External Evaluation of the Community Development Project (DECO)

Background

The Community Development Project (DECO)'s development objective is: "To contribute to the empowerment of poor and marginal groups, giving them back hope and opportunity to build their future and demonstrating in this way that God's love and justice are equal for everyone." To reach this objective the project is structured in Lines of Action and Axes of Work, terms that are defined as follows:

Lines of Action.- These are the areas where the project will focus its efforts, with the purpose to reach the project's proposed objectives. They are: Education Development Line; Churches Development Line; and Disabled' Line.

Axes of Work.- These are cross cutting areas, meaning that they participate in all the Lines of Action. They are: Community Organization; Health and Social Relations; and Family economics.

Purpose/objective

The last external evaluation of this project was done in 2003. Thus, because three years have already elapsed, it is necessary to provide updated information on the project's progress and impact.

Methodology

An important aspect of the methodology has been the high participation of MAN-E's personnel and of beneficiaries through interviews and workshops.

Key findings

In the target areas the Project works with "Counterpart Groups." A "Counterpart Group" is composed of a formal institution, which can be an Education Center or a Church, and committees or commissions organized by the beneficiary population and composed in its majority of parents. Currently, the Project is working with 15 Education Centers and 13 churches. The objective is that by the end of the project, it will work with 30 Education centers and 30 churches. Since 2004, of the 15 Education centers only 4 are new and of the 13 churches 6 are new. The fundamental remaining question is whether the project will be able to include 15 new schools and 17 new churches in the little more than 3 years that remain of the project. There are no operational plans to reach these goals that do not seem very realistic.

The beneficiary survey showed a very high appreciation of the positive impacts. Concerning infrastructures and equipment in the education line, 76% of parents and 64% of directors and teachers graded the impacts as high. The same figure was 63% for ministers and leaders. In the disabled' line, the appreciation of impacts was much less favorable, 40% for the parents and only 9% for the personnel, from which 91% graded the impact as medium. In the educational training activities, 74% of the parents and 50% of the directors and instructors graded the impacts as high. The same figure for ministers and leaders was 68%.

The sustainability of infrastructures and training results is not well guaranteed.

The beneficiaries have confirmed the project's relevance and pertinence, with observations on different training activities, in particular for teachers and parents, which should be strengthened in order to improve quality of children's education. The disabled line is very relevant for the region, but it is questionable if these social assisting activities are pertinent for an integral development project. In summary, the project's objectives continue to be valid and of interest in relation to the regions' situation of MAN-E's target population.

The project's methodology reflects the region's social complexity and the fact that there are no organizations with solid and permanent foundations, which the project can work with. The methodology for planning and execution is very participatory.

Recommendations

For the education line it was recommended:
• To keep current focus with "new" centers (infrastructure / equipment, educational training)
• To strengthen in-classroom educational training at established centers
• To take greater advantage of resources from the Group of Directors in order to strengthen the line and assure transference of experiences
• To continue parental educational training to support the aforementioned processes
• To discontinue technical educational training on household economy in schools and high schools
• To support handicraft centers
• To strengthen activities for children's health
• To strengthen cooperation with health centers
• To incorporate the church into activities of preventive health and family relations for adults and families
• To concentrate activities for community organization with committees and commissions from the education center

For the disabled line it was recommended:
• To clarify this line's prospects (This line corresponds to action more related to social assistance than to community development)
• To decide what will happen with the two current centers based on what has been previously described
• To discontinue the technical educational training on household economy
• To strengthen activities for children's health
• To discontinue activities for health and family relationships for adults and families
• To strengthen parent associations

For the churches line it was recommended:
• To strengthen strategies for community involvement
• To apply better strategies for a) incorporating new churches into the project (when they exist in the region and they are new), and b) for managing the termination process of other churches.
• To strengthen and enlarge the implementation of the household economy axis
• To strengthen activities for adults' preventive health
• To strengthen family relations
• To strengthen cooperation with education and health centers
• To motivate participation of head churches with health brigades
• To strengthen activities of community organization at the church level, in order for community leaders to get educational training and replicate knowledge of community organization in fields associated with the project or to the community.