Food Security and Income Generation End of Country Program (Strategy) Evaluation

Background:
Plan Zambia is implementing a Child Survival Project in with support of Plan Norway and funded by NORAD. The program is part of the Framework Agreement (2008-2010) Agreement reference number: GLO 0742 – GLO 07/385. One of the components of this program is empowerment of particularly women for income and livelihood security, a sub set of the Child Survival Program under the Enterprise development & Water & Sanitation Intervention. The Child Survival Program is thus linked to the Food Security and Income Generation Program in as far as the latter connects to enhancement of income and food security for ultimate goal of supporting the nutritional needs of under five children. The Plan Zambia Country Program on Food Security and Income Generation Program (2004-2009) therefore contributed to realisation of the nutrition needs of children and their families.

This evaluation summary will however focus on only the findings and recommendations of the program components that directly relate to the relevant objectives of The Child Survival Program namely: strengthening household economic security through enterprise development and access to microfinance services. The key feature of this program was to contribute to improved incomes and household food security, with desired aim to fight malnutrition amongst under five children. The key components of the Food Security Country program include the following: Livestock Production, Seed Multiplication and Crop Production, Irrigation and Horticulture Promotion, Own Savings for Asset and Wealth Creation (OSAWE) – Micro Finance, Alternative Livelihoods promoting food preservation, processing and preparation.

Purpose/objective:
The purpose of the evaluation was to provide Plan, its partners and stakeholders an assessment of the extent to which the objectives of the program have been achieved. It is also meant to inform the development of the next program cycle. The evaluation critically reviewed the program and its activities that have been implemented since 2004 for their Report of the Evaluation of the Food Security and Income Generation Program relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact in relation to the issues that were identified and its set objectives. Specifically the Evaluation ascertains the extent to which the program goal has been achieved.

Methodology:
The evaluation used document review / desk study which among other things included review of program documents and field work which involved conducting of semi structured interviews and focus group discussions with selected stakeholders to this project e.g. Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC), Child Headed Households, Female Headed Households, Aged People Headed Households and Households of people with disabilities and those affected by HIV/AIDS among others.  The evaluation covered 48 communities from all the 4 Program Units of Plan Zambia namely: Chadiza, Chibombo, Mansa and Mazabuka.

Key findings:

1. Use of Plan’s Rights Based Approach to development - the Community Child Centred Development Approach in some ways contributed to enhancing community participation and ownership. Children, youths and women are increasingly actively participating in community life and a number now hold key positions in community decision making / leadership positions.
2. The various project interventions contributed to the meeting of the food and nutrition security of children and their families. For instance the milk from farm animals was used to feed baby orphans and children of young mothers who had initially dropped out of school but had to return to school while their babies were left in the care of the girls’ parents. Similarly fruits and vegetables added to the diets that benefited the children. The fact that the project promoted different high value / protein foods also contributed to food diversity available for children e.g. groundnuts, soybeans, honey and other legumes for instance.
3. Access to micro finance through OSAWE is concluded to have contributed to increased incomes particularly for women who were involved and used the proceeds for household welfare including food and school requirements for their children.
4. The evaluation further observes that the food processing and preservation groups have also been instrumental in supporting  and teaching other women who have malnourished children on how they can diversify and prepare nutritious meals for their children and families.

Recommendations:

1. Plan is encouraged to promote bulk selling amongst rural farmers to enhance their capacity to access more lucrative markets while they share the transport cost burden among other benefits.
2. While stat up grants for most projects are fine, Plan is encouraged to introduce more cost transfer measures to communities in order to ensure more long term sustainability of such projects.
3. The government should be pressed to do its part in e.g. constructing more deep tanks which in essence would also help to increase livestock disease control to poor farmers and in the long term contribute to more profitable livestock production.
4. The evaluation finds that the type of bee keeping promoted by Plan is both profitable and low cost and also contributes to countering deforestation caused by the more traditional forms of bee keeping. As such the evaluation encourages Plan to promote more of this type of intervention.

Comments from the organisation, if any:

1. While the evaluation notes that the food security project contributed to decrease in incidence of malnutrition on children (e.g see p49/110 para 1, p53/110 para 1 etc), we acknowledge that this is based on qualitative inquiry through e.g. focus group discussions and interviews with the communities and other stakeholders but is no way substantiated by any scientific measures to prove this trend. The limitations to quantitative findings were already highlighted in the report.
2. The fact that households have been able to diversify their food can on its face value be considered a positive move towards meeting the dietary needs of children, however we are also aware of the intra household food distribution that takes place as part of some cultural values and we are hoping that the gender component would also in some ways try to address these e.g. the practice of first and best serving allocated to men in the households before women and children would need to be confronted by the concerned households. This is why nutrition outcome indicator is still a good long term measure for assessing effectiveness of such interventions, nevertheless we are also aware that such measures could be complex and time consuming.
3. The persistent use of terminology of Vulnerable but Viable people is somewhat strange and does not seem to have a good grounding in Human Rights Language. We however, consider this to be a challenge in expression than a consideration that other people are not viable. It seems that the conclusion is based on viability of the respective undertakings than on the persons involved. (e.g. see p 42/100, 8.2.7)
4. We hope that use of animal power to work the fields would somehow in the long term, contribute to relieving of child labour on farms, on the assumption that the children themselves are not vested with the responsibility of drawing the farm animals at expense of their education and health e.g. as was observed in our other study submitted on child cattle herding.