(PDF, 101 mb) - USAID

- :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.