Evaluation of ‘Reconciliation, Peace and Development in the North and the East’(2001-2004)

Background

The aim of 'Reconciliation, Peace and Development in the North and the East' (RPDNE) is to contribute to the peace building process of the country (Sri Lanka) by attaining reconciliation and peace through sustainable socio-economic development. The objectives of the project are to provide:
- Peace and Human security (by convincing stakeholders of the importance of working and contributing towards everlasting peace, which in turn will insure the security of human life).
- Food security (by assisting and training farmers in eco-friendly methods of agriculture and farming systems).
- Health security (by creating awareness of the importance of cleanliness and basic sanitation, as well as preventive measures in order to prevent infective diseases, while stressing the importance and effectiveness of indigenous healing methods.

It has been unclear how far progress has been made to achieve these objectives and goal, as qualitative impacts have not been documented properly.

Purpose/objective

- To provide sufficient analysis of the results [relevance of the project in relation to the context, effectiveness and impacts of the project] achieved by CfHD through implementation of the project Reconciliation, Peace & Development in North & East (RPDNE).
- To assess the efficiency of the organization.
- Based on this information to recommend the necessary changes need to be made in the project and for the organizational development.

Methodology

The methodology was to interview a cross section of the stakeholders of the project in each district and to visit at least one village per district. Staff meetings were held in each district, and all district staff met at the CfHD head Office in Tholangamuwa for a debriefing on the findings of this evaluation. Meetings were also held with Head office staff and the Members of the Board. The meetings were carried out in a consultative & participatory manner. All available documentation in the four project districts and at the CfHD head office has been taken into consideration. CfHD was in charge of logistics and was represented right throughout the evaluation, which enabled continuous interaction.

The following stake holders were included;
- Non Governmental Organisation's (NGO).
- Community Based Organisation's (CBO).
- District and Divisional Secretariat Officers (DS).
- Grama Sevaka Niladari's (GSN).
- Farmers.
- Ayurvedic medical practitioners.

Key findings

- The project's objectives are relevant and should be supported.
- Some institutional weaknesses were identified, including need for capacity building in particular in the district offices, which are implementing most of the activities.
- The monitoring system is weak, too much depending on individuals.
- Various minor weaknesses identified in the technical implementation.

Recommendations

1. Improve monitoring systems, some of which are;
- Regular documentation kept at the field level.
- More frequent monitoring from the head quarter and more staff capacity building.
- Improve planning procedures and coordination between staff of different ethnic groups.
2. The project should include micro finance element to address economic problems of the beneficiaries.
3. Review district strategy regularly and make appropriate changes in concurrence to district needs.
4. Review staff performance, delegate responsibilities.
5. Improve financial accounting and reporting system. Introduce a computerised accounting package to facilitate this.

Comments from the organisation

Many different changes have been implemented in 2004-2005 as a result of the evaluation, which DF sees as significant improvements of the institution. See last part of the executive summary for more details.

Any evaluation is produced within a very limited framework with regards to the composition of the evaluation team, its time available, its access to information and how it analyses the information received. Furthermore, any social reality can be analysed and presented in many different ways, among which an evaluation represents only one. Hence while this evaluation report may be useful as a tool for general learning, it has limited value as a source of information about the particular projects and partners in question. We urge any reader do consult the partners involved or Development Fund before applying this information in a way that may affect the partners and the project.