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