(PDF, 101 mb) - USAID
(PDF, 101 mb) - USAID
(PDF, 101 mb) - USAID
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
- : 33: <br />
levels, including some recipients themselves. From those<br />
discussions, it appeared that recipients were:<br />
- those who are known to the beneficiaries and<br />
- those who want work (e.g. daily wage earners).<br />
The exact nu<strong>mb</strong>er of recipients on a project is generaily<br />
left to the discretion of either the individual beneficiary, or<br />
the project organizer. For example, the project could employ<br />
100 recipients for 6 weeks, or 50 recipients for 12 weeks.<br />
It is an observation of the team that landless labourers<br />
are common recipients in these programs. In many cases,<br />
particularly in community projects, the beneficiaries<br />
themselves were also found to be FFW recipients. In some<br />
cases, parish priests as project holders have also set up<br />
village committees which select recipients on the basis of<br />
their being "the neediest".<br />
Here again, from the sample studied by this team, there<br />
did not appear to be any religious bias in the selection of the<br />
recipients.<br />
4.10 Strengths and Weaknesses<br />
Based on the above sample study, the evaluation team has<br />
been able to identify certain strengths and weaknesses of the<br />
selection process, which are discussed below:<br />
St rengtls<br />
Consignee Control of Project Selection: Addressing<br />
Community Needs. Given the fact that Consignees are able to<br />
influence the selection of projects, there is more assurance<br />
that comunity-based needs will be addressed. Where Consignees<br />
have stipulated that only community projects will be approved,<br />
they are in a position to reject projects which are not<br />
,ommunity oriented. This process Is serving to communicate to<br />
project holders that they should propuse only community<br />
projects for considerition.<br />
Against this backgrund, the PM&E Grant appeonrs to have<br />
stimulated greatu-r dialogue between CRS and conslgnees/pjroject<br />
holders witlh a view to exploring ways and means of designing<br />
Community Projects.<br />
Where the CRS zonal office (e.g., Bo<strong>mb</strong>ay) has developed<br />
policy guidelines advocating long-term planning for achieving<br />
community-based targets, the consignees appear to have had no<br />
difficulty in accepting this additional responsibility.
Change language