Evaluation of Livestock and Range Development Project Gash-Barka

Background

The Livestock and Range Development Project Gash-Barka has been under implementation since 2001 in the Gash-Barka Administrative Region. It was planned to start in 1997 but it was delayed due to policy changes governing NGOs in Eritrea. However, immediately after commencement of implementation in the year of 2000, it was further postponed until 2001 due to the Eritro-Ethiopia war. The project was financed by the Development Fund (DF) and implemented by the MoA, Gash-Barka Region. The project implementation was planned to consist of two phases, each lasting 5 years. Phase I was to end by December 2004 and phase II to begin in January 2005.

Purpose/objective

DF required an evaluation of phase I prior to the start of phase II which is the purpose for this mid-term evaluation report. The purpose of the evaluation was to assess project performance during phase I at all levels as compared to what was planned; to assess project organization and management; to examine the validity of the present project strategy design; impact; and sustainability issues and to produce recommendations, in order to enable collaborative decision about adjusting the project's direction and approach in phase II.

Methodology

To satisfy the requirements of the standard evaluation, in accordance with the TOR, the approach taken for the study was by forming a multidisciplinary team and by involving the partners as much as possible and in particular the beneficiaries, the donor and the project authorities. The methodology involved several steps which were outlined as the study plan based on the ToR and the objectives and scope of the evaluation.

Key findings

The various project components had specific objectives to increase incomes, improve access to clean water for livestock and humans, and to improve livestock productivity and institutional capacity. The project plans (purposes, outputs and activities) anticipated to be achieved, up to the time of evaluation, had been achieved for the most part. In some components (e.g. water, camel, donkey, poultry, and dairy goat), the expected results were reasonably satisfactory. In others (e.g. rangeland, veterinary and institutional capacity), achievement was in process.

The factors that influenced the variations in the level of achievements by the different components were largely due to the differences in the intervention logics taken or the strategy design and its nature. The factors that had a positive influence, in at least some of the components, included the good commitment by the partners in general and in particular the active role and acceptance of the beneficiaries, in particular women, of their priority needs. The factor that had a negative influence was the poor capacity of the project organization, such as the unfavorable implementation environment such as lack of personnel.

Recommendations

Recommendations included some of the following:
- Project organization and management: The project management capacity should be systematically upgraded, and there must be a viable organization and structure with adequate personnel and material resources to carry-out the functions at the required standard level. It would be advisable to provide technical assistance to train personnel on technical and managerial matters.
- Veterinary service component: The two veterinary stations must be improved by equipping and improving the facilities and by providing personnel. The health delivery system must be improved to allow adequate access for farmers.
- Poultry component: The poultry feed problem must be addressed as soon as possible. The technical skills of the women beneficiaries should be upgraded through frequent and quality training.
- Dairy goat component: It is the most relevant component for the communities in the project area, but it has strategy design problems. Special attention should be given to improve this.
- Rangeland component: Rangeland development has high priority in the project area and it deserves adequate attention if the livelihood of the population is to be changed fundamentally.
- Camel and donkey components: The camel component should be expanded because there are many male-headed households in the project area that are very needy. The donkey component has had a significant impact on women's welfare and it is an efficient means of transport and it generates some income. It should be expanded to reach more needy women in the project area.
- Consolidation or expansion: During Phase II, it is more logical to consolidate what has been achieved by the project rather than expanding it to other areas. There are many sustainability factors in each of the project components and it is essential to address them systemically.
- Extension component: An additional component which deals with rural organization, literacy, home economies, market, credit etc. should be established.

Comments from the organisation

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 to consult the partners involved or Development Fund before applying this information in a way that may affect the partners and the project.