of provincial departments (agriculture,
forestry, planning) and field visits one day for each of the four components. All target groups
and intermediary persons participated in a lively way when discussing the question “did the
poor villagers have a sustainable benefit from the project?”
The evaluation team is quite aware of the limitations when assessing 18 months of project
implementation in the course of ten days only.
Structure of the report
The report follows the structure as proposed in the ToR. A brief overview with the essential
data of the project is followed by the executive summary and remarks on the framework
conditions. The main body of the report is then structured by the five classical criteria for an
evaluation: Relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. A chapter on
conclusions and recommendations is the last chapter of the report. The annex lists the
information like ToR, itinerary, references. A number of tables are reproduced which are the
basis of the analyses in the report.
Sub Target 1
• Management systems for the sustainable conservation of communalforests and for natural resources protection are in use
- Activities 1: Promotion of community forests, the sustainable use of natural resources, and the efficient use of energy in 1,500
families o Community forest resource management:
o Planting campaigns:
o Reconstruction of ponds o Firewood saving stoves
o Energy from biogas plants:
Sub Target 2
• Adults and children have less diarrhea because of improved access to drinking water, hygiene, and sanitary facilities.
- Activities 2: Improving access to water, sanitation and hygiene for 2,000 families
o Installation of water pumps and filter systems o Management of water
o Assistance by providing toilets
Sub Target 3
Agricultural production is diversified in an environmentally friendly manner and self-help groups have been established.
• Activities 3: Improvement and diversification of agricultural production and family income for 1000 very poor families
o Organization of savings self-help groups o Training program for integrated agriculture
Sub-Target 4
Children and monks are active as multipliers for ecological rights of children and are committed in their schools and communities to promote integrated agriculture and the conservation of natural resources.
• Activities 4: Training of Buddhist monks and children, so that they become able to promote the protection of biodiversity and to
take part in community development and awareness raising about the environmental rights of children. o Capacity building on biodiversity and on the ecological rights of children
o Production of public campaign materials -
o Learning center for biodiversity
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
13
4 Framework and conditions of project implementation
The implementing organization is closely cooperating with provincial authorities. These good
relations are an important and precious asset of the project. The other side however is also a
certain dependency on the working style and schedules of the cooperating provincial
departments. A change in the policy (adding three steps to the establishment of Community
Forests) and a change in government personnel (two competent experts in the forestry
department have been replaced by two young and in-experienced persons) have had a
negative impact on the project. These negative effects can be compensated only by an
additional budget (see below).
5 Five criteria for the evaluation
5.1 Relevance
Does the project respond to the needs of the target group?
Concerning poverty rate in the
province Svay Rieng is slightly
higher than the national average in
Cambodia: The survey in 2004
(the latest one available on the
website of the Ministry of
Planniong) showed a poverty rate
of 35,9 %.
5.1.1 Needs of poor households
The project takes care also of the immediate needs of the target groups.
• The project contributes in numerous ways to improve the livelihood and the health of
the villagers in the 66 target villages.
• In cases where the poorest do benefit from the project (collecting mushrooms, firewood
from the Community Forests) the data are not monitored. If monitored the data would
show that most of the people benefitting from the community forests are very poor
households.
The targeting of the poor (understood in the Cambodian context as those households with ID
Poor I and II) is generally quite good but it can still be improved. A number of measures
(biogas system: too expensive for poor families; micro-finance: the poor can join but some
have difficulties to pay the monthly fee).
Province Poverty headcount index (%)
Kompong Speu 57,22
Kompong Thorn 52,40
Siem Reap 51,84
Other provinces1 46,11
Kompong Chhnang/Pursat 39,57
Prey Veng 37,20
Banteay Meanchey 37,15
Kompong Cham 37,04
Svay Rieng 35,93
Cambodia 35,13
Battambang 33,69
Kampot 29,96
Takeo 27,71
Sihanoukville/Kep/Koh Kong 23,18
Kandal 22,24
Phnom Penh 4,60
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
14
Water filters (small 500 and big 10) and latrines have contributed to improve the healthof the
villagers.
Should the poor be allowed to get loan from MFI for getting Biogas system installation?
5.1.2 Climate change
The project is designed to contribute in a long-term way to positive climate change
In 1985 there were 10.000 ha forests in Svay Rieng – now just 1.000 ha –mainly bushland –
are left. In the aspect of climate change, the effort to shoulder one fifth of the whole
provincial afforestation is remarkable and excellent.
5.2 Efficiency
The question whether the project is working in a cost-efficient way will be approached by
discussing the competency of the staff, an analysis of the budget and the timeliness in
implementing the activities.
5.2.1 The competency of the staff
The team of nine (plus 2 financial staff only in the office) persons can be described as very
committed and also competent. The team is mixed with older and experienced and younger
persons. The relations of the staff with the villagers are marked by trust and friendship.
Some aspects need attention:
- The gender balance can be improved (3 female staff and 8 male staff). Of the female staff
only one person is in the field.
- The main responsible leader of the project should be 100 % assigned only to this project.
- The project staff has expressed training needs in monitoring by results, reporting and in
technical fields.
The project has 11 staff of which three are female. Two female staff are in charge of financial
matters at 30 % of their working time and only one is field staff. The four leading
personalities in the project are devoting between 18 % and 30 % to this project.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
15
Graph 1 Organizational Structure of Santi Sena Organization
Recommendation: One leader should be working entirely (100 %) for this project only; this
persons should also be competent in processing data with Excel and reporting in English
language. The gender balance should also be improved since most of the target groups are
women and children. - The staff is mixed concerning age and experience ranging from 22
year old staff to 57 year old leader.
Six of the staff (mainly
the leaders) have been
with the project since the
beginning (18 months);
on the average the 11
staff were 13 months
active in the project.
Concerning training all
participated in training
course ranging between 3
and 13 days mainly on
the topics Result Based
Management (7 staff), on
Leadership and
Development Program (2)
and on Governance and
Leadership. The staff
wishes to be further trained mainly on monitoring and follow-up.
Photo 2 Santi Sena Staff at SWOT exercice
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
16
5.2.2 Budget by overhead and programme
The share of the budget concerning OVERHEAD is around 15-20 % and the share concerning
PROGRAMME between 80 and 85 %,
If we look at the budget items under the angle of OVERHEAD and PROGRAMME (see
Annex in detail) we find that about 14 % are
overhead and 86 % are programme. A range
between 10 % to 20 % would be acceptable for any
NGO project. No overhead or a very low
percentage of overhead can only be possible when
other funding sources are used to finance the
administrative personnel and costs.
Graph 2 Budget Analysis
The ratio of 14 % for overhead costs is excellent.
5.2.3 Planning of the project
The planning of the project has been done overall well done. There are only a few remarks
which should be considered:
(a) The formulation of the project objective starts with “Poor families from 66 villages in the
districts of Chantrea and Kompong Ro…” this is quite an apodictic way. “Poor families” are
well identified in Cambodia as those households classified to belong either to the “very poor,
ID 1” or the “poor ID 2”. A more flexible formulation would be “Low income families in the
target area (with focus on poor households”…As a community development project it
includes also rightfully non-poor households.
Text Field 2 Activities behind schedule
(b) When looking at the budget items and the
various social groups benefitting of a measure
we can see that the installing biogas systems has
been budgeted with an amount of € 8.298,-
whereas Self Help Groups are budgeted with €
3.688,-. Biogas systems can only be run when a
daily input of dung of five buffaloes is
guaranteed – clearly a well-off family only (not a very poor, or a poor, or a middle-income
farming household) can afford it. On the other hand, SHG which have a membership of 46,7 %
poor households (ID 1 and ID2) – a very good achievement of the project! - have less than
have of amount spent for well-off families. The proportions of a budget should be seen very
precisely which social group is benefitting. With an 18-month experience of the project the
need is felt to have an enhanced training of the natural leaders of the SHGs – however the
financial means are quite limited.
Activities 1
o Promotion of community forests
Activities 4
o Capacity building / training of multipliers
for monks on ecological children's rights
o Technical exchange among children's
groups
o Awareness raising, peer-to-peer education,
o organization of children's groups on
ecological rights of children
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
17
5.2.4 Timeliness of implantation of the activities
The project has implemented most of the activities according to the plan as listed in the
project proposal. Concerning the establishment of community forests SSO is lacking behind
schedule for two reasons: (i) The project has gone through the eight steps of the procedure;
however after the beginning of the project the government changed the procedures to
establish a community forest and added 3 more steps. (ii) The personnel in the forestry
department changed: Two experienced experts were replaced by two young inexperienced
persons who have not been trained in GPS methodology in clearly setting the limits of the
community forests. To complete this activity further efforts must be made and the change in
procedures requires additional funds.
Under Activities 4 the project started the measures related to school children two months late
– the reason being that the project was approved later than anticipated.
In both cases the delays cannot be attributed to the SSO but to external actors.
5.3 Effectiveness
Has the target group had an immediate benefit from the project?
The activities of all four components have been listed by the project staff in 37 targets of
which 28 have been reached (11 targets have been reached even by the project end values; 5
targets have been over-fulfilled and 13 targets have been met for the mid-term values). Eight
targets have been met only partially (concerning the mid-term values). The staff however is
confident that by project end all targets can be achieved. In most cases external factors
(Forestry Department has changed personnel) are the cause of the delay, in other cases the late
start of the project is the cause.
5.3.1 Component 1: Community Forest
Achieved targets: About 8,073 people (40% women) from 12 villages who are living around
the community forests are direct beneficiaries and at least 7,000 people are indirect
beneficiaries through learning and sharing information.
COMPONENT 1 Community Forestry
# Activity Target for
project end
Achieved at mid-
term
Assess
1 Provincial Project Orientation Workshop: 2 meeting Finished 100% yes
2 Conduct Physical Boundaries Demarcation of Community Forests 100 poles all
3 Develop Community Forest Management Plans of Prey Chamkar
Koki and Prey Thnaut
3 meetings Conducted 2
meetings
over
4 Develop Wedding Park and Agro-Forestry System 1 Place Finished 100% all
5 Rehabilitate Natural Ponds for Fish Conservation 4 ponds Finished 100% all
6 Organize Quarterly Meeting among Executive Committees of
Community Forests
12 meeting Conducted 6
meeting
yes
7 Building Capacity among Community Forest Management
Committees and its members
6 training Conducted 2
Trainings
partial
8 Launching of Community and Public Tree Planting Campaign: 60.000 trees Planted 27.795
treesn (50 %)
yes
9 Management Plans in Community Forestry incomplete in 11 steps
because of budget restraints (short of 6.000 $) [
3 Management
Plans in CF
8 steps achieved. 11
not yet.
partial
Table 2 Component 1: Targets planned and achieved
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
18
From the nine targets differentiated in this
component 1 seven have been achieved
either the planned quantity for mid-term (3
“yes”), or more than planned for mid-term (1
“over”), or even the target planned for
project end (3 “all”); two targets have not
been reached concerning the community
forests (see below).
Table 3 Community Forest: Villages and
Area
SSO undertakes in this project the
afforestation of 440 ha land concerning over
8.000 persons in three communes and 12
villages. The area is 1/5 of 2.500 ha currently being planted in Svay Rieng Province. If adding
other SSO projects the total area is 570 ha. In a province where only 1000 old forest areas
(and mainly bush type) remain this is an excellent achievement by Santi Sena Organization.
The special features of this component are:
• Plantation of 27.000 trees: Beng, Neang Nuon, Koki, Akasia, Chheu Teal, etc.
• Used standard Community Forest (CF) boundary demarcations which the other
NGO/project in Svay Rieng don’t have.
• Twice a month the Management Committee members are patrolling the Community
Forest,
• 8.000 people in 12 villages can benefit from the 3 CF.
– Collecting mushrooms (Example: 1 million Riel or € 180 in 2013 for one family)
– Non-timber products (for brooms)
– Firewood
– Medicinal herbs, leaves, roots and barks
• The Management Committee interviewed holds the view that these people are mostly
poor.
• The register books of the CF Management Committees notes names, quality and
quantity collected and the date.
Communes and villages Total persons Area (ha)
Cham Kar Kounkoki 3.212 404,0
Ang Kduoch 699
Ang Sala 397
Pnagn 758
Prey Padav 644
Trapang Plong 714
Chres 2.170 21,4
Duon Nouy 755
Trapang Dear Lure 686
Trapang Run 729
Prey Paav 2.691 14,2
Prey Paav 668
Prey Pniet 824
Prey Ta Nhory 690
Traok 509
TOTAL 8.073 440
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
19
Recommendation:
- To check the users of the community forest (as registered in the CF Register Book) with the
list of ID Poor I and II available at the Commune office. The assumption of the Management
Committee can thus be verified that the vast majority of CF users are poor households.
- To describe the type of trees in terms of use in environmental protection and benefit for the
people and prioritize the type of trees most useful.
Photo 3 Chart of biogas installation (poster of Dep. of Agriculture)
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
20
Table 4 Tree planting
Data: Participant to Plant trees in community forest and communities from July 2012 to
December 2013
# Forest Monks People Students Total #Trees Area(ha)
1 Prey koki forest 4 300 513 817 25.000 29
2 Prey Phaa' forest 4 46 43 93 1.095 1,2
3 Mesork Nhork primary school - 8 56 64 1.250 1,2
Total 8 354 612 974 27.345 31,4
5.3.2 Component 2: Sanitation & Hygiene
Achieved targets: About 22,307 people (12,604 women) and 5,621 children (2,930 female)
who have been living in conditions without access to sanitation and hygiene are the direct
beneficiaries and have improved their primary health status.
COMPONEN 2 Sanitation & Hygiene 0 0
# Activity Target for
project end
Achieved at
mid-term
Assess
10 Demonstrate and Support Improved Cook Stove (ICS) 1500 ICS Provided 750 ICS yes
11 Support Family-based Bio-digester Development 90 Bio digeter 45 Bio digeter yes
12 Formulate Water User Group and Set-up Policy 15 Groups Conductet 5
group
partial
13 Contract with private business to drill Afrediv and simple pump-
wells
105 water wells Built 40 water
well
partial
14 Support Ceramic Water Purifier (CWP) 1500 CWP Finished 500 partial
15 Support Water Filters to School and Commune Health Centers 10 WF Finished 100% all
16 Provide a set of latrine equipments including sewage pipe, toilet
bowl and plastic pipe to interested families
200 latrines Provided 100
latrines
all
Table 5 Component 2: Targets planned and achieved
From the seven targets differentiated in this component four have been achieved either in the
planned quantity for mid-term (2 “yes”), or even the target planned for project end (2 “all”);
two targets have not been reached concerning the community forests (see below). The three
targets not reached by midterm concern the ceramic water purifiers, the water user groups and
the water wells. The staff is confident to catch up and reach the targets by project end.
Example: Small water filter. 500 small water filters have been installed benefitting as many
families. About 45 % of the beneficiaries belong to the two poor household groups and
around 15,6 % of the
small water filters went to
the category ID Poor 1).
Table 6 Small Water
Filters by Communes
Clean water is available
all the time for the
patients and the students.
Here mainly members of
Commune Small Water Filter Poor I Poor II Total Poor
Chantrea 128 15 27 42
Chres 103 19 39 58
Reachmun Thy 43 10 15 25
Samley 54 9 17 26
Samrong 66 14 25 39
Toul Sdey 106 11 24 35
Total 500 78 147 225
In Percentage 15,6 29,4 45,0
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
21
poor families benefit since they use mainly water at home from sources which are not clean.
Photo 4 Well in Phum Check, Khum Samrong
The project facilitated the
installation of 100 latrines for
the same number of
households of which 66 were
poor (25 very poor ID I and
41 poor ID II).
Table 7 Latrines by
cCommunes and Poor
Households
Ten big water filters have
been installed in schools (8) and health centres (2) in two districts, nine communes covering
41 villages with a population of 4.888 households or a population of 21.260 persons (of which
female 11.000); the share of the poor benefitting from these big water filters is about 25 %.
When checking with the “criteria for selection” it seems not only desirable but also possible
to increase the share of the poor among the beneficiaries from 45 % concerning small water
filters or 66 % concerning latrines. Overall in this component the achievement of the
project is very good.
District / Commune # Latrines Poor I+II Poor I Poor II
Chantrea 72 47 19 28
Chantrea 35 21 10 11
Chres 13 10 3 7
MeSorthngork 10 7 3 4
Preykoki 14 9 3 6
Kompong Ro 28 19 6 13
Chres 6 3 1 2
Ksetre 6 5 1 4
MeSorthngork 1 1 0 1
Samlei 15 10 4 6
TOTAL 100 66 25 41
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
22
Recommendation: To increase the share of the poor (concerning small water filters and
latrines) to about 80 % (ID Poor I to 40 %).
5.3.3 Component 3: Livelihood (SHG)
Achieved targets: About 684 very poor families are direct beneficiaries and have increased
their income; about 700 families are indirect beneficiaries through extension of good practice
in agriculture productions.
COMPONEN 3 AGRICULTURE & SHGs 0 0
# Activity Target for project
end
Achieved at mid-term Assess
17 Facilitate the formation of self-help groups 30 SHG Formulated 15 groups yes
18 Grant revolving fund to SHG ($100 per SHG) 30 SHG Granted 15SHG all
19 Provide technical assistance on sustainable integrated
agriculture production
30 trainings conducted 10 trainings partial
20 Vegetable production 300 families Support 150 families yes
21 Cash crop production 200 families Support 100 families yes
22 Rice Cultivation 300 families Support 184 families over
23 Fish production 200 families Support 80 families partial
24 Poultry production: 300 families Support 170 families over
25 Provide Training on Integrated Pest Management and
Farmer Field School
4 FFS Conducted 2 FFS yes
26 Provide Training on Pesticide Reduction and Organic
Fertilizer Production
15 trainings Conducted 8 trainings over
27 Support farmers produce compost fertilizer 450 Families Support 240 families yes
Table 8 Component 3: Targets planned and achieved
From the eleven targets differentiated in this component 8 eight have been achieved either the
planned quantity for mid-term (5 “yes”), or more than planned for mid-term (2 “over”) or
reached the end-project term-target (1 “all”); three targets have been reached only partially
concerning the SHGs, integrated agricultural production and fish production.
Self Help Groups
The project has facilitated the establishment of 15 SHGs involving 591 families (or 2.850
persons) from two districts, seven communes and 15 villages with a total of 32.637.000 Riel
savings or 8.159,25 USD (4.000 Riel = 1 US $). On the average a SHG has about 40 members
ranging from 25 to 56
The percentage of the poor among the SHG members is on average 46,7 % - ranging from
24,4 % to 68 %. If we consider the very poor only (ID Poor I) about 14 % of the SHG
members fall into this group in a range from 8,3 % at the lowest share to 25,9 %.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
23
Text Field 3 Tape of data on ID cards for poor
households
If we compare the situation in the SHGs
with the situation in Svay Rieng province
the percentage of poor households to the
total population is 21 % (ID Poor I: 8,2 %
and ID Poor II: 12,8 %).
Photo 5 ID Card Poor I of Ms. Mom Phorn
in Khum Samrong
And in the 66 project villages 13 % belong
to the 2 poor categories. The share of the
poor range between 5 % and 36 % in the
project villages.
This is a very good achievement.
Recommendation: Although the share of the
poor in the SHG is remarkably good it can
still be increased to 60 % - as proposed by
the project leaders themselves in the
debriefing discussion.
Table 9 SHG and the share of poor households
Village with SHG House
holds
HH
Poor1
HH
Poor2
Total
Poor1&2
%
Poor1+2
Loan
Total
Deikrahorm 25 4 13 17 68,0 1.713.700
Trapeang Run 27 7 10 17 63,0 3.471.700
Prey Char 36 4 18 22 61,1 1.370.200
Prey Ph'av 45 5 20 25 55,6 1.417.000
Trapeang Dieleu 36 8 12 20 55,6 2.175.000
Prey Tanhoy 45 4 20 24 53,3 3.219.000
Troak 36 7 12 19 52,8 1.025.000
Phnum Srov 27 4 10 14 51,9 1.486.900
Charmkar Live 30 4 11 15 50,0 5.591.200
Sen Tor 54 7 20 27 50,0 1.445.000
Trapeang Smarch 48 4 15 19 39,6 1.583.500
Prey Sangker 36 3 10 13 36,1 2.318.300
Dounnoy 56 9 11 20 35,7 3.494.100
Ruesei Orm 45 5 8 13 28,9 807.200
Trapeang Chhouk 45 4 7 11 24,4 1.519.200
TOTAL 591 79 197 276 46,7 32.637.000
Maximum 56 9 20 27 68,0 5.591.200
Minimum 25 3 7 11 24,4 807.200
Average 39,4 5,3 13,1 18,4 48,4 2.175.800
The ID Card states the data: code
number. province, district, commune,
village, head of household, sex, date of
birth, date of issuing the card, category I
(very poor) or II (poor), signature of
commune leader.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
24
The benefit of the SHGs for its members are seen first of all in the saving and credit activities
and then in the social support.
The total capital of the SHG in 2013 was 32.637.000 Riel saved by 591 people or
55,223 Riel per member.
All the money is circulating and is used as loans for agricultural production (seeds,
fertilizer, breed).
Individual example: Loan for piglets bought for 200.000 and sold for 800.000
Table 10 Project villages and the share of poor households
No of households
Poor I Hh.
Poor II Hh.
Poor I+II
% Poor I
% Poor II
% Poor I+II
Total of 62 villages
13.503 647 1011 1658 4,8 7,5 12,3
Max 654,0 34,0 38,0 72,0 15,8 19,7 35,5
Min 75,0 2,0 3,0 5,0 1,7 2,1 5,0
Average 217,8 10,4 16,3 26,7 5,2 8,1 13,3
Comparison: Villages and SHG
If we compare the share
of the poor in the 15
Self-help Groups, the 66
project villages and the
average of the whole
province of Svay Rieng we can see that the project villages are more disadvantaged than the
average of the province:
Table 11 Share of the poor
in comparison
Graph 3 Share of the poor
in comparison
The share of the poor in
both categories (ID Poor I
and II) is higher. Looking
at the composition of the
SHG we can see that the
project has put a strong
emphasis to include a
higher share of the poor:
13,4 % are in category ID
Poor I and 33,3 % in category ID Poor II – total of 46,7 % poor in the SHG. This is an
excellent achievement.
% Poor I % Poor II % Poor I+II
Svay Rieng Province 8,2 12,8 21,0
62 Project Villages (average) 10,4 16,3 26,7
15 SHGs (average) 13,4 33,3 46,7
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
25
After discussion during the debriefing session in Svay Rieng the team opted for the target of
60 % (up from 46,7 %).
In the second semester of 2913 the project supported 115 families (562 persons of which 283
female) with poultry. About 56 families belonged to the categories ID Poor 1 and 2 (or 49 %)
and 59 to families just above the poverty line.
In the second semester of 2013 the project supported 750 families (or 3.365 persons of which
1.483 female) in 24 villages, six communes and two districts with 7.500 fruit trees. The share
of the poor is 55,5 % (or 417 poor families of which 105 ID Poor I). The share of the poor in
the 24 villages varied from a low of 22,2 % to a maximum of 95,7 %.
Benefits of the SHGs in terms of social support
Social support is seen mainly in
o Emergency cases
o Funeral ceremonies
o Sharing experience
When discussing these social aspects with the women of the SHG they value this dimension
very much and emphasize that this is very important. The project staff has facilitated these
social activities in a remarkable way. In terms of monitoring and reporting the social aspects
have not been grasped as well as the economic activities of the SHG.
Recommendation:
- For (1) emergency cases and (ii) funeral ceremonies the activities of the SHG can be listed
in table format. The (iii) item “sharing experiences” could be reported by describing examples.
- To promote the natural leaders in the SHG. There are always five persons with functions in
the SHG (president, vice-president, cashier, two book keepers) mostly chosen because they
are respected by the fellow villagers for their technical competency and their sense of the
community. It is an investment in the future, a guarantee of sustainability to promote these
natural leaders by training workshops, exchange and exposure visits. To keep track of these
natural leaders through a database would be a further opportunity.
5.3.4 Component 4: Ecological child rights
Achieved targets: From the targeted 7,830 primary school children (3412 female) and 16,200
adults (40% girl and women) only about 700 children have been reached at mid-term.
# Activity Target for project
end
Achieved at mid-term Assess
28 Training for Buddhist monk-trainers and community
awareness raising on bio-diversity and ecological child
right:
2 trainings Finished 100% all
29 Monk trainer conduct disseminate on ECR to
schoolchildren
540 times Conducted 270 times yes
30 Quarterly Technical and Reflection Meeting 12 meetings Conducted 6 meetings yes
31 Develop Information, Communication and Education
Materials suchas T-thirts, poster and leaftets
1000 T-shirts, 5000
Posters and 5000
leaflets
Finished 100% all
32 Formulation for Community-based Ecological Child
Right Working Group
4 groups Finished 100% all
33 Training for Community-based Ecological Child Right 2 trainings Finished 100% all
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
26
Working Group:
34 Conduct Semester Meeting of Community-based
Ecological Child Right Working Group:
24 meeting Conducted 12 meeting yes
35 Construction of Community-based Bio-diversity
Resource Center
1 building Finished 100% all
36 Training of children in ecological child rights 7.000 Children Actually reached in
2013: 700 children
Partial
18 %
37 15 monk trainer each children 20.000 Children Actually achieved: 60
% (12.000 children)
over
Table 12 Component 4: Targets planned and achieved
From the ten targets differentiated in this component 4 nine have been achieved either the
planned quantity for mid-term (3 “yes”), or more than planned for mid-term (1 “over”), or
even the target planned for
project end (5 “all”); one
target has been reached only
partially (18 %) concerning
the training of children in
ecological rights.
The reason of this quite
substantial deviation from the
target at mid-term (around
3.500 children) is the late start
of the project in the schools.
About 20,000 people will be
the indirect beneficiaries
through knowledge sharing
on ecological child rights
through training sessions with
monk trainers. At mod-term
about 12.000 (60 %) have
been reached.
Photo 6 Monks protecting
trees (painting)
• Monks and peer children
are active trainers on the
topics
o Child rights
o Ecology
o Biodiversity
• All children planted 3-4 trees each.
• In four schools about 700 children (300 female) (60% among them was estimated they
plated tree) have raised the awareness concerning ecological child rights in 16 sessions
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
27
• 15 Monks including Ven. Mey Nork in Vat Trapeang Pring teach the villagers at „Thngai
Sel“ in the pagodas and the children in the schools.
Photo 7 Children peer-
educators in Prek Ta Nhoy
primary School, Khum kseth
When discussing with peer
educators of the schoolchildren
(see Photo) the evaluation team
was impressed by the
personalities of these children.
They have been chosen by their
classmates as leaders for their
competency in the subject
matter, for their own initiative
and innovative ideas, for their
communication skills in talking
and convincing other children
and for the commitment to the class, the school and the community.
Table 13 Children’s Groups active in ecological child rights
No Name of ECR Village Commune District Session Total Female
1 Prey Tanhoy primary
school
Prey
Tanhoy
Kseth Kampong
Ro
4 163 73
2 Prey Monors primary
school
Prey Mnors Samley - 4 182 75
3 Hun Sen Chres
primary school
Banlas'et Chres Chantrea 4 176 74
4 Trapang Run primary
school
Trapeang
Run
- - 4 180 79
All 4 ECR groups 4 villages 3 communes 2 Districts 16 701 301
Although the activities with children started later than planned and therefor the target
achieved at midterm is just about 18 % (700 actual, 3.500 target by mid-term) the staff of the
project is confident to achieve the target by project end. With this qualification in mind the
performance may be rated as being good and it is likely that in the second half it will
improve considerably.
Recommendation: To emphasize more quality than quantity: This means to promote the
natural leaders, the peer-educators among the school children in special training workshops,
in exchanges between different schools and in exposure trips. These natural leaders will
ensure that the activities begun in the project period will continue beyond project end.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
28
5.3.1 SWOT analysis
The self-assessment of the project staff is more or less confirming the assessment of the
evaluation team. It is to the credit of the staff that they are more critical than the evaluators.
In the SWOT exercise the nine staff participated and expressed their opinions regarding the
questions: What are you proud of (Strength)? What would you like to improve (Weakness)?
What is helpful to you from outside the project
(Opportunity)? What is threatening the implementation
of the project from outside (Threat)? The 51 written
statements show that the staff has a balanced view on
the positive (25 statements) and critical aspects (26
statements) of the project.
Graph 4 SWOT Statements
When we cluster the written statements by topics it is
quite surprising that statements concerning the own
persons (no card) and even the team (only 5 cards on the staff: 4+ and 1-) have not been on
the minds of the participants. They were rather concerned with the community and the local
authority. Concerning the COMMUNITY (9+ and 13 the participants praised the
understanding and participation of the villagers (afforestation, hygiene: latrines, clean water);
the establishment and functioning of self-help groups and children’s clubs and the
involvement of monks. They also pointed out some critical aspects:
The capacity of some SHGs and also Management Committees in Community Forestry is
limited; the participation in training courses could be better. Meetings in planting seasons are
difficult.
Graph 5 SWOT Statements clustered by
topics
And monk trainers have changed.
External factors also had a negative
impact on the project: Villagers migrate
to Vietnam for jobs. Floods and
droughts affect the harvest and also the
health of animals. Concerning LOCAL
AUTHORITIES the participants
expressed 11 positive and also 11
critical points: The good cooperation of Santi Sena Organization with the various departments
of the provincial government has been affirmed: The very useful system of identification of
the poor is available at all commune centres (ID Poor I and II). The Commune Investment
Plan is a good interface of cooperation between local authorities and NGOs. The cooperation
with the forestry department in establishing community forests and with the agricultural
department in training farmers and installing biogas systems is very satisfactory. The critical
aspects regarding local authorities concern the limited capacity of the various departments
(change of staff in the forestry departments), the insufficient involvement and participation of
district officials, commune councils and village leaders. For some activities the government
policies (CF steps from 8 to 11) have changed or deadlines reset (biogas installation). -
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
29
Concerning the STAFF five cards were written (4+ and 1- ): The good team work has been
acknowledged, the sharing of technical knowledge between staff and farmers through
exposure visits. Facilitations skills of the staff however have been noted as limited.
Concerning DONORS the opinion was expressed that the project period is very short. And
with regard to other NGOs the sharing and mutual learning was felt quite positive.
5.4 Impact and Sustainability
The long term benefits for the target groups (impact) as well as the continuation of project
activities after the end of financing can be discussed and assessed by looking at (i) the change
of behaviour patterns particularly of the natural leaders, (ii) networking with other
organizations and (iii) anchoring the activities in the agenda of institutions.
5.4.1 Change of behaviour patterns
A certain change in behaviour patterns concerning environmental protection can be assumed
because they go along with substantial material benefits for the target groups in particular the
poor households: They can benefit from forest products (mushrooms, firewood, medicinal
items: herbs, barks). They benefit from saving firewood through new stoves; they are less
exposed to diseases when using clean and filtered water. A change of behaviour of the young
school children is more likely than a change with older persons: When school children are
taught the interrelations of environmental protection and benefit to the community and the
households, when they participate in practical events planting trees around the school, their
family homes and along roads, paths and canals then they most likely keep these habits out of
school, One particular aspect is noteworthy: In all project activities a number of natural
leaders make themselves known in the group dynamics: These persons understand quickly
new things, the are self-confident and implement the ideas in a creative way, they are able to
convince their peers and mobilize them. The promotion of these natural leaders in the Self
Help Groups, the Forest Management Committees and in The Ecological Child-Right Groups
are a most valuable asset of the project; these natural leaders will not stop when they have no
more meetings with the project staff and when the project has ended.
5.4.2 Networking with other NGOs
Santi Sena is cooperating and networking with six other NGOs on topics like Anti-Child
Trafficking Campaign, Our River, Our Life Campaign, Capacity Building, NGO Governance
Professional Practice, Child protection network, NGO cooperation meeting on water
sanitation and hygiene. There is certainly a dimension of sustainability in networking –
however it is very difficult to assess it. Ideas developed by Santi Sena Organization have been
and will be taken up by other organizations. However this has not been monitored and
reported and therefor the significance cannot be assessed properly.
5.4.3 Anchoring in institutions
The project is cooperating in a very close way with the Forestry and the Agriculture
Department. Measures of the project are in line with government programs and activities of
the provincial departments are inspired by project examples. The good relations of Santi Sena
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
30
Organization to the Government of the Province of Svay Rieng and the relevant departments,
the authorities of local government on the district level (srok), the commune level (khum) and
the village level (phum) are an important asset to the project. This close cooperation has
however also another aspect: If the governmental partners change policies or personnel the
project can be affected negatively; this has been the case when the policy to establish
community forest has changed (11 steps instead of 8 steps) and when the experienced experts
in the forestry departments have been promoted and other inexperienced persons took their
position. However there is no alternative to the cooperation with the local authorities and by
and large it is overwhelmingly positive.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
31
6 Conclusions and recommendations
6.1 Conclusions
When concluding the evaluation report we recapitulate and summarize the project activities
and the benefits for the target group under the angle which social group did benefit and finally
we make an overall assessment.
6.1.1 Social strata and benefits
The poor
The poor househols benefit from from the Community Forestry by collecting and selling
mushrooms, firewood and medicinal herbs etc. The can also benefit immediately from home
gardening. They benefit from imroved water quality (through wells, water filters and latrines)
and from better hygienical practices. The poor benefit also from improved stoves by saving
firewood (30 %). The poor benefited from SHG through ssaving and credit schemes as well as
through social support in cases of individual calamities.
The middle income families
The middle income families benefit substantially from the savings and credit activities of the
SHG: When buying pigs, chicken when young and selling after half a year they can earn a
substantial amount even if the fodder is not cheap and not all can be found around the house.
The also benefit from integrated farming systems and integrated pest management practices
The well off families
Benefit from the biogas systems by saving much firewood (at a value of 200.000 Riel per
year), time, and also fertilizer for farming, reduce spending for electricity. And also contribute
to forest conservation.
All strata
The project has well targeted the poor households and has also included other income strata as
it is normal for any project in community development. The nation-wide classification of poor
households in “very poor” and “poor” has been a good tool to identify and target the poor in
the various project activities. This has been done by Santi Sena Organisation to a high degree
and it deserves praise for this; in the opinion of the staff there is still room to improve, to
increase the share of poor households in the SHG and to register the use of the community
forest in a differential way by identifying how many poor households are involved.
6.1.2 Best Practices
- Building partnership between Santi Sena, Community and Forest Administration Sub-
Division in Community Forestry Establishment
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
32
- Promote community based natural resource conservation through a Buddhist perspective
- Saving for change, decreased debt
- Climate change mitigation by bio-digester
- Child health care by school based water filter
- Ensure income of farmer by integrated farming system
6.1.3 The overall assessment
The overall assessment of the project is between very good and excellent. From the four
components the evaluation team is rating two as excellent, one as very good and one as good.
The latter component (Ecological Child Rights) is only “good” because – without the fault of
Santi Sena Organization – the targets could be reached only 18 % because of the late start of
the project. - When looking at the quality of implementation, monitoring and reporting we
find the classical pattern of many NGOs: The implementation is excellent, the monitoring is
very good and the reporting is good.
The contribution of Santi Sena Organization in the field of climate change through
afforestation must be singled out as an excellent model also for other provinces. The project
implementing organization has shouldered one fifth of the whole provincial effort in
afforestation.
6.1.4 Completing community forests
This remarkable effort of SSO in afforestation (one fifth of the whole province) at mid-term
of course not completed – but it suffers also from changes in government policies and
personnel. The Government has changed the procedure for establishing community forests
from eight to 11 steps after the project has started. Actually government have new guideline
where previous said only 8 steps for community forestry establishment and for now the
project still can implement the old guideline, but the project needs to works very strictly, step
by step, professionally and in a participatory model to develop management plans of
community forests and to submit them for approval from provincial governor. In 7th step
(Preparation of the Community Forest Management Plan) the project has another 8 sub-steps
to implement and only government staffs from Phnom Penh would able to do it and the
project must hire them as consultant for this activities.
The BMZ/TDH funded project allocated budget amount 3000USD for the activities, and
based on the consultation with the experts, the project needs an additional budget amount
12,605USD for preparing the management plan for two community forests, therefore SSO
requests an additional budget amount 9,605USD to covering for completion.
The evaluation team supports strongly this request of the project.
6.2 Recommendations
STAFF
- One leader should be working entirely (100 %) for this project only; this persons should also
be competent in processing data with Excel and reporting in English language.
- The gender balance should also be improved since most of the target groups are women and
children.
- In monitoring and reporting differentiate between the different groups.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
33
-Concerning intermediary groups pay attention to the role of Monks, Peer children educators,
and SHG leaders and
Component 1
- To check the users of the community forest (as registered in the CF Register Book) with the
list of ID Poor I and II available at the Commune office. The assumption of the Management
Committee can thus be verified that the vast majority of CF users are poor households.
- To describe the type of trees in terms of use in environmental protection and benefit for the
people and prioritize the type of trees most useful.
Component 2
To increase the share of the poor (concerning small water filters and latrines) to about 80 %
(ID Poor I to 40 %).
Component 3
- Although the share of the poor in the SHG is remarkably good it can still be increased to 60 %
- as proposed by the project leaders themselves in the debriefing discussion.
- For (i) emergency cases and (ii) funeral ceremonies the activities of the SHG can be listed in
table format. The (iii) item “sharing experiences” could be reported by describing examples.
- To promote the natural leaders in the SHG. There are always five persons with functions in
the SHG (president, vice-president, cashier, two book keepers) mostly chosen because they
are respected by the fellow villagers for their technical competency and their sense of the
community. It is an investment in the future, a guarantee of sustainability to promote these
natural leaders by training workshops, exchange and exposure visits. To keep track of these
natural leaders through a database would be a further opportunity.
Component 4
- To emphasize more quality than quantity: This means to promote the natural leaders, the
peer-educators among the school children in special training workshops, in exchanges
between different schools and in exposure trips. These natural leaders will ensure that the
activities begun in the project period will continue beyond project end.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
34
7 ANNEX
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
35
7.1 Itinerary – ToR - Documentation
7.1.1 Terms of Reference for the evaluation
Terms of Reference (TOR)
Evaluation of the Project of Santi Sena Organization, Svay Rieng, Cambodia
Introduction
This ToR applies to the evaluation of the “Strengthening of Adaptation Capacities of Peasants
to Climate Change to Ensure Sustainable Livelihood in Svay Rieng Province” project
implemented by Santi Sena Organization (SSO). It is a formative and creative evaluation
which intends to initiate participatory processes of learning.
This ToR is integrated in the general ToR for evaluations of the BMZ (according to the
guidelines 5.2.8).
1. Relevance of the project for the target group
• Are the existing problems and/or the needs (of the target groups) as well as the
proposed solutions identified in an appropriate way to reach the objectives of the
project in the project period from July 2012 to June 2015?
• Has the absorption capacity as well as the implementing capacities of the target group
been assessed realistically?
• Have the local stakeholders been included appropriately in the process of consultation
and participation?
Planning / Logical framework
• Are the objectives clear and result oriented? Are the inputs well-adjusted to reality?
Can the project objectives be reached through the concretely intended project
measures? Are the verifiable indicators well-chosen and broadly accepted?
• How flexible and adaptable is he project to respond to changing conditions for the
project?
2. Efficiency of the participants
Quality of daily project management for example:
• Budget control
• Personnel management, documentation and information
• Guarantee of flexibility in project management with respect to changes in the project
environment
• Involvement of and coordination with local authorities, institutions, target groups and
other NGOs
Monitoring
• Status and quality of project monitoring (timely? related to baseline?)
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
36
• Is the actual monitoring system adequate for impact monitoring and steering?
3. Effectivity of project measures in regard to the target group
• Have the project measures been implemented according to planning and have they
reached (the target group)?
• What kind of changes in the livelihood of the target group have been caused by the
project?
4. Impact of the project
• What has been the direct contribution of the project to reach the objectives?
• Which results have been reached so far?
• How flexible did the project participants react to unforeseen changes in the project
environment?
• Have there been unforeseen results in the project? If yes, in which way did it influence
the general goal of the project?
• Have the selected project indicators been appropriate? If not, have they been adapted
in the course of the project?
• Are the applied project measures effective to reach the objectives? Are better measures
or methods conceivable?
5. Sustainability of the structures initiated by the project
• Can the project measures be continued by the target group after the end of the project
period? Are the self-help structures initiated by the project capable to carry on the
activities on their own after the project period?
• Is there a sufficient degree of commitment and responsibility among the participants,
stakeholders and institutions to guarantee an independent continuation of the
activities?
• Is the relationship between input and returns with respect to the project purpose (cost-
benefit) justifiable?
• Are socio-cultural factors accounted for in project planning and implementation, for
example, the local perception of traditional ways of production and distribution, local
power structures in regard to aspects of status and religious believes?
• Can the access of the target group to the inputs and services by the project be
maintained even after the project period?
• Have cross-cutting issues as gender equality, environmental protection and good
governance been respected?
6. Lessons learnt
• Which kind of conclusions can be drawn from the project implementation so far and
which recommendations can be formulated for the remaining project period?
• On the basis of the project implementation up to now, which kinds of measures are
still necessary to assure the achievement of the targets respectively securing the
project success?
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
37
7. Duration of the evaluation
The entire evaluation will take place for a period of 14 days. This includes the review of
relevant information, field data collection, validation, and finalization of report. Proposed
dates for data-gathering in the field are from 27 March to 02 April 2014 and the validation
meeting on 07 April 2014. The first draft report shall be made available by the evaluator not
later than 10 days after the validation meeting; the final report, not later than 5 days after
comments from the project management staff and tdh staff are received by the evaluator.
Those comments shall be made by Santi Sena staff and tdh and sent to the evaluator, within 3
days after the draft report is received.
8. Methods of evaluation
This evaluation is a formative and creative evaluation which intends to initiate participatory
processes of learning from all main stakeholders of the project. It will mainly include
meetings and focus group discussions with major stakeholders of the project.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
38
7.1.1 References
A PROJECT
A-1 General
terre des hommes Germany; Recknagel, Albert; Urban, Chris (2012): Antrag an das Bundesministerium für
Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung auf Finanzierung des Vorhabens „Santi Sena - Stärkung der
Anpassungskapazitäten von Kleinbauern an den Klimawandel zur Sicherung der Lebensgrundlage, Svay Rieng
Provinz, Kambodscha Santi Sena - Strengthening of Adaptation Capacities of Peasants to Climate Change to
ensure Sustainable Livelihood, Svay Rieng Province, Cambodia“. (28 p.). Osnabrück.
terre des hommes Germany; Urban, Chris (2012): Projektkurzinformation: Santi Sena – Strengthening of
Adaptation Capacities of Peasants to Climate Change to ensure Sustainable Livelihood. Osnabrück.
terre des hommes Germany; Urban, Chris (2013): Terms of Reference für die Zwischenevaluierung des Projekts
Stärkung der Anpassungskapazitäten von Kleinbauern an den Klimawandel zur Sicherung der
Lebensgrundlage (ToR). (6 p.). Osnabrück.
A-2 Project Reports
Santi Sena Organization (2012): Project Progress Report. reporting Period: 1st July to 31st December 2012. (18
p.). Svay Rieng.
Santi Sena Organization (2013): [Duplikat] Project Progress Report. reporting Period: 1st January to 30th June
2013. (19 p.). Svay Rieng.
Santi Sena Organization (2013): Project Progress Report. reporting Period: 1st July to 31st December 2013. (19
p.). Svay Rieng.
A-3 Audit Reports
LRS Henderson Public Accountants (2013): Statement of Receipts, Disbursements and Fund Balance for the
Period from 1 July to 31 December 2012. Audit Certificate to the Project Management. Independent Auditor’s
Report to the Project Management. (10 p.). Phnom Penh.
LRS Henderson Public Accountants (2013): Management letter for the period from 1 July to 31 December 2012.
Audit Certificate to the Project Management. Statement of Receipts, Disbursements and Fund Balance for the
Period from 1 July to 31 December 2012. (6 p.). Phnom Penh.
LRS Henderson Public Accountants (2014): Management Letter for the Year ended 31 December 2013. (6 p.).
Phnom Penh.
LRS Henderson Public Accountants (2014): Statement of Receipts, Disbursements and Fund Balance for the
Year ended 31 December 2013. Audit Certificate to the Project Management. Notes to the Statement of
Receipts, Disbursements and Fund Balance for the Year ended 31 December 2013. (10 p.). Phnom Penh.
A-4 Tools
Evaluation Team (2014): SWOT statements and analysis. (Excel File, 1 sheet). Svay Rieng.
Santi Sena (2014): Annex big water filter. (Excel File, 1 sheet). Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh.
Santi Sena (2014): Annex ECR (Ecological Child Rights) disseminate for ECR group. (Excel File, 1 sheet). Svay
Rieng, Phnom Penh.
Santi Sena (2014): Annex support poultry. (Excel File, 1 sheet). Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh.
Santi Sena (2014): Data Fruit Tree Support. (Excel File, 1 sheet). Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh.
Santi Sena (2014): Data Planting tree 2012 to 2103. (Excel File, 1 sheet). Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh.
Santi Sena (2014): Evaluation Tool Santi Sena 2014; Staff, population, target groups, intermediaries,
achievements, best practices, networking, other projects, other NGOs in the region, budget, abbreviations).
(Excel File, 11 sheets). Svay Rieng, Phnom Penh.
A-5 Laws and Decrees
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2002): Law on Forestry. (36 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2003): Sub-Decree on Community Forestry
Management. (12 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2013): Model: Community Fishing Area Agreement.
(4 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2013): Model: Community Fishing Area Management
Plan for a 3 year period (20… – 20…). (10 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2013): Model: Internal Rules of ………………
Community Fisheries. (4 p.). Phnom Penh.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
39
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2013): Model; By-Laws of ………………
Community Fisheries. (9 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2013): Prakas on Guidelines for Community Fisheries.
(11 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Agriculture (2013): Sub-Decree on Community Fisheries
Management. (13 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Ministry of Planning (2012): Implementation Manual on the Procedures for
Identification of Poor Households. (81 p.). Phnom Penh.
Royal Government of Cambodia; Prime Minister (2011): Sub-decree on Identification of Poor Households. (6 p.).
Phnom Penh.
B BACKGROUND INFORMATION
B-1 Poverty
Bertelsmann Foundation (2014): Bertelsmann Transformation Index BTI 2014 |Cambodia Country Report. (30
p.). Gütersloh.
Ministry of Planning (2006): A Poverty Profile of Cambodia 2004. (147 p.). Phnom Penh. Online verfügbar
unter http://www.mop.gov.kh/Others/PovertyProfile/tabid/191/Default.aspx.
Ministry of Planning (2012): Migration in Cambodia: Report of the Cambodian Rural Urban Migration Project.
(210 p.). Phnom Penh. Online verfügbar unter
http://www.mop.gov.kh/Projects/CRUMP/tabid/213/Default.aspx.
Ministry of Planning (2013): Poverty in Cambodia - a new approach. Redefining the poverty line. (12 p.).
Phnom Penh. Online verfügbar unter http://www.mop.gov.kh/Projects/tabid/148/Default.aspx.
Ministry of Planning; World Food Programme (2012): Identification of poor Households in Cambodia. Results
from Data Collection Rounds 4 (2010) and 5 (2011. (124 p.). Phnom Penh. Online verfügbar unter
http://www.mop.gov.kh/Default.aspx?tabid=214.
Ministry of Planning and United Nations Development Programme Cambodia (2007): Cambodia Human
Development Report 2007. Expanding Choices For Rural People. (127 p.). Phnom Penh. Online verfügbar
unter http://www.mop.gov.kh/Others/CHDR/tabid/193/Default.aspx.
National Institute of Statistics; Ministry of Planning, Royal Government of Cambodi; United Nations World
Food Programme (2013): Small-area Estimation of Poverty and Malnutrition in Cambodia. (61 p.). Rome.
Online verfügbar unter http://operations.ifad.org/web/ifad/operations/country/home/tags/cambodia.
National Institute of Statistics (NIS), Ministry of Planning; Directorate General for Health, Ministry of Health
(2011): Cambodia: Demographic and Health Survey 2010. (393 p.). Phnom Penh. Online verfügbar unter
http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/FR249/FR249.pdf.
B-2 Climate Change
Buddhist Institute (2000 (2543 Buddhist Year)): Forest Voice. Buddhas Theory on Environment. Lessons for the
Pagoda Community (KHMER). (195 p.). Phnom Penh.
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) (2010): Cambodia: Environmental and Climate Change
Assessment, Prepared for IFAD’s Country Strategic Opportunities Programme 2013-2018. (61 p.). Rome.
Online verfügbar unter http://operations.ifad.org/web/ifad/operations/country/home/tags/cambodia, zuletzt
geprüft am 26.01.2014.
Ministry of Environment of Cambodia; UNDP (2011): Cambodia Human Development Report 2011. Building
Resilience: The Future of Rural Livelihoods in the Face of Climate Change. (224 p.). Phnom Penh. Online
verfügbar unter http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/FR249/FR249.pdf.
C METHODOLOGY
Development Assistance Committee; OECD (1991): DAC Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance.
(12 p.). Paris. Online verfügbar unter www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/2755284.pdfD.
Development Assistance Committee; OECD (2002): Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based
Management. (38 p.). Paris. Online verfügbar unter www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/2755284.pdfD.
Development Assistance Committee; OECD (2011): Quality Standards for Development Evaluation. (78 p.).
Paris. Online verfügbar unter www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/2755284.pdfD.
Development Assistance Committee; OECD (2012 (?)): DAC Criteria for Evaluating Development Assistance
Factsheet. (2 p.). Paris. Online verfügbar unter www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/2755284.pdfD.
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
40
7.1.2 Itinerary
DATE ACTIVITY REMARKS / PLACE
Thursday
27.03.2014 -
09:00
Arrival at Pochentong Airport in PHNOM PENH
15:00 - Briefing with tdh staff Cambodia and Southeats Asia
- Interview of tdh staff about monitoring the project Santi Sena
and about the tdh program in Cambodia
Friday
28.03.2014.
- Travel to Svay Rieng
- Briefing with projectkleaders
Saturday
29.03.2014
Meeting with project staffs
Brief about project
Achievement presentation
- SWOT with all project staff of Santi Sena
Needed: DIN A 4
paper: 80 sheets, 10
markers, scotch
Sunday
30/03/014
Community Forests
Tree planting
Meeting with CF committees, FA
CF members (biogas
Visit to ponds and center
Prey Koki CF
Monday
31/03/014
Sanitation and Hygiene
Meeting with water user group
Water filters in school, families, health center
Latrine families
Prey Koki
Chamkar Leav
Tuesday
01/04/014
Diversified Livelihoods
Meeting with SHGs
Visit home-garden, integrated farming
Meeting with IPM students, trainers
Rusei Arm
Trapaing Chhouk
Wednesday
02/04/014
Ecological Child Right
Meeting with monk trainers
Meeting with school children
Prey Ta nhoy
Prey Monors
Thursday
03/04/2014
Editing Debriefing Notes
Svay Rieng
Svay Rieng
Friday
04/04/2014
Debriefing with SSO Staff
Travel to Phnom Penh
Meeting with Staff, Svay Rieng
Travel to Phnom Penh
Svay Rieng to Phnom
Penh
Saturday
05.04.2014
Reviewing Debriefing Notes Phnom Penh
Sunday
06.04.2014
Private activities Phnom Penh
Monday
07.04.2014
- Debriefing with SEA coordinator, rdh country coordinator and
SSO leaders
Phnom Penh
08-10.04.2014 Private activities Kampong Thom
Friday
11.04.2014
Departure PP to Germany PP to Osnabrück
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
41
7.1.3 List of interviewed persons
# NAME POSITION
1 Mr. TOU Vantha Tdh country coordinator
2 Ms KONG Salea Farmer with biogas system
3 Mr. UCH Sitha Chief of Health Center Prey Koki
Ms. ORN Sithan Staff in Health Center
4 Mr. PROM Savann Principle of school Khum Samrong
5 Mr. NORNG Kunthea Vice-Principle of school Khum Samrong
Ms. LONG Nara Teacher in school Khum Samrong
6 Mr. TEP Sean Commune Chief Khum Samrong, Srok Chantrea
7 Ms. HEM Sokhom Farmer with latrine in Khum Thngork
8 Ms. TOUCH Sinal And 17 other persons: SHG / Water User Group in Phum Chamcar Leav, Khum Prey Koki
9 Ms. MOM Phorn ID Poor I card holder in Khum Samrong
10 Mr. CHIENG Am Governor of Svay Rieng Province
11 Ms. HOU Savin ID POOR I card Holder and 19 other members of SHG in Phum Russey Orn, Khum
Kseth, Srok Kampong Ro (ID Poor I: 3, ID Poor II. 4, Non-Poor 13)
12 Ms. SOM Sarearn Deputy Director of Provincial Planning department
13 Ms. CHHET Chhay Chief of Statistic Office in Planning Department
14 Mr. THOANG Kompheak Deputy Chief of Statistic Office in Planning Department
15 Mr. SAM Nhaung Member of SHG in Phum Trapeang Chhouk, Khum Kseth, Srok Kampong r with 7 other
members (Total members of SHG: 33 of which Poor I: 4 and Poor II 7)
16 Ms. Srey Ny Member of SHG in Phum Trapeang Smach, Khum Kseth, Srok Kampong Ro with 3 other
members (Total members of SHG: 56 of which Poor I: 0 and Poor II 10)
17 Ms. SAM Thida Pupil (7 years old) in Hun Sen Svay Ta Yearn Secondary School, Phum Prek Tanhoy,
Khum Kseth with 14 other pupils. All peer educators in ecological child rigths
18 Ven. MEY Nork Abbot in Vat Trapeang Pring, Phum Pney Phneat, Khum Samley, Srok Kampong Ro
19 Mr. NOV Borin Deputy Chief of Provincial Forestry Department
20 Mr. YOAK Sovann Officer in Provincial Forestry Department
Mr. TEP Vannak Officer in Provincial Forestry Department
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
42
7.2 Additional Budget Request for Community Forestry
7.2.1 Letter of Santi Sena Organization
To: Mr. Tou Vantha, Country Coordinator
Re: Request Additional Budget for Developing Management Plan of 02 Community Forests
Dear Sir
I am writing you to inform that during the project design, Santi Sena has worked
closely with chief of Svay Rieng Forest Administration Sub-Division in planning and
budgeting for community forest establishment in target areas of project co-funded by Ministry
for Economic Cooperation and Development, and Terre Des Hommes Germany. In early
2012, chief of Sub-Division was moved to be based outside Svay Rieng where he is expertise
in community forestry establishment and training. Anyway, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fishery have reviewed and amendment the steps for establishing community forest
mainly in management planning that need to be strictly, more participatory by community
members and local authorities as well as official support and recognize by local authorities
from commune to the provincial level that will be more costly needed.
The project has allocated 3,000USD for developing management plan of 02
community forestry and based consultation with expertise from Forest Administration
General Department, to develop management plan in 02 community forests, we need budget
amount 12,605USD for supporting the field activities such as; training, field assessment
(PRA), reflection meeting and fee for external consultants.
Santi Sena would like to request additional budget amount 9,605USD for completing
this activity where importance for 02 community forests to have completed the steps and
documents through the national guideline and the evident for official recognition from
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery as community forestry where fully manage by
community people for livelihood improvement.
The additional budget request would able to withdrawal from code: 4.1.3 (For
Personnel) amount 4800USD as it remained during the first project start and recruitment
process, and budget code:4.1.6 (Reserve Fund) amount 4,806USD.
We would like to submit you the additional budget request for your kindly
consideration and if you have any queries or more clarification needed, please let us know.
Thanks for your good cooperation
7.2.2 Budget Plan for using on Community Forest
N
o
Description Needing/Activities Unit Unit cost Total
I. Management Plan
1 Training on PRA, divise
plots and inventory
Material (1 Tr x2 CF ) 2 150,00 300,00
Food for participants CFMC (30 P X 3
daysx 2 CF)
180 2,00 360,00
Transportation for CFMC (30 Ps X 3
daysx 2 CF)
180 2,00 360,00
Snack CFMC (30 PsX 3 days x 2 CF) 180 0,25 45,00
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
43
N
o
Description Needing/Activities Unit Unit cost Total
Fee for FA ( Facilitator) (3 days x 1 Psx
2CF)
6 100,00 600,00
Sub Total 1.665,00
2 PRA Practice Fee for FA (1 Ps X 4 days x2 CF ) 8 100,00 800,00
Sub Total 800,00
3 Divide plots and
inventory Practicing
Transportation for participants (30 PsX
០4 daysx 2 CF)
240 2,50 600,00
Foodfor participants ( 30 PsX០4 days x
2 CF)
240 2,00 480,00
Snack for participants ( 30 PsX០4 days
x 2 CF)
240 0,25 60,00
Fee for (2 Ps x 3day X 2 CF) 12 100,00 1.200,00
Sub Total 2.340,00
4 Data analysispractice Data instalation 2CF 2 1.500,00 3.000,00
Sub Total 3.000,00
5 Draft document
management plan
Fee for draft document2 CF 2 350,00 700,00
Sub Total 700,00
6 Reflection Meeting Draft
Document on
Managerment Plan with
CFMC,CFMs.LA
Material(1 workshop X០1 day x2 CF ) 2 50,00 100,00
Snack (1meeting X០1day x2 CF x100Ps
)
200 0,50 100,00
Transportation for
Participants(1meetingX០1 day x2
CFx100Ps )
200 4,50 900,00
Fee for FA Facilitator ( 1meetingx1 P x
2 CF)
2 100,00 200,00
Sub Total 1.300,00
7 Prepare final Document
to Recognize
CFMC,Triange,FAS,FA
CK
Kampongcham,Director
FAC
Fee for FA 2 800,00 1.600,00
Sub Total 1.600,00
11.405,00
II. Fee for recognize from
Ministry
1 Prepare document to
recorgnize from Ministry
Per-diemfor CFMC 2 CF 2 200,00 400,00
Per-diem for Triange and FAS 2 400,00 200,00
Per-diem for FACK 2 500,00 200,00
Per-diem for FAC 2 500,00 400,00
Sub Total 1.200,00
Grant total 12.605,00
Budget Approve 3.000,00
Balance (9.605,00)
CFMC: Community Forest Management Committee
CFM: Community Forest Member
LA: Local Authorities
FAS: Forest Administration Sub-Division
FACK: Forest Administration Cantonment Kampong Cham
FAC: Forest Administration Cantonment
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
44
7.3 Evaluation Tools
7.3.1 Target Groups by communes
# Location Type of target group Number of target group perons Total Female Male
1 Chantrea Farmer pruducer
groups, Self Help
Group, Water user
group,
There are 15 farmer user groups consist 132
families. Including 1 SHG=15 persons
(8 female), 44 Fs received latrines, 10
water using groups received 10 big water
well= 83 Fs, 81 Fs received ICS and 128
families received water filters
675 345
2 Touldei Farmer user groups,
self help group (SHG)
and water using groups.
There are 16 farmer user groups consist 108
families. Including 30 families produced
compost fertilizer, 1 SHG=14 persons (7
female), 6 Fs received latrines and 5 water
using groups received 5 water well= 15 Fs
612 298
3 SamRong Farmer producer groups There are 9 famer user groups consist 81
families. Including 30 families produced
compost fertilizer, 1 SHG=14 persons (7
female), 6 families received latrines and 5
water using groups received 5 water well=
15 families.
369 191
4 MeorkTngork Farming groups, SHG
and water using groups
There are 14 famer user groups consist 124
families. Including 30 families produced
compost fertilizer, 1 SHG=14 persons (7
female), 6 families received latrines and 5
water using groups received 5 water well=
15 Fs
575 289
5 PreyKoki Farming groups, SHG
and water using groups
and Community-based
Ecological Child Right
Working Group and
Community forestry
member.
There are 14 famer groups consist 120
families. Including 29 families produced
compost fertilizer, 1 SHG=26 persons (19
female), 9 Fs received latrines, 6 water
using groups received 6 water well= 18 Fs
and 87 Fs received ICS and 163 community
forestry members
1294 646
6 Chres Farmer producer
groups, SHG, water
user groups,
Community-based
Ecological Child Right
Working Group and
community forstry
member.
There are 18 famer groups consist 155
families. Including 14 families produced
compost fertilizer, 3 SHG=62 persons (29
female), 10 Fs received latrines, 2 water
using groups received 2 water well= 18 Fs,
62 Fs received ICS and 209 families
received water filters and 2 child peers=30Ps
(12female) and 498 community forestry
members
2896 1540
7 Tnout Farmer producer groups There 30 farming groups 266 famers 1193 547
8 Samley Farmer user groups,
SHG ,water user groups
and Community-based
Ecological Child Right
Working Group and
community forstry
member
23 famer groups consist of 208 families.
Including 34 families produced compost
fertilizer, 1 SHG=18 persons (3 female),
10 Fs received latrines, 5 water using groups
received 5 water well= 15 Fs, 83 Fs received
ICS, 54 families received water filters, 1
Community-base ECR working group=15Ps
(7female) and 331 community forestry
members.
2449 1220
9 Ksetre Farmer user groups,
SHG ,water user groups
and Community-based
Ecological Child Right
42 farming user groups conist 379 families.7
SHG = 146 person including 79 female, 62
families received ICS, 2 families received
bio-degester and 3 water user groups = 9
3018 1540
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
45
# Location Type of target group Number of target group perons Total Female Male
Working Group and
community forstry
member
families, 1 community-base ECR working
group = 15person (8female).
10 Reachmunthy Farmer user groups,
SHG and water user
groups.
10 farmer user groups conist 85families,
4 water user groups =12 Fs, 43 families
recieced water filter=43 Set, 1 Self Help
Group =16 persons (13 female) ,
1595 827
11 Batie Community forestry
member
346 community forestry members. 1472 765
12 Prey Angkugn Community forestry
member
84 community forestry members. 397 205
13 Chrork M'tes Community forestry
member
142 community forestry members. 644 341
TOTAL 17.189 8.754
7.3.2 Cooperation with other NGOs
Other NGOs in same project area with similar activities
# Name of NGO
Project title Project area Type of target group
Number of project staff
1 CCPCR Anti-Child tracfficking Tnout, Samley and Ksetre commune
Vulnerable children
1
2 C-Right Anti-tracfficking and reduce dropout of school children
tnout commune Vulnerable children
1
3 CFED Improve sanitation and hygiene
Kompong Ro The poor households
4
4 Vatanapheap
Agriculture and Hygiene Touldey, Samrong commune
The poor households
2
5 ICC Education field 6 communes in Chantrea
Primary students
1
6 Cambodia Red-Cross
Hygiene and Sanitation Touldey, Samrong and Chantrea communes
The poor household
1
7.3.3 SWOT
# CARD STATEMENT +/- TOPIC S/W/O/T
1 Response to the need of the community + C S
2 Participation of the monk trainer and child club in dissemination awareness on
ecological child right and biodiversify
+ C S
3 High participation of farmers in self help group + C S
4 Success in establishing self help group + C S
5 Farmer adapted agriculture techniques (rice, vegetable, etc.) + C S
6 Community Forest understand the law, principle and biodiversify + C S
7 Farmer understand about usage of clean water, latrine + C S
8 Contribution from community the money, materials, and time + C S
9 Community Forest is in potential area of the Government + C O
10 Participation of farmer in some training/meeting are limited - C W
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
46
# CARD STATEMENT +/- TOPIC S/W/O/T
11 Capacity of Self Help Group management committee are limited - C W
12 Capacity of management committee of CF are limited - C W
13 Market for selling product of farmer are far - C W
14 Faced difficulty in organizing meeting with farmers during rice planting season - C W
15 Farmers asked for money for meeting/training - C W
16 Some farmer are still practiced traditional techniques - C W
17 The monk trainers are changed - C W
18 People migrated to work in Vietnam - C W
19 There are factory nearby target villages which some people are working and no
time/commitment to join project
- C T
20 Farmer lack of water in dry season - C T
21 Drought affected to animal health - C T
22 Flood affected to rice cultivation - C T
23 Project has short term - D W
24 ID Poor data existed in village/commune for using + L S
25 Authority/relevant departments understand about process of project
implementation
+ L S
26 Cooperate well from relevant department (Government Institute) + L S
27 Good Cooperation with local authority + L O
28 Support from authority (village, commune, district, province) + L O
29 Project responding to CIP (commune investment plan) + L O
30 Cooperate well with FA in CF establishment + L O
31 National Program of Government on Biogas contribution are in place + L O
32 District of Agriculture are able to strengthen agriculture techniques to farmers + L O
33 Provincial department of Agriculture cooperated well on Biogas contribution
project
+ L O
34 Government strategy to export rice has contributed to motivate farmers in rice
planting
+ L O
35 Capacity of relevant development (FA, PDA) are limited - L W
36 FA staff limite understanding on CF guideline - L W
37 Involvement of commune councils and village chief in activity monitoring - L W
38 Agriculture department changed the plan of biogas subsidy plan - L W
39 No support from district authority on CF plan - L T
40 Village chief changed - L T
41 Commune councils changed - L T
42 Commune and village authority are not participated in all meetings/trainings - L T
43 Tehnical knowledge and experiences of FA staff are limited - L T
44 Policy/plan changed from MAFF in subsidying biogas support project - L T
45 Government policy for CBO establishment are available - L O
46 Sharing and learn from other NGOs and company + N S
47 Well and clear plan by project staff + S S
48 Staff share knowledge and experiences to farmers + S S
49 Staff learnt agriculture techniques through exposure visit to other projects and
then shared to target farmers
+ S S
50 Good team work in project implementation + S S
51 Facilitation skill of project staff are limited - S W
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
47
7.3.4 Time table: Activities planned- actually implemented
Activity ‘12 ‘12 ‘12 ‘12 ‘13 ‘13 ‘13 ‘13 ‘14 ‘14
Activities 1 Establishing a project office and hiring of
staff
/
/ x Planned
x Actual
Orientation workshop / / x Planned
x Actual
Determining the borders of the community forests and
development of an operational plan for the management
of resources
/ / x x x x Planned
x x x Actual
Creation of a “Wedding Garden“ with its own forestry
system
x x Planned
x x Actual
Reconstruction of ponds for wild living fish / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Quarterly meeting of the executive committees for
community forests / / x x x x x x x x Planned
x x x x x Actual
Training for community forest management committees
/
/ x x x Planned
x x Actual
Planting activities and campaigns in the communities
/
/ x x x x x x x x Planned
x x Actual
Demonstration and distribution of firewood saving
ovens
/
/ x x Planned
x Actual
Support for families to use biogas production / / x x x x x x Planned
x x x x Actual
Activities 2
Organization of water user groups / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Supporting poor families with household water pumps
for wells / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Demonstration and distribution of ceramic water
/
/ x x Planned
x x Actual
Support for schools and health centers by providing
water filters
x x Planned
x x x Actual
Hygiene education and construction of toilets / / x x x x Planned
x x Actual
Activities 3
Organization of savings self-help groups
/
/ x x x Planned
x x Actual
Training for integrated agriculture techniques / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Training for integrated pest control techniques / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Training for the reduction of pesticides and their / / x x x x Planned
replacement with organic fertilizer
x x x Actual
Support for vegetable production / / x x x x Planned
x x x Actual
Support for cash crop planting / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Support for rice production / / x x Planned
x Actual
Support for fish breeding / / x x Planned
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
48
Activity ‘12 ‘12 ‘12 ‘12 ‘13 ‘13 ‘13 ‘13 ‘14 ‘14
x x Actual
Support for chicken breeding / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Activities 4
Capacity building / training of multipliers for monks on
ecological children's rights / / x x x x x x x Planned
x x x x x Actual
Technical exchange among children's groups / / x x x x x x x x Planned
Actual
Awareness raising, peer-to-peer education, / / x x x x x x x x Planned
organization of children's groups on ecological rights of
children
x x x x Actual
Reflection, evaluation, and systematic considerations
for community forest executive committees / / x x x x Planned
x x x Actual
Construction of the learning center on biodiversity / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Coordination; Monitoring and Evaluation
Project monitoring and internal evaluation / / x x x x x x x x Planned
x x x x x Actual
External audit / / x x Planned
x x Actual
Project monitoring tdh country coordination / / x x x x Planned
x x Actual
Project care visit / / x Planned
Actual
External evaluation / / x Planned
x Actual
7.3.5 Budget by overhead / programme
Code Description Total O/P
4.1.1 For Investment
4.1.1.1 4-wheel drive
4.1.1.1 4-wheel Hehicle 34.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.1 34.000
4.1.1.2 Equipment for Project Implementation
4.1.1.2 Motobike for program staffs 4.950 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.2 4.950
4.1.1.3 Computer Equipments
4.1.1.3 Purchase laptop (100%) 550 O
4.1.1.3 Purchase printer (100%) 250 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.3 800
4.1.1.4 Office Furtniture
4.1.1.4 Purchase Desk 300 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.4 300
4.1.1.5 Launching of Community and Public Tree Planting Campaign
4.1.1.5 Materials and equipment for tree nursery 2.000 P
4.1.1.5 Seed and seedlings 4.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.5 6.000
4.1.1.6 Fingerlings and chickens
4.1.1.6 Fish production 8.500 P
4.1.1.6 Poultry production 9.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.6 17.500
4.1.1.7 Sanitary
4.1.1.7 Purchase latrine equipments 8.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.7 8.000
4.1.1.8 Water Filters
A Support Ceramic Water Purefier
4.1.1.8 Purchase Ceramic Water Purefier 15.000 P
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
49
Code Description Total O/P
Sub-Total 15.000
B Support Water Filter to School and Health Center
4.1.1.8 Construct water filter in school and health center 12.000 P
Sub-Total 12.000
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.8 27.000
4.1.1.9 Pumps
4.1.1.9 Simple Pumping well 24.000 P
4.1.1.9 Afridev Pumping Well 30.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.9 54.000
4.1.1.10 Demonstration and Support Improved Cook Stove
4.1.1.10 Puchase ICS 5.250 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.1.10 5.250
4.1.1.11 Seeds
4.1.1.11 Vegetable produtcion 9.000 P
4.1.1.11 Cash crop production 6.000 P
4.1.1.11 Rice cultivation 9.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.11 24.000
4.1.1.12 Community based Bio-diversity Resources and Learning Center
4.1.1.12 Building materials (cement, brick, sand, steel, ceramic, roof) 13.000 P
4.1.1.12 Construction cost (land preparation, labour…) 3.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.17 16.000
Total for Investment cost 197.800
4.1.2 For Operational Costs
4.1.2.1 Office Incidentals
4.1.2.1 Electricity (47%) 2.520 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.1 2.520
4.1.2.2 Office Supplies
4.1.2.2 Office stationary (25%) 3.600 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.2 3.600
4.1.2.3 Communication Cost
4.1.2.3 Internet and Email (45%) 1.080 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.3 1.080
4.1.2.4 General local amin costs
4.1.2.4 Bank charge and.. 2.700 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.4 2.700
4.1.2.5 Maintenance and Gasoline
4.1.2.5 Maintenance for motor (5motors x 36months) 900 P
4.1.2.5 Maintenance for 4-wheel 2.100 O
4.1.2.5 Fuel for motors 7.920 P
4.1.2.5 Fuel for 4-wheel 3.600 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.5 14.520
4.1.2.6 Transportation and supplies
4.1.2.6 Transport for ICS 600 P
4.1.2.6 Transport for CWP 750 P
4.1.2.6 Transport for Latrines 500 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.6 1.850
4.1.2.7 Provincial Project Orinetation Workshop
4.1.2.7 Materials and venue for workshop 300 P
4.1.2.7 Materials for participants 100 P
4.1.2.7 Snack for participants 100 P
4.1.2.7 Food for participants 500 P
4.1.2.7 Transportation for participants 500 P
4.1.2.7 Fee for resource speakers 250 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.7 1.750
4.1.2.8 Community Forest Resource Management
I Conduct physical boundaries demarcation of community forestry
4.1.2.8 Mapping meeting among committees 300 P
4.1.2.8 Big pole construction for boundaries 5.000 P
4.1.2.8 Small pole construction for boundaries 2.500 P
4.1.2.8 Sign Board for dissemination 2.000 P
Sub-Total 9.800
B Develop Management Plan for Community Forest
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
50
Code Description Total O/P
4.1.2.8 Materials for meetings 300 P
4.1.2.8 Support participants (3CF x 3days x 30ps) 1.350 P
4.1.2.8 Fee for resource persons (FA) (3CF x 3days) 1.350 P
Sub-Total 3.000
C Organize Quarterly Meeting among Executive Committees of Community Forest
4.1.2.8 Materials for meeting (3CFs x 12times) 180 P
4.1.2.8 Support participants (3CF x 12times x 20ps) 2.160 P
4.1.2.8 Food and transport for Forest Administration Staffs 2.520 P
4.1.2.8 Allownace for forest ranger group (3CFs x 36month) 1.620 P
Sub-Total 6.480
D Building Capacity among Community Forest Management Committees and its
members
4.1.2.8 Materials for training 300 P
4.1.2.8 Snack for participants (6trs x 2days x 30ps) 360 P
4.1.2.8 Food for participants (6trs x 2days x 30ps) 1.080 P
4.1.2.8 Transportation for participants (6trs x 2days x 30ps) 1.080 P
4.1.2.8 Fee for resource person (6trs x 2days) 1.200 P
Sub-Total 4.020
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.8 23.300
4.1.2.9 Planting Campaign
A Develop Weeding Graden and Agro-Forestry System
4.1.2.9 Land preparation 3.000 P
4.1.2.9 Decoration and planning 2.000 P
4.1.2.9 Fence and gate 2.500 P
Sub-Total 7.500
B Launching of Community and Public Tree Planting Campaign
4.1.2.9 Food and transport of farmers for tree planting 3.000 P
4.1.2.9 Monthly allowance for 2 nursery caretakers 1.800 P
4.1.2.9 Materials and preparation for national tree day forum 1.500 P
4.1.2.9 Media for national tree day forum (TV and newspaper) 600 P
4.1.2.9 Snack for participants in national tree day 900 P
Sub-Total for A.1.8 7.800
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.9 15.300
4.1.2.10 Rehabilitate Natural Ponds for Wild Fish Conservation
4.1.2.10 Procurement meeting 100 P
4.1.2.10 Fee for pond rehabilitation 8.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.10 8.100
4.1.2.11 Demonstration firewood saving stoves
4.1.2.11 Cooking demonstration 500 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.11 500
4.1.2.12 Support to Family based Bio-digester Development
4.1.2.12 Grant for support bio-digester 10.800 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.12 10.800
4.1.2.13 Formulate Water User Group and Set up Policy
4.1.2.13 Materials for meetings 300 P
4.1.2.13 Snack for participants 450 P
4.1.2.13 Meeting to formulate management committee 500 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.13 1.250
4.1.2.14 Formulate Self-Help Group
4.1.2.14 Materials for meetings 900 P
A.3.1.2 Snack for participants 900 P
A.3.1.3 Seed fund for SHG 3.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.14 4.800
4.1.2.15 Training events for integrated agriculture
A Provide technical assistance on sustainable integrated agriculture production
4.1.2.15 Materials for training 600 P
4.1.2.15 Snack for participants (30times x 30ps) 450 P
4.1.2.15 Food for participants (30times x 30ps) 1.350 P
4.1.2.15 Handout (900sets for 900farmers) 1.350 P
4.1.2.15 Fee for resource person 750 P
Sub-Total for A.3.2 4.500
B Training on Integrated Pest Management and Farmer Field School
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
51
Code Description Total O/P
4.1.2.15 Materials for training 800 P
4.1.2.15 Snack for participants (4weeks per session) 1.080 P
4.1.2.15 Handout 600 P
4.1.2.15 Fee for resource person 2.160 P
4.1.2.15 Food for participants in Farmer Field School forum 1.200 P
4.1.2.15 Materials and preparation for farmer field school forum 400 P
Sub-Total for A.3.3 6.240
C Training on Pesticide Reduction and Compost Fertilzer Production
4.1.2.15 Materials for training 300 P
4.1.2.15 Support participants (15trainings x 30ps) 2.250 P
4.1.2.15 Handout 675 P
4.1.2.15 Support farmer for production 6.750 P
Sub-Total for A.3.3 9.975
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.15 20.715
4.1.2.16 Capacity building bio-diversity and ecological right of children
A Training for Buddhist monk-trainers and community awareness raising on bio-
diversity and ecological child right
4.1.2.16 Materials for training 302 P
4.1.2.16 Snack for participants (2trs x 3days x 15ps) 90 P
4.1.2.16 Food for participants (2trs x 3days x 15ps) 450 P
4.1.2.16 Transportation for participants (2trs x 3days x 15ps) 450 P
4.1.2.16 Fee for resource person (2trs x 2days) 400 P
4.1.2.16 Snack for awareness raising by monk-trainers 5.400 P
4.1.2.16 Food and transport for monk-trainers 2.700 P
Sub-Total 9.792
B Quarterly Technical and Reflection Meeting
4.1.2.16 Materials for meetings 360 P
4.1.2.16 Snack for participants (12times x 15ps) 180 P
4.1.2.16 Food for participants (12times x 15ps) 900 P
4.1.2.16 Transportation for participants (12times x 15ps) 900 P
Sub-Total 2.340
C Formulation and Training for Community based Ecological Child Right Working
Group
4.1.2.16 Materials for meeting (form working groups) 80 P
4.1.2.16 Snack for children and teachers (form working groups) 120 P
4.1.2.16 Materials for training 400 P
4.1.2.16 Snack for participants (2trs x 3days x 30ps) 180 P
4.1.2.16 Food for participants (2trs x 3days x 30ps) 900 P
4.1.2.16 Transportation for participants (2trs x 3days x 30ps) 900 P
4.1.2.16 Food and transport for awareness raising (4groups x 3years) 2.400 P
Sub-Total 4.980
D Semester Technical Meeting
4.1.2.16 Materials for meetings (6times x 4groups) 720 P
4.1.2.16 Snack for participants (6times x 4groups x 15ps) 360 P
4.1.2.16 Food for participants (6times x 4groups x 15ps) 1.080 P
4.1.2.16 Transportation (6times x 4groups x 15ps) 1.080 P
Sub-Total 3.240
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.16 20.352
4.1.2.17 Develop IEC Materials
4.1.2.17 Printing T-Shirt 2.000 P
4.1.2.17 Printing Poster 3.500 P
4.1.2.17 Printing Leaflet 1.750 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.17 7.250
4.1.2.18 Personnel training
4.1.2.18 Annula staff training workshop 6.000 P
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.18 6.000
4.1.2.19 Auditing
4.1.2.19 Fee for Audit 8.000 O
Sub-Total for 4.1.2.19 8.000
Total for Operational Cost 154.387
4.1.3 For Personnel
A Salary for Management Personnel
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
52
Code Description Total O/P
4.1.3.1 Food for Executive Director (18%) 7.200 O
4.1.3.2 Salary for Deputy Director (38%) 10.800 P
4.1.3.3 Salary for Programs Manager (30%) 5.400 P
4.1.3.4 Salary for Admin and Finance Manager (29%) 4.680 O
4.1.3.5 Salary for Account Assistant (29%) 3.600 O
4.1.3.6 Salary for driver (47%) 2.520 O
4.1.3.7 Salary for Cashier (75%) 5.400 O
4.1.3.8 Salary for Cleaner (50%) 1.800 O
4.1.3.9 Salary for Office Guard (50%) 1.800 O
4.1.3.10 Salary for project team leader (2posts x 36months) (100%) 20.160 P
4.1.3.11 Salary for Community Facilitator (3post x 36months) (100%) 23.760 P
Sub-Total for Salary 87.120
4.1.3.12 Incidentals
A Bonus
4.1.3.12 Bonus for management staffs (9ps) 3.600 P
4.1.3.12 Bonus for project staffs (5ps) 3.660 P
Sub-Total 7.260
B Serverance Pay (5%)
4.1.3.12 Serverance pay for management staffs (9ps) 2.160 P
4.1.3.12 Serverance pay for project staffs (5ps) 2.196 P
Sub-Total 4.356
C Insurance
4.1.3.12 Purchase Insurance for management staffs (6ps) 378 P
4.1.3.12 Purchase insurance for program staffs (5ps x 3years) 315 P
Sub-Total 693
Sub-Total for 4.1.3.12 12.309
Total for Personnel 99.429
Reserve Fund (Only by demand) 16.383 O
Total for Reserve Fund 16.383
Grant Total 467.999
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
53
7.3.6 Staff table 2014
# Name Place / position in project
Work share
Sex (f / m)
Age
Birth day
Time in project
Educational level
Days of Trainings in development
Topic of training Training desired in the future
in %
Years
Months
Person-days
1 Ven. Dr. Nhem
Kim Teng
Executive Director
18 Monk
57 22/06/1956
18 PHD
2 Ros SamOn Deputy Director 38 Male 30 15/06/1983
18 Master 3 Governance and Leadership
Staff Capacity building
3 Hun Sarethan Progrmme Manager
30 Male 39 01.01.1975
18 Master 13 Leadership and Development Program
For monitoring and Follow up and staff capacity building
4 Puth Saron Financal Manager
29 Female
25 13/01/1988
18 Bachelor 13 Leadership and Development Program
For monitoring and Follow up
Khieng Muny Accout Assistant
29 Female
27 30/04/1986
18 Bachelor 5 Result Based Management
For monitoring and Follow up
Hul Chanty Cashier 75 Female
22 15/04/1991
2 Bachelor Asso
5 Result Based Management
For monitoring and Follow up
5 Ich Saran Team Leader 100 Male 36 04.04.1977
15 Associate Deg
8 Result Based Management
For monitoring and Follow up
6 Soun Chanthan Team Leader 100 Male 28 07.07.1985
18 Master 8 Result Based Management
For monitoring and Follow up
7 Thong Kimsan Communities Facilitator
100 Male 27 11.04.1986
15 Bachelor 8 Result Based Management
For monitoring and Follow up
8 Dong Chanthol Communities Facilitator
100 Female
23 06.04.1990
3 Bachelor 3 Result Based Management
For monitoring and Follow up
9 Sok Socheat Communities 100 Male 23 26/05/ 3 Bachelor 3 Result Based For monitoring and
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
54
# Name Place / position in project
Work share
Sex (f / m)
Age
Birth day
Time in project
Educational level
Days of Trainings in development
Topic of training Training desired in the future
Facilitator 1990 Management Follow up
11 Number
11 Number 10
30,6
Average 13,3 Average 6,9
57 Max 18 Max 13
22 Min 2 Min 3
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
55
7.4 Debriefing notes
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
56
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
57
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
58
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
59
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
60
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
61
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
62
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
63
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
64
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
65
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
66
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
67
7.5 Relevant texts, tables and legal documents
7.5.1 Excerpts of Audit Report 2013
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
68
7.5.2 Criteria for selecting beneficiaries in the project
Criteria concerning farmers
Criteria for selecting target farmers
• Family who are poor 1 or poor 2
• Farmer who able participate in project implementation (labour, land, contribution and
other resources)
• Have permanent resident in village
• Vulnerable family
• Committed to implement project activity
• Encourage and give opportunity for children to participate in project
• Family who are CF member
• Family who are not involved in other NGOs
• Family who have high responsibility
• Family who are working hard/actively
• Family who living in project target area
• Family who do not apply sanitation/hygiene regularly (have not latrine)
• Family who lack of knowledge related to agriculture techniques (animal raising, rice,
vegetable, fish, etc.)
• Family who have animal raising (pig, cow, buffalo, etc.)
• Family who lack of capital for agriculture production (animal breed, rice, vegetable,
fish, etc.)
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive Latrine
• Farmer who living in project target areas
• Family who are Poor 1 and Poor 2 based on commune statistic in 2012
• Family who are permanent resident with family member from 3 to 5
• Have commitment and resource to contribute in construction the upper part of the
toilet
• Family who also participated in CF and SHG
• Family who used to participate in training or awareness session on health sanitation
• Family who suffered or vulnerable with labour exploitation and child trafficking
• Family who have children study at primary school
• Family who success in project activity implementation
• Family who don’t have toilet/latrine
• Family who doing agriculture production
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive improved cook stove
• Family who are poor 1 and poor 2
• Family who don’t have improved cook stove and have ability to participate in project
implementation
• Have permanent resident and committed to implement the project activity
• Vulnerable family
• They are CF members
• Family who have high accountability and work hard
• Family who living in project target areas
• Family who do not perform regular sanitation and hygiene
• Family who have home garden
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
69
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive cash crop
• Family who are poor 1 and poor 2
• Family who have ability to participate in implementation of project activity (labour,
land, contribution, and other resources)
• Family who have permanent resident in project target areas
• Family who are committed in planting and apply appropriate techniques introduced by
project
• Family who are CF members, SHG member, Water User Group member, and in other
farmer groups
• Family who are not involved in other NGO
• Family who are working hard and commit to share knowledge/experiences to other
farmers
• Family who are planting vegetable in the village
• Family who lack of capital for purchasing seed, materials, etc.
• Family who suffered from climate change
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive fruit tree
• Family who are poor 1 or poor 2
• Family who able to participate in implementation of project activity (labour, land,
contribution, and other necessary)
• Family who have permanent in project target area
• Family who are CF member, farmer group member, water user group member, and
SHG member
• Family who are not involved in other NGO
• Family who are working hard and commit to share experiences to other farmers
• Family who suffered from climate change
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive fingerling
• Family who are poor 1 or poor 2
• Family who able to participate in implementation of project (labour, land,
contribution, and other resources)
• Family who have permanent resident in project target area
• Family who committed to raise fish and apply the appropriate techniques introduced
by project
• Family who are CF member, farmer group member, and SHG member
• Family who are not involved in other NGO
• Family who are working hard/active and committed to share experiences to other
farmers
• Family who lack of money to buy fingerling, materials, etc.
• Family who suffered from climate change
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive vegetable seed
• Family who are poor1 or poor 2
• Family who able to participate in implementation of project activity (labour, land,
contribution, fence making and other resources)
• Family who have permanent resident in target project area
• Family who are committed to plant vegetable and apply appropriate techniques
introduced by project
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
70
• Family who are CF member, farmer group member, water user group member and
SHG member
• Family who are not involved in other NGO
• Family who are working hard/active and committed to share experiences to other
farmers
• Family who are planting some vegetable in the village
• Family who lack of money to buy vegetable seed, materials
• Family who have compost house
• Family who suffered from climate change
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive chicken and duck
• Family who are poor 1 or poor 2
• Family who able to participate in implementation of project activity (labour, land,
contribution and other resources)
• Family who have permanent resident in target project area
• Family who committed to raise animal and apply appropriate techniques introduced by
project
• Family who are CF member, farmer group member and SHG member
• Family who are not involved in other NGO
• Family who are working hard/active and committed to share experiences to other
farmers
• Family who have animal raising
• Family who lack of money to buy chicken breed or duck
• Family who suffered from climate change
Criteria for selecting farmer to receive biogas system
• Farmer aged between 18 to 65 years old with good health
• Ability to contribute the money for installation of bio gas system based on the price on
market
• Must have and can collect cow dunk at least 20 Kg per day. It means at least have two
or adult cattle or 8 pigs
• Have permanent resident in project target area
Criteria for selecting farmer group to receive drilling well
• Group that located in the project target area
• Group that have members who are poor 1 and poor 2
• Group that have members who are SHG member
• Group that have member who are CF member
• Group that have clear management structure
• Group that willing to participate in drilling well construction and repair
• Group that have member who planted vegetable and raised animal
• All group members don’t have drilling well to use
• Group members that have resident near each other
• Group that have clear planning for repair/maintenance drilling well
Principle for using drilling well
• Poor farmer group will receive one drilling well. Drilling well will own by the group
managed by group leaders or the member who were selected by themselves
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
71
• Group member have to participate in defining the location and type of drilling well
based on the project budget available
• Group required to define the contribution for construction including labour, spare part,
and service cost when repair/maintenance need
• Group leaders have to facilitate in preparation of plan for agriculture production (crop
planting and animal raising, and method for using something, etc.) for irrigating
appropriately to the activity of group member
• Water user group member have to responsible for managing, maintenance sanitation,
environment surrounding drilling well
• Group leaders have to play role as facilitator in decision making on contribution for
drilling well maintenance/repair
• People who are not in water user group can also use the drilling well when the time
not use by group members, but need to contribute for maintenance/repair defined by
the group
• Group leaders have to report the expenditure used for maintenance to all group
members at every group meeting or when there is repair
• If there are using drilling well not followed to the all above points, it must find another
drilling well to replace for the group
• If the drilling well are not use effectively or not use, the organization will use the right
to convene the meeting with facilitation by village and commune authority.
Criteria for institutions (health centres, schools)
Criteria for selecting Health Center (HC) to receive big type of
water filter
• HC where located in project target area
• HC covered from 7000 people
• HC that have nurse/doctor permanently
• HC that have high responsibility
• HC that have good environment
• HC that have clear management structure
• HC that have people come to get services regularly
• HC that participate in project implementation
Criteria for selecting primary school to receive big type of water
filter
• School that have at least 300 students
• School that have water well using regularly
• School that located in project target areas
• School that have classes both in the morning and afternoon
• School that located near CF
• School that have good environment
• School that have vegetable garden for student to practice
• School that take high responsibility in clean and sanitation at their school
• School that have clear management structure
• School that established child peer for education group
• School that participated in project implementation
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
72
Criteria for selecting Trainer
• Appropriate age (not too young and not too old)
• Volunteer and committed to participate
• Have enough time for participating in any project activity
• Have good cooperation with local authority and involve institution
• High responsibility to carry out the task provided
• Managing well on all related things, example tree nursery and report
• Be brave and have capacity to facilitate the awareness to the community
• Have transportation or have ability to travel to community for awareness raising
session
• Popular in the community
• Able to manage data and situation in community
• Can prepare work plan
• Cooperate and report all activity involved with project
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
73
7.5.3 SEA Project List
SEA Projects Data
(as of 28.03.2014)
Code Name
IPEG No
Country / Theme
Full Name of Project Project Holders Total Budget
Planned Start
Planned end
CFED-Camb-12
1204/710033
Cambodia
Small Project
Livelihood Improvement of Primary Schoolteachers and Rural Poor
Cambodian Farmer Economic Development (CFED)
Mr. Riem Sophon, Executive Director
Email: [email protected]
Chambok village, Sangkat Chek, Svay Rieng province, Cambodia.
Tel: 017482860
€14,200.00
01-May-2012
30-Apr-2014
CFS-Camb-14
14/01/58
Cambodia
Regular
Quality of Life Promotion for Marginalized Rural Border Children and Population
Cambodia Family Support (CFS)
c/o Dr. Eng Samnang, Executive Director
Email: [email protected]
#400, Group 19, Kapko thmey, Ocha commune, Battambang
province, Cambodia. Website: www.cambodiafs.org
€49,350.00
01-Jan-2014
31-Dec-2015
CRDA-Camb-13
1211/710034
Cambodia
Small Project
Equal Access to Primary Education through Livelihood Improvement
Children Resource Development Association (CRDA)
Dr. Kak Seila, Executive Director
E-mail: [email protected]
House # 197, Group 8, Wat Romdul, Chamcar Samrong,
Battambang district, Battambang province, Cambodia
€29,379.00
01-Jan-2013
31-Dec-2014
CWCC-Camb-14
1312/710036
Cambodia
Small Project
Domestic Violence Prevention through Anger
Management for Men
Cambodian Women’s Crisis Centre (CWCC)
c/o Ms. Pok Panhavichetr, Executive Director
Email: [email protected]
#13C, St. 331, Sangkat Boeung Kak 2, Tuol Kork, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia. Tel: (855) 23 997 967
€28,401.00
01-Jan-2014
31-Dec-2015
KTC-Camb-14
1312/710037
Towards Fair and Real Opportunities for Former Street Children
Krousar Thmey, Cambodia
c/o Mr. Herve Roqueplan, General Director
€27,160.00
01-Jan-2014
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
74
Code Name
IPEG No
Country / Theme
Full Name of Project Project Holders Total Budget
Planned Start
Planned end
Cambodia
Small Project
Email: [email protected]. 4 rue 257, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia
31-Dec-2015
PSARDEPOT-Camb-13-FF
1211/710034
Cambodia
Regular
The Psar Depot Street Children Centre of Krousar Thmey Krousar Thmey, Cambodia
Mr. Aun Auray, General Director
E-mail: [email protected]
Krousar Thmey Cambodia:
4 Street 257, Kampuchea Krom, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Tel: +855 (0) 23 366-184 . Fax: +855 (0) 23 882-113
€24,000.00
01-Jan-2013
31-Dec-2014
SSOBMZ-Camb-12
1209/770016
Cambodia BMZ
Strengthening of Adaptation Capacities of Peasants to
Climate Change to Ensure Sustainable Livelihood
Santi Sena Organization (SSO)
Venerable Nhem Kim Teng, Executive Director
Email: [email protected]
Prey Chhlak pagoda, Svay Rieng province, Cambodia
Tel.: (855) 44 6666403, 016 640353. website: www.santisena.org
€347,006.00
01-Jul-2012
30-Jun-2015
VCAO-Camb-14
1312/710038
Cambodia
Small Project
Child Protection through Livelihood Improvement and
Better Health
Vulnerable Children Assistance Organization (VCAO)
Email: [email protected]
#72, St. 608, Boeung Kok II, Toul Kork, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Tel: (855) 23 884 722. Website: www.vcao.org.kh
€21,862.00
01-Oct-2013
30-Jun-2015
COCDBMZ-Kampot-Camb-13
1309/770022
Cambodia BMZ
Integrated Rural Development in Kampot
Cambodian Organisation for Children and Development (COCD)
Mr. Ung Pola, Executive Director. Email: [email protected]
#34, Street 480, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Tel: (855) 12 234773
€349,036.00
01-Jul-2013
30-Jun-2016
7.5.1 Map of Project Region
EVALUATION REPORT Walter Aschmoneit, April/May 2014
75