(PDF, 101 mb) - USAID

o
0TWM
- :80
D. AC IVITYA
ro ect
W, U 1
I tIESEVALUATED tea w Ia aa
Proa.Lpa Ter
WevaIllat oQJ )
z. ailuatio f ~Cat6 c
S~isFoo7 o orogramo
'nIdaUSJIDnfd a ,
ft e
2.e ita eCIexOsti g ED:Y MISOantAD a OFIC pIate
3.Ide ify a' -i,or oL heo'tanS ~ arsuc
4.St enat , en,t os Coin g 'dav ee
et oz Uyued
a4 s~ lo n I U'
-call roj ex
ccred Freco
M , ,aht wo
Bo a e Gm
S Whg c"-b"n~i~ fh e' t neesb--'s'e- ,'-. h o ,h
GP
A -
111T
tu p E1ul a~aD ccJ
e gnees S_ D~
u
Pb~al
il

HEV ATIOAS C do * a p ed
hG 'e C e foe y fe r g ~ e aJF s o v r g 2 0
Ic evel o o e au i
ie
es
of tdf~~
eee
no -
spt
s
aaa
z elsy
aa
a d t e e1 g a18 ese a o - utro:e e, ildIl ear
2
Gmuc;alhuh any ar also b g I pleeeted D oa /Os.I S~ is1ev lu
Was o uce b.a3 pers o sul -an team b e-sRf iis o S Zo all
o "'0 s, to t_~c u n ar t oTa* at ns ~ e - m ea no: eig 1 consig nees)
one Zn uave,,,. be esrin o rae e lpet matI ogt
- Te prgrawekes mjo
Th~Vakauaetchia,
i atNRe co
aae
si
n
ean
ndav6omn
pre-hodrlels
lac spfficlent mcot e en
siaryip
ts
an
suc Gtyas
as t aing a era aNa
The T CFFW Program
he proje aier
s'r r fetlewee
a, ies r lu it I strona
oe~
inerstinF
ie sapoo
a r
undest of co inung r,;:gra evoom t.,,ev,]:pmn 4 II
- Tte ~~esandresp~i ii~-ies f C-S e: e pa rea i I'
Rev s e i, ie
asnnot succee e n mleen n aPaESy
CR5gap. major of pro wete cjv ctg ie- i mis i n in ~
incom-gen a a d s, -±1
c1a-Wl
deo -n ee p oje:s.
- C S s~ u d a e,,-a'e,' in6 - Wi"vT donors% , en u e ev es 'e I'e s
-y shouaRS e t isth )asuI s wigmtGov, r qe te sr ner
eadfes and imgok~ leme a Ionya psoacgodps
f Inc-
'-i rfo
uat Tea,0 VE6va no K
M ~~~~ G- ~ S edehr
eso rce
15-0 J.6rrj'
Gde
-350uKe-roce S
1 Ju",8, "" e
elin r8-8e--O~
19i-6nVit
* p. ina ars an 860
uni
9-0
e 1
0- 16-0
pmei
,
746"'ro eso a-d s i FiedR 3ep50 0' -Gie e ess re,,ua J q gy n,
haS dA ,m m in aPI &4Y so psme
e6tScea
PAGE 2

A.I.D. EVALUATION SUMMARY PART II
J. SUMMARY OF EVALUATION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Crynot to exoed the 3 papes provloed)
Adress the followinp hems:
* Purpose of activity(ies) evaluated * Principal recommendations
* Purpose of evaluation and Methodology used " Lessons leamed
Findings and conclusions (relate to questions)
Mission or Office: USAID/India Dale this summary prepared: March 15, 1988
Title and Date of Full Evaluation Report: Evaluation of CRS Food for Work Program in India
PAGE 3
1. Purpose of the activity (i) the generation of employment opportunity July 1.5, 1987
especially for the poorest; (ii) the enhancement of their income through
agricultural/economic and community development activities; (iii) Improvement
in their quality of life.
2. Evaluation purpose and methodology
The goals of the evaluation were (i) to assess the management aspect of the
FFW Program (ii) to evaluate the 3 year FFW Planning, Monitoring and
Evaluation (PH&E) grant.
The methodology used consisted of field visits to all the CRS zones (except
Cochin which does not have FFW Program), observations on a number of FFW
Projects, and interviews and discussions with relevant CRS staff and a sampled
CRS counterpart agencies' personnel viz. 17 consignees & 26 project holders
who were selected based or. criteria such as geographical coverage, type & size
of projects, type of consignees & project holders. Survey form to collect
descriptive data at the zonal level, and interview schedules for various
categories of interviewees were prepared. The sources of data consisted of
recoras at the CRS H.Q./Zonal Offices, and consignee offices, group
discussions with the zonal personnel, and private interviews with CRS staff
(specially with the zonal airectors, and field reviewers & evaluators) &
interviews with the 17 consignees ano 26 project holders.
3. Findings and Conclusions
- The CRS FFW Program is a very functional program: CRS zonal offices are
striving for greater development impact; in the last 2 years, the emphasis
has been on long-term planning with an integratea community development
approach; there has been increased dialogue between CRS and its counterparts
regarding the development objectives of the program; and the Planning,
Monitoring and Evaluation (P,&E) Grant has contributed positively to all of
the above.
- The major program weakness is at the consionee and project holder levels.
They lack adequate technical, management ana aevelcpment skills; and they also
lack sufficient complementary inputs, such as training, materials and cash.
- The FFW Program is lore effective where: the project holder is a private
voluntary organization (PVo), and/or wnere the project holaer is a Priest or
Nun with strong interest in FFW, ano understanding of community development.

- The roles and responsibilities of CRS field reviewers are unrealistic due to
the large geographical program coverage and the wide, variety of functions.
- The recent aecision of two zonal offices to concentrate their staff and
other resources on a limitea number of consignees who have demonstrated good
management performance was a good one.
- The PMI&[ Grant was a weak response to a very
high
ambitious
expectations.
set of objectives
Although the
and
grant contributed
re-orientation positively
of the
to
FFW
the
Program towaras integrated
development,
long-tern community
it has not succeeded in implementing
system
the
is
PM&E
implementable.
System. This
However, not enough training
BIIA arid
has
AEA
been
instruments
provided;
are
the
not usable in their present
aq
form;
yet,
and
no
there
linkage
is,
between evaluation results and planning.
- The CRS policy shift away from supporting "individual" projects and towards
supporting projects which are intended to create "community" assets is
resulting in the application of stronger, more community-based criteria for
beneficiary arid recipient selection.
- The CRS System of project categories inhibits innovation. In the few income
generating projects which are being implementea, little thought is given to
the actual potential for market tie-up. Skill aevelopment for the landless,
i.e. vocational ana on-site training, is not given enough attention.
- There is evidence of collaboration at the field-level between
consignees/project holders ana local government officials. However this
collaboration is not systemic.
- There is ambiguity within the CRS organization
decentralization. on the scooe
This
of
lack of clarity impinges
policy
upon
formulation
management
which
functions
should
and
be based on
retrieval.
systematic
The
information
CRS FFW Program
storage
in
and
India is achieving
results,
positive
but
development
there is potential for much greater impact.
4. RE CONE NDAT IONS
* A CRS/USAIU workshop to review the outcomes of this evaluation, and
fotriulate
to
next steps. This workshop shoula occur as soon as the new CRS/India
Director is in position.
- CiRS should liaise and establish closer links with Government at the
national, state ano local (block) levels to ensure integration of Program
planning and implementation. It is recommendea that local Government
technical officers be incluaoea as resource people in training seminars.
PAGE 4

* CRS should take more initiative with USAID and other donors to ensure
greater resource mobilization for the FFW Program. Consignees should take
more initiative with Government and other PVOs to do the same.
* The PN&E System as developed by Community Systems Foundation should be
revitalized.
The remaining PM&E Grant funds should be reallocated to cover costs
of CRS Field Reviewers to prepare additional case studies on-site;
and to fund a seminar in each zone designed to use the case studies
as an educational tool. The Grant should be extended to September
1988.
The BIIA and AEA formats should be reviewed and revised. Procedures
shoula be developea within CRS to consolidate and analyze evaluation
results, and draw conclusions and learnings as inputs for future
planning; and expected users of the BIIA and AEA instruments should
receive further training. Outside assistance will likely be required
to carry out these recommendations.
A neeos-basea training approach is strongly recommended to improve
job performance of CRS staff and key consignees and project holders
in planning, project design, management and evaluation. To develop
this needs baseo approach, a training needs assessment is strongly
advised within the next six months. Outside assistance will be
required for this needs assessment.
An annual seminar to review the implementation of the PM&E System
should occur at the national level to discuss evaluation findings and
fonulate new planning directions. It is recommended that such a
seminar occur within the next six months to review the findings ano
recommendations outlined in this evaluation report in the light of
CRS's past approach to the PM&E System.
Each zonal office should organize on an annual basis a 3-day strategy
oevelopment/planning retreat to aooress issues affecting program
implementation, and to aevelop action plans for the coming year.
* Concentrate resources on consignees who have demonstrated good past
performance. Strengthen their capabilities to support good development
projects with the aadition of staff with technical and development
skills, and experience in rural aevelopment, to carry out project
promotion functions. Provide complementary inputs (training an TA
support, material and cash resources) to their projects.
* Project design assistance should be provided to CRS to develop FFW
project moaels for income-generation, as well as for skill oevelopment.
arket tie-up potentials must be considered.
PAGE f,

- --------
-
_ _ __ _
_
_ _
_
_____
---
___-__-_ _________ ------- -------, _._
I
= 11,
'- I I~~
....... _
n- ,,, _ "Ll
l, : Ill, 7 '', , I - _.,
- , 'I I'll I
I I 11 _ 1 == - .WWAWt
, ,
(u gr,li'-:
tiill 11111enti ; r .
,
tIA C-,
C , -_ GLi6
C 5aEXT IIIr,_-_I-I- UbMtn'e dr-----y'6 ... lira-I i newsy POWIN P
usvon:r
... - iN P I
AV& y b .M"I ie i
"AC
"ri*_0Ia nr,.1 I: 0
-
, ,r,M ---
i1'11,:z ., "
03. W"-I am I
.. ! 'T ,,,, - , f - .'' I , ­
, ','P I'i;
' ;-a--0,,, ,i,- -- , , , -_-, ,'-i-
, __
_ "MW ItL 0 ,1 -1,"-, ,",_1',, , ,1,
"",­
-
"', I
-, , _'- "_-- , L_' ,'' ,V' -- , , -."
.,! - , ,,-,, ,'i,7-,, , , "", , r, ,--"-,.
, '-''
" , ), ',,,,,,.,,',',''z"
- "'; ,l -,-,ir ,,11
lrL,, ,,,, ll.- ­
, , - " ,_ ., , _ "I _ , - , , . "--
'-v 1; -,
, ,,,, ';', !-_ _,- ' -1; , T 111 , ",,_ , . IM, ""
- I-_,
,i;p-_, , , ,.',-,"-;S _,,_,,i , ,il.,; , i,,:, _ _ , 4
-' ?-_ , ,_"ZI11-
.t -, , ,_ _",__
Jl . - _ -, , " , -1 11
. Lt,
.IFlf ' ,j ', -I---- S;%, _',,',i , '.,.o
,,,ifT -' '-',,',,;'-i ,,--.- - ,,,,,, , "" '!',"' ,V", 11 , , if
"1, 'riy-f,
, , - ,
__ - - - -i' ,,,-,-i;,-,,;- -.,"-'- ,,'"---- '', - , I 11)--- ,_I-Ir ',* -',,'%"'I:,
-----
I i:,--, :, I , - - - -1- i.4 'I ),,6,4 -111r-,t f -1,
I- -- ., , - - - ,", " , " - - -- r, '- ,'.,, , ;", -_, Ill- 'Ili
I I-,
. _ ---­
,,P -- .r , , , -,,,, I . -.1 l. I - I I ,, ', 1, r', -_ ,'i,,' _- lil- ;l ,- i _ .- ,,,,- 0- _, .,".,ii , -- ,r,, c
,', i- - ,, ', _- ;".",i-i_-- F",.i:, ,i ;r ol - I.i. . 1 , 11,ill
-,j,,,lli,,, , ", ,,, J _ , , , '- , , -i'.r - ) - . . , - I -1-1 " _
t, . , - , , , , , - , _.,-,,.- i;,.,,
, ,_r "'-V
14
-Li
, 1' ,i- - , I - '. I , ,; ,; , . , " ; I , ' , , . ,_ ,: - , - - , - . rm
,-'i'.-,"'' ,;,V'.., EVA LUATJ ON,'_OF,
" '
rCRS ,' ,- , ., ,, - , , , -; , " 1,
, 7, - -,
,
, , , I, ,
, ;i";
,- " ,, "
, , i"
1,:i;,-e
, , , ;, , , " ,; , S : i ? , , , - - . _,4i, _,_ r , ,i'. '
Y"i-
I 71 1il,
,
li , , , ', V,-,II', ,,,,
, I I.v
,
Ii,. I""I',-, 1
I I I
-, ll ,,i i , - ' - ii -,': , " " ,1, - -_Av A-.,li,-i,$
, "',- 4 ' r ji'. i ,Rt,-
, "." %Lr" I ,I.I,- , , I
P , , l,- " _ , :7 , ;i
'k ,- , , , , ,, , , 'i" li ",'Z ,'-,-' - .
10 -lt, ",
o ,--,;, "i , -,', 111.;,,iol "I,;,- I , "6"zo: ­
- ,,,
-
., ,FOOD ',FOR'- , kil *:" - .,",..
1-,- ,- ;A'.
" , " - WOR0 PROGRAM;:t
',J N',','I ND IA,
, ,, , USA I D7r'INO i AA' l,'-r,!'
,, ,t,,,,, ,,.
-,., , _ _-,i___ " , - - . , ---- ' - - ,,'_ ,­
', :., -' , _ - ,,,,,, " ,i,:,-
!Juif , , 11 I
., r.- - "'- , n i-,, ,4,
il_, _-_ r.. ..,"''-,
,- , ,.-1-
___ " , " ., "r,-,- ,;
", , "-, I
,..Z-'-",
, .',r II_,I,'T-,' ,4-:, ' , , _ %'.
I...
-i--v ',r,-',-,,' , _. "-l-'I - , -, .I,,
!, ". - I , - i, 'I
.:Jj _,_ .,_, , " _,;, I -,;,;­
! _ -. I
,-.i,
Z-, % - l. ,,,-,t"I -1, ,
, i, _ i ­
i, '_"I, :,, ,_,,,i,'-,, -, - -" , ."
, - f I- ';V,,i,-, ,_ , 7-,-1 I - ­
.- ,.L ,1,
-, ; i-.i,--A -,-, l :'irL ' I1jij',I,-
, , -, " lr
- - 4,-i,,, ,:-, '';,:,.:
- ,;- _, " l,II,,"--,4
_:-"_ , -'i;-'- R,.,.,-- ".Y,
, - - - ,,YU ,,,,,,
"4%,
, ,,,;, - t _
,;,
P
i:' i
IAl .,
,
,_,ilt.
" , , _1
I I
- . " ;
, , ,!
"
_.,:,
"l; ,
,'-__
_ -::,
', , _ ,
. ." I -,
,
' I.,
11 . , ".
''.
- ,.71
- ,
,
,
1-'1
, Iii
,I.
" . I,-,
,,' 'k
,
i-
, : ."",
I-,
11.1t
'-
,&,-,,,,,-
I i-. '4 t,
II,,,._,"* _ " .
-1
Ii'
,
i" ,
I
-,111111-, , 1. ",-- ","r,-:,_ .' _ . -'"-, ,-,,""", 1 Ml7,%1 _ _4"-,,-,,', i,7 ': I '. I", , _,
-- , - , , . ,: , , '' ,,:, , r'_ _',,r,
-i, '-,
", .,r,, _ , ,, 41 , L-,z,,,' 7 ,-_
r r,
,-,, ,',., i,,;
,, ,
_ . , ,_ . -__ , . -1 .'_'I--.-I - ' .'!;. _, 11 - ,,Jl
. ,: , ,-, ." i ;
-,,
i,, ,- _,';
_ - ",f'
, r-,,I .',, ol , ', - ­
.,I' -
.-
- -
1 - . ,:;:, Ii, , " , , , i .-t.
"
- -1 , I " . j 11 !,"-, -,-'!, ,, ,%--i ' ,
. . I:
- , , :- -,-, , : - II '.L
-
,' -; , -
,
- . I
-1 , . 44
I %
,, ;
-
- - ",
'. :, :,',, --,_:. , ,
-
I :
. ,' II 1-:I , , -
-,
, _, " _ -
- -I , 1-1-1
-,.
, -
IS io ,,, ! i, , - -: ; -'I , z - , _. ' - ; - - - , 1 1- - , .,,,-,.iij_," r",- : "" .- '_ --, - l i-',C I.! f ,I "
. , ,_-
- , Iq : . ,
;,
,_- , , - , _," , i _'I _,- - , ,
" _' , , -,, , ,- 4 , , . , -, , . ..-; ,:, _. , ,,, " - ,- _ - __ _,
.......
-- . r .
_ 7B ,
a- , - _- -." -II -'1111.11 _-- - - ,r- , - -,--L-!, ", ":-%- '.= '- -I, " _ - , ._ _- '-r - , , - , - , , 77 . " , - ". ,,, , , , ,, ,-- , ii ,, - 7, ,
.
F "".,., ,- 11 I
.
. , -
- , ,- ,
r ; , , , , .,- , ,, ,- - "". f'."I-7 3 ,
- ,
,
- _ ,,, - 1 11_1,- ". , ,
-
I I , ,
,
': I , " , - , , _ , !- ,
I .:, , " I
,kl ',
, , r._., -, tj, ___
-Ini __ r - - I , - I . . l , , , r, , , . , ,- ,., , , -1,7 _IL--,-,--,-7,f.-,
21 ""--;, , -- _ r,-,
, -7,,7",,"-,",
, . ,_1, ,.11, '.,-,,,
- 7, - ;
,,_ . ' , , -r , ' -, , 1 , . , ,, i I-_1- ,'2.',-,;i , L-, 1,
-1
- , II _I'_, , , . , , ,, - ' "-, ) )V -_.- 4
't.
i
. , ----
, . . . , I . . ,, , .
1.
- - , , I" j 1,_. I - ,
, ,
-
, -" _ll_-r , I "
,
......
4 ,, - , -.
, .,, j
,
- - , ,
, ,_ , ,, , - - , ,
- , , ", __ - ,. 'i- -
1 I_- ;I,,. "I 1 _ -;
, ,
,
- , , 11 ', - V ' i .
, " , . I - - I - :_1_11-
, , .- il ;
" , idL, -' ,", ,;,
'.
- , ,,,, - , , , - .%i,_i_-l,, ,I i,' ,
, , .,,11I-i---
i- -_--,-
I ; I -li ", _
. ,_ _ " " , , %' 11-1pl-
,, , "N "I.,
,., . '
I
, i
.,i - , , - ," _ ,, - _
1-1 .1 xl 11, I.,.
, , - - - , -1 l", '. , , , I . , 1 , _., , -- _, , , -- , , , _1
I
1 : ,-.- ,,I: , ,-. , , , ,
Y _ , , - I - , , ,_,"I'll _.-
. ,,-,;11 - ,-r,I;i , ,
"I 11, I - ,, " :I'll, ....'', ' -,- - _ '_- 11,I- 11
, I 13Y MISSI -,. 2, -1" "i -,'''',',,''ll
1....:''I'll , 1 - - , ,
, , ', l 1,L .LCOM NIENTS ,
", ': , " 0IFFICEiAND BORRoy ER ,
- ; '" i'. - - I , , :- _ __oNAID/IA I , - 11 -" .',irp-tv.
-til, .. I
,l', " ', , '-,L, , , - , _ - - " : , I .1 1, _ z_, /GRA ,
' I :, .r , ,
, .,- 7 I ,1-- , 1 -' "",
. _,--, -i; I 1 '; -_' - --
_-_:',
.,,,
-'- :"-t-.
- , , , , 1"r'.2",' -- ,.".,',,-,%!., I -.
, I I, _
- , L"',-:
'
_..
" ":"", " - '1171"-,
:I;; .....
, ",-;',,_ --,',,, -,,; --,,, -," , , v%,,
- r-I - , , , , ;,, . I Ii I - : 11I e _ -1I I, -
ii'. i . - _ - , I , ,- ,, . ,. , , ; - - -,"1. , , '.';- , ,
il I - 1,I-., -1 , - - - - -,'' I- i, ,,-'.-,] ' , , ,
,The r .1 - I ,' I , -,, ,',,r,, - - - _ , I I--, - ,,. _'-_
0, _ - ',I_-%, ",_ ,:
, , .,, ,
, " IL:" i', , ­
- ev- - - 1_ - , , , ., , ,_--,,-, -% I-'Ir,
I iz] _- I ' ' il:, ,,_ :_ ,,-q , n
,: :"_:- ,'':,. . : ,: ,,; , - - , ,,-,, , ,,
, 1, -:,,--_
111 _ , _ ! I-i,"
,,,,,,ltia,,
,I,,,,
r
s .CRS I ,'_con entioh :'th ' MSr-
- I-1'll-I-II i- I !! ." -,f -- , ','
L,,
"L' "', , "' , a IU'a t i o ' t ' ' ,- . a -t "'M' -ilL,
'i0rog
7i_'
ra -, '
, , "f
-, ' '" "'- '_ - ' '" ' ""'
" . iave Ia;00SJ
"' t"v"'e'-"rol
' e -,-to ir_""_'
I0 ' _1f ':" ' " .t "'..L_i I I "i?", - ,,, - - i'?'
I , "r:", 'i"
, , , , t
'', -, ,pIay, in the :al lev iat , "'. - -_
-, ' L I, . Iru ,ra.1 , " n ,o , ru ra I ' -1"' I"' , 'I- ,_''- -- - ''V,' - ,
Al pover ,,y 7.,and,._a. "- , ; ,I 11,Iill '
, -I - t, ,, - I _ po tent-la
,tj- ,',-,,,for,,-cr,6a'
_-_,- - ,,, 'Li
._
- n1-i_.,
g,--,, Io
- ng - . , .-
,'. : -I,,',,.;
i . , , ",:%"
e rm ;--.,.-';- -.'
- ,_;_, '-Li;
- 1. asse s tto,-Im prove" productiV ity "_ an d, . ,I-, ,- ":"-_,e ',-'''i', _7*,
; ,,,,,
shift ' I om es,.,:-,, ',I ,"-ls r,inite- _ ,"-
-,!] k-
i
lp 11 - , . 1.1lic __ esLing ;.'to , i
" , , S Wh , I, - I ,r,i '_'.1y.
'.t r-
. n'ote --
', h6; , ;i,,",.-
' ,' :i' ',!l'
-,,,-"
" - -,f _"'--. r' " ', -, - rr7-
b-- f,,". - - - .1-11- .,,Il
.r:: , 11.1 -of CRS_ consJ gn.ees.'f rom project' ' i cn,--pri ma r-i I ene _,jr,,. ,._,.,_, .,,", ,;,";,',
II, I - I ,r I I- ' r,i , Jt._ fa J esI-1,t 0"r' :h6_ e',, ,',_,r,7,: _71 i--,,
,., -,
r I ,,it hi', b. 1,,IL , I _,t , . 5 %,*,;,T
' ' ro _
ade r -community, benefits,. I e I -. ,, "" '- _'
, -,_:,',,,i',"%"
I 4: 1';' ..r,, ir ,,,_
'
,Th i s 'I,i s'-a" w6 1c' 0 1 -" On'-'th6-, ', - "7el ,
,"-I, 1.r 1 .appears -that''effOrtS 'to t _ - ,t; ' 61 -,s hJ! t,'-"
""Z.
,L'.- 6 a t"" , ,", ,-r ­
,,
J - 1, 11, I .t .' .L-' ., _ ' ,"'L1,6 i ve - s .,Id )F,,,--_,,,
ii,,,7_
-,, :
I , :, . ' ns a a, projec -m ni __-, "- - ',L.
-,'r-'6',__i - -_,,i,.7,
,,,
, - - ,_ -'r , If oring ,,and -evaldation',,.."L' '- ',
;i - , . , .. " - . IL- I -11,stem-z'
.- j"hav"e':'.'7',
-',-,., I-,-?
-L _,
1,
. 'fal Ten' 'shorrt of'the Mark . . This-.may bel."a' __,
., ,1, r r - c'ase,-o, , ,a ttl -_- Ii,b- ,
II !, t . t' __-,1- --
I. L'd- -'*r - .--
em p, i ng ;a.,-, oo:,,,Ie a orate
,-,,is
''';l"
I,_J,!
I'13 ,r!
il-,
on - -,I',- - - ' y ste
" _'-"
j-"l-ll"'.."
_" """
-, ! ,,,
i - , W _
t-.I-:,-"_1, " ' I.i'l '- , ,::k,
1. . it ho'
' ut, Su . ffi c'Jent reicbgbjti Ir .- , - -, - . i' .
i and',freedom .-, I . II11 " f ' I:,, -. S
:,,.
uppo_-
r t' _ , , ,tl 0 ' 'i ' - I'l" ----"i" l "'i, I ,f;, ",
, _',r' I 6f:: 'a ",1* I e v - a N at i"o h- s ,,,Ii ,,2,:,,,, -- "'II - ,: ,*:_ NPl
c t Ion-. Th e n',' ,! --- , 711.4.
, 1111'- :),
,
1, .A t, -1 uggests'.,a-' . numbe erms
r--of-,Ways -,,USA ID,_m i ght, 'J-J
, ns .I II , , I ' - ,,,_',-,I,-;-
for the FFW ,,:, . .'- ' ',"v
_ _ ,,r , I, I . P--,,--'"-; -,; I-r k ",--'e,-..
-1_ , ,-
I I m y f CRS' ,-",;A s f ' t i7_'.
i- ogram .,a e , bbkl,,'fo , ;...
-',,',",!",V,
..
, - ' - I ,, : , L essons'
ai'n-i'
-,earne
-Nay's4tll
o,,-,,'I",- ,,i
'_'"
-_,1.
- .- d. to
l_ _
I , ,
i , ,,,, res pon ; th&_:,current;
-1I1. ,-p
I I I - I - ' " ;, , ,,7 .," * - g,", I --_ - ",- ,r ,- . ,,
,,,i,-
-,- ­
i ' I .- - ,, _.- , pe
11,
;J",
,L-,":""-,",,'
,',obl 6ms i created"by,'-the" droUght-_,' -r'.the ,- -.
i" II , t'-1 '-"'I- ' - '-'-1, L,-, --, - ,
.1II .. . I,,, -1 sonne
-' i-,,,,--
" '%"
_r
'_- -,
,11'1,
,,;- ; Zii
- . ,, ' ' "d-*n,;,,"',
-- -----" I..,
..... , -_"
,: I'__ 4..zi ,, ilI11- L,",
,",I ,P..,
i,-,,­
..." ; _',enddrsemeht, I : 3" , eva ,l,,..
,,.
I'll f uat i on,'s'i', s t rong,,', 4,,',,% ; ,_
-,i
'
lnr . I e e sr I0f " I'.1 I,'-,ii-,
_r',
,,I 11
:t h1s-,eVa I0art ib n CtL t "-, I'i'11- - r , - I , 0 '
s Il,,r, ,,, I __'t . ,-, "",r ' ' ' " ,,, """r ' ­
" ,6 - _ - Li h)'c'o'm 6i niihg,.i'-FFW,,,
- W
,.,, ,l:
I 'ifor local pr6je gr . il1_1, r ,l'., ,, it isoth'
- -,-' "' _'_ :"
s a aim ,-,., ,,-,.Ii- Ir"." ,,,- - _.;""'-. _,r-".,, , -­
"I
_
S:SUg g s p 0 oppoir '6n'* ,r t--'- r.- '. _,""_ _ .rrr,
' " -- -,t _, I - i '-_
-11 7 1 ng - - - ,, h 11i ss10* n --t, ",
- 11 I , I I ,. __ I , - . 11- -, e " - ,._ :. ; r-;,-I
r, ,-I I- I I.
are' i nde'e' d II , I.
t 1me 1
I
-1
y "
, " , !, .-I i- , , - Y yrsu , ,11: ' " ",,,
r I .: .1 - - , ,,,,1_1 .I.-
I_-:.
,., r ,.Ii, II o I . I : I- II . . , e i I -:.1 i - - , - ,- " .,_: -._,, ,,__
,_, 11 I,- , ­
- I I I - r,",,J,',i , " , , _ \',
- I I "th'e'' I - , ,,- " , . . , _- ,,L,:
I I . . r-I - r I ,II I
II ,,,
I,-,-I
,r-i,- I, I, _,
,---1- i ', :, !_, ,,, -
,,,-,
,r 'l '. . - _,: 11 i "
,, ,;ill-
I I 1_ I1., ' ' -,- ,',.'",L ,- - II
, "
11,
, I, " ,-__
, _- "
,_,
, !"';,,,l,
-, ,- --,---"-,,,
I " ., -L' Ir' I II I. ffI j . _L I ,_,",-" L;: '
,-,", 1,
:.",-r _,
, --,,;-' _ ,.-, ,, I -, ,I -,
- ,,,
1-,,­
", , I _, s 11I Ir I11 .:. , - r Ii , % "! -, - ,;- ",, I',,,, -,_-I,",rI ,,,-i;_^
"::-i.'
I . . I I I. tjvenes -, 'r,I, - - - , _,_ _, - , -_,, ",; ­
!_ 'I_'' I I II I-
r-Fo.
I r 't
.L Ke ."Ibng_ .: '' , ' ' -' ' " _ , - ., - -!
WIt- ,I II II I I II,II I I . I I . I 'Li ' ' '_ - " , ; I_, -', "7,"LI", '
II I .I .1I I 111. ' l' ,I "-il , . , " " , -,L - i
,_ , , I i . I 1. te'rm,'- ' , _, , ""-1,." .." .:11"
, - -
I , 11 L ;,'.,,_"k
I I I I I- I , .,7'L, _I_
I i-,,2"_; . ., Ir ,i.,'.."', ,I,_L;. I_-­
, I' ,,L _ I I I I , 1: the,'
,
"I 11, I, - -1 , - _ , . , ," 11
- ,.,111
;-1_;_,;,
_
0 ''r"I- I I I I I IL I I r , ,__'
,. " :, "l,",
__",, , ,.,. ", ,,-
I . I I . 1. r'uraYP.V
. . -I1 I.- ,A_: __ L,.__ '
,;,!, 1 ,'.11;54_,
I II I I I I I : . I - 11%.I , ,1, I I I',,"I , " "- ',",-',-",
-, '',LL I I '' I I, "'L,
-_-, .. -, I .-,.,-"
-.',-
' ,il,I_ _',".11
,, -I -"- .1111,
-, ;:,,
_ II I , , '': , -l IIr,,,,,-_ ,,- -, , -.- ­
- - '' -_)ll. .'l-,-,
I I , - , .: 11 ,_, I - 1 _ nc , _ , , 'r PIi,,
,', I . p ,* II I , , -- ,' Ij, .,',;'
,
(11_" - I " ;,-;" ! , -,
. - "?-.,'",
_,_,r, I ., Ir I I I I I I I- ' , ,,,.;-,
. . . - , ,,, l: , "
,, II , I r -- 1 I I, I :I .1 11,
1,I I L'i
-I::,
';, .,_ i'j r_'_,
".,"_.!.,, ;,i,,,,",,
ZL, , I . II" - I I 11, II . I :, :,
, " I . - ..-.1 -il II,resources
'il-i:I. I . 1, . I , II . I ! :;, i " , . I I- ,
1.i, - - I I I I I , 11 .1 1: r,'',
, ,iL._!':11r,"' '' 'r'r I: I L' I- ,,-_-;, ,
' ,_',
, ;
II I I - - ' I ,I .,,I . ; r It1,:- -' -'.1ir,- .. -,;,,"L,:
,;, .".
:::_ , ' - . , . - ,I-I- .11 ..__
? iil
i'll
, - . I II I, :r;
I., I I:, I-1Ir - " - I _ I _ - ---, _ ­
-1,I_ -1 I I % ,: I " , - -,rLI, .1
111.,:I I-, r',", L II -I - . II- -
L_, - - , ]' .,
... I . 11
11 I I I . I r ,, _, , . r : - "'1,1
1.11_ ,!-, ",I'j
4, I d- I .,, , - I 11 ,_-_ .", , i._ ,-, --',"I "'
,"'_,
-L','I'
_', I I- I I __ . I .1 : -: l, - ,, , . ,I,:.I - '
i; ' . I .
I
.
. I
I
L I I 1, .. r, I -
- 11,I , J'"' _
-'',, ,
- -1-1
i- , 4ie
.,
I I_
.
",:"
: .' - ,'_
-- r' , - ' f I - - : .,::
. _, , _
,,r,'"' 1,_ Ll
r __,
_:_,
", I
1. -r -1 , , , 1.115Z
I __I
; , , '_ ,
11 I I . r I; : I
L
, .
, I II
W "" , I" _,,k:_. ', 11,
I I
, ' '
. ' :
,
-
I I I I
:
I I I . _
-
,
, . , " I' i ,: .I, , . 1;I I
. - , I
;" " . -V -"
I - ,,I",11'11
_- I
, . .1 ; ; - . , I L11,, I- ,_ , ­
'
.I I I I I I. - .r -
I - 1- 'i
. - _ , -
: - , I " , e '
, 1' i , -
- t
, . ,. _ L' ,
. ,
!:
J - -, I.- ,
I
I
I
: _
,
,
, -_
_
,-,­- _
, " "
9 ' i ,--, i: , , 2 :- ,
I- .I . I . - . - " I I .. , II I - , m ,
_ r ', - -- - - ,:ii , t 1, ' , '. , io
. f. ' - .,
I
' I ,
- I - . . I - I . .I I
.
, , ,
, i IIi,
- I1. I -, -1 .1 , I ,.II-.-1, 1 1- , , I1, : '
, _ '.
, ,- -, . L_, ", - - " , , , ,,_ - - _ , .. , .1
-
-
;
M,
, , : - I r , - , . . I , - : I , ., ,
, , . ,,; " I, , _ "' I ," -- "IM
r' - '. ,
4,i"',
:i _
__ I L r I
- , . I L . I , I. -, I I. I I 'L , f I I- I ,, I , , , , - - . ,
I -, r, , , - ., - - - , I I.i.
, _: , l- _ ji :r ,
, , 2
_
I , L , . r , ,,
-,I , r _- -, I i 11, , , , , - ,
, , I , , , , ,
, -,- ' , 1, - , ;! "",'i
"
,
I I , , I li I I . I ; _ , . : -i
,-, ", ;'.-,
, "- - ,-",i-L ,,, ,, - , 1
I I L 'd,' r - i , - L , , - , - I - , I : , I . . : ­
-1
,
, T, . . I I r I I . .
I - I - -.l I , - . , I -I ., , - -
I
, -
- _
" 11 , . , , .
, I I , I , t , , , _ r , _ I , _:, , I , , ,'L - , , l , "
" .r:1,I
. - b" . ,- ,- .l,
L- _ , , , - ., I ,- I,- :IL:L - I ,_4. ­
., I -
.,
, _.
,
.
. I I
I I I . 1, I I I I I :I I , I 1, I r
,
., - , r
I - , ,
. , ,
-
, -j ._
, r. '
,_
':
r;
'.
I . ,
I
. -, "" ',
',
, , , I . I I I I I 11 I L l''I - : I i,
I I F; 'r 11 , , .. 1,, 1 ' - - "' ,
-
.1 i , : I I t - . , . 7 - I I
'1 I .1. I '1. I 1. L ".. _1. 11- '- .1
' r _' - '--:- ' "' "
"
'' .-. - _'
I :' i ' 1 I r . I - i , i I
"
I
, " ' I I -
. , 1,:, ,':I . , - ; , - I - I , ,
, .
, , - - , , , .I- -__
,
,-;,,.,
:l:, :I-
-:,- ,", ", I -i)
" , , e ,, , -- '_-
,i
, '
, _, I , , I
I I ) I . I "L I . I I , , , ,
- , - , . 11
" I _ _r., 1 , i,- N I ij-_­
_ 4:i , ,
I I ' 7 . "'r' : ,- . , I , . . , I .,_,
, ,
- . , __
IrI-1 ; -, ,; , -_-, I-'
I -_ 11, 1 1 '. I I" "
, , -, - -,. " I
I , r .
I I -,,I-,r7 _ _P , __I;I
."' ,, , ' ,
" I
1.
, , . I I , .
I . , I , e I i I _,.
, , , .
z
,
, . .
.
: , I
, I I - , , ., , ,-, i . , ,, ' "
- I , I 'r, , r. ,. ,
,_
' . .
. - . - . I I I I . I I I :: I I . I . I, .
- , I , . - ' -, , , , 7", - , - . I, -
. , .,i , , - , -," , e, -, ; t :,,
,-, '! -i --,,',-, ,',
I 1. I I . - : ' -_ , , , - i , !"
. _r, , , , , . ,i L 1, l , - , , , -
! ,
,
- , : .
0 ' , , - ,
I
" , - I , I
I I I
I : !, r I Ir :_ , - 11 I ., 11 , , , , ,_, r- -,
. I . I, I I I - i ", ,
I I - I . -. I .1 - I I
, , I -- 1,. - !
, .; ': , , -, -- "li, , ...
- , , , ,-,
, , , ', L,,. , . - . - : : I , r , ,
I - _' '
;',_ 1,7 , , . r- r_ I
,
, , . I I r I . . I I . : , I L :
. I
, ,
I -
-I I , '
. 11 .1 - 1:" "i
, we
, ,
-
, .
, ( I . , :
. , 1
I - - ' ' i -- , '
' L, L,;r ,J, !
, _ '
, , , ., 'i- I ; -,- , '%,_
'1 P"
,
'_ , "
I r I . , , I I I I I , I I . I I- I I , , I: I, , ', _-: , :, ,.r i , , , :, - '
_'; r" - , ,; I 1'111 , I 1 ­
, , ,
_ i
- , , i I ,- . , " ,
-, , ,,',
fZ,-, 71il, - "
, - , , r r I , 1, : . , -1 :
. -L , , , _ , : , , , I , , ", -,-'..-
'
, , r . I I I
-1, . I - , ' i- . I . , ,I I
, . _ , I , IIl:,, , , , -I , , , ,;,, ,,,- , _-,-_
I I I . 11. '. r , . , . ;, : -',
, . , , : - ,- , -,', ., . , : ".
"I . ,
_, il,
,-1,'- .I-,, i',
, :rI I r I .
, , , , , I-,I"I
, , - - ,
-, I"', , ,:, ""I _
, ,
I I I .1I 11 I _1 . -, , '.." ." ': , , ,
,i",
ill ,
I I I I r , I, , , :I , 1, , " I :4, _ _"_ , '. .
. "-7
, ', . , -, , ii,-Vi
" -. .
I , I.I.
- - , " - " -, - r, - -, - , , , I, - , , Z',"
P- , - , I ; I , :: : __ I -
.
: ,,-., -',":: ",:,,,-,
.'",-, ,
1, ,- , I _ ;, ;I.,
,-''j,;
, ,, ,-- _,rl
,,, ",Ii r vlll_,,
,I I , LI . , , I I , -- ; !, , , , 'i , " , "
"i"
,I
L-
I - , . - , I I ,, .
I I . I I I ,
- , , _
L
" ," :, , _ .- .;;:,.ir'
, , , " "
,-, .-,,
,,,11, ,, 1I -,,. 11
'I, ' ; ','_i_ ,
, I
I I I
I I
. . I I , , , i - , I I, , , I , -
-
P, . ,
- , " -,
, , -, , . I 'i--.
: ,, , , L. I
. ';, 1 , ,
,,
; j " I I
-
' I'­
"', , ; t - , - , :, 1., , !I. I I . , I I ;'l ., -
. - I , i"I IL, , , Iii r,. ., , " :,
, ;-: " '' '_ --r,
, r ", I , , , 'T , F '_ -, 4,
:"
"
, I__ 1,
I I. , . 1;, . I I , _ , , - .
I 1 ,
, - __ , '_ I . - - , , , ,
I . , 1_ _, __ , , ,;,
._Lr ' I I.
. : ' ,
, , I, , , , L !, , - , , ,,l, _
'
, - _ I s
, L , , - , .,r
:- ,, i, ,
,- "
-- . , ,- ,, .",,',
1,- i 1',
1 "
, , ,, ,
. IL , , , 1. _ ,!
' , "_' -1, __,t .% ' , ,,_O, "', I ,
I . ,, ,, ,, . - li. -!,, al
-11I , . I
!' _ - ,
- , ",' ' ", I , , L
,,, " ',,,,
-, , I i; , !. .
,' : ,
L , x" , "', _ i '
. I
: , I,
-,I . - ' _ , . L , . - ' :_,., , . ," , r, , :;' , , ,I ' , . , 'I',
,i , "I 1
II ; , I I I , - - I "
,''L '
:
- ,,,,,--,,
" ; ,
, - , ' . I , ,1 I, ,'L"i,, , i, ­
,I , I I I II I I :, -i I l.. r - , :' ! , ' ", -,L" , , L;' ', " , , . I_ r I I I. , , , -
i l,, l , ,,,
, , ' Ir , I I , . I I I I . r , I . ' 'I ' -,. i . I , "I , "p,
, L , ,, . , II . ,_ - _, I ; , "I r, . , , .! I , 1. ._, I
- ,
. '
I I , _ , , , , ,
_' _ _ I L_ ' r - ' L,, - II; -
__ - i'_ ,
' ' , ', ; il
, "' - '"l -,,I ,1 ' ,
:.,:,, r ,
I I , ' I '
I " 1""'
I ri'll "- '_" , 1 - - "
_
,;_ 'i , , , 1,
I I I . ' , , , i, , , ;
. - L
- , _ I
i . -J, "
__
. I -, . I - . .
- I I II I- , ::i ,I , . I , r I
, : -, , _L ., , , , I , ,. ,,, ,- -, _ -';t,_ ,, , -, , , ", ,
, -, , - , "
, L
' _,11
'L
_ , , _. I . . . I , I , . I - -; , I I - - r I- - ." _r,' -, , -'I- ,,, !- r
- , : I I - I r' :: t : r. I-I-I 1 . 'I
_' - i' -, ,
']
' - r" .I " "_,, ", ' ' -4 , i :ji- ' ,
- ,, 11
!,_,,, _.,.r,
I I _
, , __ r , , --
- , , IL Ii , '
-
, , - I I , iei I- I , , . 'Ll
, . - I :
1 . I : -, . r", : ' V , I 11,
. ii,,- ; -- , - , , , '.- , I , L , . I : , .1 ,- , ,
__
- T, , ;,; ' " i, :r . : .- , , , ,- , ,,',l, - ,,, J ,-, , , 5;I , 1 , ;.
,, I I- , I I - , ,_ - 11 -. :, L - " I - I . -1 II I 1; . I - , . j L i ", 'i"- 2, .z" ; rj" !,: .,,,, , 1z
4 '.ily, l I I 1- ."L'.
, - "-' : P , . ,- I , , _ , ' , ,, , , [L
, _r -,
, '' . LI , , , I -r I' -1 I , - , v , , ' n -iV,i 34-
,
,
!
, "*'
,, - , , - , -, , , - .- I,
, r - I - . , - , , - ,,-" - l
i-.1 _ , , , ;L, z L, - . . - , . ' ' ' :' I - , , , ,, , -1, , _ , ; -" ", , . '
,­
," , ,"" ' r - ,
,, I , %, :
'
I I
,, i
! - , _ _ I . I - - I , 'r, -. - .
I _ , - , - ,1,
-r t -"7:, '
,--,
,
. , , i;
"',
i,,,
Ij. , , I - I . '
. -
11 , -, 1 I. !. ,,I . , _ , , , -- -I I .
- L I I ,r -" .:' ": "II ' I ,:, . I - _-
-,, _ ' , Li ', ; .",, L ' ' I II,I I - I .
II i, - , - , _,
,, 4l,
- ; , - - , ,,
' ,' , , , , ;-. , : -- ,
' '
'--
I ' - , x, , I . r
v I -, , ,:.
- , , ..' ' --, - ., _ I ' -- - , ,."i - , "-, 1, - - I" , .0,
- ",4,6
I "i,']; .; .-,I,
- 4r, , , , II. . ; I. . . I . . ,. I , r, , l, , , , , , . e, - - ' , - I . . I , Ir'
, !", -' i ,, '
L, Lf
, ' _.
' L, r4 ,'-: __
',, -1I . __,
- -, - , :': , , li, , . , , , ,, _'_ : r )
. , ;' -,
, , '
,
I I . I. 7 ,
. I I
,
-- ;- -, ' 1,z
, - "'- . , I ,i,, g '
Til" - - I I - I-
I ,I ,
.
- I
:- : ,, 11 11 , - -
- . ,r ,4I ,"
- . , , , , , - '. . ; -
- , --1 , I, , -, . ',' , - - ',, , :", " 4i --,' -- -,
_ , ..
_ ,4 I.
I-7 -I I , , , .1. - - 'L , -, ,_ _ ", ; , ,
,'r ,'. I , _ _ 7 , - - ' "
1, , - i -f . .r, '.
- - - I I I , 1. I . _1 : 11 , , r r , I, . , ,
. - _,", _ 11-. ,_, :'_ , ,'i 'L.', ,'L,
,- ' - ' 1 - - .1r ' 1 " Z - : I _'; ,,
' ' . . ' ,' r I- - " , l , , , r I
'
. - , r - I . , I- , I- :-
- : I ri : r - 1 , ' , , I
,I-II Ii , 'l , -: r
. , ,
- , ,-;- , ",,- , , -
11- I-
, , ., ' , ,' I -
-
, - , , , r r , - ,
,
, , _
,, - T
_* , -
I . - -- - - "'."
I. "I'
r I , ,I . , I I ri , _ I s 1,"' , ,- ,%, I .1 - , . w , , ,
l-,iii,,7, : _- , , "I , _. . -, - - I I
, I I - _r
"I -, ' _", ,'- ' ' ,'_I11,I I II , L--L _,! , - "- , r t -, , " I
I . 1 - -;'. I , , 11 - , , -, , I - __,I -1I -,,
i ! , . , , , , , ;lll4 , 11 , _ - '. 1 I , :, ! T I
, ,",
I - , ,,,: r,, , -, - , 1,- - " ,
1 , -, ", __
_ _-, ! - - - , ,
L
I11 ; I ;, ., , , ,' ., I , 1.
_. Z, , ,
r , - " , , I '-., : - , ,- , - - ",: . ,- , I , i , . I L , , __11 - , k,
-
- I - ' - I I I ._,, ,- .I. , ,I :, " , . , -' , I, _,_, r g
, , - , _ 1, i , ,r, ': i j, ,,,*,, 1, , 1 ,,41, i "I , - , -.," ' '
, - _Jij , ' ' , 7'.? , , I
- , ,,, , 4. - . ; X ,. i, " '-1
! IZ
I , I , 4ir"_
, lz_4 - -, " ; , I I ." r I -
, , " , ":, _" - , _ ,i , , 3, Zi i L
', :ki6,V , l ,
;: _' r' ' '_ " ' ;' , ,
L l , ,i,_ , ,',r. . I ' ' , , - , --. : ; :1,
- , " -- . I1 , , L, , , , ,
,
,
,_"i'l,,- . . . " , . -, - - ". .,
7 "
- , :;
, - 1 ,
, : I i I'll,
, - I -. , -_ r 1, , . I I.,
1,
,; '. , ,,I .i
,
_-, , ,-1, ,i , L-
_
- , ,-, . ,-, ,
, - i - "I , , I ,
,
,
, , ,;
,,",
.
. , .i,r, I -,, I , ,
L I- p , _ " , - - -1I ,-. - _,,, .-I
: , , 1. . ,,, , , q" ; .-_% , , , I , - " , , ;;
, , , , , ,, . "
:, ,_, '- , , '- - I'i'T, I , I
, ,, r, I -, r.
,, ,I' I* I'__' . ' , , 4,
l I I - , , , I - ,, _'. ,,
L , ' 1, - "I , ., Z . , 5 " , I ,,il- "I", ,
. L, - i"4
_, , , t ,Pl,
I - , I 'r11 , : ,
,- ­
, ,
I , j
, - '1 ' I "I . "
, ;,
,
-. , ! ,
I" -, ,, " "
I
,
,_
-
: -,, I Yi l'ir1 I , --
- , , , , _
.
, ,.' Ir
,
.
I I
: Y . -.
_
, 1,I - ,
Iii
I - ,
I
: -",,
I r,. "
- ,r,_,,
,
,
I . , q
J: ,
_ ,,.7,
,', ,4
L,
; -; _, .
i ,
ir ,,L :, 1 I
I ,% ­ l'
I 7o ,,, J'
- .require
' I - , , l ' l I ' I . - " , , ,- ,. I ' "-',,,-
,I ; ,
',' ,"I IL, L
, , ,,' -, -1I , I "" , I -,, , :I ,- , " ,,.,,'
- , ,., -:L , . ,_! 1 1, ,-+-
" ,_?;
, -j I I"L
-- ,' " ,"
I . . I I , r " ; - I , I I- -, , , 1 ,i , - , ' I , . . , , , . ,r ,. , ,, '., ,,r,. t ,,
"I ',,,,,,,,,_
-1I;;,,I ,- I 11,-
"-1 , I ,
-. _I- _"', I 1, ,]
_,_il,2
T, .1, I., "I
"; P,
r,_9!"'
I I , I ,: , r" ' ' : '
. r, I II , i .11: - - I-1 - , , - _: L_ 'Zr ,i' I ,_', :: I- , 7, --­
,:O _;,,

EVALUATION
OF
CR3-I
OOD FOR WORK PPOfGRAM
IN
L\JDIA
Steven Joyce, Team Leader
Averthanus D'Souza
P. Subranariyam
USAID/India
July 15. 1987

EVALUATION
OF
CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES'
FOOD FOR WORK PROGRAM
IN INDIA
Steven Joyce, Team Leader
Averthanus D'Souza
P. Subramaniyam
USAID/New Delhi
July 15, 1987

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Evaluation Mission team received very friendly support in
the course of its work. We would like to acknowledge this support and
to express our deep appreciation.
The participative and collaborative approach to evaluation is
still unfamiliar to and not understood by many. We would like to
thank Dr. Peter Amato, Deputy Chief, PRJ/PD/E for his understanding
and support of our evaluation process, specially the one-day seminar
with the representatives of the four CRS zones. This support was
crucial for the successful outcome of this Mission.
The encouragement, specially at the briefing and debriefing
sessions with officials of USAID/India helped to focus the attention
of the Mission and resulted in a more thorough assessmenL of the FFW
Program. We gratefully extend our thanks to Dr. Richard Blue, Deputy
Director; Mr. Christopher Crowley. Office Director, DPP; Mr. Douglas
Broome, Deputy Chief, DPP.
During the field visits, the members of the team were received
with deep courtesy and hospitality by CRS zonal staff, consignees and
project holders. CRS zonal staff accompanied team members in their
travels and facilitated their visits. We would be failing in our duty
if we did not acknowledge these kindnesses. We would like specially
to thank the zonal Directors for making available to the team the
members of their staff.
In the process of reviewing and analyzing data collected from
the field, the team had the benefit of the services of Mr. S.
Chandrasekhar, Mr. Kotwancy and Mr. Y. Chhabra. Ms. Hema Ramaswamy
and Ms. Rita Soni were unstinting in their support. They not only
smoothed out logistical difficulties but facilitated administrative
passage of team requirements.
A specia] mention needs to be made of the assistance which the
team received from Mr. N. Krishnamurchy. His long experience with
Title II Frogran in; India provided the team with valuable insights.
Moreover, the team was greatly impressed with the dedication of Mr.
Krishnamurthy to the cause of ensuring that food resources be used in
the best possible way to promote development.

This team is particularly grateful to Ms. Neera Gulati who
undertook the final production of the Report. She not only showed
exceptional skill in organizing the material, but also diiplayed an
unusual sense of responsibility in having the Report completed against
a very difficult deadline. She worked overtime late in the night and
on weekends to accommodate the many drafting changes made by the
team. Under such difficult circumstances, Neera not only maintained
her cheerfulness but infected her colleagues Dolly and Savita Arora
with her enthusiasm.
Without the willing cooperation of Neera and her team, the
completion of this Report would have been in doubt.
The assistance of Ms. Sarah Harbison and of Joseph Perianayagam,
whose helpful suggestions and compilation of charts and tables is
gratefully acknowledged. Their contribution enhanced the quality of
this Report.

Purpose and Method
- : I : -
EXECUTIVE SUMIARY
The purpose of this evaluation is threefold:
to assess the ability of CRS and its counterpart agencies
to manage the Food for Work Program in India;
to assess the development thrust of the program,
particularly in project selection, beneficiary selection
and recipient selection; and
* to evaluate the 3-year F W Planning, Monitoring and
Evaluation (PM&E) Grant, which ends on September 30, 1987.
The team's overall approach to this evaluation was a collaborative
approach. The intention was to ensure thot CRS and its counterparts
felt a sense of participation in and ownership of the evaluation
recommendations.
A major aspect of this approach was the briefing of CRS zonal
office staff and consignees at the rtart of each visit, and a
debriefing at the conclusion of each visit. Following the team's
field investigation, a 1-day seminar was held for 12 representatives
of CRS headquarters and zonal offices, the purpose of which was to
arrive at a common understanding of FFW program issues, and at
appropriate measures to address them.
Food for Work Program in India
The 1987 FFW program budget is $7.3 million, representing 33% of
the CRS Title 11 assistance budget.
A total of 2189 projects were implemented in 1986 with the
assistance of CRS FFW commodities. The majority of these projects
were low-cost houses, wells and land clearing and leveling.
F ind inr s
The CRS FFW Program in India is a very functional program.
Over the last 2 years in particular, CRS has been striving fur
greater development impact in the program; it has been emphasizing
integrated community development; and there has been much more
dialogue between CRS and counterparts regarding development
objectives. This CRS policy shift away from supporting "individual"
projects and towards supporting projects which are intended to create
.community" assets is resulting in the application of stronger, more
community- based criteria for the selection of FFW beneficiaries and
recipients.

- :2: -
The PM&E Grant contributed positively to this re-orientation of
the FFW Program. Nevertheless, the Grant was a weak response to a
very ambitious set of objectives and high expectations.
In the management structure of the CRS FFW Program, there are
two weak links: the consignee link to the project holder; and the
project holder link to the community and the project site. The
primary weakness is the lack of personnel with technical and
development skills, as well as the lack of other complementary
material and cash resources. The program is more effective where
the project holder is a PVO; or where the project holder is a priest
or nun with strong interest in FFW, and understanding of community
development.
Consignees and project holders are able to receive little
program support from CRS Field Reviewers - not only because of the
geographical coverage which is expected of Field Reviewers, but also
because their scope of work is unrealistic given the ratio of Field
Reviewers to consignees and project holders. As it is, they only
have time to "audit" consignee and project holder records, and they
rarely have time to visit project sites.
Recommendations
The CRS FFW Program in India is achieving positive development
results, but there is potential for much greater impact. To this
end, the following recommendations are put forth.
1. A CRS/USAID workshop to review the outcomes of this
evaluation, and to formulate next steps. This workshop
should occur as soon as the new CRS/India Director is in
position.
2. CRS should establish closer links uith Government at the
national, state and local levels to ensure integration
of program planning and implementation. It is
recommended that CRS liaise with GOI at national and
state levels; that local Government technical officers
be included is resource people in training seminars; and
that pssibi]ities be ex:plored for integrating, the
planning and Imp leient atIon of FFW-assisted projects
with local Block l)evelopnent liars.
3. CRS should take more initiative with USAID and other
donors to ensure grea ter resource mobilization for the
FFW Program. Consignees should take more initiative with
Government and other PVOs to do the same.
4. The PM&E System as developed by Community Systems
Foundation should be revitalized.

- :3: ­
4.1 The remaining PM&E Grant funds should be reallocated to
cover costs of CRS Field Reviewers to prepare additional
case studies on-site; and to fund a seminar in each zone
designed to use the case studies as an educational tool.
The Grant should be extended to September 1988.
4.2 The BIIA and AEA formats shouid be reviewed and revised;
procedures should be developed within CRS to consolidate
ond analyze evaluation results, and draw conclusions and
learnings as inputs for future planning; and expected
users of the BIIA and AEA instruments should receive
further training. Outside assistance will likely be
required to carry out these recommendations.
4.3 A needs-based training approach is strongly recommended to
improve job periormance of CRS staff ahd key consignees
and project holders in planning, project design,
management and evaluation. To develop this needs based
approach, a training needs assessment is strongly advised
within the next six months. Outside assistance will be
required for this needs assessment.
4.4 An annual seminar to review the implementation of the PM&E
System should occur at the national level to discuss
evaluation findings, and formulate new planning
directions. It is recommended that the first such seminar
occur within the next six months to review the findings
and recommendations outlined in this evaluation report in
the light of CRS's past approach to the PM&E System.
4.5 Each zonal office should organize on an annual basis a
3-day strategy development/planning retreat to address
issues affecting program implementation, and to develop
action plans for the coming year.
5. Concentrate resources on consignees who have demonstrated
good past performance. Strengthen their capabilities to
support good development projects with the addition 3f
staff with technical and development skills and experience
in rural development, to carry out project promotion
functions. Provide complementary inputs (training and TA
support, material and cash resources) to their projects.
6. Project design assistance should be provided to CRS to
develop FFW project models for income-generation, as well
as for skill development, Market tie-up potentials must
be considered.

- :4: -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .
GLOSSARY
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................ 6
1.1 The Purpose and Major Objectives of this Evaluation.. 6
1.2 The Approach of the Team to this Evaluation ........ 7
1.3 The Team's Itinerary. .................................. 8
2. PROGRESS REVIEW O THE CRS FFW PROGRAM ..................... 9
2.1 Historical Background of the FFW Program ........... 9
2.2 The Program's Current Status.......................... 10
2.3 The FFW Program: A very Functional Program ......... 14
2.4 The FFW Management Structure: Two Weak Links ....... 15
2.5 Zonal Personnel Issues: Unrealistic Roles and
Responsibilities of Field Reviewers ................ 2-1
2.6 Decentralization of CRS/India ..... 25
2.7 The Potential for Creater Program Impact ........... 28
3. PLANNINC, MONITORING AND EVALUATION (PM&E) GRANT ........ 28
3.1 Overview of Grant Objectives.......................... 29
3.2 Summary of the Grant's Current Status .............. 31
3.3 Team Conclusions and Recommendations ............... 34
4. SELECTION CRITERIA......................................... 38
4.1 CRS/Consignee Agreement on Objectives ..... 38
4.2 Selection of Typcs of Projects ....................... 39
4.3 Different Zonal Strategies ........................... 39
4.4 Planning - A New Process Within CRS .................. 41
4.5 Beneficiar, . l2ection................................. 41
4.6 Beneficiaries Belong to the Poorest
Sections of Society......................... 42
4.7 No Religious Bias................................. 43
4.8 The Selection Process................................. 44
4.9 Recipient S ction................................. 45
4.10 Stre-ngths and WcakNvsses ............................... 45
5. DEPENDENCY RELATIONSHIP....................................
5.1 FFW Prevents Migration and Promotes Family Stability
5.2 CRS Long-Term Planning Will Reduce Dependency ......
5.3 FFW as an Investment ...................................
5.4 Creation of Community Assets Distributes Benefits,
50
50
50
51
5.5
and Minimizes Dependency. ..............................
Skill development and Income Generation Projects
51
for the Landless.......................................
52

- :5: ­
6. RESOURCE INTEGRATION ....................................
52
6.1 Government .........................................
6.2 Catalyst for Release
52
of Government Funds ........... 53
6.3 Other Donors .......................................
6.4 Private
54
Voluntary Organizations ....................
6.5 What CRS
55
would like from USAID/India ............... 55
7. CONCLUSIONS ............................................. 56
8. RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................
BIBLIOGRAPHY
MAP
APPENDIX A: FFW Evaluation Scope of Work
APPENDIX B: Interview Instruments
APPENDIX C: CRS Seminar
APPENDIX D: List of Interviewees
APPENDIX E: CRS FFW Zonal Profile of Project Types
APPENDIX F: Communication to Consignees on CRS's Community
Development Approach
APPENDIX G: CRS Viewpoint - The Characteristics of an Effective
FFW Program & Inherent Program Constraints
APPENDIX H: BIIA & AEA Forms
APPENDIX I: Indore Diocesan Five Year Plan
59

AEA
AER
Beneficiaries
BIIA
Bund
CARITAS
CEBEMO
CRS
FFW
F'
GOI
HYV
IRDP
MCH
MISEREOR
Nullah
Panchayat
PM&E
PVO
Recipients
SOW
TA
USAID
USG
- :6: -
GLOSSARY
Asset Effectiveness Analysis
Annual Estimate of Requirements
Those who receive assets created under a FFW
project.
Beneficiary Income Improvement Analysis
Mud Embanment
Official Agency of the Catholic Bishops of
India
Dutch Donor Agency
Catholic Relief Services
Food for Work
Fiscal Year (1 Oct to 30 Sept.)
Government of India
High Yielding Varities
Integrated Rural Development Programme
Maternal and Child Health
Official Agency of German Catholic Bishops
Stream/canal for drainage/irrigation
Elected local body of village
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation
Private Voluntary Organization
Those who receive food under a FFW project
Scope of Work
Technical Assistance
United States Agency for International
Development
United States Government

1. INTRODUCTION
- :7: ­
This first section of the Food For Work (FFW) evaluation report
is intended to provide a summary of the following:
* the overall purpose and major objectives of the FFW
Evaluation;
* the approach of the evaluation team to this evaluation; and
* the evaluation itinerary and major events.
1.1 The Purpose and Major Objectives of this Evaluation
As stated in the Food For Work Evaluation Scope of Work (See
Appendix A), the overall purpose of the FFW evaluation was to "assess
the management tasks involved in the implementation of the CRS Food
For Work (FFW) Program by quantitative and qualitative review at the
Field, CRS zonal and headquarter levels". USAID/India emphasized at
the outset of this evaluation mission that the team should not attempt
to quantify the volume and bize of the FFW Program, nor should it
attempt to measure program impact; but rather, it should assess the
ability of CRS and its counterpart agencies to manage the program. As
noted in the SOW, this evaluation - with its focus on program
management - was expected to complement the 1979 eval-iation, and the
FFW program impact studies which followed that evaluation.
An additional objective of this evaluation mission was to
evaluate the 3-year FFW Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E)
Grant ($79,200), which was given to CRS in 1984, and which ends on
September 30, 1987.
Given this Scope of Work, the FFW evaluation team identified the
following key issues to address in its information gathering:
Effectiveness of the management and implementation of
the CRS FFW Program.
Status of the Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluation
(PM&E) System.
* Selection criteria for FFW projects, project
beneficiaries, and FFW recipients.
Resource integration at the project level - Government,
PVO and other donors.
Relationship of community to project holder. (Is there
a dependency relationship?).

- :8: -
These key issues were presented to senior USAID and CRS officials
and agreed upon in separate meetings on June 8, 1987 just prior to the
team's field investigation.
In discussions with USAID/India regarding its expectatiou of
this evaluation mission, the team was asked to make recommendations
which would "help USAID be helpful to CRS".
1.2 The Approach of the Team to this Evaluation
The team's approach to this evaluation ,was a collaborative
approach from the beginning.
During its 4-day Team Planning (June 4 - 8, 1987), the team
provided two briefings to CRS and to USAID, on June 5th and June 8th,
for the purpose of soliciting CRS and USAID expectations of the
evaluation, as well as their reactions on input regarding the team's
evaluation approach and interview instruments (see Appendix B).
As a standard procedure in its field visits to the CRS zonal
offices, and to consignees and project holders, the team members
provided a briefing at the start of each visit, and a debriefing at
the conclusion of each visit. The intention of this approach was to
ensure that information gathered through interviews at each level of
program operations - project site, project holder, consignee, CRS
zonal office - was shared laterally. Sharing team observations and
information as such not only enabled team members to check their
findings for accuracy, but also enabled CRS and its counterparts to be
active partizipants in the "learning process" of the evaluation.
At the conclusion of the team's field investigation, a 1-day
seminar was held on July 1, 1987, for 12 representatives of the four
CRS zonal offices and the New Delhi central office. The purpose of
this seminar was to enable the CRS organization to arrive at a common
understanding of FFW program issues and at appropriate measures to
address them. The outcomes of this seminar are an integral part of
this evaluation report, and its recommendations for program
improvement. (See Appendix C.)
In sun, the intention of the FFW evaluation team and its
collaborative approach to this mission was to ensure that CRS and its
counterparts felt a sense of participation in and ownership of the
evaluation recommendations. The hoped for outcome of this approach is
a "successful" evaluation - one in which the recommendations are
valued and implemented.

1.3 The Team's Itinerary
- :9: ­
The team's itinerary for this evaluation was as follows:
June 4-8 Team Planning
June 9-27 Field visits to Madras, Calcutta and
Bombay zones
June 28-30 Debriefings in New Delhi
July 1 CRS Seminar (New Delhi)
July 2-15 Data Analysis, Debriefing and Report
Writing
It should be noted that USAID selected the random sample of
consignee visits, and developed the field visit schedule.
In all, team members interviewed 17 consignees and 26 project
holders. A complete list of individuals interviewed can be found in
Appendix D.
2. PROGRESS REVIEW OF THE CRS FFW PROGRAM
This section of the report describes the background of the CRS
FFW Program in India, its current status (size and structure) and our
observations as to its effectiveness in providing a development
resource to the poorer segments of India's society.
2.1 Historical Background of the FFW Program
CRS entered the Indian scene in 1951 with its Family Feeding
Program, criaracterized by "free food distribution". In 1966, this
Family Feeding Programme was phased out, giving room for the advent of
FFI,' and MCI Programs; PL 480 Title II, Section 204, provided for
complementary resource support. Section 204, however, was terminated
in 1971/72
In 1979, an Interim Evaluation of Title II Programs (including
CRS FFW) was carried out by Community Systems Foundation (CSF) of Ann
Arbor, Michigan. This evaluation led to recommendations calling for
impact studies of the CRS FFW Program. Eleven studies - asset impact
and recipient profi K studies - of FF,: were conducted during 1981-83.
In 1983-84, following the il impact studies, the Planning,
Monitoring and Ev,wuation (PM&E) System was developed for the FFW
Program by CSF in collaboration with ACORD, a New Delhi based
organization. To implement the PM&E System, USAID provided CRS with a
grant of $79,200 in 1984. Thus far (7/87), approximately $52,000 of
the grant has been spent.

-:10:­
.,;In l85 -Pri'ce: Waterhous was ont2rcted 2 000through-CRS"- T",,-,,'
for; management improvement in' the!-overall 'CRS5 'operationswhc
re sulte d ,7amo ng- ot her things in? the .rev ision of somz e FF, foms
2r Th roram s, Cur rent St atus
Th e'. 198 TFFW Program bud g ist 7.1 3-,mi1 io'n' repre sent ing" 33
prcen _of h-Ce' CRS Title I a'ss istance6 budget.
In'FY, 1986, a total of 2189 projects- were imlmne 1ih
h
assistance of CRS Food For.Work commodities., ,ost of ,these proj ectsb
were 'low-cost 'houses, wells (driiikingairrig hrand i
clearing 'and leyeling. gto),adln
USAID dollar ceilings for' the CRS~Title.IProgram 1984 88i
Afollows 00 'i
:7K$27338 t28,1'43~ $26,249 -t21,713- ' t'19,860
,1984 9>'1985 ' 1986, '' 1987, 1988
Gien te above ceiligs, CRS- all~ocations to its-FEFW Program from
1984-88 ar~e as follows:,
$10,676 t9W16&00 til0,400 t7,3002- '$6 342'
1984 ~ ~L985 ~ 1986 1 ~987 '1988 -
-As evident from, the above'figures,.'there has, been: a dowznward
trendF ini the FFW -Program since. 1986- a reflection of, he .downward
trend in the overall CRS Title II Program., This"ten e tlet he
USAID decision in'1984 to phase out the FFW,,program' b 99. t ug
USAI5/India is'int'erested in supporting coiV.-Linuation of, th, program
beyond 1990, CRS woulid -like, UAID' to n6ot only% reverse, the'decision,
but to also expand' the program
-Bu-gar repIa ed-wve a Ir 1'l9 86' as th primary pr omo
4~addiion to vegeta le oil1'
At'teproect level,'teF Program~ismanied b azale3
number of CRS .7consignees.,or ,c n orparts) rdpojc-ode
Consignees ar primar-ly Catholic pris wodirec d-iocesan-,,cai
se rvi ce organizat. on's Proect holders8arprimaril. - s' rea .
and nuns I-kou )a:,rowing numer ofprojet Jodr'ae, c
pr ve voluntarqorgai'za tions, ( CRS, Prograr n ad 'ddd
0.four "z'esooperation - fdr's.' 1 u~z ~
F11 ne'na Cchi one, TeG n;zocIEe not' i~e' F roram
XSee Map.) See.Tabil ofrua I ta e data on th-F k.. Os I
India for they r 19 't1986'

190 AEbRe
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- - --- - - -
SIL IJU MARA LFMA"CLIACTA IOTA9
MARS BMA CALEU ID ITOT L DOD CU IS T MDFAS! KM SWA U
SI- ------ ---- ....­ ...-----.
FUt a s 1e 1 36 1 50 27 1 13 1 1 27 18 3 1 1I 298 110A
uera of c 1ler576' 1 246 1 51I? 1331 591 240 -261 1-3 22 221 375 123
usob-er.oaroajedcs 1 1207 1 731 623 1 2?051 1298 P4? 402- 25 ?,1022
kus e' Of Project sites J62 6Z I I~ )I- 5 1
Us~er - r0jI ye 1 1 16W1 16 1 ~ 1 15 1 16 1 18 1 1 1 6 19EIT
Nar ( iient s I4227166 ec 1 166032601130C 443 1II89558651 43W i4 153 39 1 0 1 -.
........... -- - --- - -
Thet ps fi projects which utilize FFW vary, wdely, althogh a
indicated abov ,jin,the past~most-of ~these proje~ 'sha'a e d be
Spojects, primari 1yo -cos oP se I
wiells and' land clearing/leveling, (Se~e Tabl1e~2). fora percentage
summary'kof pro~ject types for F~Y 1986, 'A3 year zonal' profile of, t ese!'
and other projects (19847"86) can be fo rdid iAppendix E --.ncludingeach
project type' s pece'ntage of tot al'pr kram manday s
Table ~2
PERCENTAGE SUMMARY' OF PROJ3XCT7 TYPES ~-FY 1986,4
S1. No.' Proct MDRAS~ BOMBAY CUTA'' :TT
Types ZNE ZONE 'ZONE IPROJECTSI
Low Cost Htousing' 341, 1352248
5 Rod 89 5~3 58 20 93 .-.
6 Vc. Tr, ~ 52 ~ 38 6 5
5 53
.8 Sdh oIC 1 743 .
22 9 3 5.

- 12 -
It' s important. -o note ,herei _given, hat 1987, -figres are no'e
aval l'ab t1',a BombDay, and, Madras zonal offices , stopped 1approving
"project" applications! for )'ow-cost., h'ou ses. Calcutta ozne continued';, to.
approve app1 c'at o-ns for houses this -yer because 1 87' i's t e6UN; Year
of She o the ..Homele ss;Alte z ~ ~ ~
c. - n- ee past .years to maoveiaaynsr wyfo n~~ project's
projec ts -. 6e'f iting on-- or a -smalJ numbe r, of' fami les~ -towa'scommuity
projects,, rojects benef itting- entire com ntes
Most FFW actiities~ are implemented b>etweeni January and June, t he
so called "lean season". when there i~s ltl Mef6~lyet:nwm
~ ood stocks are low.~ Although t leesittedfz mpm vauenf andag W
ration runs 2-'OX belwteuofca minimum wage in '6ost places'
Shi s lowerperc eived value did not poea problem during :the.-lean,
2 season~, according to mo~st people interviewed. It did become a problem~
inatatn routv okr with FFWP during ,other~ times of .the
~Qyear. See Table 3 below 'for~ dal rationf size and estimated market
Talje 3
DAILY RATION SIZE M~D IT YEAEUEV.AU FR'I4l A985A 8
--------- ~~~--- -------------------------- ------------------------.........
I RATIO" SIZE (KG,) IESTIMAJED I RATION SIZE KG. IESTIMAED I RATION SIZE'(G) 'SESTIAEDQ
----------------- 1VE\E ------- EI R E------ ~ ~ . ~ a
IVHEA/BULGAR OIL IVALUEMs.)I WHEAT/ 68IA OIL IVLEf. IWET/UL6RA I A (
3.DA 1 021S 10 1 00' e 1 4 1 0.10 8 1
IC80 BTA 1 3.0 0.0t 1 0.IK 1 7 1-0 00
2.3 The PFFW Program: A VerX Functiona Prga
ThCS 9FProgrami ndai a~ver fncion program~
Prora -i hvin apositive e g
Summar mpo ii184)
anu fCU~~I~Z. ~
:I Y18 heewrr8 pjct. blmentd,,iirmte,.
an,
and~~ di f0 h eav ov m o a . er y-r
ch

- 4
CRS In4Jd i aware that :th6efood resourc~e can4:have a greater­
impat trough'amr jdcous app icat oo ocm
proj ects',Which "are, iteded tocete lon1g- erm .assets
-nthla w-yas CRS "India _has' ade-'-
oef-i
o euppor 0on ly. cm u nity Y4' jc~
onIy a few families (Se 'Appe ndx F
nstea~ of pro'jec ee i
Atog heflimpact of this policy shif~t will be felt ,only...
afLer~ 1988, the evaluation~ team1 saw- strong 'evidence of- the 'appication
projects having long-term development objec.tive 1.
of FFW to commuinty
(SeeAppendix G, CRS Viewpoi'nt: The Charaeistics'of an Effective
FW'Program; and Inherent Program Constraints.)
2.4 TheFFW Management Striucture: Two Weak Links
In the management. strcture of~the' CRS FV Program th~ere are two
hler; and~ the~ project
weaklns the consigne lik to the, project
Wea LinkFood
F&~FW Program Managemenft Structure
CRS5oa fie
~ >~*,r'-~~ ~ FFW Coordinator
P;;oj ect Holder
Weak LinkComunity,
Management Staff
*The primary wakness at 1bot the conignee and projethlr
sklsa well~ as othe cmpeen pjta nus suc atrain$ing
Th traininge o nare rovided for iid e~r tihe P&ESr1tdi
attmpttostrngten the tehical'anddevelpmnt is of
0' tsr~ hi nk:ta his i ndivd ope nd
a'ufcin: ' jeom I-erw n1wthe
fie
-
,Y

- 14: -
It must be recognized that the FFW Program is only one of many
programs that the consignee manages. In addition to the CRS Maternal
and Child Health (MCH) Program, and CRS funded projects, most
consignees visited during the field investigation were implementing
projects funded by other donors. Moreover, in addition to these
external resources, the consignees were also managing Church resources.
The number of project holders per consignee and their
geographical distances from the consignee centers also restricts the
consignee's role as FFW Program monitor and development promoter. One
consignee noted during the field investigation that even for those
project holders located 20 kilometers away, he could only hope to
visit their project sites once a year. This particular consignee had
6 project holders. In some areas, particularly in the hill regions of
northeast India, projects may be 400 kilometers, and even farther
away, from consignees. The average number of project holders per
consignec- in the Bombay zone is 7; in the Calcutta zone, it is 13; and
in the Madras zone, it is 18.
At the project holder level, the "weak link" - seen during the
field investigation - resulted from one of two possibilities:
* the project holder was disengaged from the FFW activity
(usually a parish priest in these cases); or
the project holder, though interested in doing development
activities with FFW, lacked the skills, confidence and staff
to carry out effective community development projects
(usually a paris|; priest or Catholic nun in these cases).
Where the parish priest was disengaged from the FFW activity, the
evaluation team saw evidence of employment objectives overriding
development objectives, or the FFW resource not being applied in
adhruncc to CRS policies.
Ex amp1
At one completed project site, though the primary objective
stated on the project application was to provide drinking
water, tic water was vtsibly at the bottom of the well. The
project wa,, documented as "completed" by the project holder.
The evalu;iLion teair member was at the site because he wanted
to see a project application which was still in the planning
stage. I 1was only on reaching the site that the story
unfolded that the same well had been deepened - and
"completed" - six months earlier. The project was considered
completed because the allocated mandays were finished, not
because water was reached. Community members said that the
parish priest hadn't visited the site; the parish priest
wasn't available for comment.

- 15: -
It should be emphasized, however, that the evaluation team saw
these cases as exceptions. More common was the second possibility
cited above ­ that many project holders, though very interested in
doing FFW activities, lacked the skills, confidence and staff to carry
out effective community development activities.
Examples
At one community site, a Catholic nun was implementing
several FFW well deepening projects. When asked why she was
concentrating on well deepening projects, she said that well
deepening was the only project type she felt comfortable
doing. She was interested in doing other projects with FFW
particularly income-generating projects but she was afraid
that they might fail. When asked what outside assistance she
needed most, she replied: encouragement - if someone with
rural development skills could visit her every 2-3 months to
give her project ideas, and to let her know if she's
approaching the project appropriately, she would be able to
take mor. risks in initiating projects.
One project holder (a parish priest), when asked why he only
did well deepening projects, said that they were relatively
simple to manage and implement. He added that he would be
interested in doing other types of projects, but that he felt
he lacked the technical skills to do so.
* Another project holder, a nun, was carrying out a program of
teaching tailoring to poor women, but was concerned about the
fact that the skill did not necessarily give the
beneficiaries adequate incomes. When asked why she could not
explore the possibilities of giving them training in other
skills with better income earning potential, she replied that
she was not aware of such possibilities, and that she would
welco,::, any asii star-ct, in this regard.
* Another project holder, a nun with several years of
experience with FF, was carrying out six FFW assisted
projects simultaneously. Although she was viewed by the
cons,"nce and CRS as an effective FFW project holder, she
herself acknow] edged that she didn't have the tne to
adequately supervi se each i,'rk site. For this supervi sion,
sh said, she relied prim:jrily on local comnmunity
volunteers. When asLed what outside assistance she required
most, she stated that she needed training for her work site
supervisors and an assistant with good community development
ski ls.

- : 16 : -
The most effective FFW-assisted projects visited by the
evaluation team were primarily of two types:
* those in which the project holder was a private voluntary
organization (PVO); and
* those in which the project holder was a priest or nun
with maay years of experience with FFW, and good
technical and development skills.
The PVO managed FFW projects were particularly impressive. All
of these projects visited by team members not only had on-site
technical and management staff, but most also had staff specialized in
establishing village organizations and cooperatives. All of these
projects had very strong community involvement in project planning and
Implementation, and consequently, better maintenance of assets.
Moreover, the PVO FFW-assisted projects had much more in the way
of complementary inputs, such as tools, materials, and cash.
Examples
One project holder, a PVO founded in 1946 had 10 on-going FFW
activities as components in its Tribal Development Project.
The purpose of the project was to bring self-sufficiency to a
tribal area encompassing 33 villages.
The PVO staff assigned to the project area totalled 15
people, and included 2 agronomists, 2 water engineers, 1
community organization specialist, and a project director.
The FFW activities included construction of 6 check dams for
irrigation, land development of 40 acres for rice production,
I irrigation canal and 2 drinking water wells.
One of the 6 check dams nearing completion was 600 feet long,
and was expected to hold water covering 25 acres. It will
provide irrigation water to 150 acres belonging to farmers
from 6 villages. Given that these 150 acres - which up to
now have only provided I millet crop per year - will soon be
providing 2 rice crops each year, it is not difficult to
speculate on the significant impact that the FFW- constructed
check dam will have oI tle lncoines of the beneficiaries.
Three thousand ,nandays of FFW have been provided by CRS to
construct this check dam, which translates into 12,000 kg of
bular and 300 kg of soybean oil.
Another project holder, a PVO founded 25 years ago, has been
able to involve the community actively in project planning
and implementation with the result that it has been possible
for the PVO to utilize the FFW resource as a catalyst for

- : 17 ­
attracting resources from other donors and the State
Government; and has been able to integrate these resources
very well into a long-term plan of community development.
The project has self-employment schemes with assistance from
IRDP and has successfully completed a village wide sanitary
latrines programme with FFW produced bricks and labour, and
design assistance obtained from the Block Development
Office. The PVO has also constructed a Community Centre,
part of which has been let out on rental basis to a Bank, in
the process attracting institutional credit facilities to the
village. The PVO has also assumed responsibility for the
maintenance of assets created and actively liaises with
Government for implementation of environmental programs like
Social Forestry.
Clearly much more could be accomplished with the FFW resource if
all project holders had sufficient access to complementary inputs such
as technical input, support in site management and community
organizing, and material and cash resources.
2.5 Zonal Personnel Issues: Unrealistic Roles and Responsibilities of
Field Reviewers
The roles and responsibilities of CRS zonal field reviewers are
currently unrealistic, not only because of the geographical coverage
which is expected of them, but also because their scope of work is
much too demanding in that it expects them to provide program audit
functions, promotion functions, and linkage to project sites.
Table 4 indicates the magnitude of Field Reviewer's task in
maintaining linkages with consignees, project holders, distributors
and project sitzS.
Table 4
1986/87 COMPARISON OF FIELD REVIEWERS TO THEIR COUNTERFARIS
.---------------------
.-------------.---------------------­
-- - - - - - - - . -.. -. -. -. - . -- -.
-. .- . ... . - .. .- .- .- . . .. .. . .I ........ ... ... ... ..-I ... ... -.. ..
I I I Nusber of I
IZONES INumber of INuse' of INumber of FFW IDistributors INumber of
I (Field RewiewersICons~iqees (Project Holders (MCH!OCE/etc.) IFFW Projects-I
I-------- -- I--------------- ------------I------------- I------------I ----------- I
II I I I I I
I MADRAS 5 1 37 420 1 1874 1C25
II I I I I
I CALCUTTA 1 4 1 27 I 395 1 1295 1 499 1
BOMBAY 1 5 1 49 I 276 1 1021 665 I
I I I I I I I
COCHIN 1 2 1 25 1 0 1 1810 1 0 1
.. .. . .. .. . .. . . I . . . . !. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . I . . . . . . I
1I-------------I ------------ I----------I------------- I------------I------------I
I TOTALS 1 16 1 138 1 1041 1 6000 1 2189 I
--------------- I------------ ..------------ I ----------- I" ---------- I.------------I

The 'fieId.. reviewe rs in: !each' zone are. expected to vsit all,;1
Sconsig nee's at le'ast':once,,a,year; and '25 othprec hldsevry
year', Thyae roae to dferent- consges duigechfi9
visi~t to avoid: comp licity - pehap" eesr rcuin u
pt~ao ze-vert eless iwhich idoes 'not_ bui- d xeinc ien -,,
location to sufcient y "under'stn he spcal problem andisue
facd byapriua onsignee and his proj'ect holders, l in F'W progra
impl'ementation
An analysis of.Table 5 indicate's that on an averagefie,
reviewers barely contact 14% of project-holder's', as 'against' :their' ow~n
arge of25%a yar.Given the f igure's in.Table 5',-adteditne
obecovered, it is creditable that the field :revewr cane'ven,,,
reach 1 4 %. However, it wo~uld seem obvious that' they ,cannot offeri-he
program su~pport services expected of them.: Field,, e I w r from all
Athree zones Atold team- members that in most cases they only had time to
audit" co6nsignee and project holder records and they'rarely'had time
to vi sit project sites.Y
Table 5 ~ ~ -TOTAL FIELD YISITS BY ZONAL STAFF:
lp / lie ron
Iiie I 1year wise, Grand I
151,~IStI No ear Wise I MADAS I BOMBA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ICALCUTA 1. otal
7----------------­
1 1 ----- 43 1 50 1 Is
U1 1585 1 23 1 44 1 1693
~ 1 ~ 19B~ -~[1-~ 12~ .1 498 1 .79
- - - -~u~- ~ ~2. ~i~roj-t Htolders ~'~-~ .
S 18 I 101 i 20 1 89 1- 3
1904 1 319 1 175
ZoalW seSand -TotalI - 4O
Atthe CRS semnaron~ July 1 1987 on of thesa1- rusws
asked t o adrs i 1cW gqeto
J, WhtI a re aI I st Ic and appra r st e role , , i f i Id
reviee vis-a-vis theFFW Program?,.
Tei r responses, recorded, on: flpchr we re a1 1 OWS
- Roleo re R- ee
dt ard Revo
-~h a c ~~rf .aand s"e - 1~llato

- :19: ­
- Project beneficiary selection, need, coverage: visit
project sites, physical accomplishment.
- Check infrastructure with project holders/consignees,
e.g. storage, staff and transportation.
* PromotioLn
- Assist consignees and project holders in selection of
project sites, beneficiaries, overall planning and
monitoring.
- Promote need-based planning in relation to integrating
FFW with funded projects and MCH.
* Evaluation
- Post evaluate certain number of completed projects, and
discuss the observations with project holders and
consignees.
When challenged as to how realistic this list of expectations
was, the small group acknowledged that it was not possible to carry
out all of these responsibilities well, given the geographical
coverage, and the fact that at best field reviewers can only visit 25%
of project holders. It was very strongly held, however, that all
those functional areas - audit and review, promotion, and evaluation ­
must be covered somehow.
The small group presented the following options for strengthening
the above functional areas:
* Additional Field reviewers at CRS zonal offices.
* Strengthen review staff at consignee level, and provide them
with training.
* Reduce the requirement of geographical coverage in a fixed
period of time.
* Concentrate a significant portion of field review functions
and time in selected geographical areas.
The evaluation team agrees that any of the above options, or
combination of options, would result in more effective field review
from the CRS zonal office - in the audit/review and evaluation
functional areas.
As for the promotion functions listed above, the team believes it
to be unrealistic and inappropriate to expect field reviewers to carry
out these functions effectively from their zonal offices. Promotion
functions, to be addressed appropriately, require frequent site visits
and thorough understanding of the issues and problems of a particular
area. Moreover, the team (and some CRS representatives) seriously

- :20: ­
question whether field reviewers can simultaneously wear the two hats
of "auditor" and "promoter". Can the same individual effectively
combine both roles?
Given the two "weak links" in the FFW management structure
discussed earlier, the team endorses the recent decision of two zonal
offices to concentrate its staff and other resources on a limited
number of consignees (5 in one zone, and o in another) who have
demonstrated good management performance. Furthermore, the team
believes that the FFW Program with these consignees would be
strengthened considerably if staff with technical and development
skills, and experience in rural development, were employed to carry
out the project promotion functions.
2.6 Decentralization of CRS/India
CRS/India decentralized in January 1986. The intention of this
move was to give the zonal offices the autonomy of separate country
programs.
At the July 1, 1987 CRS Seminar, one small group was asked to
address the question: How is decentralization being defined? Their
flipchart response was as follows:
* Transfer of control over program activities from Headquarters
to zonal offices.
The FFW Program, however, has traditionally
been controlled by zonal offices.
* Further decentralization - i.e., from zonal offices to
counterparts - is desirable.
This decentralization has already been
initiated with the planning process.
CRS/Madras has moved one step further, and
* Advantages of Decentralization:
decentralized the project approval process.
Greater incentive for development.
Those consignees having greater potential for
development can be identified and encouraged.
* Disadvantages of Decentralization:
Complete decentralization could lead to poor
management (improper selection of projects).
The evaluation team supports in principle the goal of greater
decentralization of the FFW Program to the consignee and project

- : 21 ­
holder level. Institution building, after all, should be a major goal
of development programs.
Although the team agrees with CRS representatives that further
decentralization to consignees and project holders is risky at
present, in view of the "weak links" discussed earlier, the addition
of staff with rural development skills, and further staff training,
would help build stronger local institutions, and make further
decentralization more manageable.
The issues concerning decentralization between the CRS/New Delhi
office and zonal levels were difficult to clarify by this evaluation
team primarily because the CRS'India Director's post has been vacant
since May 22, 1987. The new CRS Country Director is expected to
arrive in August 1987. The team has noticed a good deal of confusion
around decentralization on the part of zonal representatives, and ever.
a degree of inter-zonal rivalry; but this confusion and rivalry may
more likely be because there is no Country Director at this time,
rather than to issues of decentralization.
It does seem apparent, however, that decentralization does not
necessarily mean non-coordination of the FFW Program at national and
zonal levels. The zones do share information about the FFW Program on
a regular basis, a process which has been facilitated by the PM&E
grant.
One issue raised by CRS representatives at the July 1, 1987
seminar pertains to the relationship of the zonal office with USAID.
Zonal Directors see a need to interface directly with USAID/New
Delhi. This issue will need to be explored further when the new
CRS/India Director arrives in August 1987. Another issue that needs
to be addressed is: How can greater collaboration be achieved with the
Government of India if the zonal offices are operating as 3 autonomous
country programs within the same country?
2.7 The Potential for Greater Program Impact
The FFW Program in India is achieving positive development
results, Vet the potential is there for even greater impact.
In particular, much more attention paid to the following areas
would significantly incrteasu the Program's development impact:
* the encouragement of innovative project types, especially
income-generating projects;
* more community participation and attention to local
institution building (i.e. cooperatives and village
organizations);
* stronger linkages with Government support services and
programs;
* greater integration with other PVO programs; and
* the Institutionalization of program planning for long-term
integrated rural development.

- 22: -
Outside resource support to the CRS FFW Program - particularly in
the areas of training and staff strengthening - would help the program
move further in these directions.
3. PLANNING, MONITORING AND EVALUATION (PM&E) GRANT
This section of the report reviews the goals and achievements of
the Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E) Grant, which USAID
provided to CRS in AugusL 1984. It presents:
* an overview of the Grant's objectives;
* a summary of the grant's current status;
* team conclusions; and
* team recommendations.
3.1 Overview of Grant Objectives
USAID provided the PM&E Grant to CRS to implement the PM&E
System, which was developed by Community Systems Foundation of Ann
Arbor, Michigan, during consultancies in 1983/84.*
The Grant amount totalled Rs.910,800 (equivalent of approximately
$79,200). The original period of the Grant was from August 1984 to
September 1986; although the expiration date has since been extended
to September 1987. [CRS's reason for the extension request was that
the training model for the PM&E seminars require "recasting" to
include a resource team selected from CRS, local counterparts and
regional professional institutions to conduct the seminars.]
The objectives of the Grant were as follows:
* BIIA/AEA Forms: To help assure the annual completion of a
minimum of i2 and a maximum of 60 analyses of FFW project
beneficiary income improvement and asset effectiveness forms
(See Appendix H). To achieve these objectives, funds were
obligated in the Grant Agreement to provide travel and per
diem for the (CRS Headquarter) FFW Evaluation Coordinator to
make four trips to e-ach of four CRS zones over the duration
Of the Grant.
Case Studies: From the above analyses, the Grant proposed
tlhat case studies be prepared for review by zonal staff to
enabl- thcm "to advise consignees/project holders on the
types of FFol activities which will maximize benefits to the
participanits, and result in the creation of more durable
*The Implementation of a Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation System
for PL 480 Title II (June 1984) Fcod for Work Programs in India
(June-1984).

- : 23 ­
assets." Funds are obligated in the Grant for the printing
of these case studies. [The Grant does not stipulate how
many case studies should be completed; CRS has set the number
at 5 per year per zone.]
PM&E Seminars: To provide a series of consignee/project
holder-level workshops which would cover "improved techniques
in FFW project planning, design and management, and
appropriate technical skills required in each area" such as
"dry farming, road and bund construction techniques,
construction of post-harvest storage facilities, use of
improved seeds and agricultural inputs, lining of wells,
ground water location, social forestry, etc." Funding was
obligated for training of upto 250 consignees, project
holders and/or their staff in the form of eight 3-5 day
workshops.
According to the Grant Agreement, three major benefits were
expected from installation of the PM&E System:
zonal FFW coordinators and field evaluators will better
understand how to advise consignees/project holders on a
more discriminating selection of proposals, monitoring
project implementation, and assessing results;
* zonal staff, in analysing project impact on both
beneficiaries and creation of assets, will be better
able to advise CRS/India on allocation of commodities
and funds to FFW; and
consignees and project holders themselves will be better
able to maximize the benefits of FFW using their
knowledge on designing and construction of wells,
irrigation bunds, roads and storage facilities.
3.2 Summary of the Grant's Current Status
Even though the PM&E System is recognized by CRS zonal offices as
a thoughtful and very much needed approach to improving the
development impact of the FFW program, implementing the system has
been a struggle for tLhem.
Follow'ing the upcoming July 13-19, 1987 FFW seminar, remaining
grant funds will total approximately $27,000 (more than one third of
the total grant.) The Grant is due to expire in September, 1987.
The BIIA and AEA Evaluation Instruments
Since the beginning of the Grant in 1984, CRS zonal staff have
been reviewing, revising and field testing the two evaluation forms ­
the Beneficiary Income Improvement Analysis (BIIA) form, and the Asset

Effectiveness nalys s"AEA), form in", 'an'at temptfto,better"mth h
instruments to..the ftepol xetdt s hm h Jaa~lt
orgnlisrmn eindby Comm nt Syrstems' Foundation, re
seen'by' CRS -as; technica11 sou nh but- inappropriat e,'i en w th -the
-multiple ,r'evision the ha e.- since ten ,,through, the- forms "are ,st~i Li~::,l
_conside'red to 6o'."f.c~1rdna a h-a~
I.solicited "unre li able'
One t he Bao~ssp IA' form, accor ig.to ,zonal,,ield
reviewers, is the questio~n which is to 'be po'sed ,to--benef iciaries, to
dter-mine their income prior to the FF project. "How can you :expect
villagers to1 rememer their incomes 2' or: more yearsi prev osy, and,
Y;,can i inomtin" field, reviewers as(il
~reviewers in the Madras~ office have proposed that this '!baseline data"
h- establistedeaofthe time of's art-p]
' One~issue with the AEA 'form, according to fie ld revi~ewers- is-the
qestion estimating te expeced life ofani 'asset. In the evaluation
tem srviwofafew comple'ted AEA orsteestimated life o0a~
locsthuse anged from "5 y9ears" to "7~genera tionl and the life
ofa rwell ranged f rom "7 yers". to "15 years". Field reviewer si, asked
us: "'How do we make these deteriinations?"'
~In interviews ,ith field reviewers, most we re unable t o 'eJI I US.Lc I1
what the rationale was for doing the BII'i~and 1AEA eva luat ion's- "y
are you . doing the evaluations, and how m ight the' infomation,be useful
to'you?' Whe se wa was done with the -forms-, -he reply was:,
"We send them to Delhi."~ h e ~ofc as 'hf asked what;
with thw the-Whendo rc' Doelhi~
iLheydo i':: iththefors te~eply was,"They are, filed'.
tksplace,
No 'analysi
no consol'idation is done, and nofed~ s, povided t'o
the7 zonal offic'es.
.....................................
BTh~or dat'e5 BIIA form's and 100 AEA' f'orms have been completed
Bothform arestill 'considered to be, in. a field, testing stage.. See
* " .....
I YT* ..~ ..* ..* .. . .... ..... 4'R. .
IP10 A A
1A[ 1 I t 1 l
'ni ai I
EAst lti j

Cas'e Studies6
Fi ye case- studies hav e',been 'ri tte s'nce
Co'mpletied".
the Grant
case;
began
'stdies_:ar ett rzna fcso ei
They have otbe-n--i nI db*d 7in any. seminars -thus ,ar.7 ,n .mi'd-Uune
197R NwDelhi atarqet to ieac zonal offc ngth at 5
caesu e oe'be comple ted by July' 15 18' i order'to meet
Siing deadlines prior to the ,Grantf xprton I on Sp em 6r" 306
1987,. -Field'reviewer a writing these case, studi es n te i zona
offices. As one zonal Directo a&"e r .sh ing those case
~studies only to mree~t the Grant deadline. They are nap go ig to',b
high quaity, case studies."
~The PM&z Seminars
Ir1986, In PM& "'trainiingprograms"~ were conducted'4 nal 3 zones.
sesions. (wosessions were hel in; ech zone to ke'ep thie numbe of
participadts per sesion belwthrty.), (naddtonal. tra.ining,
proran s chduedfor -July 131,1987].
'The sesin hed Clut and Madra's zones 'accordi'ng to
fedack~ from participants and zonal staffwo at ended, .were
'>1ture-orienced, and morie the~oretical thn:ractic' -;'A Sone
consignee complained, "We didn'tt even~ get a ,chance.-to sa ar
Sinformation amnonst ourselves about our ow FFW rojec t6.
The sessions in Bombay zone, :on the 'atherhand were mor
nds-based 'and practical-, Zonal staf 'consignfees, and project'
vl 'holders describedthe~seminar as highly succe'ssful
It shouild be noted-owever, that:t e Calcutta "and Mad as
programs were more responsiv to the requirementB, 0f t 'P&E.Gran~t
than teBombay program. Give~ the very amiio agenda for the"
seminas& stpolted i h rn, n'gvn, ml bde.oliae
for them, a sees leturesrath onld lese'l dyo me b t
Grant requirements. a~h ypssbea~ome te
3. Team Conclusions' and eomendations
Te amoun of R,910,0 (79,200 wa wek. repns toth
Alhog theGan has hadapoit'ive~
inlece on e F~ Pram
~CRS has struagledt~try to.rn tte Grantimnt: i
..... Code a o. tG,n,.u e
ul - iie b wi t-itl v' ina d ' r n e a e ,
re Us-ItaBe-],-t
ls idircth
et-,m ematin Cmm-,,pra
a .1 tpe 4,

- 26 -
Specific eanhclusions a n recommendatIo'ns areo1 ned, below
T e~BEI an AEA Instrumentsi,
he BA-I'adAEA rfsat present do not have.,prov i io fr
collecting basi ne d ta from a 'sampl o enef icia'rie
,determined at the time 'of,proje t-start-up., -Without.thi
baseline itds very dff icu1 'to comparc'cer'i, in icators,
like inicomie levels before 'start ote pjec r~ -an, after
Sproject completion,
p * There areseveralcolumns in t liese formats which are
preived by the field staff as being unclear or redundant or~
ambiguous. -
S The effectiveness of the assets' created~is not clearly
measued in the instruiments.
IThe inistruments do'inot pinpoint weaknesses or failures inthie
imlmntto o h project.-~
Remedaions~ ei~I
I .Revew nd evie te. IIAand AEA formats an well, as thie
S jProject Appliation for-ms to reflect the',above conclusions.
~2. Develop rcdrswti R to consolidate and analyze BIIA
W--''- Lind AEA evaluationh resudlts, and daw conc1lisions aiid
~.earnings l as inputs for fture planning'
-~3. Traini users ofl te: H1IA and AEA istruments: what is their
pu~~& rpose; how sh)uld they be applied; how should the' re sul1ts-'
be anlye and~ inepee d and ~iow sh'ould. the conclusions
4.Otieassac wil likely beeqired to~ carry outhtese,
reomndtos gie htCS-a tuge f or:2 years-,to
mae heBIA and AEA intumenta ppropriate and.
meaingulThi asistncesholdbe, .provided 1by, people
wit frs-hndexperienceote issue relthed to'~a
-Tat thre havebeen only fiecopeted ca'so'studesis
caae, a~vlopmeft was inke:t completed, _ad
a
evlation

- :27: ­
- no funds were provided in the Grant to develop case studies
on-site; and
- there is not enough understanding as to the purpose and the
method for developing case studies, and how they can be used
as educational tools to assist in future planning.
Recommendations
1. The remaining PM&E Grant funds should be allocated for two
purposes:
- To cover costs of CRS Field Reviewers to prepare
additional case studies on-site (several days may be
required). These studies should focus on the process of
project implementation, especially in cases of
innovative uses of FFW.
- To fund a seminar In each zone designed to use the case
studies as an educational tool, e.g, to serve as a
discussion basis for developing innovative project
approaches.
2. Prior to preparing case studies on-site, a 3-day orientation
seminar should be conducted to acquaint field reviewers with
the purpose, objectives and methods of case study development.
To conduct this seminar outside assistance should be provided
by people familiar with problems -f rural development.
3. With a view to enabling the refocussing of the remaining
portion of the PM&E Grant as recommended above, the Grant
The PM&E Seminars
should be extended up-to Sepetember 1988.
Conclusions
The Grant requirements for the seminars were over ambitious:
the training objectives, though appropriate, could not
possibly be adequately addressed in a 3-5 day seminar. What
resulted were lecture-oriented seminars; and skill
developmint, the intenteion of the seminars, does not occur
through le:ctures.
The seminars did contribute positively to CRS staff and
consignees arriving at shared awareness of the need to
promote long-term community development.

Recommendatio'ns
- : 28 :
1.,CRS staf andkey.consignees:,and projec t hodesaretl
great-l~~in-need--of ski-1\i's- rela ing t lnig ngmn.
Project esgn and evaluation. A,needs-base'd7 trainig
approach :to improve, these ,ski~l AS'trongl
s recomme nded
2, To develop' this nee'ds-based apoc train tann
nedassessment isstrongly advised" toensur t~ha tran
modules devel~oped,, actually lead to .i'Mproved job;
p'~ e'rformance. ,This needs assessment, ought to be made 'by
people 'who are not 'only familiar 'with experiential'itraining
i tmethods, but who also have experience 'of grassroots
devel~opment problems and processes.
3.~ Anana em eia oreview the implementation of thePM&E ~
Sytmshould occur a't the national level to discu~ss,
­
evaluation finigadomlt newpang directions.
-~~This approach' was in, facts recomm'ended by Community_ Systems
~.Foundation iits guidelines for implementingtbe system.
4.Ec oa fic hudognz on, aniaiinual basis a 3-dayA
strategy deeomn pann retreat to bddress issues
Saffecting program implementationv and. to develop actionV plans .
for~ the coming year. '
4 SELECTION CRITERIAJ
In4the past, two years,~CRS India ,has made. a.very "definite pofidy
shift aw~ay from~ supporting' "individual" projects- to support'ing
projects 'which are intended~to create "commu nty," assets with'
long-terim-benefits f or, thli'ocal' vi llage commu~nities. 'This policy
~hift 'isresultingg.in the application of, 'stronger, more, community:based
criteria 'r~ beneficiary. and reci en s le tion.',
4' /Consi~gnee Agreement.on 0bjectives
A positiv a ysgiiataspect 'dv of this shift .in CRS
polic'y is the tact :that the rationale for 'the change was 'iscussed
with consignees an key project~ ho"1d.r s From t he s~ampling 0o
consineeand project 'oler visted 't was evident, that, -here was
undestadin of and~ agreemunt wih h need to ap ply f ood- resou rce s
in.mnner that wol crat'e 'long-term commun 't ase that foo
Commodites should be applied to iong term deve pme'nt objectives'
Ia$r than' bL, consumid An short-term. eedin - ogramis
'Gi v p thefc.tat- consignee's aie: autnom'b a and iidepaneit
by a OS"~ n rp a nd are. xi t extensione
of- the CRS organizatc s apioa'',,he''csf on: 0 FE P rogram
t o promote 1ong~tm deve opment-de p sd'a eat dean on CR~S and~r ;, .

- 29: ­
counterparts having agreement on the bes apliaionofod
commbdi'ties to aciv development ,objectives., 'Meetings bewnCR
zonal staff and consignees to 'arrive 'at a common understnding of the.
long, term develop nt objec t'ive s of the FFW Irogram are a ;recent and.
lo'e'-'phenomenon.
c he-PME Gran c ontr IIute7 tivel ii
process.
4.'2 Selection of~Type of Projects
~,Fromrn the smlso lcsvstd twseietta h
slcion of types~of projects~wr appopriate to th~e loa eds
Ini drouight prone an rdareas, the emnphasis, wa~s on. drinking
.>water wells, water storg reevisadcekdm~ o collect and
Astore rain water, peclto ak oehneground weater recharge',
reforestation projects to ~prevnt sil erosion.A 'In other places,. e.g.A
~in remote hillfres village roads to connect villages~to markets~and
tenable vehicles to ply prdmntd Poet nhilaesas
includeda.Tnd leveling and terracing to enable clivation.'
SInterviews and observations by team memer at proet sie
indicate that project types wrlargel deermned rs > te calte
,~jpopulation who communicated their needsto th rjc holder.' InTh
smany instances, the~ village leaders an acaa ebr niae
tihe type~s of p~rojec~t that >th'ey needed.~
4.3~ Different.,Zonal Strategies A
~Each of the three zonal offices 'of CRS has develo ped a "different
strategy~to ensure tht FFW~support goe&s only to promote, long-term.
dev~elopmentA4~
MADRAS: Consignees within the Madras zone are given Athe auhrt
tassess individual prjet ppictin and screen, out those which
do not conform to, the' norms agreed to between conignees and CRS.

BOMBAY: -'The' Bombay, CR ' zonal of ice has i'nsi's ted that 'alI
consignee s make, a; f ive- year. Developrnent Plan: and,"submi t' it toth
zonal: off ice See Appendi Fl. If any cjonsignee -faTl s.! to," subm it,
s a'an ah is- assumed(hth ~ o n rse nteF
P-gaand :he drpe rmte Is list of .consignees. ,-hei zonal;
office approves project,,applications only, if- the6y- were,_part -of,;the
6rigi al ,5-year plan stbmitted" by tec~cnsin and 'provided they
~conform t o the CRS policy of approving only integrated communty
projects.
2 The zonal office~ha 7stipulated deadlines for the, receipt of~the
_5yea lna el fr~thje submission of -annual,,project
P rpoal. Se Appedix IteChoi Diocese of Indore FiveYa
~Socio Economic~Planning Programme 1-~987 to lg9l.)
~4.4 Planiin8- A~New Process Within CRS
~~Althogh the CRS zonal offices have come toget'her inpast. years v
to detemine the'Annual Estimt of Rqiremnents, (AER), thi's has not~
~ been don on the basi s of~any real 'assessment of needs-a'sI deter-mined:
-at the grass-roots level. ,The AER was geared to the commodity­
-~allocationis as communicated t'o CRS by USAID. As such -it,has been ani
~ annual exercise in resource allocation, rather than a bottoms-up,
needs-based planining exercise., -t-
Planning for developmen~t started within CRS/India -only -two ,or,
three yearsago. Thje need~for planning, and' conseqjuently, the nee'd
for moioigadvlain has become crystalized only in,the-very ,
-recent past.
The PM&E Grant, was a~ positive intervention which came at.an
appropriatepint in time; to help CRS focus its:Program to achieve,
greater. development imipact.
As a consequence of the fundamental shif t i'nprogramiming
0bjecti~ves, the'introduction for thef~irst time of, plianning as an
integral part of the operati.ons of CRS, and the use of monitoring
'mechanisms~ and evaluation tools~wi1 need much expe r Ience and time, to
become instfiutinalzed.:
4.5- Benieficiary Selection -
The evlation ' team's observat on isthat~thesi t -i emphasis
i.n ORS in-favor o~f community projects, as~against indi'vidua I~ r at
ha resulted in a~shift, in,ephai in the, crtei for,the~eeti e.
of benef icbiaies as well. -
BY -their er au commuinity-projectsentofcan a
7
com ad'm rr maj afecting,pep. I htpo ,hr
a-patentconcern to addrsa ,he ;pro btms of the poo and: weaker
ro pher* re - as also. evierge& ,hel needfor, proper 'lann
n mn oringof,projects
g
a

- :31
-
n tepshetndency had been. ,targe t the bIenef its under.:
the FFW Program 6o individual s for the ,creatinof.-specifd c,! asse tsG,
.THi s-.was,' ap due o the" fact . that it was e'a s-y, to'.:ien fy
indivd\a1 rficYe s and .. t was ,'eaier to managesc rgas
Mror idvidual projects: involve less ef fort in pplann ng and
moitoringplrogram ipeena n
4. Beneficiaries:Belong to the Poores Scionso oit
SDuring ,the visits mnade by the, evaluation' team, to the sites. of- the
sample cosgie/rjc holders, it~was observed t hat, by and large,
~the benef4~ Icaidsc e~ e totepoet sections of, society.
SIn thecase of villages which had heterogeneous caste Systems,.
the benef iciaries~ were, Tby and large, found to belong toQ the weaker
(nd~the poorer) gouips.< )Inthe case of homogeneous lvillag'es, whichr
ffwere invariably found tbe tiba l, itwould seem that theweake and
porrscin fsceywr ~al1so ,reachied. In these cases, :again,
thboe Iaresfore argemajority -of those dliving in those
Sareas.
S The teamsa seeral projet ofconstruction of roads, wheire
enievlagso at of villag~es benefitted~. -Other example~s were:
construction of nullahs;. de'iltinig and bundiiig of' irrigation -tanks;,
const~ruction o~f check-dams, construction' of percolation ponds;
construction of~community,' centers;~ digging of ponds'L for.pisciculture/
salt production; and construction of "sanitation' facilitie's-. In al11
these cases, the benef iciaries formed~a large ajryofteppl
living in that area who derived benefits either ihn the fjorm of a
upblic co'nvenience or inxthe ,form of an upgrada't'o fpiaeast
whichs
whchthey heldo
d z i
ntefr
hefr of av~ilability of, emp'loyment, for the
lanles orlonger -periods, thrb introducing an element of
stabil~ity in th iv~es-'of these people, -,ho'otherwise .might havle',ad
&miiad sach an ofepoyment oppor un ities, Ih Marh19
Smay Report '(Johni Chudy~) sjippo r7ts thi s abse,'vation:.
x~ ~ -
~Recipien prpportyfidig cit show that the program is
'providing emp16yment~ npor ities to'the r' n dy of
rua Inia soit. rd dl, the studies sho'w t h'at, FW
isprviding about7 da cfemployment per, recipient per
yeaor: abou.t 21~ percent' of a household s'annual
employmenit' FN sas rviig a7 eretices
in ueholdl Income. Ne,'erthele'sa the averag .recipient
hoshl is.st-ill below~ the' offic 1 GOI poverty line of
Rs6pe r-capit pe r, on'thAn' ru ra areas wth the
average recipient household; per ,apt a'income bengabt
Rs 465 per mont'h. Most rec pientC'
_.adleas -ag~fitutur 4al: and non-ag
wee~ be
ciituralaors a out
(6 --pret -28 .pe tent iwer al aT nd margl nali farmers',
ad percent we amailJtirader nora rv ice rkers.. I
Stionit th, employm nt and' ncome- n icaors h'e
~A
3

-:32:
studies sothttevrwelming'-majority 'of recipie'nts
(aboute pecn eemmes: r8 of Scheduled 'Tri
bes,
Schedu6led, Castes an ter backward c assesal
referredtoofficiall _LbyteGIa the-ekrscins
ofIndian Soiety~:groups'-targetted by- 0 steneis
in te rms .of econiomic ad .social development assi's't'ance.
~4 7 No Reli ious Bias.
From 'the sample~ studied, there appeared to be nxo religious
bias in the selection o~f benef iciaries, -and recipients. PVO' and
pari sh, initiated community projects we re -secular in thi
S:approach an rcs fipeetn hi program,.
4.8 Th Seeto rcs
#Different processes'of- selection of beneficiaries were A
~observed by the teamn.-< ­ -
In tile case~of many individual projects, it~was observed 1
~that those who knewi that FFW was available approached the
~project~holder to get the benefit.Ui
Incsswer Vswr prjc hlders, selection
themibeescomposed ovilgran/r project' staff select
teonfcais Ths omite appeared, to accept the''
In two icases it was' noticed that the -local' Gove rn'me nt
of ficial1s took up7 the responsibility of selecting, the'
beneficiaries, ,following the Government- a norms',of-giving:'
preference to thie most disadvantaged targeted groups.
In certaini other cases, it was noted-that 'the: vi.llage
Pancliayats had been eit r~Usted with
selectr
'the.,' ni
-rspns p iPty cif
se1etng~the boeneficiaries., InilI cases 'where beneficiari'es
were sele~cted by a committee or 1lcl group, t'he selection was
done not byfaiindivu 'bu by an e'nt i're group.
Therewerealso instnces whre~ the groups seece ,a
n-op indiidua detohrreasons which weg'd Wt
tw.For exa'p e;{n tw~o cases the vilg comite ha -
selected awidowi as a benficiary fo l an~d clarn and'
lo-ost hose -because she had no one els to loo ,after
heri~ Thle entire group, in suc~h daes i n
9, Recipient Selecti on
-Itwa snot anoject e of iev-a-o so
ad ti~h sf,'i a on misioto doav
tn, pporunty to' di6 aer
-

- : 33: ­
levels, including some recipients themselves. From those
discussions, it appeared that recipients were:
- those who are known to the beneficiaries and
- those who want work (e.g. daily wage earners).
The exact number of recipients on a project is generaily
left to the discretion of either the individual beneficiary, or
the project organizer. For example, the project could employ
100 recipients for 6 weeks, or 50 recipients for 12 weeks.
It is an observation of the team that landless labourers
are common recipients in these programs. In many cases,
particularly in community projects, the beneficiaries
themselves were also found to be FFW recipients. In some
cases, parish priests as project holders have also set up
village committees which select recipients on the basis of
their being "the neediest".
Here again, from the sample studied by this team, there
did not appear to be any religious bias in the selection of the
recipients.
4.10 Strengths and Weaknesses
Based on the above sample study, the evaluation team has
been able to identify certain strengths and weaknesses of the
selection process, which are discussed below:
St rengtls
Consignee Control of Project Selection: Addressing
Community Needs. Given the fact that Consignees are able to
influence the selection of projects, there is more assurance
that comunity-based needs will be addressed. Where Consignees
have stipulated that only community projects will be approved,
they are in a position to reject projects which are not
,ommunity oriented. This process Is serving to communicate to
project holders that they should propuse only community
projects for considerition.
Against this backgrund, the PM&E Grant appeonrs to have
stimulated greatu-r dialogue between CRS and conslgnees/pjroject
holders witlh a view to exploring ways and means of designing
Community Projects.
Where the CRS zonal office (e.g., Bombay) has developed
policy guidelines advocating long-term planning for achieving
community-based targets, the consignees appear to have had no
difficulty in accepting this additional responsibility.

- :34: -
Consignee Control in Project Selection Results in Better
Resource Integration. The Consignee's ability to control the
selection process makes it possible to achieve a sizeable level
of integration of the FFW resource with other resources. Many
Consignees have In fact achieved such integration with cash
resources from CRS and other donors.
Weaknesses
The element of Consignee control over selection of
Projects is not without its weaknesses.
Consignees can Present Individual Projects to Appear as
Community Projects. For example, in certain housing projects
that the team saw, the consignees had presented them to CRS as
community projects, putting forth the logic that it was a
"community housing scheme". Similarly, there were cases of
"land-clearing" or even individual wells which were described
as "community land clearing" and "community irrigation wells."
Pressure from Peers. Since consignees and project holders
are often peers in the church, pressure is sometimes exerted by
peers for project approval. There are cases where consignees
also happen to be project holders, and thus are seen as "one
among equals" in project implementation.
CRS Policy Guidelines Circumvented. Where the consignees'
approach to the project selection is in conformity with CRS
selection policy, implementation of that policy is
accomplished; and where it is not, the policy is circumvented.
Given such a situation, the implementation of CRS policy
guidelines varies among consignees.
Consignee "Looking for Projects" for FFW. Some consignees
look for quick identification of projects to provide employment
to people during the lean season. In such cases, it is obvious
that proper planning is not done. This lack of planning
results in ad-hocism in project implementation. In other
words, resources that are available are not utilised optimally,
resulting in less than "the greatest number of the neediest
gettinc the largest amount. of benefit".
Non-Adherrnce to Time-Schedules Vitiates Project Implementation.
Whenl requests do not conform to CRS time schedules, commodities arrive
late (sometimes during the rainy season) creating storage problems,
and increasing the risk of spoilage. Moreover, when commodities
arrive late workers may not be available.
Pressure to Utilize Commodities Before End of Fiscal Year. FFW
mandays which are not utilized by September 30 are carried over to the
next fiscal year, and deducted from that year's request. This

- :35: -
stipulation builds up pressure on the entire system to utilize the
food commodities before 30th September. It is but natural that under
such pressure, the quality of projects is sacrificed with a view to
accommodate the quantum requirements. There have beer situations
where, because of this pressure, project holders have had to utilize
the food commodities in months close to September, even though these
are not the lean months - the most appropriate time to attract a
prod, ctive labor force. In one case where a consignee did not submit a
request for CRS commodities until February, only 500 mandays of the
80,000 mandays had been programmed at the time of the team member's
vist (mid-June). How can the remaining mandays be programmed
appropriately and utilized before September 30?
Categorization of Projects Inhibits Project Innovation. Over the
years CRS has developed certain categories for identifying project
types. Consignees and project holders have tended to identify FFW
projects falling only within those categories. In other words,
innovative proposals appear to have been discouraged by such
categorization. In fact, the project selection committee of one zone
did not accept projects which did not fall within these categories.
Predominance of "Easy-to-Manage" Projects. In the identification
of project types, the team noted that those types that were easiest to
manage, tended to predominate. For example, projects like individual
irrigation wells, which could be completed with available local
skills, which Involved very little supervision on the part of the
project holders, and which had a low risk element, tended to get
preference over other types of projects.
Social Objectives and Technical Criteria Not Operative in Site
Selection. The evaluation team noticed that individual projects, as a
rule, did not take into consideration ways of maximizing the number of
beneficiaries and recipients. Similarly, they did not, as a rule,
apply technical criteria to site selection. For example, the site
selected for a check dam could supply water for 3 acres, or for 25
acres. The site should be selected on the basis of technical site
conditions and potential impact, and not on one individual's desire
for a check dam and ability to pay food transport costs. In some
other cases, non-application of technical criteria led to the failure
of the projects (e.g. a well dug at an unsuitable site, failing to
strike water).
Recipients are often not Project Beneficiaries. As noted earlier
in this section, the purpose of this mission was not to study project
impact on recipients. However, certain observations have been made
based upon interviews with recipients during site visits. One
observation already made is that the recipient is often not the
project beneficiary. In the July 1, 1987 CRS Seminar, CRS
representatives did raise as an issue the need to look for ways to
address the poorest of the poor - the landless day laborer, for
example - in project identification.

- 36 -
Selection Criteria not always Targetted at Poorest of the Poor.
We have also noted earlier in this section that a recipient has
generally been "any individual who wants to work". Such being the
case, it has been the team's impression that there has been little
conscious attempt at maximizing the number of mandays available for
the poorest of the poor. It has tended more to be a question of
employing "known persons" for longer periods. These persons in most
cases are poor no doubt; but not necessarily the poorest of the poor.
5. DEPENDENCY RELATIONSHIP
One of the major concerns brought up several times during the
briefing sessions of the evaluation team was the dependency
relationship between the recipients/beneficiaries and the project
holders/consignees. The SOW mentioned that "in some cases, a
dependency relationship between the community and the project holder
was perpetuated". This question was examined in depth by the
evaluation team.
5.1 FFW Prevents Migration and Promotes Family Stability
Although this team did not attempt to determine if repeated
FFW experience contributed to reduced migration and improved family
stability, the team was repeatedly informed by recipients
and community leaders that there would have been migration during the
lean season had not FFW been available.
By providing timely employment, FFW Projects have not only
prevented migration and preserved family stability, but they have also
prevented exploitation of labor. As is amply docuwenLed by several
studies, the extent of exploitation to which migrant labor is
subjected is very high. Family stability in rural areas is a basic
factor for the creation of conditions conducive to economic
self-reliance.
5.2 Lonp-Term Planning Wil! Reduce Dependency
As noted earlier, there has been a shift in recent years in the
CRS policy towards FFW Program implementation in favor of multi-year
development planning (5-years) for integrated community development.
This 5-year planning approach draws a timeline on repeat FFW
expe riences.
When community development plans are carefully designed, and when
they effectively integrate esources and provide for skill
development, they do address the question of the community's
dependency on FFW, as well as their dependency on the project holder.
Repeat FFW experiences over a time perspective with well-set
goals to be achieved at the end of the period, is quite acceptable as
a perspective planning strategy, and in certain circumstances like
drought-induced unemployment, also becomes necessary to keep up the

- 37: ­
developmental momentum. While repeated food inputs may appear
inexpedient, the alternative of unemployment is unjust. Conditions of
unemployment neither satisfy the norms of planning for economic
development nor do they meet the ends of social justice.
5.3 FFW as an Investment
A view expressed by some consignees ind project holders is that
there is really no dependency relationship in FFW programs because it
is always "food for work" and not simply "feeding the poor". In the
case of beneficiaries, the assets that are created enhance their
creditworthiness making them eligible for further credit assistance
from banks and other lending institutions to improve their economic
status. 7n the case of works like land clearing, the quality of
assets held gets enhanced considerably leading to better returns from
suc. assecs.
5.4 Creation of Community Assets Distributes Benefits, and Minimizes
Dependency
ln the context of the 5 Year Plans with their objective of
creating community assets, there is more likelihood of minimization of
dependency, as community assets will distribute benefits more
equitably among all members of the community, enabling them to enhance
their incomes. For example, the construction of a percolation pond
will, by enhancing the availability of sub-soil water, re-charge
individual wells of the land-owners in the area. This will lead to
better yields, multiple crops and more employment.
5.5 Skill Development and Income Generation Projects for the Landless
There is a need, as noted previously, for refocussing some of
these plans on income generation projects which will benefit the
landless poor. While skill-development programs could be thought of
for both marginal farmers and the landless, the accent should be more
on the provision of income generation opportuni ties for the landless,
maki. ng them self-reliant and growth-oriented.
Through a proper system of multi-year planning, it should be
possible to bring about a balance in program implementation between
the creation of community assets and the provision of income
generation oppcrtuni ties and skill development for the landless poor.
This is an arewiwhere considerable technical assi stance (e.g. project
desigi.) is called for botlh at the CRS zonal level and at the consignee/
project holder level.
6. RESOURCE INTEGRATION
6.1 Government
From sample visits to selected consignees and project holders the
team found evidence of collaboration with Government departments.

- . -
Ths, collaborati on~seemsto:'vary,fro State to:,State ,as also from
Dist:rict to: D stric.t.j
Consignee and prject older claorato wth Gvrmn a
evident i n the matter. ofl obtai'ning,,pemsso forselectionII of ' projett
site s-and:for-det-erni ng' ty sOf :Pro3 wl'fih WI. I be m,156-ffost ,-,---7behef
iciai to t le' communt ies.
Moreover, consignees' and 'project,' holders', of ten -sought -a nd
obtained technical assistance f rom -the" 'extension servi'ces" o various:-,
SaeGovernment departments. For,example, in fosttoprjcs
preoetahodrsno oly got. advice on site selection and-methods, for'
refresatinbut they also got free seeds, 'seedlings- and :sapins
In rojctsinolvin the const'ruction of~ "chekdstocae-tr
reservoirs, the, local, Irrigation Engi neers, ofered-s thncrate watier
and ofte suervised the construction of the 'earth dams.
6. atalst~for Release of Governmenit Funds-'
There were examples ~where the availabiliity, of food for worki.,
served to make available government funds eg 4hsi poctfor
backwr lses lsesor and fo~r roads, and drinking water wells f r'wr tribals
living in remote hill areas. It must be notedth.intesisacs
the type o~f projects an~d the ben~eficiaries were selected by the local,
Govenmen ofiias
SSuch collaboration between consi'gnees and :projec~t holiders on the
one h~and, and loalGovernment officials onV the other' incrae h
possibilityof~ FFW asise prjcshaving 'agreater long erm
£developmna impact.
Thered is scope for inceasing such collaboration, and efforts
4 ndto be made to promote4 closer iton top wi.th Government programs,
It was hearten~ing to sll some proje'cts such as vi'liage roas swhiich had
been 'constructe~d' with FFW ,ow being maintained by the village.
Isoecases the road were streng~thened anid surfaced by the Public
Works Depari~ tmento, allow local~ bu services to operate to the
villages which were previouslyin'accessbe
6. Other~ Donors
Atsome consignee level there was* evidence that many
FFWasistd rojct were 'implemented with cash i.np obtaained 'from
other fundin sources suc as MISE~RW(Wst Gemn) CEEM
(Holan); RS/ew York CARITA INDIADa -t e Indo-German 'Social
Service S8ociety. In some cases, t~e: Doc ee aalso', cont'i bu t es.
-- , ,,
4
-

The' integrat Ion of re so rcs $sidnml yb te on e w 0
Vs also ' in most: cases ,the Di ector .of, t e6Diocesan SocialXServ ce-I-_
Society
co
Where
p e th
tr y rgoee osge p1as Lg ega after t e~ t r wfa poe n~ s -s
projects, Wheri he6 Cos ignee is not, acti ve nprsig%complementary-' ........
re sou rces the-impa'c of-FF2W-asiste pr o jec~ts i m ess beause
hey are traditional type's of projects w'ch !an ecomnpi ted,,ony..,with'FW.'
Thle key to mxmznthdeveopment Impact of FFW assisted
projet idh aon of time 'that~ the Consignee and/or,
Hlespenidsin
the ;Project:
planning the project
resources.
and leragn ecmleetr
oo~project plnignral tragcng thre complementary"
jresources.< i C ~pi om,'~~tat a bpeetr
Forucche ssfu co ple ion of a proj ec t, 'i is -necessary that
thaalabiliy of the fo resources adtecash resources shouild
synchronize.Tisi stl not'always the case.
64Private Voluntary 0Organi'zain
iesource
~projects were mlmntdete thiroug'h PVOs or with their7 R integraio as Moat in evidence when~ FFW assi sted
PVs regally betterable t ensu~re commuity,involvement. in
§rpoject~ selection an~d siting. They provideconuiyraiza ac
ldrship traiig,~ includitng buidlding of skils They have easier
acesto local government departments and officialsand facltt
lJinkages which enabl~e the FEW assisted projects, to avail of- technical
an financial resources avial wt o'vernment. t,
Since PV~ ar usually located intea,&te rvd h
necessary organiza~tionalJ Inrsrcue ohnl Wasse
projects.­
reomnain frpormiprovemn emege
More rsourc spot an more..ifood
Y. -* Op~ . a
Techical ancnutnysevcssciastiiga
prjc ein otaj~t'eauto6

S 40, t-
Staff at consignee levels with rural 'development/ projec't
promo tio-n, skII l
Program support and evalain shulbeonspcfc
* econ t o and n er t in ou d foc~~i inhrn
*Amore &dillaborative CRS/USAID partnership vi s-a-vis t he CRS
Food Program in India,
*~More support 1 from USAID to~what CRS perceives as' local
7. CONCLUSIONS. ~'~
Sr7.1 The CRS FFVVProgram is a 've ry functional program.
''"''l 7.. CRS zonal off ice's are~striving fo rgreater
7.1.21 In the last' 2 years, the emphasis has -been o~n
-long-term planning with an 'Anitegrated' couununity~.
development approach.
7..

- :41 ­
7.4.2 The scope of their work is too ambitious in trying
to cover audit and evaluation functions, project
promotion, and project site support.
7.5 The recent decision of two zonal offices to concentrate their
staff and other resources on a limited number of consignees
who have demonstrated good management performance was a good
one.
7.6 The PM&E Grant was a weak response to a very ambitious set of
objectives and high expectations. Although, the grant
contributed positively to the re-orientation of the FFW
Program towards integrated long-term community development,
it has not succeeded in implementing the PM&E System. This
system is implementable. However, not enough training has
been provided; the BIIA and AEA instruments are not usable in
their present form; and there is, as yet, no linkage between
evaluation results and planning.
7.7 The CRS policy shift away from supporting "individual"
projects and towards supporting projects which are intended
to create "community" assets is resulting in the application
of stronger, more community-based criteria for beneficiary
and recipient selection.
7.8 The CRS System of project categories inhibits innovation.
7.8.1 Very little promotion is given to FFW - assisted
income generating projects. In the few income
generating projects which are being implemented,
little thought is given to the actual potential for
market tie-up.
7.8.2 Skill development for the landless, i.e. vocational
and on-site training, is not given enough attention
in the design of FFW-assisted projects.
7.9 There is evidence of collaboration at the field-level between
consignees/project holders and local government officials.
However this collaboration is not systemic.
7.10 Tnere is antL-ipuitv wtLhi~i the CPS or-aiiztion on the
scope of decentralization. This lack of clarity
impinges upon management functions and pojicy
formulation which should be based on systematic
information storage and retrieval.
7.11 The CRS FFW Program in India is achieving positive
development results, but there is potential for much greater
impact.

8.RECOMMENDATIONS
- :42 ­
8.1 A CRS/USAID workshop to review the outcomes of this
evaluation, and to formulate next steps. This workshop
should occur as soon as the new CRS/India Director is in
position.
8.2 CRS should establish closer links with Government at the
national, state and local levels to ensure integration of
program planning and implementation. It is recommended that
CRS liaise with GOI at national and state levels; that local
Government technical officers be included as resource people
in training seminars; and that possibilities be explored for
integrating the planning and implementation of FFW-assisted
projects with local Block Development Plans.
8.3 CRS should take more initiative with USAID and other donors
to ensure greater resource mobilization for the FFW Program.
Consignees should take more initiative with Government and
other PVOs to do the same.
8.4 The PM&E System as developed by Community Systems Foundation
should be revitalized.
8.4.1 the remaining PM&E Grant funds should be reallocated
to cover costs of CRS Field Reviewers to prepare
additional case studies on-site; and to fund a
seminar in each zone designed to use the case
studies as an educational tool. The Grant should be
extended to September 1988.
8.4.2 The BIA and AEA formats should be reviewed and
revised. Plrocedure should be developed within CRS
to consolidate and analyze evaluation results, and
draw co1CJeIusi ons and learnings as inputs for future
planning; and expected users of thle BIIA and AEA
instruments should receive further training. Outside
assistancL will liklv tC required to carry out
these recommendations.
8.4.3 A nect,:s-La Sed tt,linini approach is strongly
rec 1mwTcnded t in;rov,: job pc rfornancu of CRS staff
and key consi guee's an] project holders in planning,
project desiign, management and evaluation. To
dLvelop this needs based approach, a training needs
assessment is strongly advised within the next six
months. Outside assistance will be required for
this needs assessment.
8.4.4 An annual seminar to review the implementation of
the PM&E System should occur at the national level

- :43: ­
to discuss evaluation findings and formulate new
planning directions. It is recommended that such a
seminar occur within the next six months to review
the findings and recommendations outlined in this
evaluation report in the light of CRS's past
approach to the PM&E System.
8.4.5 Each zonal office should organize on an annual basis
a 3-day strategy development/planning retreat to
address issues affecting program implementation, and
to develop action plans for the coming year.
8.5 Concentrate resources on consignees who have demonstrated
good past performance. Strengthen their capabilities to
support good development projects with the addition of staff
with technical and development skills, and experience in
rural development, to carry out project promotion
functions. Provide complementary Inputs (training and TA
support, material and cash resources) to their projects.
8.6 Projcct design assistance should be provided to CRS to
develop FFW project models for income-generation, as well as
for skill development. Market tie-up potentials must be
considered.

BIBLIOGRA-PHY
1.An Evaluation Report of the PL 480 Ttje: 'IiProg' ram i n I ndia".;
2. 'An Evaluation Plan for the PL 1480 ,'Title lII Food'-for Work Program
~in India. PracticalConc'epts "Incorporated. .December 1980.
3 PL 480 Title II Evaluation~of Foo'd forWrk (FFW)in India
Summary2 Report. John Pal huyMac 1984
4. n E erg ng onitorinband Evaluation System for PL 480, Title II.
Food for Work in India.* Community Systems'Foundaton. 'uut
~1983.- u~s
.5. TheJ Implementation of a Planning Monitori~ng and'Evaluat on System
fort PL 480 Title I'I Food for Work Programis in'India. Community,
Systems Foundation. June 1984. -
6.~ Pl~eiesoaIanning, Monitoring and EvaluainSytmfr
SFood for Work in India. Community Systems Foindat'ion. October,
7. Grant Agreemnent -for Imlpementation of ~a.Food for, Work Planing,
Monitoring and Evaluation System: No. 386-0249G!700-.4036-00 (As
* ~Amended) Between USAID and CRS effective September' 14, 1984
8.Foods for Work Manual: CRS/India (As revised aur 96
9. AID Handbook No.9 (As amended) PL 480 Title II (Relevan~t Sections
on Food for Work..­
110. USAID files containing -CRS and USAID correspondence aid,
Sdo.u-ntto related- to the PM&E Gr~ant Agreemet, 'and USAID,
11. Annuiali Summary of Activities, 1986. Cathlic Relief Services,
1i2. FiveYear-Plan documents, Government of India, -Plan nng
Copmt t ion.
123, Ree1vnt-VFiles of CRS Zonal offices
I14 -Relevant ~Fles&-of- sample- consi /~project! 11o'
daer s­

AFGiANISTAN
V.S.S.R.
0 00
J AMU A XASHI{
L.hort *I~HIMAC .L PRADESH
I.. , S
CHINA CRS INDIA PROGRAM
(MAP SHOWING CRS ZONAL AREAS)
""NJIZO
UTAR PRADS 11
0.kp, 10 01( SA
MA4, PRAMADRAS9
CAL CUTA\
M.
A.,'DIL, T,,D BOMBAY__
H .P

I. Evaluation Objective
Food For Work Evaluation
Scope o-f Work
Assess the management tasks involved and the implementation of the
CRS Food For Work (FFW) program by quantitative and qualitative
review at the field, CRS zonal and Headquarter levels.
II. 'ackqround
In FFW projects, Title II food is used in place of cash to pay
laborers for a variety of jobs performed. FFW was created to serve
several objectives; provide jobs for poor laborers, increase
agricultural production, improve the economic and standard of living
position of the poor and proirote community development.
The FFW program in India increased substantially during the famine
years of 1972-73. The major program objective at that time was to
provide a simple mechanism for supplying food to the needy pockets
of the population. India is now in a food surplus position
regarding food grains, so that the provision of food without regard
to target groups is unnecessary.
A 1979 Community Systems Foundation (CSF) evaluation found that
CRS/FFW projects varied widely in quality. The most predominant
program weakness was the selection of project beneficiaries, those
who receive the asset created under FFW. A more serious problem in
a number of programs was that no selection criteria were employed.
Many projects were approved on a first-come-first served basis. In
some cases, a dependency relationship between the community and the
project holder was perpetuated.
As a result of this evaluation, an enhancement of CRS/India's Food
For Work program has been in progress. Since 1979, USAID has
invested approximately $520,000 to upgrade the CRS FFW program to
make it more development impact oriented. Upgrade activities began
with c follow up evaluation designed to Quantify development impact
that flows from FFW's two streams of benefits, i.e. those that
accrue directly to workers/food recipients and those that accrue to
oenefic iary/users of completed assets. Results provioed the basis
for Lne developmeri' of toe Piaening, Monitoring an Evaluation
Svsten ( FMK ) aeve loped by Comrinunity Systems Foundalior.. Tie
princ ipal pjur;pose of toe PMi&E system is Le heIsCnscrees anc
Lrc ec' iclers i;,rove ti efectiveness i of trie ,r prcjects over
LIime. A secorcdry PM&E purpose is to provide an indication of
program operction to CkS/i.,Y arid USAID. In addition, PM&[ intends to
measure charnes that occur at the local level ana attemt to
attribute those changes to a cause, whether it be FFW or some
combination of other program elements. This second stage is now

-4­
h. Describe origin/amount of capital Inputs for selected
projects.
i. Describe/quantify commodity delivery experience vis a
vis consignee project implementation schedules in sample
consignees.
j. Describe/quantify ration composition if appropriate to
recipient/workers.
8. Develop an analysis plan for the above data which describes
how FFW is carried out in actual practice at all levels.
The plan should attempt to identify patterns that emerge
over three years at all levels, as well as capture the
magnitude of the monitoring responsibility that lies with
CRS field staff.
V. Statement of Work
A. Composition of Evaluation Team
An international contractor assisted by a two-person in-country team
will carry out the evaluation.
B. International Contractor's Scope of Work
The international contractor (one person) will be the team
leader and will be responsible for reviewing the CRS program
developments and reviewing the evolution of the PM&E, taking the
lead in designing the field evaluation protocol and instruments for
the management assessment of the FFW program, conducting the
analysis of all three portions of the evaluation, and writing the
final report. Specific tasks include:
1. Upon arrival in India, review and become familiar with
the following oocuments:
a. An Evaluation Report of the PL 480 Title 11 orooram
in India. Cownounity Systems Fournation. June 4,
19i79.
b. An Evalua-;on Plan for ihe PL 480 Title 1i Food For
Work Hruc-r in India. Practical Concepts
Incorporated. December 1980.
c. PL 480 Title 11 EvaluaLion of Foocn For Work (FFW) in
India: Sunrniary Report. John Paul Chucy. March 1984.
d. An Emeraino Monitorinu and Evaluation System for PL
Title 1i Fuoo For Work in India. Cormunity Systems
Foundation. August 1983.

IV. Indicators
-3-
1. Count the number of Consignees, Project Holders, Project
types and Project sites in each FFW zone.
2. Compare and contrast above figures for previous three years.
3. Determine cumulative project area in eacn zone, and
concentration/disbursement patterns of projects in each zone.
4. Determine nearest and farthest project sites from zonal
cffice arid sampled consignees in each zone.
5. Derive total distances between CRS zonal office and all
project sites in the zone during the current fiscal year.
6. Derive total visits made by CRS Field Reviewers to FFW
;onsignees, project holders, projects and project sites
during the past year; derive total number of mandays
involved in these visits; conduct task anlaysis.
7. Numerate FFW training workshops that have been held in the
last two years for and by Zonal Staff, Consignees and
Project Holders. Collect agenda or curricula used for each
and assess the adequacy of the CRS training plan for
achieving the FFW/PME objectives and effective program
implementation.
8. Develop criteria for selecting a sample of consignees,
project holders, asset beneficiaries, workers/food
recipients, and community representatives from whom the
following would be obtained:
a. A qualitative, detailed description of consignee
selection ( onal input as required).
b. A detailed description cf project holder selection.
c. A detailed description of project and project site
selection (often, a project will have mutipie individual
sites).
d. A detailed oescribLior, of asset beneficiary selection.
e. A detaiied description of worker/food recipient
selection, arid length of jFF experience.
f. A description of the role of the community in project
selection.
g. A description of community vs. privately owned asset.

-2­
drawing to a close with the termination of the USAID grant for the
implementation of the PM&E. Upgrade activities have primarily
addressed development impact issues of asset creation. While it is
well known that the FFW program is diverse in project type and
geographical area, previous evaluations have made no attempt to
assess or analyze what this diversity means vis a vis the size and
skill level of CRS staff and for program enhancement efforts along
the lines suggested in the PM&E. It is now felt that an
understanding of the traditional FFW management apparatus in
quantitative terms, and qualitative terms may reveal ways to improve
the effectiveness of programming FFW . Therefore, the current
evaluation will examine the traditional FFW management apparatus,
collect and analyze appropriate qualitative information on FFW
selection criteria and supervision at all personnel and project
levels. It is expected that this information will complement the
data collected in 1979. On the basis of this analysis suggestions
for further program improvement will be made.
III. Issues
1. Given the experience of the past three years, has the PM&E
been implementabie, and if so, has it achieved its original
objectives.
2. Have the activities under the FFW program contributed to
long-term asset creation, asset sustainability, and
maintenance of the asset. Were the criteria for project
selection appropriate to encouraging sustainability and
maintenance of the asset for a period of time after
cessation of the project itself. In other words, was there
a long-term impact and what was it.
3. Has CRS developec a supervisory system at the field, zonal
and Headquarter level sufficient to effectively implement
the FFW program.
4. Is the geographical coveragE of the CRS program appropriate
to its goal ano rrnagemerit capacity.
5. To wriat extent are CRS project and beneficiary selection
criteria re leCLet in site s lecitior, beneficiaries* and
recipients- iT, , programs.
*Benieficiaries are those 'rio receive asset created under a FFW
project.
*Recipients are those w7o do the work and receive the food wage.

APPENDIX A
FFW Evaluation
Scope of Work

-S -
thsJauto.heeoe eouenai htfo
frtY oto v~a'o ilb 1ie
nt~~eract ~ WtFVa er oret
linpier taton
-rimnf thaHE
c
t
sOmgn a dofiod otest evaua t Ionprotoff da1 zd
t diith na FF1ys roraf gF and anagemetas
6 onc anIyj of dea~ (taeol wi bei ee b
foranaysRsN dgm
7.~fii reprt an
vaf
T~ ~ cositgo ~ eammn ~ ipconrptamo ~
~~ IV.,,~~ero~ Revewdoumntnlst
i Bl.abve
iffel tstng e teva t:I,'o potiocol a jata
colflection,-instrumns -- n.-,an~ Ie
if 3 Subse e pie ing 2 yoco abo eIraOet
an.nt to CR
ZoRS a d onc a c",Pog ecim ng m e e w ,- 1,
appyaratusf a"a c'le o e ac Vae ~ t
b UCt~ e r d e ?
d~is
a r,l 'o eto an L
eeerc~adOg ene to
aa '

*.Th I f1metatjor of a Planning Nniton 'ond
lul if stmw or4tWT ti eVI Fod~ ork
Proi ams,1 nMrid iai.TComr.f ty Systemsl Founrdation.0 "
JUn e 198C.X
Gu e1 nes- for&a- in'n in -ad~nlaonto Systems' F66ndatibn. 0Oct obe r 19 8
g. Grat'-Agreement- for mimttlnoaFoFr
Work" iMo o in , -'n :EaIu tio -,SY t ri.
'and CRS.e ec itve S ibe 9
hWFodFrWork' Manual: CRS/ India r ev'se
-January, 1986 ­
i.Al Handbook'o.9 (As' amended pL 480,lTil e~ VI
(Relevant. sections on-ood For-:Work)';.
UID, f Ies co'nti ni ng9S andSAID correspndence
and, documientat on et'd~to' te--& grant
~ agreemen ,n US iDel-d.inspection ,tours
2.~ Review t~ Iii &:Grant wit 'the p rpoe of: assessing thre
~fol I wing
a- Has th'e grnt act 4v t -achieved:-r o d6 CRS towa rd
achievng the,three' inajor-expect ed, enefjs rof:the
R PM&E through, het egap , i e. improving,te F
mianagement capabilitis of C" 1oa FFN cooyd nao
staf f &iherL CRS: zona'L sta ff ;co nsig ne'es and proje c t
_Lh tri e lemen\at ,I an f6rPM&E r nt,
asame rid ed 'WaS op fora'c niev ng te
obj ect i ve of f,' meen ii t16e PME
Rev the evo Iutlon' of ,the P~ M S L
j~~
,i
o re d- t~ i iere ag a WA
waI e,
Te Lo bJeCt
to
0
h otha'ttfi
Fa opa a a ncaea om at
aeL
-wid ' etoaar e
e' tf

VI iCoIsltion' of the Ttam
A.i n terna loaI Contract
Ms'be an.1 te na tlonal serv ce ,.r d et.l p eh , fproe s o af
'de' ece mnage veao ,dsk eva)u
des n1n gia nd con'd u'ctn.uanla a ad qu'81tv aato0nso
PL,401e I Food,. oi k program's ,or other f'-ood ~assistance"progrdflS
Proven'.analytical ski s,,are requ re . P br dl ect'
opal~l aenexper encewi a S.Ua VO, e' teras
dn employee or as5 a consu 1ta nt, s g s le ea
c~andidate may be _cons'idered f he sieha a v edge
p0o ork n the area. offood aSs s-tanc _ea,!:des pecJa od
Wrk, ajn possesrses t e required .a ag e nt exper ence and a record
of researcI and evaluation-thaV demo ~ a es a&genuie "inte est 1-n-"
tesubject of foo ,aid"and' its potenlal for,development c
Iii s esential that the team lea de rpos'sess t e r'e'qui ede aat
skills, and operationial maagement exeine d'oses'
awaenes ad snstVi ty.appropriate tounderstn ai4ng an wor~
withfin the PVO nm)lieu intr'na t 'n' ly He/she' must',be'_a va lab e t
min ini India for a.seve wee kperiod,. It ,s esim e te
evaluation would conuence on/ab6'ut. 3 e 8,l987. A fi nal' draftwould
be submittLedtoUSAID before Ju~ly 124 1981.
B. InCountry'ITeam
This team will consist of two persons. Each-1l have proven
evaluation experience and skills gaie 'okw w'ur
development projects. in India I bnt st hae ec
experience~ dkowledge of 7PV9 prograsinndaadse
exeineor-knwledge of food assistance prog ram's if pos le5
1mot~tcriterion for both teamimembers isa demons r'te
,V, professodl ,interest: in' the wok-o'POs1Jidaardgeninje
interest inmaking a cotrbu i to tat work, Proven
erieri asa team membero researh or ev ut or ~ 4
1 1hly desirable.l is~rcalta the 'tj ' e eb have,
ii.&~~1 fe ble personalities ati ebae o wo togethe. I
additio,teyshoul each po~ssssexper~ece or'w1.16g e s owra
w'I~ U la i~oal rrteateam leader and be able, afdw 111ig to, keb
te S of tile t0l eV - e a u t o
1110 drg h a aIc ll c i n p r 'd h n h 'Jn b"' 0
e ur ngoO ' ,tm

V1 . Re'PO'rtin ReQuiremientis
AFo'rmat ofteWrittneor
Tie, finaI :written repp.twl -conta the'-fol-lowinysecilons:.
1txvcuunr:
pages
o
.
oexceed
Th is section
th ee si
sta
nglIe
ds
spaced
donmt
l
and
r
s
temi
ir1es, in'a:
major
con
elements'6
ise -succ1ictway
the' report
te
(Eapls'owti
setonsuld -appearwil be 6 ~e dhg 'Ae
latio
nalI contra ctorsf rst vIsit
ws
2 Bdy of he R(?TOrt:
contet~inhhFFW
The. repo rt .wiIl
in,
escribe
Ind'a
th e
the specific
Is'ple e
environment
alngwi W1
three
and,detailssections
of
fo
the
each,-f.the
'eval
~provide uati
evidence,
on.': Th
and-
't~pW
~graphs.
analys
to
i's
support ici
conci
I irg,
s
tab
o s
1 ad
reatie to eac
dtln
part of-the
should
evaluatibno
not'exceed The.,eport
30 pae;.eeat
aecdotal inom i pats Reo e in dai ec
t~ o0l
of a conclusion, Sppr
or~recommendatlo
dppendices.
mybe a-d ded,-a'
~,. ~
_
Th Ttrepobrt should 'end with a ful
0aeeo
conclusions. ,Since 'mflyrmnagement
issues-are and,"serviceco
'wn to
del
bothFFW
ivery.
recomhlendation sectio wil be
a
dn
THnE
te j
the,
MICH
Iy
Jeam
wi
Leader.
tA'e
',The sectio w licopreTCE
specific
issues
recomhm1endation,,
that sas
crscut
asCSmana
botti
geme
be shortarid
programs.'
succinct.
ConIus
ion s houl
Apend icess hou it I ude theoIoi g
d.Te ealuatijonj scb e ofwr.
4b {e ind orKf tte ' purf,
vle
L
ofL
nrjdie5'
ou
nd le ~I
manaysof.ork
expeted0UtP
creaed typen
exprsee
Ya
n
1eof as
I J4
ee d t

- 9 ­
3. Submission of the Report: The final report will be
submitted and found accep~ablp by USAID prior to
completion of the international contractor's visit. The
report will be reviewed by USAID and CRS while in draft
form. A formal submission of a draft report will
bereplaced by interactive review of it by USAID and CRS
as it is being prepared for final submission.
4. Debriefing: Formal submission of the report will take
place at debriefing to be given by the team leader, and
his/her in-country team members for the benefit of USAID
and CRS executive-level staff officers. The debriefing
will be scheduled to take place two days prior to the
team teader's scheduled departure to allow time for any
follow-up/follow-on actions or clarifications prompted
by the debriefing that would require his/her presence.
5. A table will be developed by the Contractor specifying
major findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Priorities will be established for all recommendations
maue by the International Contractor.
6. The Contractor, working with the Project Officer and
counterpart staff, is responsible for preparing in draft
according to Bureau guidelines the AID Evaluation
Summary (ES), Part I ('Action Decisions' and 'Evaluation
Abstract'), and Part II ('Summary of EValuation
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations'). A sample
outline of the above requirements is attached to this
Scope of Work. The Project Officer will not approve the
contraLtor's voucher until the required sections of the
ES are prepared in draft.
7. Relatioriships - The Contractor will be responsible for
drdft iru Ect i cit s of the pa pr drid rCP, I tirig d!SUC id eU
WiLt Ilic dLtiVijies outlined in Sect ior II and Section
IV dlov.. Ihe tedri, leader will be directly responsible
to the Foou For Peace Officer and
collaborate
will be expected
closely to
with the Evaluation
the Project
Officer
Couxiittee
and with
Members. A six-day work week will
be expected.

APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW INSTRUMENTS

isr'Wh., i. our, overlal ±pesi of':the effectiveness
of the F ~ rg pyur ~n
do-'dyou :feel ths W8 E~ es ,to.illustrate?).
1Iould'the programbe Strengted fr jTc ur,
point. of view7
~Wht keening this 'from 'haTD ei mg3
1.3'~ -In 'what ways -has th e PMi ':grant, helped, to strengthen,,.,
the program ?
In retrospect how~ minlijthe gr'ant h'ave 'been' r
foc ~used and a-TpIied
P1nning?
* ~ ~ - monitorinig-7
- -Evaluation?
2. PG IPE$.NAI'
2.I

:2
23 Wha t" pecifiJc a s sitance., do yu nive osine
vis.-a-v-is Proram implemen'tatio nJ
-Pannin - ssi ance?
11Monit-oring ofror ?
~ la1utd~6Prog ram .
-Training 7
-Commodity management ?
K~2.4 Hov t are Project 1olcersselected?
What is the selection criteria-?'
I,ho is consulted in rn h ig the,~ lcin
What arey our exT ectations, of Pro ect 'Holder's
o are these exrpectatioIns com -unic' e'' o
7Proect Holders ;
'i~What are Prjcodin_ ,osoes
ProJ~~ect~~'Ho16ers..exnectatios0Cnine~
OfCR Zon~al. oflice
~On the who are these exoect, io'ns b:eing met,?
1What is the turn rateec ofe Hodrs
(..~ow m~anyjnew project Yolcters dovyu add' each year?
11a 0& o vou do ifc voufre not satisfied with a
paricuarprojectlhol-er I
>.dPla e s.cri< th pro Qct 5eeop:)ent- proce.ss' %
"CL.crare~ pro'ects _i±ed N7
noaiproves ne%, prjet, =ndh i~ con EL
"hat crte&. ia a.s ~use6 .elC~.)Ctr
4~ a are~t U2b~~Jcs~aeen
h e cheacer c So -S ce-q_ poe
2r w r"Rr e' cipie rts eted,
F_ i e ± se'1c6

VVtt
Who i. c~1eins ~ .ee in
I-,,ha -percentarle of FT %worJkers ,ere "re eat'!
recap ie nt:s (Been e" I0 1oe d
revik o F.
1halti s CRS' sover Pn-,roah t 0 0vin -rec1pet
~ fuood- aid deendency 7,
What sp eci fic~ steps arc t~al en at, the prO'eCte 7e.
tm e 6 this harien7
thiproject le vel ? 1,Ih at'sp ec a.ic st ep s-a re b eino
~taIen tb promote~greater. skil'l d6evel'one t'
2.7H c, r Prject Beiefi~arie'. se'lected 7:
'4hat ;criteri issed i this selection -pTr ceSs ?~
Wh i onule ~i'aking
thes~e 'sel'ect~ions
VWhat percentage~of. b~neficieries, are ''epeat"
, benefaciaries ?
..'hat i the percentage of projects b'hat,TVFFIrecipient s, ,l
12renai of t e cases (xi wh ch recipien't A
ElrDrlmcar es are -he asets crea-zedI
mmuni rliva. -'on e d
Ub a isCRSs' oiic% !on pri-vate v t-esus comni
2. e7D ar~ -e t k n, to a sc cue-e a doen ecy
relalonhp. Latueen a- o _ve c~n
e 2Re -as ee
Q 0_ qe 0 o
7

Who', is on'uited in anr this deterrito
',k.Inw at wavsi doe. he CRO' zonal' office colaabor~ze
QQI
t ..J..-e.. ee~p~ -p anners "7
aI~i.w t av 5 d o consion ees ano, Prq ject Holders,,Z
~c ol lba te w it hBlocli< eo ntp~ies L.-i
th e FW prgrami and project e omn
S1n ,.h Et, ways are local.- over-nment se rice' extensL on:
~ personnels conisulted during project, identification,,
kdesiin and i plementati n
-~Design assistance ?
~ ~AAA~.* ~ eneiciar se
Bens6i lection7
NAL n, ICE P-7rSC)oItE ,/ESPOT I,IELITIES
3. Please describe~your zonaioffice staff an d
tzeir prma.jo esonsibiities,
Wha s-eif ic skiI-s are 1rec-,uire - to carrvy out
thei~rA lob resA-szlte A ieA-vs--- Su4
31 2 Wha- ct inoervce trinn App-'1i I5J e e, .
reieer ca''e ou{ in t" last vear ?
A' 2AIWhta have-o sevie ta~in 'oppothese e Iu tboeyS t
1 :~Ehe 1 PT,, 7,AA
A~~~~~~ " xviweskcrrJd
''' ~'A ~ A A I U iJ
-- -

4. Ce ",CDITY DITTT.ON
5
4.1 Are you satisfied thus far with the distribution
performence of In6ian Potash Ltd. ? I'hyA'hy not ?
-
Whtt hFF been the impect on the program in the
past w-ien food uommodity deliveries have been
delavec9 ?
5. Nei;- POLICIES
Have delevs occurred recently ?
- Port to consionees ?
- Consignees to Project Holders ?
- Project holders to project sites ? .
5.1 How familiar are you with the new 7-* guidelines on
monetization ? On multivear planning ?

Plaepoieeeae
data for thepro 18-6
1. Nume
inthe
2. N, per
3. i' beri
4.
-­
in' thi
r
HE
1984
ofCnsigneeS
Zone:
of .roject
:of ;Pron
one
th erinZthe Zone
_e t s
umber o~f Proje
sites V, in the Zone.T
5. Nu,.mber of Pro j ec
tps in-. the Zone1
6. Nlur-nbetrof rec ipilents 2,
*~
Niuer:o
eneic
ocne ,3
nS,,TD
e ~~ tn0
ot
pira
ies inth e
FFW :P-neG
19865 198
teaai w ith the6, foi c ig)~tttv
P 0ojectype.
t
. IV-0
-. 1*"

Tota]2 Co oii
fo0r, e ac y'vea r
- eg.i)
y.er-)ge :.rupee 'a auc
ofra dal rton4
10. To' a) fiel vixs
by Zona staff,
-to Con sionees
-toTrj ect holes
-to pro~je ct sites
ii. umbr ,:of training
programs,:5
- for Cons ignees
-for- projec odes
f for zon2 r iel reyv w ers
1ube r olpor0jec,
e va. ua tions: 6
iea e'- . sepa."at
u -ale -,.ze
~.7Fe ~Ie
~e

: 3
13 Please provide a map showinn
your current and recently
completed FFV Projects.

FIELD REVIEWERS
in addition to appropriate questions from
questionare,
field reviewers.
the Zonal Director interviet
the following questions will also be posed to the the
1. PRIMARY JOB REPONSIBILITIES
1.1 Hay long have you been in your
1.2
current position t
Please describe your primary job reponsibilities 2
What percentage of time
the FFW Program)
Which do you
1.3 Please
respons ibilties ?- .......-- ­
do you spend on each 7 (including
consider to be your most important
describe your FFW Program planning, monitoring
and evaluation responsibilities.
When you make field visits, what specific tasks do
you carry out ?
How often do you make field visits ?
What is the average length of your field visits ?
1.4 How -many projects sites have you visited in the
last year?
Please describe your project monitoring responsibilities
Whzrr specific things (tasks)
a project site ?
do you do when you visit
What is your average length of stay at a project site ?
1.5 What percentage of questions frrom consignees, projec-t
holders and project site coordinators can you address
'on the spot" 2
2. CO1SIG..EES AjvD PROJCT C TTP S
2.1 How many consignees/project holders have been
dropped in the last year?
.lv

S 2 a
3* PRIMARY/SECONDARY BENEFITS TO FrW RECIPIENTS
3.1 How would you describe the range of benefits that
FFW recipients receive ?
3.2 In what ways is the MPW ration on appropriate ration 7
Does its appropriateness vary from project to project ?
(In what ways) In what ways is the FFW ration an in­
appropriate ration ? (What needs to happen to make
it more appropriate.)
4. TRAINING NEEDS ASSESSME"T
4.1 What are the primary skill requirements of consignees
to effectively carry out the FFW Program 7
Which skills in particular could be/ought to be
improved through training seminars ?
4.2 What are the primary skill requirements of project
holders to effectively carry out the FFW Program ?
Which skills in particulars could be improved/ought
to be improved through training seminars ?
4.3 What are your primary skill requirements to effectively
ca-ry out the FFW -Pg'-erm?
Which skills in particular woul3 you like to improve
to be more effective in your Job ?
What training programs/seminars have you .ettended
in the last 2 vears ? (Are you scheduled to att-end
any upcoming prograns ?) K i~4c
5. APPLICATION 0F 1 "ME FMr. RECOURCE
5.1 In your own opinion what are -the most important points
to vtress to consignees and project holders n how the
FFW resource should be appropriately applied 7

2.1 Wh~t are -our primarv res-onsibilities in the PF,,'
prornm
How often 6o you visit FP,-' project sites on field visits
2. FVW RLTION APPRPKI-TFR NSS
2.1 In what w;'x'v is the FEW ration an appropriate
ration ?
Does a-prc.-raitene- mo-f--thr rtion variy- from, project
to rroject ? (in whit v ?)
In what ways is the FF.: r,tion an inappropriete ration ?
Whet needs to happen to make it more appropriate ?

CONSI EE
T efoloqn cu~ o f f e oa ie or ues tonar w 1.1
"be pse6 t3o 'he, con,si onees :
1 .2
2.3K7
2.1
2.6
4. I4~
in addition to the above cues-lions tLne fo IIowing questionsS' l
also be oosed to consiaces
2.7F4ppIRN PISaS?.ILLITIES
21 rowlong hF17 -%ou been a consignee.
.;2 Z) 7t#70yU, see as,, 17 - p r i na r e s o s i±t e
v1he pecnai of vo -i o o s pen alon each~
Aths 0-5 -;: es-nosib*ifities *hich)on e do ou, cofisidei7
2. RES CURCIE~ TG
2. ~n o. 0m 'r~~ Ce
esoces do.you ageP
re s o~ ce'e1 a e
F74, p o.~et

'2:
2.2 Ae o ab'le- o 1 eve r e ., a oi1ion -direso
C s
from ot Pr aTn. 'norgs n a neceS in
sur ort -0 "projec s,,
&Whcbad-i -ona~ re..o rces-are yq U-- 0 :;succ
at.lever ging
3. &N"O-~Z~TIC~DIS- EM1AlIO 16' IN CC-T
~'3.1 H-Jow often ar e o 0 a Ie to' vit, roject holders an pr0e
sites to Monitor progranh/.oj ect prgess?
Whatar th-mos t: ccmon,'.,ceczt onss su~s hpoe

- Planninv Assi-ctance
- Monitorinc Assistance
- Evaluation Assistance
- Commodity Manacement Assistance
Have the field reviewers and other CRS Zonal personnel
been able to answer most of your questions "on the spot"
regarding your FFW program ? (What -, have been
adequate r _sponses 7)
How often are you able to meet with other
consignees to discuss FF,-' program issues ?
4. PRI!M-.Y/S CC!DG.' 'BENEFITSFFv T-- RECI TIE,]TS
4.1 How would you describe the range of benefits.that
FFW recipients receive ? (skill Development 7)
4.2 In what ways is the FF4 ration an appropriate ration ?
Does its appropriateness vary from project to project ?
(In what ways ?)
In wh-t ways is the FFY; ration an inappropriate ration ?
(Whet needs to happen to make it more appropriate 7)
5.2 That special problems h-ive occurred vis-a-vis FF'
commoditv storane handling, transport, distribution ?
5.2 Who pays trarnspert, costs of commodities to project
sites ?
If implementors must pay (or beneficiaries) does this
make iz less, aztractive to more distant or poorer
co.nunities ?

: 4 :
6. PROJECT MkIN'"EN,- NCE/SUSP.- INA _ILITY
6.1 whet consideretions are given to plan for maintenance
and continued effectiveness after project completion ?
7. APFLIC12TIO!N OP THE FPW RESOURCE
7.1 In your own opinion, what are the most important
points to stress to project holders on how the
FFW; resource should be appropriately applied 7

PR OJEC HOLDER
.'The fq1oloing -que- Ions. from the ZN'AL;,DIRECTOR UESTIOPB'11
be posed t o th e pDIroject hoTer
2e.
2.2
2.1111
~ Please describe the, e-ent our o experienc~
p ' Ou see 1 a Ez o~r prim ary respoisbili ies,
Srvis-e -vis the F'F' -ropram
.- 4
W~Ahat'-Percentage o fyour tieisspent on each ?
~hese,. t which responsibily -do -you-consde
to be yuour cms4 V rortant one- 7 Thyr Q
2.1',-f ed.'to'toh.- rsot~ce .V
resouxces ',0.o ME= ~e
E!

: 2'
"hicof t ~ e resource~~e qe loa
WFprojects" ?
2.2 I-, Et ad d iton resources" are yo0 blie-to', e
fron ,h e o gj nizations_. anc,,QG en0' sulobo
FI 'projects
- Forproject desg
-For
project implementetion
,VJay proj ects/pro ject sites tre you, responsible,
f orr
Hmchtie a are vyou able to spend att e n'I rR qi e
ThosmPeriss Fn.. wors whe yu'w o h
What, do you se as your primary skill requirements
tc'9eo ffectivey. carry out the~FFrv7 program,?
:,9~~jiWhich skills in perticulh -oul1d yvot 1 i e' to
~,

NaeCfSField Reviewers. . cons icjne'es. been" gerall
abetoanswe r- yclur- q ti1on s "'on e 7.9 pot!,,, r egardIng
~your FFW pr oc rJ eehe r.,e benaeqa
Hwoften doCPS Field Peviewers': and cons~ignees Nvisit"
ho)Ur W (ow. often woula6 you ietosee, them visi t 7)
Ijiof-Len ow are yvi abl e .to-meet with. other co's ignees t
F p±rogramissu s-7
-.1 4ow, H do~Project Coorcdinators ge't -rewarded ?
4' ~ 'R EOND R ENEFITS T FFW,,RECIP1ENTS
~> ~4.l~}jowwo~you
- .FF r4eciTpients
escxibehe
x'(i~e7skill
range of enefit
deveIopent7
.~jj42 Inwhat ways is the FW ration an apopr raio 7
Doe it aprpitns
('In what ways
varyr
from: proj ect 'to,project ,,.7,
iIn wha-t ways ,is 'the FFWr, ration an inappropriate -ra ion7
(l'ha needs to happen to make it mo~ propriate
5.1 -''hat s-.)cial T'prob-2em s hav e o-curredf vijS-8-7vi"
5. ' 4hopays tra~nsport cost's, 'o commcdities t-ko, Projec-J-,
~ ~~Sit&es7
':-f irpplementors miust pev (Or be eici'aries does' ..­ hi s
mak i- es t active tc more.: a s ant or ,poorr
cc {ties7
6.1 acons6erc- s ro e Tiv Co mln a, t e a
ancntiueefect veness; erpoe c e o

4
6.2 In what ways are projects planned to take advantage
of labor availpbility during off season periods ?
7. APPLIC:.TION OF THE FFW RESOUPCE
7.1 In your own opinion, what are the most important
points to keep in mind to appropriately applying
the FFW resource ?
7.2 Describe generally, and tothe extent possible the
program in terms of recipients, age, sex, socio­
economic status, regularity and total months of
program involvement.

APPENDIX C
CRS SEMINAR

TCE CRS SEMINAR
July 1, 1987

CRS SEMINAR - JULY 1987
A seminar with representatives from the four zonal offices of
CRS was held on July 1987. The seminar was designed and facilitated
by the Evaluation Team.
The purpose of the Seminar was to enable all the CRS zonal
organizations together to arrive at a common understanding of FFW
progrm issues and at appropriate measures to address them.
The AGENDA was:
1. Introduction
2. Presentation of the findings of the Evaluation Mission
3. Brainstorming to identify characteristics of effective and
not effective FFW projects.
4. Discussion in three sub-groups on issues surrounding
* CRS Personnel
* Decentralization
* PM&E System
5. Identify inherent constraints in the FF7 program.
6. Discussion in two sub groups on Issues concerning:
* Next steps
* Collaboration between CRS and USAID
7. Summarize the key outcomes of the day's discussions
8. Closure - How has the Seminar been helpful?
- How do you feel about the seminar?
After the Introduction and the presentation of the findings of
the FFW Evaluation Team, the group identified the characteristics of
effective and less effective FFW projects. Thereafter, the seminar
divided itself into three small groups. Each sub-group had a definite
task.
SubGroup I - Personnel Issues
What is a realistic and appropriate role for the field
reviewer vis-a-vis the FFW Program? Given this role, what
should be the major responsibilities of the field reviewers?
Is the position of the "FFW Evaluator: an essential
position? If so, what should the responsibilities of this
person be?"

Sub Group II - Decentralization
* How is "Decentralization" being defined?
* What aspects of operations are decentralized and which are
not?
- Administration
- Program Implementation
What are the advantages and disadvantages of
decentralization on the FFW program?
Sub Group II - PM & E System
* Based on the feed-back you have received on the PM&E
seminars, what sho'ul be the goals of
* What
future
should
seminars?
be the cbjectives in doing case studies on FFW
assisted projects?
* What information should the BIIA and AEA forms try to
capture and how should this information be used?
The full group then reassembled to discuss the findings of the
three sub-groups.
Thereafter, the seminar Identified the inherent constraints in
the FFW program.
The Seminar again divided itself into two small groups each with
a definite task:
Group I - Next Steps
* What steps should be taken to strengthen the FFW program
- at the zonal level
- at the national level
- at CRS/NY
- Other
Group II - Collaboration with USAID
* How do you perceive USAID's role vis-a-vis the CRS food
program?
* What changes in USAID's role would you suggest?
* What steps could be taken to enhance collaboration?
* What aspects of the FFW Program do you think need
additional USAID support?
On the re-convening of a larger group, the seminar discussed the
findings of the sub-groups.

The zonal representatives were very positive about the
usefulness of the seminar and expressed great satsifaction about its
outcome.
Present were:
From Madras Zone:
Mr. Michael "rank - Zonal Director
Ms. Usha - Nutritionist
From Cochin Zone:
Fr. Ken Vavrina - Zonal Director
Sr. Elsie - Program Reviewer
From Bombay Zone:
Mr. Michael McDonald - Zonal Director
Mr. T. G. Ekande - Fied Reviewer
Mr. Babu Mathew ­ - do -
From Calcutta Zone:
Ms. Vivian Marn - Zonal Director
Mr. Abraham Edassery - FFW Evaluator
Miss Nirmala Gupta - Senior Nutritionist
From New Delhi Office:
Mr. George Ruttickal
Mr. P. M. Jose

APPENDIX D
LIST OF INTERVIEWEES

CRS MADRAS ZONAL OFFICE
LIST OF PEOPLE INTERVIEWED
I. Mr. Michael Frank - Zonal Director
2. Mr. G.J.M. D'Silva - Administrator
3. Mr. L.P. D'Costa - Programme Reviewer
4. Mr. D. Theophilus - Field Officer
5. Mr. R. Vincent - Field Officer
6. Mr. J. Pozarlo - Project Officer
7. Mr. Aiman James - Field Officer
8. Ms. Usha - Nutritionist
9. Ms. Sujata Amarwadi - Nutritionist
CONSIGNEE - TINDIVANAY SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY
1. Mr. Don Bosco - Consignee
2. Mr. Thomas - Field Officer
- Nutritionist
PROJECT SITE - Serathanur (Irandhai Parish)
Mr. Anthony, D - Project Bolder
Seven members of the Village Community, including
the elcted leader
CONSIGNEE - SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY, NALGONDA
1. Mr. Julian - Director
2. Mr. Maria - Project Officer cum Coordinator
PROJECT HOLDER - Mr. Balashowry
PROJECT SITES - Nalgonda
Thelakantigudem (13 Kms from Nalgonda)
CONSIGNEE - VISAKH-APATNAY SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIE2Y
1. Mr. George Manianghatt - Consignee
2. Mr. ATithony Paravil - Project Holder
3. Mr. Terrence Joseph - FFV Officer-in-charge
4. Mr. G. George - Field Supervisor
PROJECT SITE - Mangalapala
Benefci aries
PK OJECT SITE - Narsipatnar
1. Mr. Jol Babu - Project Holder
2. Mr. Sambasiva Rao - Sub-District Collector
Peddalioddcpalli
Tribal Villagers

CONSIGNEE - TIRUCHIRAPALLI MULTIPURPOSE SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY
Rev. Fr. S. Kulandaisamy, Director
Mr. Joseph, FF Management
Mr. D. RaJendran, FFW Reviewer
Dr. Dorothy, Women Development Program
PROJECT HOLDER - Unavailable
PROJECT SITE - K. Udayapatti
Road Construction
INTERVIEWS - Mr. Muthu, FFW Worker
PROJECT HOLDER - Rev. Fr. Gnanpragasam
D. Udayapatti
PROJECT SITE - Chinnondipatti Road Construction
INTERVIEWS - Mr. Anthonysamy - Youth Club President
Mr. Felix - Youth Club Member
Mr. Arokiasamy - FFW Worker
Villagers (Both men and women) in Community Meeting
CONSIGNEE - MADITRAT MULTIPURPOSE SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY
Rev. Fr. Asirvatham - Acting Director
Mr. Sakthivel - FFW Personnel
Mr. Jovial - Coordinator, Development Program
Mr. Xavier - Coordinator
PROJECT HOLDER - Unavailable
PROJECT SITE - Silukkuvarpatti
Proposed Drinking Water Well
INTERVIEWS - Mr. Jesu - Village President
Community Members (25)
Mrs. Anbamma - Women's Club Treasurer
Mr. John Sundur
PROJECT SITE - Ammapatti
Proposed Drinking Water Well
INTERVIEWS - Youth Club President
President, Small Sawings
PROJECT FOLDER - Ir. Rajarethinam - President
Asseta Kariyapatti
PROJECT SITE - Puliampatti
Proposed tan], deepening
IlfTERVIEWS - Mr. Savarinathan - Community Organizer
Comunity members gathered
Y'r. Ramakrishnan
Mr. Ramasamv
'r. 1Yrishna Murthy of USAID and Mr. D. Th~ophilus of CPS
Zonal Office accompanied Steven Joyce
CONSIGNEE - CANARA OPGANIZATION FOR DEVELOPMEN,T AND PEACE (CODP),
MANGALORE
Fr. Arthur Pereira (Away)
Sr. Dulcius - MCH Coordinator

PROJECT HOLDER
Mr. Sylvester Moraes - Field Reviewer of Consignee's
Office
Ms. Ivy Larado - FFW Asst.
- DIRECTOR - CODP
Siddhakatte - Bantwal, T.K.
Fr. Peter Serrao - Director
Mr. Rozario D'Costa
Prof. Rodriguez
Casimier Rodriguez - Ben - Village Koita
PROJECT HOLDER - Capuchin Krishik Sewa Kendra
Daya]bagh, Ujire
Belthangady Taluk
Fr. J.Y.T. Pereira (Away)
Mr. William Samuel - Supervisor
Fr. Fabian
Mr. Sbeenappa Extension Worker
Mr. Birmana Madivla-Ben-Kalmanja Village
Mr. Umarabba Ben-Kalmania Village
Ex-Consignee
- Fr. Edwin Pinto, Umanjeri
PROJECT HOLDER - Fr. Mark Valder
St. Thomas Church
Ammemabal, Bantwal Taluk
SITE VISIT - Individual Wells
Beneficiary - Mr. Valerian D'Souza - Bollyar Village
PROJECT HOLDER - Fr. Lancy Mathias
St. Thomas Church
Nirkar, Vogga P.O.
Bantwal Taluk
SITE VISIT - Road Work
CONSIGNEE - Fr. Saler.a - Pirect 6 or of Social Work
Bishop's House, Bangalore
FLTCTIONAPIES - Mr. Leo Anthony
Mrs. Sheila Joseph
PROJFCT HOLDE? - Sr. Jude
p~OJ 'fPFEECTT - S7. Celestine - Pirector
Sunandha Prisinapurar KGF
SITE VISIT - Desilting and bundnp of irrigation tank
Beneficiary/Pecipent - r. Ramakrishna and others
Thookkal Villape
(Mr. Vincent from the Zonal Office
accompanied Mr. P.Subramanlyam)

CRS CALCUTTA ZONAL OFFICE
1. Ms. Vivian Matin - Zonal Director
2. Mr. Abraham Edassery - FFW Evaluator
3. Mr. Sushanto Biswas - Field Reviewer
4. Miss Nirmala Gupta - Senior Nutritionist
CONSIGNEE - TEZPLT SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY
1. Fr. Thomas Thottungal - Consignee
2. Sebastian Nellikunnel - Assistant
3. Joseph Kandulna - Assistant
PROJECT SITE -Dhekiajuli
1. Fr. Alphonse Kerketta - Project Holder
Member of the Village Committee
Menjenjuli
Seven members of the Village Committee including the village
leader.
Mazbatb
Fr. Augustine Panakatt Namkibelaguri Village
6 Beneficiaries
CONSIGNEE - TURA SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY
1. Fr. George Kondookkala - Consignee
2. Mr. Mathew - Assistant
PROJECT SITE - Mendal
1. Miss Myrtle Fernandes
2. Secretary of the Mahila Samiti
INTERVIEWS
CONSIGNEE - JAIMSKEDPUR CATHOLIC CHAPITIES
1. Fr. Joseph Kalathil - Director
2. Fr. Tory, Nelliekunnel - Assistant Director
3. Mr. Thisolone Kukeha - Officer Assistant
4. Mr. Robin F. Sorung - Field Supervisor
PROJECT HOL')ER - Unavailable
PROJECT SITE - Rengara
Check Dams (2)
anks (3)
Low Costs Houses (2)
INTERVIEW'S - Brother Andreas
Brother Suchil
Brother Joseph
Mr. Sonathun Himbsim - Tank Beneficiary
Mr. Momgal Singh - FFW Worker
Mr. Raghu Humbrom - Tank Beneficiary
Mr. Ramesh Humbrom - Rouse Beneficiary

PROJECT HOLDER - Sister Gracy
Jinpani
PROJECT HOLDER - Msgr. John Bodra
Chalbasa
PROJECT SITE - Community Center
Low-cost House
Land Leveling
INTERVIEWS - Mr. Martin - Project Supervisor
PROJECT SITE - Dhpbhar Village, 4 KM bund
IRTEPVIEWS - Mr. Bali Narayan - Thira, Site Manager
Fr. Thomas
PROJECT SITE - Purl
Women's Training Center
INTERVIEWS - Mr. S.K. Sen - Secretary, Mahila Kutir Silpa Kendra
Fr. Stanislaus
Mr. Rinus Sundi - FFW Worker
Mr. William Sundi - FFW Supervisor
Mr. Nistor Sundi - FFW Worker
CONSIGNEE - CATHOLIC CHAPITIES, KHURDA ROAD, CUTTACK
1. Fr. Augustine Karinkuttiyil - Director
PROJECT HOLDER - Mr. Harihar Ron
Nehru Sewa Sangh, Banpiri
INTERVIEWS - Ms. Sarojini Dass - Member, Nehru Sewa Sangh
Executive Committee
Water Engineer Tribal - Development Project
Water Engineer Tribal - Development Project
Agronomist - Tribal Development Project
Community Organizer - Tribal Development Project
Community Members
Mr. Mritunjo Dus - FFW Beneficiary
Land reclamation
PROJECT HOLDER - Unavailable
Puri
COINSIGNEE - Fr. K.J. Raphael
Krishnagar
West Bengal
Ex-Project Holder - Fr. Dino Colussi
Functionary - Mr. Decpak Yanda'
Secy., Directorate, Trishnagar
Site-Visit - 1) Pond Scheme 2) Poultry
3) Housing - Villages Badciangla & Others
PROJECT HOLDER - Fr. Sushil Hira
Cathedral Rectory
Krishnagar
(V

Beneficiary - Mr. Chainanalk, Jalalkali Village
Visit to Muktinagar Housing Scheme
EX-PROJECT HOLDER - Fr. George
Cathedral Rectory
Krishnagar
PROJECT-Holder - Fr. John Vaikath
Monlgram
Murshidabad District
Site-Visik - 1) Housing
2) Pond Construction
CONSIGNEE - Fr. J. Noronha
Vicar - General & Director
Seva Kendra, Calcutta
FUNCTIONARIES - Mr. Ajoy Gomez - Project Accounts Officer
Mr. Oliver Gomez - Coordinator of Programmes
Mr. Chandrasekhar Banerjee - Field Reviewers (FFW)
PROJECT HOLDER - Mr. Subimal Kumar Patra
Secretary
Sarat Smriti Sangha
Hatiberya Village
Other Members - Mr. Radhakrishna Gir
Mr. Harekrishna Ghorai
Site Visits - 1) Road construction
2) Community Centre
3) Sanitary Latrines
4) Social Forestry
5) Housing
BENEFICIARIES & RECIPIENTS - Mr. Gunadhar Thana
Mr. Swapan Patra (Recipient)
Mr. Vishnu Pada Nayal: (Recipient)
and others
PROJECT HOLDER - Basantia Sevak Sangha
Basantia Village
Mr. Madan Mohan Das - Secy & Porject Holder
FUNCTIONARY - Mr. Shakthi Ranjan Das - Asst. Secretary
SITE VISITS - Housing
BENEFICIARIES - Mr. Pradip Kumar Ola & others
PROJECT HOLDER - Ikshupatrika Social Welfare Organisation
Ikshupatrika Village
Mr. Narendra Nath Maridal - Secretary and
Project Polder
FUNCTIONAPY - Mr. Birendranath Jana - President
SITE-ISITS - ]) Fousing
2) Drainage Canal
BENEFICIARIES - Mr. Kali Pada Das
Mr. Radhakrishna Shree & Others

(Mr. Sushonto Blcwas from the CRS Zonal office accompanied Mr. P.
Subramaniyam)
CRS BOMBAY ZONAL OFFICE
1. Mr. Mike MacDonald - Zonal Director
2. Mr. Babu Mathew - Field Reviewer
3. Mr. I.J. Augustine - Field Reviewer
4. Mr. T.G. Ekante - Field Reviewer
5. Mr. Vincent - FFW Evaluator
CONSIGNEE - INDOTOF DIRCCSON SOCIAL SERVICE SOCIETY
2. Mr. Joseph Thavil - Consignee
Project Sites - Dathigaon
I. Fr. Peter Pul]iparambil
2. Fr. Mohan Berrys
Chhota Chosalva
Meghnagar Village
Mother Dongri
Pipl.kotha
Khatamoh & Titriya
Satsera & Bandisera
CONSIGNEE - ASHA NIKETAN SOCIAL WELFARE CENTRE, BHOPAL
1. Fr. Stanislaus Paul - Consignee
PROJECT SITE - Sehore
1. Fr. Paul Parecattil
PROJECT SITE - Ashta
1. Fr. Samuel Kavil
CONSIGNEE - FATTHEP GEORGE D'SOUZA RAIIATA
PROJECT HOLDER - Ashok Bedakar Tata Relief Trust
PROJECT SITES - Ralegaon Shindi - Irrigation Well
Dhoki Village - Irrigation Scheme
Parner - Check Dam
INTERVIEWS - AT Parner - FFW Workers
PROJECT HOLDER - Father George D'Souza
PROJECT ST- - Vaakli - Irrigation wells (2)
INTERVIEW:S - Sister Alphonza
?-'r. Buhanlal Muhamed Shaikh - Beneficiar
"r. Popet Mugal Yolgue - F17- Site Supervisor
Mr. Goresh Nath Vishum Shirole - Beneficiary

PROJECT SITE - Vase
Bhil Adivasi Sakakarl Cooperative
Lift Irrigation Scheme
PROJECT HOLDER - Father Baptist D'Souza Rahmi
PROJECT SITE - Kanger - Community Well
INTERVIEWS - Mr. Villas - Site Supervisor
Community Members
PROJECT SITE - Vadner
Community Well (2)
Individual Well
INTERVIEW - Babu Rno - Community Leader
ADMEDABAD
PROJECT HOLDER - Behavioral Science Center (BSC)
Mr. Rappai - Acting Secretary
INTERVIEWS - Fr. Franco
Dr. Vijaya Sherry Chand
Mr. Nattai
PROJECT SITE - Vadgram
Bhal Social Forestry Project
INTERVIEWS - Mafa Yhana Bhai - Cooperative President
Mafa Jetta Bhai - Site Supervisor
Laku Jeeva Bhai - Committee Member
Bhavan Narayan Bhai - Manager
A.R. Patel - Secretary
PROJECT SITE - RhonJ - Tree Nursery
INTERVIEWS - Kala Bhani Bala Bhai - President
Khoda Bhai Baga Bhal - Supervisor
Walgi Bhai Chagaon Bhai - Committe Member
Cyril Govind Bhai - Manager
CONSIGNEE & PROJECT HOLDER - Fr. TBOMAS ,MNAPALLI R.C. CHURCH
Kapustalni, Amaravati District
(Director, Social Welfare Center, R.C. Church,
Kapustalni)
SITE VISITS - 1) Housing
2) Land ClearinF
2) Individual Wells
L) Road Construction
BEN"EFICIARIES - Mr. Jingu Jingariya Dandekar
(also Secy of Regional Committee)
Melghat Area Chichati Village
Mr. Bansilal
and other beneficiaries as well asvillage communitv
(meeting)
rarcara- V\-a'
all beneficiaries and village community (meeting)
Badnapur Village
Mr. Chandru Babu Belsare
Mr. Lachman Puloo
Mr. Mahadev Sanoo
Mr. Ganesh Mannu Belkar
and other beneficiaries/ Village Community

K~hirpani Village
'BeneficiariesVillage Community meeting
Savarpani Village
Mr. Chichu Jogi Savalkar
Mr. Jayaram and other beneficiaries in a village
community meeting
Gadsimbha Village
Mr. Nanji Motia Khasdekar
and other beneficiaries and also village community
meeting -
Chandpur Village
Mr. Muna Zulu aoskar
and other beneficiaries and village community
Khongala Village
beneficiaries and village community meeting
Girkutti Village
several beneficiaries and village leaders
Jamli Village
Mr. Kalu Mungu Busum - Sarpanch and other
beneficiaries and village community
Kolungana Village
Mr. Michael Tirkey - Animator
PROJECT HOLDER - Fr. Joseph Puthankulam
Chikalada
SITE VISITS - 1) Road Construction
2) Land Cleaning
3) Individual Irrigation Wells
BENEFICIARIES & RFCIPIENTS AT - Kamapur Village
beneficiaries and recipients and village community
meeting
Amchery Village
Mr. Michoo Dadu Jambekar and other beneficiaries and
recipients in a village community meeting
(Mr. T.J. Augustine from Bombay Zonal office accompanied Mr.
P. Subramaniyam)

APPENDIX E
CRS FFW ZONAL PROFILE OF PROJECT TYPES

CRS FFW PROFILE FOR THE LAST 3 YEARS
------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
YEAR 19B4 YEAR 1985 Y ....
ACTIVITIESI... -ADR- ZONE I ---------------------
BOAY ZONE I ---------------------.
CALCUTTA ZONE I.............- MADRAS ZONE I BOMBAY ................................
lNo.ofl ACTIITIE I-------------i---------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------
I............. ZONE
It
I
of ............. CAt.CUTTA ZONE I --------------------------------------------­
No.off I of
MADRAS
INOocol
ZONE I
17of
BOMBAY
INo.off ............
ZONE I
AY.............I
tLEUTTA
IPro -INo.of I T Al-New 1rrigaton Wells
A2-Irrigatia nWeels
Deepening/Cleaning
3
A -TankslDas/Reservoirs
A4-[rrigation Canals
Itof
otal
INo.o
iProj-INm .
Izof
of ITotal
INo.orr I of lNo.off
I... .
Iiof
...
Pro No. of ITotal IFroj-1No. of ITotal
INo.of
l- I... of Io of
lects lMan•ifc
PrO
Ia~daiects
-INo. of !Total
a
IProj-INo. of Total
IMandaysi
IPro
andayslec~s
-INo.of Iotal
Ilandayslandayslects
IProi-lN o lI
InandaysInandasiects
aotal IPro,-cto cf.i
IMandaysllandayilects
II
IndayslMandayecls I-andaylMandysects
I III
.landayi
I I IIII I I I I
I
102 152630 11.4
II
.93105202 1
IIII
12.2 1 40 1390543 1 9.6 1 85 1441557 I10.1
I
95 1700200
III
1 11.9 1
I
2 I
IIIII
18700 1 2.4 f
I
64 1260163 I 9.8 84 1671415 1 13,3I 5I 27297 1
1 112
I
426877 1 ?.2
I
56 1420674 1 6.4 1 1 i 2247
I
1 0.1 I 217 1673852 1 15.4 52 1450920 1 7.6 1 - I I
I -
I
I - 1 129 1422790
I
14.9 1 56 1600417
I
1 119 1 - I -
I II I I II
I
1 73 I 1 1242589 f 5.2 1 69 1296846 1 4.5 I119 1813732 I 19.9 1 96 1302429
1 1 6.9 1
I
64 1314398 1
I
5.3 1 21
I
1123052 1 16.0 I 122 1227574 1 8.0 1 61 1416862 1 8,3 1 82 1:37680 1
1 24 1 48910 I 1.1I 6 I 45144 1 0.7
.
I
1 19
II
1 71587 1 1.7
I
I18 1 42491
I I
1 0.9
I
I 11 1 43960 1 0.7 1 1 2127 I 0.3 1 221
I I I I II III I AS-BUnd Construction/
Repairs
A6-Land Cleaning/Levelling
T rnahin 1 p
A7-Bench Terracing
Land
Slope
Reclamation
54335
I
13 1 4 1 11920 1 02
IJj
1 91 29622 I
1
I,
14I
1I
63350
1I2
I 1.41
,
65
I
1737037
92
1 11.2 1 31 1235125 1 5.7 1 6 I 12310 1 0.3 1 55 1609058 1[0.3 1 1 -
I I I I
1 5 1
I
4968 1
I
0.2
f
I 53 1470065
I I
1 9.3
I
1 13
I
1 57310
I
1
I I I I
I I
1 165 1643466 1 13.9 1[76113330891 20.2 1 122 1722007 1 17.7 1 132 1423509 1 9.7 I[6 I11341721 19.2 1 23 1101958 1
I7B2
13.3
4
1 125
0.
1391870
10
1
15
13.8 1
0.
124 110539291
12 6 I7 I
21.0
I
1 93 1.70575
2 40
1
0.2
1 8 1
II
32240 1 0.7
III
I I
1 10
I
1 41856
I
1
I
0.6 1 12
I
147562
I I I 1 1.1 I 1 2 1 7400
I
1 0.2 1 20 189280 1 1.51 1 1 3600 I
I I I I I I I 0. 15 I 1 - I AB-Reforestation
A?-Pasture and Forrage
-
I I - I J,
I
1 1800
I
1 1.0
I
1 12
I 3081
I
1
3 1[2360 1 0.2 1 8 1 69844 1 1.01 7 1 27476 1 0.7 1 14 1 87400 1 2.0 1 5 1 58060 1 1.0 I 1 1 8000 1 1.11 5 1 2780' 1 0.9 1 7 1
I
73620 1 1.5 1
I
4 1 20735 1
I
1
19584
1
1 0.3
1
1 5 1 13511 1 0.3 1
Development
1I 1
1
1 1 f
- I I
- I
I I II
- . - -
I -
-1 2 2I 1 ?150 1 1I
A10-Fisheries Development I - I - 1 1 3 1 9120 1 0.1 1 - I - I - I - I - I - 1 66 1 11690 1 0.2 1 - I N.A I - I 1 1 2500 1 0.1 1 1 1 11664 1 0.2 I 1 1 9843 1
i1-Road Construction Repair 1 147 1438046 1 9.5 1 90 1742010 1 11.2 1 75 1265359 1 6.5 1 144 1508260 1 11.7 1 81 154B125 1 9.3 1 16 1 49980 1 6.5 1 B9 1291359 1 10.2 1 53 1329414 1 6.5 1 58 1I2024 1
2-Bridge Construction 1 3 1 13084 1 0.3 1 - I - I - I 1 1 400 0.1 I 3 1 11350 1 0.3 1 - I - I - I - I N.A I - I 1 1 2000 1 0.1 1 1 1 4000 1 0.1I I I 246
B3-Drinking
I
Water Wells 1 17 1 16409 1 0.4 1
I I
28
II
174234
I
1 1.11
I 18 1 B80O0 2.2 1 58 I 56144 1 1.3 1 32 195810 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I 1.6 I I I1 I 1050 1 0.1 1 II57 1 56337 1 2.0 1 33 I 1125680 I 1 I 2.5 1 121
B4-School I 32263 1
Community Centre 1 46 1116959 I
1 2.5 1 28 1 97410 1 1.5 1 26 1 69915
Health
1
Centre
1.7
Bodown
1 36 1115220 1 2.6 1 27 1105930 1 1.8 1
I I
3
II
I 2200
I
1 0.3
I
1
I I I I
7 1[4035 1 0.5 1 19I 76035
I
1 1.51
III I
17 1 27648 1
III IIII I
I
6
5-Low Cost I
houses 1 432
I
18964391
II
40.2 1 195 117548631 26.6 1 95 1496501 1 12.2 1 423 115071631 34.6 1 178
I
116304751
1
27.6
1
1 42 1193871
1
1 25.2 1
I1
341
1
1952939
1
1 33.5
1
1 123 110660591 P1.1
C-Training
64
Ed.
13,3089&
Vocational 1 54 1134070 1 2.9 1 44 1150383 1 2.3 1 126 1817948 1 20.0 1 49 1134991 I1 1 1I I I
1
I I1
Adult Literacy
1 I
Classes 3.1 I
I
1 36
I
1111022 1
I
1.9 1 70 1255701 1 33.3 I
I
52 I 96588 1 3.4 1
I
381
I
77168
I
I
1
I
I I I f
I I I
1. 1
I
651 75042
I
1
II III I III I I I I III I I
0-Const. I I
of Drains/Ditcher I
1 9 I 18158
:1
1 0.4 1 1 1 7056 1 0.1 I 4 1 24038 1 0.5
Latrines
1 151
sewage
37660 1
disposal
0.9 I I1
I
300 1
I
0.1 1 3
I
1 7800 1
I
:hO1
I
5 I 19151
I
1 0.7 1 31 4799 1 0.1 1 6 I 12389 1
tanks I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I I II
I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
TOTA I I
1120914
I
1-1
I
100------------------------------------
I I
-
TOTAL 11209 146291661 100 1 873 166033581 100 1706 ----------
140859611 100 11298 143617411 --------
100 1849
--------­
159034001 100 I 185 1768039 1 100 11025 128455091 100 1 665 150448471 10$1 444 11;335761
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4------------------
------

APPENDIX F
COMMUNICATION TO CONSIGNEES ON CRS COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT APPROACH

. . .. . . . . .S
S ~ S * S ~ * r . . * . * . .
Cahoic Rle
Tcv rone.
Ca bI
00039,g Congr61y
. * t * *
20 2 7SI4
CATII IW
Rl .La/8/294 2 October .23, 198
U24 1 FQ4 o W'r
t ~ ~ fia 41* end'Ahe~asin fte'TWmee Jns
.brieon do'W6 th 4
a ou of4h onr n o bst
benbifd ntemeting. ,by our staff and byFr. Franca, and
Mr.* Ga'gan Sethi in Ahzmdabad.
Thi 0 lotter isan attempt~to clarifyany mioundoratunfdiflC that
-remain about' our plans for rood for Work nd-t gve youa good
ido' of 'how and "vho v6 hopo' t'o rooeed with MN
cje
4.PLANN XG
r: ~Weo are vorL tseriousa bout planning
planni'ng
for
f(or~all
FV 'as woell'
de vol open~t
aBy temaltlo
prograins. We highl arcat0h.hr
work and seri1ous erffort that you have undortaken, 61 arepresently.
ud taking 'to develop 'your p I ans'. I .wish to- assure:,yo tho
office
t ,our
will 4mko u'13 o' o r plans and th nt' we sihi1~ t m:vo
3rusly,
ry
e are sura 'that 'o uvi1 1 fls ind hoD uso u
.444
Fr.i{de v6Io nezt c i t c iion f:or
uPon 1t Ou1re rcen'. 0tig
ood
e'seI
f o
er
W~o1 orkts 4
acreed
FPood 3rC o-r '-'-si SE- "SII-FXC~
C) ?'k'C r?' - M
~ 9 * .

RELIEF SERVICES. U.SCC,'!I CotnuanSheet"No­
-f sdfrVrk
*
:2
oui':~n'u.y* all NEAT IVE SCT,,h tt
i"i projeaa pN MUST: BE i:AVZDE D
WP Projoo6ts
kH COKMLUlIY; n
co00uld uzptosycep
Must NEIVER CREATE -DlVSIONS AN D 3,,eAl US Y,,
- 'd for -Work Projects Mdst_'NLVER',be' i ~mc~ntedWITHOU7,T he _f ull
I~PAT I C 1ON, of the. 'OKMtUITY'
j''.,~fr W rk Projocts muat' NEVE R be used to' ENRICHOL FEW ope
IF~ for Work proJocts msalysbceconomica~lly v iable and* techni'ca~l y
C.,blo.' Thcy. suhould alwaya have, linkages to~othorl gonl in your pluan
F xample,. consider an 'irription proje.ct iMplmontod .undo'r a F,~ ach o
LTho .projoct should 4.nclude~ an educational comnponent. The- proJect ,ben6,
f. iciri shouild also loarn about any other bank loan, or,, govcrnmont 1)p
portod programs avai lable to them which would - uhanoe, this-,pprticular
pr~joQ o an -project that thby may pla to ,undortko Th pl
shouild also be apprisdo any e-nvironmental. consideratons lagricul ura
it chni ques, etc that they neod to learn. They should .also "l-earn -exactly,
__ tare their rzights as ~~zn f&prtc~rcitizens tt n ofi
The name irrigation-rpoet6o also be used as an entry. point7 to
orgaizethe pie ople~ Can an~iiiig'ation cooporativo ;befo'e7Caa
savir. "-,choe :or ozdit =nion! bcostatbiia ,?, P1N 'vi V:-ihve.- , mah
£Z9ter.mac fV can-link "a'~~i r~Qet othe'r, I'o~pn
obiectiyoa IZvezy; &trongl enogj 70two~ you.xsa tin'1 ig
'that the be nfits v~grung from a P'7 ahe~ a reat m'nhAiA --44
a e serious &4out DJ&E LOPING eiitino c rie a nthrpo- P1Wte,
Lrof coverago will hxave ob loano. T1~o'ro vill boonong~tens
dALopmental benefi ts if we mcatterF projoc'ts throighout120 or 3
* 3P0.s. The area of coveorage will haveL tos bo lanedt ag~y
a 13nuber of Villages aot a ti1 ;tnyno imorQ.'than 2 b-,r.
t. it, ichallenge thct wo must meet. Zvon ifa, pr ~ olde'r.
r i 0to one6~~i ~or wo sa, pr:jco in, ci largo'. niurnor, of_'
I tUt3 uuol tili thu maximumnu jbor uf. '1iix dyo at hio' d'i 3PODal
I~ J)Qor two villnjti KALutu ddtnri:t'vtvi i 11! l ojUd 1 ovvri u r~,
rK en~ o ori h z~uU a ofi rcb11ictri.. Ion m.ty ai i nid A bu
tob~r ~ilio7 Food' f Work i. -t r, J~iui tha ean' b 0
'ciI~' L;T1 t hat c n'
by b~ilcrs year af ter yaar. Every pl:-.n i3ud'-ave ,, p''se out
* vi3.ago nhould bo aoi1d t r.~ouh7Ie fo as~c 0
rio1& ou bo t, r-_-1 4 Ir
tadbL eeed-. It v i
d64'in 0-bot f: ea~r r
hr ' p_-rticu r -v 1-,g '0a-a an em
- It -far- a al t fo 110P
erioOua W'J; b, 'r1
ir n c d~ cxrdoL

ThOUR~EF ERVICES .US CC C iuto he , -
3:
Whn.talking a bour.t, c o
upon~~ uoo~ oosrc
nnitieabeiefitinu fr
tc prpa anc'
it is 13Vicumb.
c
)bor;in, F ..pro jecta
u~w proj'. ec t Thens opp roor t mi1 n oi onl giethDr
mont~~ oe a, 1rio of1 s, e~ y. r , -u it ,3
a ~ thtto ~ a ~ eor~ ~ oprhspobywt ~ -
that, at, a air vs3 im'l bu-L oc
-ro'dehe wit an,
(I.to
ulrepo­
t~nbe to o sv
o~ h toebb sit
mt~ges
ppc~m oorut c b
c n _t'u~ t in Id o l'__ j_YA_t; i r' I~-­f t'o. Ut~r~k il olprk o n
FF,
ous
0C n
pl~ining~cu prbra~oovi th next, oiv onyrou focus is on dovolopm
ruiot .11 11ta hloi o -'orgnce iu yiinbnu to
Futur anulp
be vc lpe t or,;ienteda yr-riS~bU i n natr' disaster
3nzo s. that~i the mnda eole will'urc Li 3bl tpo cp bterv
o f,am to an in ceigyer
'hat -rd s in thev Mnt CR B omy wil r i uve eryj rosl for
pr~~curc~~ a~diie~ thesourc aneesy incp ihsro rbess
ts
cee
btt
i
ye
9 tinn suptmna
'r shallcVEr.,t
i nlyw ty. gr~d aloain
foovry orenydo ituaolvoo-n :
itr'ofrm o rocent
hop tohveikpae t;t~ Le yse
plahnin vcupr oa 1ov(. p he hiv t f~ rc r eve0 ry: ye0 rS BiS'. rojeC
muLt "'inotbalof ewrgits. For o-illr, ouf -ds o tFuldr ranua
ro~ppr~uct 2 ~iri~'atin or i~eig wol.9 ~w vil1 rquir tht
so' ~~~s a pr3Vt o1r ikd Di. rin itas
,psoc stoa a i co arsi ~o
o2ras ntep t:CSBm e 1f y:w11r '.
_PCUe diioa esu ws neesrt)coo
.
s
pp
v ryOe3 d orVpbi f
I -T
wt:ts _,,rbeaV3c "
p
h
Ahic

s44:
y ic sisto be usod Fo 1N:_ ,pro o 'c' d0sic'nod ''to inc rease, inc'r'Lc'_
'and the Ase fotveis nls3 d. hich. i s fto busod for
FWprooect s, de s1n ud, to. create- sts sueI h l
nkin
houses,
Uwater. we
comrun
II ,sch
Iy
oolb and C'o ritY c'trc aL c cLosd cods
Ua3 odu pIi c atc- tho s0-usti-on nair r o u re-UL Ie
As mentioned- arlier, we requ ire all' pro'je ct hold~ors
to evalua t610 of thirtota prjc uz I a 'or .t leastonprjt
concunt- tconOl project s"I7
duieF 1f985 for the, cozing )-ear's a ~1tions._ FY' 1 85, wI~ e ou
~base your bc~cauoeo
thw
suff icLn tio noLp
~~~~~~tm hasr
tha
pP,195poissed :to thb.nft
accrinefro th YY198 pocscti.R~ pla to conduct
uatx ons~
-your
bof
ovnl
ore Mrrch187 All o valution. s~ould ruc ti ofl±cu
baMrch 1, 1987.i
pcir year.~ I request ttovory om 1 iploe A)nt d
ouaePoabl aw are tha t CRS i. oin, -o'Th w it h the' Behavioural
~~Science Cotr i s'nao ondcavourinC to dovclop' oiLcwhat nore ophis­
.ticate4d cfalu:±tion and ,case satudy instruo~lnt dosignod 'to -supp obont your
ovaluaioma, Thos evaluations and czis&.studio~ it b udotknb
our own staff in consultation with -thc thoso cofls noeL- s and ,projoct,
holdors diroctly invco1vd. These 'studios-w 11. pI-'c :.a 'Igr ato r e ra phasia'
~on the socialt raiiifcatiois ofb Food for dorkc. 4 shall ko y n
forood as we continue developing~ the suppliinent~i val3uati on.
5. i.Y, 1987 -LNDAY kLOCh~T1ON$
~klcation of r.Andays f or FY w97~ill be ba ~d on the-,plans that yO1u
have developed or are, in tIhe pocess of dvL opirig. Tho PiV/2 1P6 r
(theforrer Form 1j1i) will be closely - crutinizd to, e na *r,t tyour,
suL;..ary. of~food for workc applicat*ions fa wtin thie' puriow- you
p an~ o t. We cannot coot al fyu"nod :
bort to nota uhof yornosa spossible have aak-dl_ pver
orowio suomt, thi plnngidrdotioto ;boforo Octobor 31 Tho.,~/
rM illnotbo onideed ithutthe 5 year p1.an. Weoxpcc
tounasb
all ao
you undeorstand
r~i-'ovouberW
.hatS the P'i rzotines
W cgot
and
tho
tho
dolay-
P nin
but
roo
-are 'sure
h~v
tht
be
6. -COMCUSTOS~~
-~thi.n? t,:-t uuJ rucrL Y' A 1jit nnd th ', r~ ril jo
onsign; and pojoc ho61~r hvev f~
1t1uecttne a lonE-terJi do Vlopj phn
Ir or'_ rr
a~~
i.'tdio has tv-u pic s : 'i'. ull oiour 1oo Oricout
.1 0 VC'
rt tCoj
1)0 I -1 ll~l CR~ hotto l, u d rst
, d4

MIOUC RELIEF SERVICES. U.S.C.C.
0 5:
Continuatbon Sheet No.--­
optiuisr. Ls I 'cntioned, much hard work
as
liL:
your
ahead
attitudt.s
of us.
have
Just
chaneud, I plede th Lt will also
tho
change.
attitude
te
of
at
CRS
CttS will do
and
ovarythint
support you
possible
in your
to
future
assist
F'd projacts
of your
:u~d
developnent
for that zattcr
proeracs.
in all
zonal
We at CRS
FF progran
are co::i
the
ted
Liost
to zaking
dovclopLtntil,
our
very best
the
FF
nost
program
effective
in tho
and
world.
the
I hope
CRS/Bonbay
that in
Food
future
for
years,
Work Progran
the
will
other
be
FFW
the
programs
bench-hark
are
against
masu:od.
which
within
These
our
objectives
reach and
are
I an
certainly
sure that,
as
together,
we r-dodicate we shall
our
attain
partnershiD them
to serve .. poor and disadvantaId .
With optimism for the future and thanks, I roeain,
Encl : BIIA
LEA
MMcD: rr
Sincerely,
HICHA"L S. McDOLLD
DIRECTCR-BOMBIY ZONd

,To:
1e.oCL/1 O/v86/D
,CATjHLIC; RLiZ SaVICEYTS.. t
P.920X:1650b-,BLIBA"oo"o
A1~1on~inees,
Fr(,: Director -BoibaY Zon60
Stubjc t FPort)oi~Pan~frDvlp-n
J~ay618
This has reference to. 0ux earlier, ocicu!
~Deceinber
oCL9'
24, 8/..
6985 ae
_s Ou alr ady kj y e b r f u r il
an.eb-ruary
e v a t
for'
~
the
y
purose
u i
o
a~
i1re
wr
ncllbtiveaLn-ing
would like
aIu
ors 2-fftCib ers t-o 'return --
to
,a'
you, with some bas
Bo'a
ln
from
d
their'
ta on 'your-areas, Weti ith
be Colle"ctedp W3ili1 reflect The'
the
base
pres
line
ent
datat t
distributors
l
and
situation project hlders
In-t ie area's
are 4,6'n~
whe-re your
assist us in p
Thisifrton
a n~ o it rn,3 a~ ri
U
vz uatirE
etl
, current;L n futur sno rais.
I:presunme ,that FOt 6f'yur
ors Vl*11
FE'
are
prj&hldr
i-ntereste .dnJn
i dvelop..eh or i
por6:
iu
for, -0UIinV_ necti6.' are
These
pann n
daTb. are th~e People
h
To end'ec~s~r nme from who'
ffni
e need
chi-hicLulx
to ole th
in l rw r a cpy
q Csk
to
hI&VI/er
each i
to
n±i
co-",lcte -rhoW;'i tie fIo-~
at end t e;m
t e.
e nan
.ieiS .I.e
htatot hodes/
C s noeI~b proj c s e a sh ul c p
-_T nly
o -ir
C ~~ tly ebtin
Met i crc
to.
s
co.-,;Y)pec
n m
th
cv
6a,Lfo
~
dn . o-
aj~
c
~
~ ,
d~.ess ~o
t ~
t. e
t
nee~ n b eiats 'o thdev l in ceflabc
e t
in our r ~ e~ c o l h
a tint
%..lnaaeE ehqi ins. ,,
2. Intn ­
~e~
5a 6 Lj,
CCQle'r
_
s

I, ook
c5-
41 Z0
4.' 4.
Pq4
-j-
U) t
't.D.
ti

74 -3
4.44
rT i­

- __
-_____.____.-___.___
- ', r
-
A Z,'
....
, -...-
. .. I I
I .
.
...
-, _-
O I , _ 11111. I _,."
I t . A I I 1. I 11 1,-1 - - - .1 -- ", "I
I'll, ,
. S, - _ ,L . _ - .__ " _ .
- tl>',
. . - ',',,l -, l,,,,k-: R 'wri",Om& -",_7-, 11,11-,"- " ,
ml ,
11
"I , , P _
.,: S".,_
""',
-
- .1 j ,,I ,,
, - I I.. .......
. Rrtli _1,,, .lt-.,,
I-l'. 4,I,'-. , ,,,. i ; : ,,- - "., -, 4;;, I "-,i-", Y- ­
" n I I i "
R I -.I
', ., ' ,., , , " "'i , -, - It: ,J, z;_.1tl", ,,,-,l .,,,, _ -1
1 ":"_ T
, ' 1', ,C ,-_'?,,, , -7 - ', , '. , A ""K " , ,,,, "", t X-,','. , j-,
j
,, '.
!,:, i' ,,,,,-,4",.
00c) ,4 , , k,-, J,
, - "?L ;, '-l T,.
" __ ll'
, _ ,,,,
.
, . ", I " "Y-,. II, .1 , n .- -,,"" , 1.I , ,,f j - . _', J.,, , I ,
" , , , ": , , "', ., "- I_ _' i, i I ,,,,,,,,- _,, ." 1 j_ ._ i A', A, , ' Fzi
" , ,,,
, q ,'',-, ."j,,,-,
y,
0 ")O
,!, --
',,- . , ' , 4
,"',4 -!, , .- ! , -,
, , _%.,, , 4 _., 5 I,
";
, _- ,,' 4 -,,, -,,. , ', ,,;, -,I- " I; , ",
,_- "n , , , ,1-1 , ,,
_ , I,'_
'_ I,,.,.'
, ",' "I - - , "I-, I, , I ', , j- ; ",4
,& i -m , - *$
- _ l'o , .,' "-_ ,-,-,',%,o
InI ., , , ,..
11
'-','v - - i ',, - ; : 11"
, - , , ,; i ., , - I,,, I I
-
,,j -1-11
" ,ll I",
!, j - A -, "
I. "
" . . I , ,, , , , , I , , . " . - ,- , ,;I , 1,' - I., ',( 74 , , " - , .",114 , , ,
11
- a-- ,,V,
- , , 1, , ,
, ,, , . , - , - I I 4'
, , -. , , I ,: ','
.,
, , ,
- __
-,, . I ,,i , . , - "', ', ,, - , -,
, ., , " , , " , -- v,w . , , ,,I, ,1,
. ,.,l
- - - ".,
r ---. ,, , i t:", ­
lb '. C " - , " '. f;'- , -F," -. , , -' ,-.-,-,,, _' !- ,',,,. -'-'.,, ;
, _;Cil l -', ,,_ :"-,,-, ,
. - ,- ,,,--Z, !,, -_:;, - ,, ',,_,,,,,, -. vR
,-".,,il Ir,
_ ,, ",.
,I , .., , ',
, 1t W I 11
e, ,,,, i,. -I, ; .r -, ,
,;: J, , '. , ,, , , ,., j ,
- ,' ,.',,;l,, v
... ,:, a " l,."l"., ll_-. " 1",,, , , ', . ',, - , '- ' ' , ; , ' " "; - , -,,,,E", , ",-!'
-
1"".5 _ =, -'., , -- - , ., t- I",
- o - -1 , ,- , , ,,'-" _', ,, N-:. , . , , , , - - " " - , I I " '. - f', , ,- , -, , , " _,4 ,,
,' j ". , !; _-,, - ,,-, ( -, ' ,' ,',, , ,, , - ,',',',
, , -
t
,E6----
1, ,,-, , _11,1;'l-l", ", --, ":,:" ,-,,,_ , : .,,i , , .., ,,,i4 ,, . _, ,: - , _l ,* !,_,,,",;,
. - 'I"
,
- - z"
- , . t''I; -, " 4 4F", ; ,,,,
.j ,,,.,,
", ', , ,- . ; z "i' 1 , I- Y;,- , ',,- - I., ,
-' I ' , ":-",
, .,,,,
,T , - ,- .
: , --
-., , ,:,
;. , 1 ,,- , ,,T,-. 7 7 1, ,1 , ,)71',..
., 0,
;,, , 3, ,,', -, ,; k I
..
-"
-',-,
, _ , _,-,a
I , I I,.( I :
,, ' , - , , I' - 7_'I' ,, ,
- , , _--,,,"'I f
,
.; o',,: ,,- , ,'.,% , , I
, ,,ct olf., ,, ,',; ,,' ,,,
,;,,-, ,,,,
il ,, 5 , ., , ., " - ,
, , , ,,
, " ". - :,,,. I , I I7 - 1 - ,,, ", , _ "
, ; , _j , P-'l,-":4-W
',,^, ... ,
1, I , , , , ", , ,- -,., I I - - . I,l ,I,j - 111 , " :,"i-;,.,- , , , , - , ,, : ,,',:_- % ., ,-,, ,,-,J , ,' " ", ' , ' - .,'V " " - _
",.. 1, ,., , ,
,."r-
, ,
, . ', ,
,
., , -",.,,_,,
- - , Z4 .
0 , ql"_ill
. ; ,-
­
",' 1 - " ' ", ,, , .:' . .V"... , ,- , ,;, , , -11 " , - ,_
- ,
,
. '
,I ,
1- ,"-
, , ,_.
,0, )_ ; i lll _ . 71 ,_' ; - ,,, ,,,, I ' - ,,, ,, ' - ." . , , , I - -1 ,, ,. - ", ,
. _, . .
, ,ljr;-,'-
,i ,- ,
-, ,.- - '' ",_ k Te, f, Fi,
, - -1 _r rI I I II " - - ; , '' -,., , I,
, _l_' I'i - , -: - - "', ; , ,
, - , , . ",
, " " 't- "i
11_.-z"I'l,",
j- '- ,. ,,,I, . 'l, , " ' " -_7' , ,,"': , - I ', 1. "I -'j-, ' ", _ , - , - ,, :, , '- , 1, - , -,,', , , ,
' , - ?, r _
, - I , _ , -
I "I - ,
.'., , ,
-
- -It
.c,' ,, l o., 1
" 4 H ,,,-,, " ' , fj 1. , , , , 't - .. .....
. ,; '. li , ,, ,, , - "_ '-. - 1, , .1 - 6' 1 1 _,", - l"rJ ?,rr f,' " ' v !
- ,' -- " , , - , ,-, ,, - - ,., ' '
";
, 11, '. , , , ", - - I ­
f , '.,- ,, -, I , I ' , , -, . , , I -
I - 1 1 , " , -, " , - ;, ,,;-, , , , J"; ., I", ., " "' .x t, . '.r", T, k , ;_ ,.,- , , ,
'. -, " )',
- . , r ',,-, I- r ' - 11.
.7
. , , , " -, -,. , ''i - j , ,_ ,
J."t , ,l , , , _ I I- _ , , r t. :,- - I ; ',':;.' ' - 1,r . f ,, , ,;,
'
' ',,' , , , , if, ,jr , -,, ',
'41'j
-, ,, , , - ,11 _ ll . r , _ , ' , ' :, - , ' .",C ,,,
- --, ,, '_"I
'.
, _z - _ _', ,, ', " " _',
- , " . . - ."
, "
, ',- ,,',' ,.,
"'
, -- ; 'j",
"',%
.- -, _ 7 , ,
_ ­
'; " - ' C 4,, _, , , I m I- , I ,_I I - I , -, 4 . , , , , - .. ., - , - , ,, 'jy ',', , ,' ' _'II' " " , ,1 -_,'t, I I
.-l " - -',' 'r - 7- , ', , " _ T ,, ,, '
', - I
,
. , I _.. , , , , ",
,j
,- .
, , , I , . - . (D,, " I I, ' Iii, rl i I I
-
I I I ,, , , - , , ", I " - -, - , , " - - '- jr ; S _,
'J" "
, ,
"_'
,, ,, , I r " _, - I
. ..
11.
, , I "- -11
- : - "" J- I , ,%' ' ',- wi,,4 ?
. _'. . , " t 4 _-r _ - : 1, I I : ,1 -_ ') ,, ., , ,
, , , ,
I t" - ---
, - , 1 - _ , , ! ,. ,. - , ., .,o, , , ,[ , , k,,,- , ;' !, I, i.;. .,,,
I ". ., .__ ;, , I . --- ,-" -, ,. :, , . '_',, :,_ r, .,-; - - " - , - ' ' ' I' "' 1.; ' .1 . .. " 'j r',' ' , r '4" I
1 I I.," , _,r1,- _ " )_ , I__,
. ,T,4"-, _ -,
- 11 - - ,' I -- I I , .. , ,
, , - L)
;t
- . -
,
, ,
, . "
. t , , ,
. , ,_,"
. _r,
_ -_
, F , . -,
,,, ,-',, - : " , " W ......
, j , i , ,, _ , , , " " , " , Ir I _ " ,,, ,
...........
, , .,"r I !, , , C, , , , :j ,,' j - ' ' ' ' ' - . '' ,, : ' , ,11,." , ,' ,__ ' , , I 'r , ' , ' '-r __-_' ' ..
: , ,' I. "
. ' 1 '_", ,', I- I - r I 1-1 , '. , I , , ,
- - 1".
4'T ..,
- , " - ' ,' , I
I - _ _ ,4. ,,,. 6 1 ',; I r' , I" , - . ,I - " - , I I . ,, - I ," " . , - ,
,- . '. l , .- _., V , r ' ;
-
. -
,
.
-
,A
, , , , ,
, _ , , , r
_ , , , .,, I 1, A'. ' - " .,,
. '--, , r
, 7 ,,, " - - - '. , ,
, : d, , -7 ­
:,;r , 1, i "', - I - 11
1
, , ? ,
- ,
, - - , : ..
I , , I I I
"
- " -
- , , - , , , , , , , 1 Lj , , - :-',, . - , Y, , - 4 , ., - , ­
, ,,,,,,
, , , , " T " , :
,
, 1
I, r,
,- .:,
,:
11 ,
-'r
1 - 2
-I
1
I
, , , ,
, , " , ,
, ,' , f, :,--'Z-
,. -,:,
- ,
", _ ..,i ,
, - -
, , 4
I..
l
"
I
, , , . , . " , ,, : . " " .I , , :: , , . "., '-
,,, ,, , , ; - , - _ _ - - -
- - I Ir - , 1 A9vl L. '. I .
- -
- , _ -
- ,, , , - 4, - I - __.- , - - - I L
-
, I
-,- -, - ,.- - !?-.;-
! z, . T-- - - - ,- ,,, -,, - , ,- -- - -, -, -, - -, - ,---. - - ,- --- - -- ,- -1
.11,r,;, . . ,- 'I "- I,,; ,, , , - .- , , , - , ,
, ' - ' '_ - . - ,; ,- , - ,- -. . ",
- "" .", rI, , "
, I, , -,
_, "I '_
, ..", ) vI , ,
, J, .. "
,11,,,. z.,III,-_""
- .r. ,' , .z " , . I?, --, : -, ,", , I .r
,', "', . , , , , , I , , .1I.. , _. ". --- - , , , , - "
, I , , , , , ., _ . j r I ,, , ' I,_ - y ' ' _ , L' , I - ,
,,, L , , , , , , , - r; " I r ' : , - . , : _. , . _ , , , ,, ,
,
,_
:."
.A ,4 , ,,
'. ,, , - -
- " , ,
, , , - , . " ' , '.iL ' , -" , 1, - ., r" , , ,
,,
- , _ , " 11, .11It . . I - . , 1,, , , , -, ', ,,, " ,
, . ,' _ _ '
,
I,) ; , , , ,_ , : , , ; , , ', -41, Lr
:11
: A , ,
-
L_
I -
;
, , . ;i , " _'- ' '
I _ : , ' . r I ,,- - ,,,-, , , , , , - _ ' - I I, ' rL, ,- ,, ,.- . , " , ', , , : ,
-' ', - L , , & -,." ,"'). , , -, I',, 7,' ,
, '
, _ ,. ,
1, , 11 ., .p ,I ,:
- , C ' , , - L ,. ,I , I , _
.1, ,,; I , ,: , , , L, -,,, - - r . . _.:,
, , I ,
,
I 11
,
1.1 , . :, , .,t"", -
, ,,- , ,
lr, ,. ,
,
i I
."
- , ;'
, . - . .
r
_
- _ ',
, ..,
,
, , - ', ' L.
- _"
- ",
-.
L_',"
," , ,,
't ' . , - , , , 4i., , , , ' , - , - , 'r,-,-
7' _ ,_ '
7 ..
. , ­
, Ir, I : 1. II.. . ', ; , , , -
II
, :&F
, , t', I,,, , I
.
-r
- "
­
'L' I'! , ,, 1'I ;' ; " " : '. , 4, ' I "" 'H 'I U ' ,' _ , : ' ,. ,- , - - - ' I _I r , I I , Ir
-
. ,
, a2 , - r_ I_ , . ,. - C) . r , - , I ., - , " I I ! ,7 , L:
. ' ,' , ,
I :" 1.
, ,r,:,
, - ". , , , , 4 . , ,
': 4'. . , I 1_41 -1 . '' I
:-
. . , I - 7 - i -
- - ' , . , . . r II1. '
"
': - " "',
r I
, I14
,
-
: I
I "
_
,
.4, - , , 12 _ .p I , : . . I , I I I ,,I , I ,, , - , - -. ,'
' - ' , , 14: "",:
' ' , ', -- " , %..
, , . ., , - ,I I ,
'.
,,
- I , - -,
, , 7 .
,,,.H , . I I I r ' ' , , , - _ - ,, : X ', ,
. ,""_, : " I , , r , , I - I . ' ' I . I I
, " " '
'
',
- _ -,_""
I
- ,
- ,
,
, ,
, - _ .; , . f,
, ,. , , , I I- - , , :
I ,x-- I I ,. I I . , , .,. _ !: ,-, , ' ",',""I',,"",
, 1 : ,,
4 , , I - 1 - , ,-1, ,
& r . , .L , , , ,
'2- ''I 11 _" , - ,I-
, _ I- - ,I r ',',
- ;,
. ' I . I , I ,
:, . , , , , , - 4 ', , 1111111,
.1111"Irr,
,
;,,- ,!, ,-" - . I & I ' () f-' -1-4
- -4 0 - , : _q-, , " , , , . I I , . . , , , I, '. T .1 ,, , !_.. , I , ,.& ,, , , .,;, -,,
', ' :
' , " ,
- *
"
. I _ . I
r
I11 ' - ' , 1, , " , 1, .,
(O 'o I . I I Ii, 11 II I& & I , - I .I ,, I , _
" cl 0 . ,c- C. I 0 , , I I : , , 1 I ,, , , & I . , I I - r I I , , ; , '
1,, , r' , ' , , ' I " , , _4 ,) _
_
- I I Ii
I r-,
, , . , - - , . I , ; ., r 4
, . , - I, . , .-
, _I I I . I -
I
- I ,
, I , _
; : ,,, ., , , -
,
- , , - 'I I . I, - rI - ,' .
"
1.
", ';
'; '," , , ,
I 11 , ",
- , r:'
_ ,i- I- - I . . , , 1
,
, ,
I . I ,,,
,,, , ,
: r,
- , , - & , , .- , . F I I I I - I , . - _
- : r , , - - I.-L
I - I I , ' ' ' -- A - i 21 cc ' ' r . I , I I I , r II . I .L I, 1,
, - I
, I :,
'i , ;" - ". " , , I, ,,r-, ,., : ; ,11.,,',, , ,, ,
r __,.'-, " r, " ,, - " i,, - -,_ , .
- ,,,,
I -,­
.'I ,, &I , I - , , : . :
I
. : , , I ' r " ,
'. '
r . _ , 7 1. , * , -, , L , : - ' , . _
.",
-
, , ,' -. 7 4. ,,
:-- . I ( ,,
,
, , I I 'i rl',_
,r ' . ;', "_ I . _
_
,,., 'N
. . , : tj 0 I : I I I I
I . I
I . I ; r ' , r
, II , I r, . i - - - ,' : I '
- "
_-r .'
,,*
, , , , II . .
_ __
, - ,"I
v - r 1 -) . I . I I . ,
I
Ff I . ' r ' I .
I ,. , , I , . I I-
. 11 I r _ , L"' .. "" . _,jl
- : I , " . -H F: , , I
,:
I
:I
, ' I I I
I , I
I
, - I" , " , , ,, ,­
51;
)
,
r-i - C)
o(- -4
I
1. : ,
-; , - - , " ,.
, ,71, ", I , L ( ) , I I . . I 'I ' ,,
" _ 4: -, , . .
- . - - IC :j , 7i
.- ( I I I I %, I I
. i _ ) ,,, ." . ' , ' , l ' '
- : L , " ..
, L
I , , A , .'z, .
, , , ,r. - . 0 C) o . , -, ,,
,4
_r Z: r ,
. - " 1 - I , I r I I . & I L II I . , , , , . I, - . I IIr , , , - , ,' ' ' 'I . I&, , ; '41:., J"
, ,: , ,,,, ,
,
.
, ,, I I I 4 C) I I I II I I I & e: . I II : Z, , - , , . , . , _ L , - , L. ""' ,,,, ,- ,, &
-
,-
r, L) .0 I
. I , . I . I - , - - & L ' ' ' I I , . - A , I
Z,
-.
,
-
,
. I I
0
.) ,
r,
4 () C) I I
- . . . I I - . " I , - , - ,, ., -, , " , :- ',' ,-'
,
e ' I I I ". - I " , -
, ,
, , :1 4 . . I I . . , , .1 1 , , - , - I ,
I I I I r I - - -, , , " , , - , .1 1 , -1 I7i-,
, I I I - .I I I ,I , , :, .... I , ,;1,, , , : , , ,
,, ,I'i : - , , , , " ,,l
,- ,,
. I _ -
- ' ' " I~, & .-'I - -I - 1,
r
, I I I - - I . . , I , I I I , I. - I , . . ,-_ , ,, ,, - - , IFl
I ., 11
r I-I , -, ,,,_'_I . ., 1,I II t , , "-, 1 - - ,l) L"
-"I , -, -,1,
""I
1,. - ,
I I I -- - I . . I
,,
,j
' -
I ,
- , ,
. I
',".
,
r -
_ I . _
, _i "
, I 1
, , I _ I .I I . I
"I'I - ; , L , - 1 . I I
I
- I I
I - . I I I I I , -, - ll I_ . -L
.
, . - . " I , ,, , , , -,' - - , , _ ':: _; . I ,, ; $_, '., r',e
C
.
r - i
, I I I .I ,- I - - ., . ' , r, , ' , _ , I I I, , ;, - , t­
,- I I I I I , I
I 1. - , , . I , . .
, 7 ;
I
- I I I , 7 - I I . , i , 1, ,, - . - , - , . , , , , L,
11 . , " - . H - . " - ] ,,, , ,- I w , " :, 7 ,. ,,,,-,
. . I . I . I I - , - I , , , - ; . , - " - '
, - - I . "" I I , I - I . I I _J I , , , I " " . - ,, , I
" , . . , II" , , I , I . r 1, & . :: , l ,. 4 7__ ,,Ir" ,' ; '
' OL .
-1 , - : ,- -4 -
. I : I- I I I I
4 , - 1 :: , I , I - - , -, ,, - i ' . , ,, -, 1.- I , r.". ;' I'' ­
_ I . I 1,
1 ", 4 I - : I
., I
. , - ,- , ,, '. -_ : ;
- r- , , ,,, , , ',, : _ I, '.
. r - ; -4 - H I
.
, , , '.
- I I Ir :: ", :'' ' ., ' r , _':' '; ,.', ;7,, ,
', , 1
.
1 1
I
1
I
- 'L
-1 , -
I I - ' __.,."'-__', , ' ' -, .; ' - L, 4 ­
., I I I
I , - I - ,,
"I I , , :f I I " 4 , . I I I& _i .:
I- ,' i ,
I , -. : - , , I
c , , rcj I I I I I II L , I _ . . " ,I
' : - , 0 co - I . I _ 1, ' , 1. ' ; ,. _ 1, _ , , , : -, 1: " '_ , , -, I
V, , Z I I . . . I Ii - , . I ' I 1. r : "
: 11 'I,
, ,
, : - . lf_, I~-
i,
- - I I r _ ,'
I -
-
- , r-1 I
I
. .-
;
I I . r, r r , I :.I II - - ,
,
;'
-
_ ,_f '. . '
, ; I'.'
, . _
. , -
'"
I I II
. I II I I , I
I . ' . - , ,Z' r -_ ,, . ',,'- ' ;j " "." I ,-,7" . I
- I II - r, 4 C) 4 1 1 1 I
I 7 . ,- , , I , I ,
' " I
,
-, , , , '. " , , r - ?, , . - rf-" j,
-
I
I I I I I I I I , .. r ; , - I _ , , .. , I I I I L 11, 4 ; .- _I I: - ' ,
. L" . : ::
, . I 1Iz,, ,-, , , z" ,,, ,
, 0 ' - ;7 t.'
I .H
.> r I
,,
. I . I . I , , . , , I , , : z , ' ' ' ,, , , ,: . ­
. ' ,: I
1 I 1, I . I I. , . , , & , i ,-, .v
_ 1 I :"
I
I I . r I " _.- " I , '
""; F_
" ,
-- ' - , -i , , , , ,r
I
- - I I
I I , , - , ! , , , , I 11 , , I I -- , , r , r ,' r r , I , ,,,
1 . I ,
. 4 , . I -
I I I . 4 - -- , -
I
, 4 ,,
I I. .' , ,'I ,
, -
I- ,: . i , - I I . . I I I . , , , , , ,, - 1,
I
L, r , , , : , I I,
P : 1 I I I . I I , & . . I I . I r, . I I, ,
11 I I
; - I I .& - . , ,;, ,.j I - I
, -
I, , I, , _,I, I ,, I
,,, , . . -
I - I - ,
:
I
- I -
..
I I .
I I I I - r .
I
r, , I . II .
I - I -
,
.
,
,, , , . _ -, 'I, ,;4,
I I r
I I
'-
.
_, I 0 I
, , , I .: I - L. I I I , , , , ,
U "i,_I I . I I- - ., . I - , , , , , , I t , - II I .I ,. .
, , r . , : "; ,. !
, I _j
. . C. I- - '; ., -
.
I I .
- I : j ,7 ,
. . : :;, ; ; .r- - ', , ,& _ ' , r I - - ;-n
. , , C) - ----------
L
- - . I r i A 11 I , I I- ::' - 4- - I ;'%;
r ­
, I I - - , I :
L' , ,r ,-.
- _, - 1. I , I . r I I I . , . - , - - I - I I
_, ,I ,
, I
., , I ,. O , I .
I . I _ I , . , . I 1 L,
. - - " - I 1 I. -,
- . I
, ; I '. r I , L, 1:'- , I .. I I ,
,,,,
., 4 :, -
L I I .
%
I . , I I I1 , . , , . I -1 - -: , ll 1_4",
I ,
. I I . I I L . I . I -
I . ,
I -
,,' , , . . ", , , , , I , _, . ., _, -
I ., - __' ,, - " " , -,,
, , ,
,, r';
I :
, - I CJ ,ci ,:) I 0 , - , I . .I . .
_ ", , I " r& .: ......
. , r1.
;i, -- rL , '
, , - 1, 1,
- -1
,
, I. I I I i
, % : - I I- '4 , I : . I - i I" r. , e , , , . , , ,_ . , , :T,
:T ;rL I
-
, , y . - I . , , . I I i , - I . 11 I I : f , , , , I I . , I - I 1.: ' - I I - I - -l"14_
.L3 r, Z , , r I I I . I . . I, ,r , I . II, ,, r' ' .1,11,
._, ,, ,
,,.--,
- ,,
, ,, ,,, '' , , ID r t , ,: Z I . I I ., I - :, .,, : . 7L, , . - 1, I -, , , , ,I _ ,: , &t I
". ,,,, , .
;:-, ; I , . - I , _ . , I - 'I r ; -
V; -, , I, .
I I I I - , . I
I I ,
- :"
- F'r' ,_!,
,
:"
.
". , 4-,
. ",
, ', " ,, ', _
, : . I Z, . . - I , ' '_ ' - I , r ,.,. , , : , - -,
- '
, 4, , 11 E- -- i C) .H - . . I . I I I . - : : - .1 , " ., . , , , - r': ' _ " :
" , -
, j
,
-
r ' , . I
, -
II - -1, ,
, , r ' ', I
i , ' -; , I" I ",I;; ,
. ,
: -L:, ." ." ,, : o
,,,
I ,.-
,, , , - , .1
, ­
.
I . , , , I ,
P , , I , I I II . I , . - - , . , . I , I , , & . ' ' , -
, L ',-
" , , ,
" ",
. ,
I , , , I - - . ' , . , - ! r,- 1 1: -, - , , ,. , r. I , ,
I . , , , , , . . , . . :4 , 'I- : , : ,* :, . , 11. r 1, ,,. ,
, ,I ! - :, . I - I I ' , ' L , L , "" ._ - ,' ,r: - I .
, - ,
. - :;I', I, )7_ . _
-
. I r r . i , __ I
-
I . -
. , - :. - - , , - . - . -
, -
, - , , ," &, ,-
, - . _' - ,;,I- . - - - - . _r
. I - I . -.- - I
- " I. - r, , , ,, , I ,I--
- i . I I I I, , L-4 4-1 , I . I I I I I I I
,
, "If :
. : - , e , c , , . . ,I r - , , I I- 14 - , - r , ,' _' .' ' , ,- ' ' .. : , I .
-,
r- _ I ; . I I - I , - - ,- II I I ,- , .r - I , ,, I , ., , 7 -,
, :., , i __ ,I,-
., I: " , . , " I '& - , I , , I , I r ,- - , , - , , ,, i, , . , " I - -,
& . r, I
. , : li 11, I ,, : - , ,,, "",
L'_- ,
f-
- -_1",
- ':
_, ,:I _i
I .
I
I- I . I I . I I
-
-.1 I r
I-
-
'
, I I -
.
I I ; . , .
" -.
I I 1- - ,, , ,I, .- .
I
- I . : I I I I .
- I :_, , , , I I - . &I - - ,,,, _
,:: I I . I I.
, ": . I , " ,., , ,,,
.4 = _,, __, ,_
_ C)
a
, r I I - I I . , I
I
- ;, r ' ' ' I . ' - - I I " -- I
, .
'i , - - ,_
;. L.0" , r) -0 - . . Ll' ' : , I . I I 1 r I . I , , , , ,' L !, & , : , ,, 1 "I , - , _ , . I , r ! Z;",
_ : ",
. I, ,
- 1 1 - I - I II I
I ,
I
lil
, , , , , ': ' , L
r ,, I r ,, , ., " ,
, : , L , , ! , I , , :'-' I
- '
- - , (i I I - I I , , , , , , , 7 , , , , , .1 , , I
-1l : : . ,-- -, . , - . . -- . _q . i I , I I , , - , t , , , . . 7, . : IL. La I
, Z " ,11
­
. ., I I , I , r ;:
, .'
_- , " - ,., . , I -
: _II - I r,7
, ,: " , -. , . , I ! _ , r 1;
.
- I, I I :,, - ,, '. ,- ,', , - 1111I
P IV -
,,
I , . I
1
I 1, I - , :I . , - 1.I ' , I 1 - r , r , ; I '. r Ili, I! " , , " '_ ,
,
, , I I . : , , L , . I . I : L ' ' 11"r' ' ; - I . q ". I I I ,- , , 1, , .
, _ ,.,
-, ,
,,', , , =
I I I . I'. - ,, , I . . rr :'Lr ' 4, .. : - :
*W - . , , ,,
:g ', . I I - I I II I I . r - t -I I ' ' , ' ,_ -1 ' r I I . : , :, ,. , L , I 1 ,
I
'7 7
,. - 7.,-
, , , L
-
r . - - - . I - -- - -
I: - :,
, ' ' - - - - : - _ - ' 7- - - - - . . , , . , -1 9 r & : L , 'r,, ,r, - ., r : . ,,-&U
_ _, ! , - ,- '- , ; . - , - 11 IJ ,_ , ; .
S - ,
'
- ; _ , , L - & Irl
. - . . I r I . . . - _ _. , ;- . -r,I , - - - . . , , - - , , , .- ' - r , , " , , '::, L r' ,
- : ;, ,L , . ,, 'I, _ ' r '-, . , " -1,_
.L "; , r ,
I
.1
I
,
-
-
, r I I ,
, '
. ,; " I" ' ,
,,, _ , , " : r Ir ' I I . , I I
, ­
- - ,,
I
I . I I 1 , ,'r
, ,
, , . , r, , ' I,' - , ... r, I , - :' , . . I r . . - 4 I I
I r rI - 1 . -I , r , I I , - ' , : r I r -, . , , , - :, , r -1 ,
, ,F- . . ,_
, -1 , -" , .m-1 , _",
', -, 1I ' , 'II , ' r : I - I I I Zr , . - II I r -I - : . II Ir , I I I- r 4 I ' - : I' r. I ,L ; , ,
r- I ,_.rr I - ,.1,
,
, , ," _
, , _,A
, , , , ., . ,
II I I I, I , . I
Z'
r I I r ; I r . I
I
I I
- . ' ,
I " L, 2 I , r
. ._ 2 I I . I 1 4 1 r 1;. I . , II :1 ': - ,
-.,
,
': " - 1 t
'i " , I ,
I.
r
r'
, -, j r ' "'
- cl 1 1.4 I . -
I - I r
. r , - I ' . I I'I r I.. . : , : , , ;" I , - .-It" -- ,
! "I . ,
,r, ,
r , I I
,
ci , I I I
I & .
I, r. I I r I r : I
r
1,
,
.1,
1,
1, I
I , r I , " r, "
,,
,
,
I . :; f ' ' II , , -1
,, , ; ,,,
­
,
,-
1..
:r r ' I I
" - , - ,
'
r
-I r I : r ) , I I - I I I
., r -, . ' ' r - I i I11 " , : .r , ­
- , - I _ .
. I , , i I - I , ,
' I
I
"I 11-1, . , - I . I . , r I I
I . - -
:
, I r , ' ' ' ' ,
-
I I r . I r I
I : L, , : . I m, , 'rI. jr, ' ­
11 ..I - r
- - -, : , . " ,
- :4 "
,
, . , - r 1. & I r L. - ,
,,,r: I, " ,: ' r , - - I -' - I , r I v I r I
'; ', ' " " - . . . - . - -r I . I , , " _ , . , _ _ . . .. , ._ I p I , 'r r . , , I . , "'
r -r" , : ' ' r - - ' - I . , _ A _ , , I ; I I I : . , ,L,
;? . I I - ,
-4 , _ I
I - r . I r :, , , ' I ' & I - - - , I L -r
I - I I r I . .. 1 L ' . ; , , r -r , . , -&-, mc, -, I , ,r ,, ., ;, .
,
' ,_
, L'
',' ,,
' r r, : I , r I -
,, , .1
1
,
.
I
I
.
I . I . I
. I r ,
, , . .
. ,
-
I . i
. d
, , I
'- L 1, I r I , - _ , , ,
, - , , - ,
., I r r4 1 1 . - r I v. - 1 , I I - , , ,'. - I ' I I '. : Ir r r _ ': I r . , . , I
'
I "
.,
, - '
I
. I ,
I, - I . .
r
I I 11 t ,. _ I - "­
,r ,. , _ , , ,
'__r ' . . , -
I , " . I.1 11 , I r ' _-,_L-
I r . .
. . I - I I I . , , . I r r , r , I , , . _ , I , - , L I - , - ' , , r,
101 I "I, 11-- ,1,I .I I , , I I ,
I L : , I , j " ,' !, r ­
- , ilI '
. I I I I I I I , ' 'T 1, .I ,- ,- - r I I
, , :I
- r I - I : t - .I. 1_ " , ," ., I,
-
I
f, - , , " , , , .
I - . I
. .
. r ' , r 1 4r . r r
. , , - r I __, , , , L , :] r .
r . . , .
I I I ,
4 , I I I ,l., - - - ! - ' . r
r , .. '_ r . I I r I , ", ', - , :
, - -
. , , I , ,.1 _ .I r' ,r,.,
,
-r r',., , - ; , r , I . I I & I r I " I . r I , I
., -- : , r, -
'r , IIIr : 4" - - "' 1'
' ' ' , , ' ' ' ' I .,
- I - I r I & , I ' ,
, - :' r r ' - , I I - I - . ­
.
%. - , _ . . _ R , I I I - I - . , I I !r r , , i . , , jI, w , , _ _ , , ? : '
, ; _ ' "' z 'L r I I . , ," I , I _ _ , : , " - ,,, z ,.A-;
, , 'r. . . . I I ;
. . I -, 1: ., 11 I I
' . ; I
. ­
, _- , : .r r 'r, I I . I
- ,
. I I I . ,; r, ' ,' I I 'A ,
_,;, ', , . , ' I r . .
.
I
I ,
- r : - I
&
- . I I , I r I r I , . I , , ', ___,_ - I 1, ,,"
.' , I ,-I , . -yl - , ,
, , - I , - . -
r i I , : -1- ,
I
,: - r
r - I , r r _ ,,, , " , ,
, , I r , . I r I -, I
. .- ,
I I I- - I r . . I I - . '-- ' ' - , I I I _ :111. - . ,, _';, ",l, " ,_
_
-, ; :, I- ' r - , -
I
- - - '- - , - - I L I , I - . I - -. - I . . I .4 rI - . I I , 4- ; . . r . , . , .I- II ,, , , , "
,, _ - : z " , , ;,._ , :, li I- " ,1;, , I
. ;I: &
. ..- , . . . , I L I III I - . - , , I , - - - - - - . . - ,- , .-
- . ' -
L , , ,_ , , I
. I , rI " r .- "",, , '
I I I r _ _ r
I I . . I. , - I 4 - r_ , _ , r.
_. " : , , . -,
, :- ? L'q I
, I
I
- r
I ' , - , - , , I, . ; . r' I r, ,,r , .. . '- j, r, ' " f
. , , , , , ID 1, , I I , I r I I .
. , . : i: , T r - - ' : ,I
I
' : -, . - I __ ' ' , .; ;
.
,_ _ I
: - ,,_,, r 'r,
, , , ', ',, , , _4'",' j - l-j ' ,
l I I , - I , Ic . , '
_ , 'I,I r t I - I : ,
-
- r. .' r,_I, I ' _ -i - - ' ,
, ' , I. ; 1
' ,-
: - : ; , ,
: , ' . , " ' r -- , ,_ r ' r .r I , .;. i j., i l , , ",
. 1, , , -
4""
- Q r ,
N , r :- , , r r 1 : L 7: , , r , , I I, - - ,., r:;
r.-.,,
r , L,
L .
. ',4I r r . L,
I 1, , :
,
, , , . , ,_, I, -r,
r" " L'i,. , , , I _ I
-, ,
LI :T,
" j - r - , rr,' . & , I I I , Ir I Ir , .r I _ I . I. r , , __ ' '
, r, ,-' ," ,.' ,r'_!I" . ,r_ . I LI ' , -,. : ,, , I, , - - -*, J, 1! :_,',,
- ".
7',r r . , ',]'Ll . - ' , .
'
, ; ,r
_,
'L , r , _ I - & ! :
i , Cr I ,'- , Ir - r '
:
,: I : 1
I I- . II- , I I" I, , , , , r.,
. . I
, , II -rw. . . - , Ir , , , 3 r 1 I . ;I I r- -. . I1,
, , , 4' , - - I
-
,
,4 ,' , . z - C ) : L , , , I, , . r , , , , 4 , : _ , , , , _,; . rr r ,
= "
L ' _ I
, I ' " r I I r , - , 1,z , ., , : . I
.
, L ' , = - - ,
r I
-
, , ,: . .' , " I
, M
.
: . I - , ' . :- , , : r, . _ - I . . ,,
r :
r
--- , - I - I,- :, - - I, - I - I , , , r_' '
, ,,
L , , '
,. , 3, i .1-1,;I,I , I I,_,
% ,
', 11 ",
4 '
.,
, , - ,
I I-, rI , r : I ,t " :r ' I, ,' - _,I' - , , _ r , , " j . I
,
' L , -, _ " : . ,_ ' - -, ,:, I, i , , II4T _ lr, , , , -& . " :, , , I ,, II , . , , , , _ _ ,. ,.. , , ,_ "",, r , -, ,
-
, 4 , I - , ' 1 - , ,_ , , 1 , , , I 1 -1 r,I , , I - , - r,,. I ; _ rr.. I .1 I _ , I,__ ::iL-,-k,--,,Y
A, , ,
j I r', _ _ r ' - , 1: , , I- - r r ': ' , ' r I - " - : L', , ' , , "'. :; _t .' %: , , " "7 , , ,", ')
. . ..
I
-1I xll . . , . - , __, , , , , , , ,
,
I
, - ,. , , ., . . , , , r - , --- I r , Ir I, I, I '. I ,_1 11
L' ' , ,, " , r, , ,- ; , , ,.,
- : - -. : 'r, " . ' I r
. L & I
I- .1 . , J, , , " r , , r -,
, . , , ,, , - L
-
, , II , , 1 &, i -j r ' I" ' ' ' 4 . I , , ; , I-,' . , - - 'L, ', ' , m,- - , ,-" " ,'j, _'lj 1_ _" I r ­
4 ,
.1. r " . I -; , , " . , -, I -1 , , , 7,.; - 1 . " , ,- - , ,. , ". _ *,' ,
-'., ,_, r I , ,," r_ , , - , - I I , 'r: 4 " r' :' ._
j :
, , _- , r , ;, - , "' , - 'r ; I, ', I, r, ,,:, " -. ;' , , -, , 14 1,, I ,i, I II. 1,
, . , , , , ., ",- ,;,,_Ij , r , ."' ­
1,
I -
I
I ,: , .. ' - .r
r - , -
. :
, 1,. - llI- ,
- I , ., L
, ,
''
,
. - _ . L I -,-_r, I
, - r
, I ,
, ,
, , ,; r - - - '
-
"' :'-' ' "
_,;',",rj
'. . .... .I
'. ,. "
- 4.
-
'r , I ,, , , I 'I _, ; , . " ': ,",
7 ",; , ,i , I ",
," . " , , J r . ', , . .­
- -, : , " L I I I II ' .
r ' , ' , , , I, - - I _r , ,rp' !"",t ' ' , 4,
- ' , , - \, -. -
,,r_ , , :,r
. , I __
, , , 1,." I, , ', ; -1, , - I-" ,,
I I
r , , ,
-, , . " '-
_ ? ,
" _, . , _
1 I, , , , ', , t ':
- I
. - ' - ' -
, _- . - , ,
, :-i " : ;, , , 7",:;,, ,-, , - 'I, I L, _ , ,,
I ,,, !.r , , , , 1;, I l .
. r, i-
I , _ t ' r L, Z' ; , ", " r- , - -, " , . ' , , I ,r . , , , , It
,", , - " '_
, ,' " . , - , , ".", r,", - , , ,
-
- '.. - . ;
,
h
_., , . ! i3l - 'I- -"-- "
_
,*,
. , _
111'1,_,
., ," 4 - . , II
, .,
. , -1 -11V r I ., , I ' I ,4,., , ,-, ,,-
......", .
, , ," -,:r L'r ; _ , 24'.
, : -,
' ": : ,- ,
I ;
&,
r-(, ,
. , ''y
ll
, . ,r I, II I - ' "
- Z V %,gr I, .. ,:,-
'I- " . . '
,
"' _',"'
-. kI11
;, 1,
, 1 " j ,r , , , , , ,
.- - 1 " . . ,, 1 11 - 'l,
ll , AL , , I, I I I L"__ " ,
. '. . , il
, ". . , " - I I
I -
I­
.
-

11
1C
CONT. LIfJ OF POOR FAMILIES :8:
Housing
Irrigation Facilities Does land require further dcvelopmont
conditions
I
(Specify)
Poor • Good Yes No Ifow
Cropping
Pat tern
17 13 14 15

tIJ
1 __1
Uj
14'4
17)
C9 C)
0 C 0

Cs~
'F 'F ' I-,
'F
F'
~4
F F F 4"''''
'F'
- FF'' F" IF' F'FF"F
'F-F''>--'F''"',-FF "';' 44It:.~~'F~F-/IF~'F"44.,'F .pFF."F~"'~ -'F~' '~
--- "'F -4~ 'F' 'F
'-4 ''-''4'" ~rF~.FFF'FFFF'F4F.'F~F'F'FF.. .~'FF'FFF..' 'F I
""F~ -"'F'- ""'F''F,.F.F "F'" 'FF 'F'> ~""""'F" 'F'F-F'L..
F' 4
''Fl
0
0
'F
'F
'F'
-'
'F'FFF'.F'FF'F'F'FFFFF.F'FFF'~
'"F"-'"'FFFF'F 4 FF'F'F' . 'F''F''F'F-'-"F' .$ ~F
F F.~~'F.'F'FF''"F f'~F''"'F~F~iFF
4 ~
-' F

* WORKSHOP NPWN
*A FRWE;VE YEARPE I O
NaEime, of' the Planner-~-rJ
Area o'f WOrk Mt, ~ V1 1 ~~Ts SeiyTlka
(3 District)
NZEDS/PROBLEMS 1,CAL -Rt SCURCES/Str era~ , .,",
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ _7__ _ _ _,_
~cO~O1.ic __ _ _ __ _ _ __ A.__ _ _ ____7___ ___
£ ~tn
~-4EDUCAT IOINAL ~c 4
K4,
__________
-L Cc Lo -
Iir
"j~~*''4-44* >~4-f~- ~ $- ­

HEALTH
EDUCATIONA
H
~
E____LTH___
LNG-;TERM GOALS
~C
SHORT TE IRM GOALS TARGETS
"Y, II
EDUCALON~t~ -
4 ~ ~
k C-
En
__ cT4____
~C-LO'I

AY
.it'
I.-I
!I z w'l 111
~ : - j c
0, L ~ -~
< '~vI~f V4Ol
--- *'~~r ~ 4 ' 7LV
7 7a
kA j ' !'

I-)- o
-- 2, 44 U) ­
C)zt
P41-­
I~~
- -o~" t-
w -I.i-
0 402. VQ
~ ~ t*
-~~~~~~~~~~
~------ -~S­
0-~--*4~-
C:
to.-­
S~ - - ~ -- ~d- -
01
-L~A4~iW-44~I -20
P
0-
~p~--~-~ [
I
4-4 74,'
- ~ -~-~~-&-
I ED '
I >
oED0
~D
-I I~
gC.-r
PD
g~~~ 4
C>jI
t.~Y4
~Jv~
c)
I
-A
I I
01

.~ , ~Al
1 ~c
~ 7~~49 ~ . 9j
~~V4
Q) %o
I ra~o f
liY a O~44 0
I~- ~~- 4-4
(Y. -s E
C~I~
'1
~'~~r u
~hI ~l-'
H I t 1
~ 4 ~ 1
I~V)I 1
"SQ
j~ ~ ~I j
I U
ci
1 10 R 1 111 ORRI
A
I>

kr .
. f~ . . . .
1 ~~~I1, r
) 0 1
A!InC I- 00

CATHOL LECi
BOvi, ZON I -__
"
To aosin lelaCn
U-1;C I .
C~r~c~ CT", JIXL" iI
y< a c.losirfl sufficient copiea of Review formats to enabl9 you to
conuctthereview -; program.s'of, alt~yourie 6wringuor YLz a4al
year Ai 957~ off ectve Ocober I ,98.* nut~eIg~h
mu
~of these reviews
~pra
sBo'that'a seiu di tin'odsweaa enb
~

. Ration rates are followed.
1 2s
c. Account ,-,r fands gonerated from CRS programs is maintained on
Form D-5.
d. Mandays and food consumption reported on FORK FFW/3 (Stock
Register) tallies with the quarterly progruss report.
e. Approval is obtained for excess mandays or when the approved
project is changed.
f. Unfit food is reported on Form FFW/7.
g. Daily attendance regsters are maintained projectwise with total
quantities of food issued.
Responsibility to follow up for remedial action will be yours. On
completion of the reviews the distributors and project holders should
therefore be requested to send their cozments/replies direct to you
and not to our zonal office.
viith best wishes.
McD :EJS: rm
KI CELEL L. McDONALD
LIRXCTOR-BOMBAY ZONL.

APPENDIX G
CRS VIEWPOINT - THE CHARACTERISTICS OF AN
EFFECTIVE FFW PROGRAM
&
INHERENT PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS

CRS Viewpoint: The Characteristics of an Effective FFW Program
In institutionalizing a more long-term planning process, CRS
expects to change the composition of its FFW Program from one which is
dominated by isolated "lean season" activities to a program made up
largely of longer term community development projects, in which FFW
activities address development needs in a particular community or area
in a more focussed and integrated manner.
During the July 1, 1987 seminar the CRS representatives identified
the following characteristics of FFW assisted projects as those
contributing to a more developmental and community-based FFW program:
* Community participation in
- project identification
- selection of beneficiaries
- selection of recipients
- project site selection
- project management
- operation expenses and maintenance
The linkage of FFW-assisted projects to an overall community
development plan (A Holistic Approach).
FFW-assisted activities are part of a continuing process of
multiyear development plan implementation, and not isolated events.
Collaboration and integration with Government and other
organizations.
- capital Investment
- technical guidance
- training of field personnel (project holders, site
supervisors, educational component for FEW recipients)
Adequate infrastructure to manage the project.
- sufficient personnel
- quality personnel (having technical and development
skills)
* Clear criteria for project selection.
* Project success defined by project impact the
on
poorest of the poor.

The following characteristics of an ineffective FFW-assisted
project were also identified:
Projects with lack of participation by the community,
which can lead to jealousy and division within the
community.
* Inadequate complementary non-food resources.
* When employment overrides development objectives, e.g.
projects which are not needs-based in terms of assets,
but based on availability of food.
* Poor project monitoring and evaluation.
Inherent Program Constraints
The CRS FFW Program does face several inherent constraints, which
future program support will need to take into consideration.
The following constraints were identified as inherent constraints
to the FFW Program by CRS representatives during the July 1, 1987
semina r:
Selection of Consignees: Each Bishop of a diocese within the
Catholic Church in India selects the CRS consignees. This
selection process is outside of CRS control. CRS zonal
offices, however, -an "deselect" consignees if their
management performance is poor, or if they fail to submit FFW
Development Plans.
Proect Folder Selection (and their staff): Consignees select
project holders - a process which is also outside CRS's
control. As with consignees, however., the zonal offices can
"deselect" project holders if their ,roiect performance is
poor. In some instances, CRS zonal offices have recommended
that project holders be Included In a particular consignee
area.
* Transfer of Consirnees and Project Polders: Because of the
turnover of individuals in consignee and project holder roles
- due to transfers within the Church organization - CRS finds
it difficult at times to maIntain program ouality and
continut'. CPS sees its relationships with the Bishops as
essential in assuring good replacements in consignee
pos2 tions.
* Th~ VountarvNature ,
of the Program: The FF ' Program is
dependent to a large degree on voluntary assistance - from
site supervision, to transport for CRS monitoring and review
staff. CRS expectations of the FF' Program are constrained
by this program reality.

The Food Resource Itself: Food is a difficult resource to
program because of the logistics of getting It to the project
sire, and effectively managing its dispersal. Moreover,
because the beneficiaries are required to pay the transport
costs from consignee warehouses, it is difficult to target
the resource to the poorest of the poor.
The Strict Audit Requirements: The management of the program
is overly focussed on the next USC audit, at the expense of
project innovation. Program implementors are afraid to take
risks on new project types, preferring to stay with the
"safe" standard project types, e.g. wells, tanks and roads.
Food Habits of the People: The bulgar provided by the FFW
Program in India is not totally acceptable to people in some
areas. This constraint affects the ability of projects to
attract sufficient and productive workers.
AID/Washington sets the Dollar Ceiling: CRS has seen its FFW
planning process restricted by the setting of annual dollar
ceilings by AID Washington. Long-term planning, they say,
requires long-term commitments. CRS expects multiyear
program approval to ease the impact of this constraint on the
FFW Program.

APPENDIX H
BIIA & AEA FORMS

E~~r~t ~­ 0o-
r,; C4 CA E-tol
N- -4
(.4 0 c
c 0 C, 41
c c c C) -1­
c:,- 0 ~ Z
-~ ~ P
0­
-4777
Ct
!FSl
71

n4~ $4D
4(. 4'441 .4H.
i
.0(141
C~., -H
~~ j ~ H
~
C
~ ' 0
0-
D Pr
Si
I0-4
- rl ,
E-4 N--~V''4
-44
.(4
C-4 ~ ~ *'
4
1
NA~
-- -- ----

V' ,
A.OJECTMS 01'
j.o r~1~
T IrI(C
'i. To
:or fz~lr
o f fu t,*r n
FCOI1~
LVALUATC!
A1i~F1
nn~c~~~
Drj'cnt
C, I
pr,.$ ,cts. zro
~t1 ~~G
.? ~4, S
n
;R.PC3
MOW TORNG' !af1D
T
f, 'th ;cwoeta imapact of ood
tho~~s'iich. ,con%!bte
ectst o toapo
iii ~
z~~c,
~
of 7v%1 ~rr.
n.Io01Iur!~" a,2oii~ aOU, tho
onatf,! z lfrom theo oa'.
-Part's . an Tii ifcc n fc elnig
of futur~e~ ' -pol'i
CUIDELINES
n.BErrc1nv1~C~F lA.11'OVr AE14T1 AALYS!, a311A)~
- .docpflf5T)
IOR
rr
U
tW
the
ln
dev elomeftaI
success
a
asISt 5 ISI1 counter
and77Monitoring_.
arn eJ rri-,atic, t~zks, 6irlls, irrig?,tiof
1
,v
A Liijiiv'it efifL~~V
jC
be me.ie 'n cccFori.cA'trzns. ro
hosr.( i ' n : - cccczior.~ TCO'
/.e)a th~ objective is
c:A:o) d!tely2
roads, bridges,
c-r e,~ etc.,
;I ,Only' thr 'e t i ro-*Ed In' the PTD; T-23!C flItion repoarts
as c r.-ct&"J~l t,: J07 ut~. Therer sould
- 'beI a api of rZleast' one year bct e 'he &te o~f'evalution
an "d thT 6at - ,o:Ompielonof' P t'ojecL .'
:
ncThe cclc n .h, I - Int be incoroatec
iny 311A and tE! ~are4 inte7view/, obse.-aa Jfl end re~viewi of 'the
recorc :; relzt#r' to t1'c project.UT)rI p~ cztOf
-o 'form, together
~I'~r" ~r~,-'oresP, coTDolt~or.. rop.. L. *'mZ
'~C
-'.1
- 4'~- ~ith~
-involircmc.-t
~
'Li Seet
thec
I)-fi~.1? coeiz~ a f ,7Pnerve~ r th,
'of Ithc
umero ~-'hc numbere
'vj-liitV' ir, planiinr- znd Implemerition,
-vIr was is-isted~Ythb 7PP etc.
of
ft~ ci: ' to e valuatac': of
1*t.evaluated i-SS, P-1 cl~t tize 0--'he' ~ r
b ~ ~ ~ ~ v .'kJ-cho,e
\ TLJ~ he of
4
b,,, ~ -e ~ :..I~2 ~ ;~bi'n, 7 es sh't' ton
con,'- 07Z~e
at i th'- :c.-s,:., il*e.
A . 'the -!) 1-2c.. :1,
'- t:-~ 1) T. r 7?ndQ
v.1 0
isis.
1,o
- cc.~ Cr. _L:~k~
to bq :Irnc ,et hi z
'Identif.a*f~l n '
,: AI, '16'l
rA
~
fAv1
C
:
-CZ C, ni7.y1 j
6eI c t ,he type~
IV-alnc t on sil
-n
- -' - r ,
c
b-cl' t 7ti5: bte u,, o umvauae
aClr
all';
-
t
- *
_'
--,V­

-2­
for one unt specif ic deIstaIis a ny bo a oeId vl th
rnndom
more,,
soloction
looe
Is to be done,; ae-Ivt~a -larcer' nmbei th'an the
OCtUai: nuiber, required I t'~aOCc,,f any eventuallty
benclticla,
1ile
-being'
'the
not- avt ilablei,- 1'or rexaMPlO,: if the
,of evaluations
nwui ho
to be done In' throe, 'select sir, units on arandoma
basis,
I. Only minimum obtes, is ould~be taken down during the' Interview.
~The format~ ahould be'completed 'after t~e' Interview iz: over.'
~The responses ahou~) d be rcn:d. An' ths for:za inshr
sentoncos or phrases.
DIUA a AEA (,planation
Z on the questions)
Bakrun nomaIon
~to Vii Cel CoI1 Zfctory ~
(4* Plbcab.
In sonlto 1,/as o2f acrs~of. thils benefi'ciary vihere
:,ojc Cnst
CRS/BOIABAY 19528 3.013
P's~r 1 r'.
411 ndicto the cash equi,,iient of inll the Mptor1Ile and cash 1I piut~
m~dt by th c Zecnc fIcIarIas frc their El(10 tozicrds the asset,
cE_5.wood, stonns,K d min~straton/traznor cos'. paibyteanfci
1briclk cost of s)IIo lac-l ctbctebneii.y.~
Si. ind icate 'he cash input mcclc on the
V, p~roject fr *isourcessuch
asL banks, -rant iro-nG t ni~ vo-:te r~cnicl etc.
Ouirf'ut before and tfl,3r they 7rjJ -ct. In tha a,.- adicre luprovcmont
~4,~sn,'~~' r~p~C~ -- u'put in~' ' 1'ar';,t VaJU3, Tote:
Ixtt r- Ac jA
b4 I'' 3 tl
',!Ijf rknt' (Pt:r '4" >A-vc
kI M.elf~ o lnatoy1 44'44%',"4
iSonorr] I (1T- 4 boccnlotoc44aft--. tho. c a1 atf
I'/
n)
Unforsao '4 Qvtntrs if any 7,h IC.11 ffocto
s 0o t
thr
. frct:
I~~t~
rr
we~p100
!i Ic h ont.
d:-O~tz~
)uv @hd to a;i ecas s
tho Przj~ct.
ca.1
~4dO Y
"'4444
i

tIcall e ccolumn 1a to b~e used f or. e analysaIs, The subaquent.
I is coI umna 'will be for' subsoquent analyses'
Self *'exlanztory t er, New Irrigation, Wel Is
i'ndicate tihe numbor-of families directly' ben'ofittinuj from the 'primary
'urpose of' the asset., o3. ftor an IrriSatlin rmll Indicate, the' nuber
offamilies usinS the vwator for~Irri~atlon purpos5&, If tho abs&t
s;inct utilised as of the, date of viit, the rns-a wi 'I I be as 4.
ol~tr o .Tear prior.-t tha compl.ticn-of the-- project' -?6tall ':
!rrm Income + non-farm Incomeb. Fairm Income rotoas to-thf- total~ output
~'lefrom the total area cultiv'ated, 1nco~r,, f, - animals and birds
b3,the family. 11on-farnm income refers to Income from trades, wages'~
cnn~'by the, fanily m~embers through *io lhinr outside : he faily
ctc. In the case~ of , community projects. ~7, Is~used. ni~
th~e Income, of -th t?.~oscho2 d of ~th bn:fiary Itr'iewed. For
cotuiy"rJt1l~~s and corimunit~ centrcs, wvhiee AIEA Is
usd niaetei~rnmt avsr?,go Incc, i f &houiseold In' the
-bentficlary commrunityx~
Total 'of cash Input by_ bonefIciary &~n~d cpsri equivalont cf material
i-'ade available 'by beneficiary.~KIn case of :cmmunity projects, Indicate
Cash i~npu~t from~ bankcs, -ot agencies,~ voluntry 3 aptncl3s etc.
State the reason for sactinr, the boneficx.a.y for" this, project, 'eg,-
I), Commnunity, discussed and decided or tho ned 4
ii) ~ Tho beneficiary applied f or, this project-~'
II IThe cor~mittee' rocom~ie~dd the tbeitficlary
Iv Abll~t7 oMe' th 7Adminstration .:st of Rls. .....
InIz uicte wh md theisio o selection. 'Resnonsas 'ill be any
of the followin-t The commiity , thc' COomittoo. the beneficiary,
the. project-'holder, project holder's, rop.-asontzyo- It the Comm-naity
or, a' group in the community Is 'tha bihasficla.7 an: If the 'docision
ms ade by them, 'indicati the responsue as comuiy
InTd crt2 o Tias primrrily 3responsible for sunevic~nG thp Implementntion
of the projfrci Project 'holder,4iroet oldrs rprsttaivc,~
communIt !l'eadoT. benef iciar -y.
. ,ncicae :7arefrmt ul,/fro h lberf.clarT 4housolods, rXal Iy
fro outside bonoficlary households,~'lot7. -fror. b~nofe lr hcisenolds,
mostly -from oqtzldc ben- iiIarj1 oiisolds. 7
ittr se lcoiplet*', (pucca) orinopet
con4 lot." or Icmnoc
.tza :s),nef
r WI only one Iput tQY/*Tds ,ho:competo 3,Oanlasset In aet
Iytpos of poets, rr caWn creato ony it*-a asset~and In
Un thz I~asct# ot-her Inputs &x xarztarcd Tho fintovi
Is the beneficiary: doin ~periodic repair of the rsetIdcaea
poperl, do'ne. or',ot don proarly, o not doflI atal
so rfi use, o h asr or

ut lfood, or. 'Partly utlauod or not utils
victor' Lroi
I
e all Is tso for ratlnS
or
the
-whrothor
:nay 16utm possible
i he land
acreage,
lovolled is fully CUltIV1ated o0 ih ot
3o~cntutdi
her
occunisd.
the,
ror o;.a-plo, Lf iso t he date-'of
ovau~ton,~ji a~r fom o ou a uo~tutillsad:
at all
ifor
~Indicae
Gatision
as3' rio utl) food
15, Total choncod ou: aluot num'br of acres' Improved, p~a
16. Indic~tO the chan.,o affected~ on besfIc ary as, a rosuit -oftho 'ams
Lor c;:asmpln I) A~dditional crop taj~oin, Z) PLurchaso of )Umps~t.
3) Us1o of fcrtills:Ths larger savln-is. 5) purchase of addtlnal
?Issq o uch a:'
17, c~i1f~ oter horyma any 56 ~ftQo 0 a munity o
' the es ot?(0P~I~ '~ rz,-ardin thq1 distribution of the lco term,
Qocc ' 1 t' comminityQowns an~d uses' the nssat ~­
2) t ?09or Croup of. persn In hc=m it owsadue
thes~ srot~ty inPh o,
--~ 3) tmlIa n 3rou: f. r~ccplo, or th, enie'commt
k nltiatoL n3, com to
tforts, such, sc.-Crc~t,yso Otc.
9. No. -4of timos this bozficlor? ,azs assisted fcr vrroL-s activities
thr-wah 17Z?W a3'con tho dntt of Visit, 6ncludinC this 'nroject, ­
0,D:s the b~neticlary~ nlan to npproach thio p.-coct holder for furthcr
~~4I assistance or~has~ be done? Ifso,~for wvhet' acti viy? ­ -
11o 1O-2O0 can ba, raoripic by
rt~talin:d hy the ' projzct Iioldcr
thcjl, In
tho ;j~v procOcss­
-hoo bo
C.~ ~ -
rovfc,7tin-, tho list of
for
boinoUiaIoj
ytlons~h nojccts comploted, or
C35btho-concoio
0~ 1' b un er
7.At Cthe ts' cr of -hcjcjoa on thon~ oftou_ izl h
Is.;ccnrr )--I sulo isr cc

'Pach~round Iformaticn
*,~ Cunsigno Cora 110,~
1:~ Awl-_111-1_1_1__1ITIAj
DIH~'CIAfyIHI E 11,IPROV.if!:1- ANALYSIS,
* J'ii~Date Projoct bc.an~________ C(p~ 1 d___________
I1,amo of the lnfcay______________
~V.< Nnbcr of fa-ail~y riomt Irs
Vi. Proj-ct loce!rjn for this bDn4i cy _______
~~~ u o of mandu~y, ugd for this
*~~~u jjj fubor< of~acrc, im'rvo !~or~ h~bnfc~r
Cost~
*

Ai Aft ho rojocc'
ill. Chanced coutnut
~-.v.. Fctors~ cthor
Gonera) -
rVaa u~nt~ Vuo Total1 fla.i,
~in. Units imuflf
-
~~~~AL
valiv )n-Ota AC':t2t "t Iu: ~ a
R-. _________
u'u valuo
than 1T1~.7 ihich contribut'd~ '~o utP tq difiorcnco.
IUnique featurC. !lssons loOarntd froma this
j&3ofthe -crs-.ns lntcrvierd
C7 THC W';I!<
DAT AAA -7
41
1-Ojoct.A
< A
1l44.4~~ 1, y ST4~1

Dakrmu Ifrtion
±. d I nf t'ro r. ba \'1~
v
vi~~ ~r t of
V
;:IA I'l
~~ATUC~L!.
/T 77TIVlIZ$ ANJAW:
!-ej~. ,r

APPENDIX I
INDORE DIOCESAN FIVE YEAR PLAN

I i.t$jl 1 AWAI
CATIHOLIC DIOCESE OF. INDOI E
'owA .7 IIP;T1rr7r. NIA7 PI 12 CT. or. 7S,,,09, 11.411r. y rAA 6__0fcM Imic -ac P A-III.
AI.11UA , 7I1 I~r SMA0O77 1 03 '7illo.o. 7I7I"1 00 7 l..
ROC-RAMMf. I
77. ,321M.7., I, I" D1107AAU7i71 09 cl -tS7 .. 5
lt11.7M2 I 36 1lotalI . - 47.
Cc'ai :s~ (, :f F7',.-Jos F-p y Ov flY-i- t. Ca c b aC L C 19710,AtAJ O
() (2) (3) ()
(
,,, ) (e) __ 60,7:c "Mn7 T C1.7 t
COALS I LUKIO7176 Ofli.C71770 I SA0nT IE77U 7AnCryS ACTIVITY/ Ion1.AME ~ sari7,77.r nitu / CO MIA (7) CLE,7177. 7..7S0 (8) COS F0ilms (9) 771700 s OTHERS
(10
I C 0 II LI C
, .V I I . I I .­
1'od. ct1.71, thyougI
.7., Co..r..tlo.. 1500 cr.. P,'c.l7tlnn so,.-o* 6l...l 20 7.n.k 10.00,000 70,J00 b. 15,00,000/- h. 5,00.000/- Yr-,. Catholl
TIr7 hrr .. *.d r hTI. P od .. D I c of Irdor ..
77 7l,.; I IObl.
I .15.00,O00/- fro Beneficil
by ..y of land 91-'..
Irr. 11-. W-11.
--700 ino *nd -li St...in.
S Y..s y.,0
600 Vt..1. 4,12,000 45,000 Ib. ,0,00 --
o nlng 750 -..
/-
"'""'00.0 /-
I &RIT /
00.. CA
175ISMO for at...7nV 150 .
&.60,.0.000/. Tr- (o r. ,l
*fnd 8,okg for t.. n Ig 200
2700 c- Do-prnlog Old -. 9770 '7.17. 3,24,000 26,00M b. 6,75.O00/- .- b..5o.o0,of/- Fr. Govro..no
.77*, lll.LI.ng oI,* and
.177 1. 7. .77 or 70 .!c t drnil. r orI' I :! id% 7j ll0.7
bl
rofs.a
9 r t.. 9 000 -. 11.
"7.22t00O 0 /- for I.(15 0 1 ."q.'.e rI 7 b .nrll
o .. nlrg 250 -. 1 . e. they d... ,.d
Soil C.ons t7t.. 2000 -ooes L.nd L o Ill g. 5ye r . 50 k. . uodd 5,00,000 50,000 1 L . 2.00.000/- Fro a..rll.
0n.,o7hT.r,.relg,
0,uod EL~A ril.
by .. y of 0toolf . ld pl*.
Crorr llon of EcologIcal 200 -ores lintInq i,.. . 5 enrr . 477.777 Trr. 60,000 6,000 N I L la 40.000/. ' Yr. Chtr
IobIonoes Folder i-oIa..o.,l 20 oolol fo~ddr
oA-7ai1abIe foctume
O'qoI..lltl..
b.. 40.000/- T-r G..v-o..
(p-lol g t...)

GrJKN41C. SrL ttly'ttJf1
1*rlcI~~~ocy.1no,
1j1.1 lt.I.
i'll.?.'
Solart .. t"
a~~~~~~L
*Y~it..yar
T
/0Jn.
12 Um .1U.tno-- is.
CS AMIAYS (7) DLWF WMLIAYS () o
--it5
()Fuo
* erps ()
Ot3"I./ l]t,.
(7)II0L
b. 3.00,000/.
h- 6.0-.000/. G".o.n ! oal
10,000 N.1.
00AF..IIg IIog*
V00I 50000a~ .II
I00. 20,0-0
000 j II I L000
.. 3000NII 0000/..
00.0.,.
b.0- 0o/.
*O.nt . ob
t S.1,
50 ..1.
Ad I1l.... Inc- t -o 911.1 b. 0. o /. Fr..
T..IIId 0 0
*dn O 50 5.otii 00 bl-.gt-L66
.0000 20,0000/.. Lo~- .0
Lan
raloat
H1.r0 II,0*,*0
8 20.000
g40 .no a .l.... ..
5 -. -. I . t b l t . 1 0
0..
0 0 o g
0.nlnq~~
a0o . ) I . I r
~ .
f ~1cno.I.-
7h..k
-
. .- ~ 0b . d
43 , 000
*0 1000 0 ,00050/
10.
*noot.
0 0
1ILa 0 L
X~ I L 00*
.. P. t'
15, ~ ~ .~ ~~n~~. .0
h. 5*
II 00L 60 3
yo00/
200 I.5.00,O0O/.
&'
C~oonI
5.00,000/-
.. notr.1
,01
0
n ~ ~C, ...
f a n l l t y 0non Cotbo1lo Olo...
':c; 100 .. 11.
1
2d,.
0 l b ,.. 4100 , 000 1.0 0 , 0 0 &.2 0 , 00 0O0/ _. T * r .. b -20 1 0 - 0 0/ -. ft t .rf . l. nd
F'r~~~~r-'t~h I 1ply n . 0-,00,000/. r~ 0
I Srono. t.C.If0 400, r.. 450 Fans 27,000 1 LL -12.W - F. -. _
- b. 6- 1,--d/.
t.
0 noo,..n
2. Cn~tranjn, .o *onl Ion I00 ',:dnd.n. 11 .nnbn m I qnortnt., .
*O
nl
Itdrr.,-t. I.., al.-35%, L.nd j1 2-21
0 1 0 odn 0 0...0
200 f.ll'g.. 0.11,.d9.
1
00 l .1..dl.. Ifd
30001,0
DeftAvailable Document
f-adt. I.

to) C) 1 4)
o r(6) 63 AJYS C) n 'MA IWI0I;) 1fi
OUOILn t LCOMITOII OIJrCTIln3 I SIK031?MhIN TANOFI ACTIlPIIl/ t( AO IIITOAILu O001.9 I00111OUCW / __1111E_____ I AJIDAYS(0) CRS FUN~S (Ept)f. F
Iwg~olAI. .- o,. of Itl lOOy. I1osiil F-o131til o oroi,,.i. , 5 r.... 100
l0.1ti- .BE 0./oo , - .42~o/. Prh~~ q.p.o
9o0 1- h. tol.. fro. Poloot. 00 *.
Itost 5:1So I 1. f.o~ot13 of 6.16,0,1 13 2500 1I.,t,o. ho.toloo. mth
11- 0l . - 5 .. 000.....'eOtO00-
200f.o L I2500/- - To p.,oo... .BOo0. r.*SPT o
1.5 1- .rr-l 1
rm1IS r
5-00o fr
30 .... dde d op-oo
N
ft.600.000/.. ForComo ct.,oI II. .00.000..D From1 th6.4..~ to *ooo
9.2t.~ zb... 2.0.0
oo~.I: L. 5
10.0 L.4.
.jl.Io.
... n c y If. 10N- 0... t00 op fof . I- .ItI60 n 2.40.00
I L 6. 200.040.. of Fro. lodor6
Ct
0 DIoo..
Church 1.0d 1 4
ol .Iq
.,o
.*11007 on..IO.00 t-:e: to
o
1ohonitng Skill.. 2000 Pp.
0 '
00 I0.... l1oo.I
I.
trIIc
'1 ro. , A;1lool .d ",, -
2.o000 ~ 00.' ,0tolno too I.'Ii?0.y. L.0 6.50, / .. For tOoot.Ig 11. 1,50,000.Fo or..6.4 n
07. C-oyno~.6Ioo..12.10.25
II~briy, . 30.000 sfo.ohr*OnI.
14-F-' 5Ioo 1351 t7olol00 7.100 dIoOd U.' 1.pl o. .ooo.. 2.00.000/. Tor P0.".06 for
L7 F.011, .01,0.
ordI C"I 116 O CoS, b .o"f9
1- 1. Vil.l~...i. Iroo.. Lif. .. portor ... y I009 Io t-.tio. 0- -in a rol W- -1 5 .... ~ 10.000 ,hild ItIL IL. 11 1L 6.5 000/- F,.gooool,
*4..too 54. Do.cn PrIl a aUt-.qot04
senittosn Loyronr
~Io..
. r. tooLlo..
I20Lo
00000. ?
GO.... .~rLo ...... .0 .0~ot ,1 t 000 IslotborSO/
oro L~ 20-.- /
od~~o~tl2 200~,, g 6 .1 6 0, . hO.o.j6
00
F or *'e..l. .-do
o . 4.00.Po.C *thc...froj~
L3/lrIE L- 6.d
H0It pI.... noato
11o, o 1.o0 .o lot.e LI.ud -1 .t~rl b* 1150 0 Flom600100.. a..
t.Iht. 2.1..o~ 1 100
CooI-60 fo. . .0ItoL ILa. .w,.o. 6." boldlg 1-0.oo... ...
-oot o I,,olt'o for 60.1I I'*111.00
Coof.... Il..Ith~l It"11 *o~I ho r,I 1 to0 2.10 6. . 6-.
T~A-ya-11ble Dcci rnen!
.h b-~20--0/- Lood pl1- by h
b

T.' ALL II 147 OIICJCA.' LIF. E ,pboncy
l n. tIItIon,
.o n n.llF r.h, ln o , 1. h6,DUh 0 01 7
F,.ose 7.IUY
o builS 6 -- mo It y
h e ttr..r
I. I oAld 6 *no- nll
y he. I th
0-
06 W I L
co ugOnmns
----
(i)
Ft* Io (to)
f~Leite S I1k~~t. ...
L h. 6,00.000/_.. b 6.00-000/ Fe. MIOIERECRend
77.1p 20 3O1 Centgoo. To F.d..ll
n lr-.tnl and r
S .porrc 20 $01 rthn,... I I L
"0/. b. 4000.
Idln-.0n,..I
Trh
l
Vl~l°Y lllg;
. Fog. ,.
l 200 Y.I.lI
I I L II I L Food nd Acn t .
0/. Frt
k"rU
50.000/. T.­
1-1e r udi-
-obile i -'lt. tl
6 lblil -dl,.il
PO'noe n I i *~l l l .
.nIt- -th
. t o s o.s
5 V*''s 6ontrbution.
rnto
t b i l e *m i l 60
-Jr 60
1*0 0000 o
ii
It I L N L ft. 3 .0,000/. To ewer
""0.. -. 20dy II.i- ..
2.00000/. 0.
h12.
0 00/- 0 Far.Iar­
to ~
Source;
(200-100.1'2.1) 521 lcel
0 be020lghi.d g b. l l
of -dll... ni-et onEllI . C.the]l
0
OrlfoA not ,r 00 d "loio"get
.itl
, .02ll
h l
lerp .,l .Incgel
Ung 'l.*r
5 F'ble Gae drlohu..
7
c
-nte.
2oqole*000*"04
O1..00,000.
50,000.
loci*iby l
inoltate tlot
c-L.unity.
0 000/- I'
de. elnd
m,
by
-oe.
I(IOAL34.139,600 2.60,.200 s,1.62.05.000/_
L
-.