Evaluation Report CELPA-Niger Literacy Project

Purpose/objective:
The objective of this study was to evaluate the relevance of the project; the impact and the sustainability of the project for the beneficiaries and in the local community; and also the effectiveness and the administrative, professional and financial capacity. On the basis of this, we have also made recommendations for a new phase of the project.

Methodology:
The approach used for the evaluation was the participative reflection. The evaluators discussed and work closely with the project leadership, encouraging each one to observe, and to analyse and reflect on the work done together and the observations made in the villages. The results of these reflections in group are the basis for this report.

The following methods were used:
• Study of documents: plans, reports, project documentation, cash books, verifications etc.
• Discussions and work with the administration and the project leadership (Rémi Agbé, project leader, Noma Afana, book keeper, Léonard Boliabo, cashier and office worker, rev. Mangalyt, chairman of the project committee) concerning the activities, the planning and follow up, the communication, the difficulties, the financial management and the activities compared to the plan.
• Discussions with the leadership of CELPA Niger in Niamey (Rev Willy Myabwa, chairman, Dr Bent Lindberg, vice chairman, Rev Omar, Rev Mangalyt)
• Visits to the four project villages: Filingué and Chical to the north of Niamey, Hallambaré and Louloudjé in the south; observation of project activities (literacy, micro-enterprise, grain banks, wells, breeding etc.)
• Discussions with the participants, both men and women.
• Discussions with the facilitators and the evangelists.
• Meetings with the local inspectors from IDENF, the Non Formal Education Inspection, from Say (Hallambaré and Louloudjé) Mr Issa Diébou, and from Filingué (including Chical), Mr Souleymane Seydou, and of Niamey, Ms Amadou Fatouma Laya.
• Meeting with the national Director of Non Formal Education, Mr Tidjani Amadou, on the Niger government policy for non formal adult education.
• Meeting with Dr Bent Lindberg, Missionary from PYM with CELPA Niger, talking about his study on the community health situation in Hallambaré. Discussion on his recommendations to including health education in a second phase of the project.
• Meeting with the literacy coordinator of SIL, Ms Annelise Djuve, concerning SIL’s work in literacy.
• Examination of the teaching materials and the pedagogy used.
• Examination of the budget and the results, discussion on routines for financial management and the cash box management, and the relevant documents.

Key findings:

Recommendations:
Recommendation concerning non formal education: Continue with non formal education, improving the methods, the materials, the facilitators’ training and the follow-up, in order to ensure that the success rate increases. Integrate the courses more with the development components.

Recommendation concerning libraries: Integrate the libraries with a second level literacy course.

Recommendation concerning psycho-social training: Emphasise this component even more during the courses, and add more practical uses. Investigate why the teaching in the north did not work as well.

Recommendation concerning distribution of seed and fertilizer : Discuss with the participants what the different possible methods are for increasing the food production, e.g. dry season gardening, planting fruit trees, producing natural manure, planting several varieties in the same field etc. Decide in each village on one common activity to do each year. Integrate this activity with the teaching and the practice of reading, writing and maths.

Recommendation concerning cooperatives: Investigate the interest among the participants for creating cooperatives, and what they would like to do in those cooperatives. Adapt the contents of the advanced literacy courses according to these desires, and create cooperatives during or at the end of the advanced course.

Recommendation concerning micro-finance: If the micro-credit component is to be kept, the credits should be given to the cooperatives for their common activities, so that one individual does not have to carry the burden of repayment. Also, there should be something left after repaying. E.g. the project could distribute a flock of some young sheep with a male, and ask that the cooperative pay back the same number of young sheep after two years. There will then be a small flock left with the cooperative. This would also mean that the project leaders would not need to manage any money after having bought the first animals.

Recommendation concerning the grain banks: Seeing the vulnerability of the grain banks, and the fact that they do not contribute to an increased food production, we recommend that the project leadership chooses another strategy which is less costly and which is rather oriented towards increasing food production, and towards income generating activities during dry season.

Recommendation concerning the wells: If the number of villages where literacy courses are offered is increased, and these villages need wells dug, we recommend that the project continues with this activity. It is important to ensure that the participants in the courses also participate actively in the work with the well, and that they take responsibility for maintaining the well.

Recommendations concerning project management:
The project leaders need to take a more active role in coordinating and following up the project. Data on the activities and on the participants should be collected, verified and analyzed by the project leader.
The role of the evangelists needs to be clarified, as well as their responsibility in writing reports.
It is important to train the project team in project management and in financial management based on the PYM manuals.

Comments from the organisation, if any:
Recommendations by the project committee for a new phase:
At the last discussion and reflection session between the evaluators and the project management and CELPA, the evaluators asked the others to divide in groups of three, and to formulate their recommendations for the next phase of the project. Below are their recommendations – proposed by the people directly involved in the project, as management team or in the role of leaders of CELPA Niger:
• Plan the activities in accordance with the real needs of the population.
• Re-examine the components qui did not work well during the fist phase.
• Manage all the activities (components) of the project in a way which creates synergy.
• Not be totally dependent on IDENF, but open up for cooperation with other partners experienced in literacy. Reduce the participation of IDENF.
• Strengthen the follow up and organize courses in order to strengthen the administrative capacity.

As evaluators, we find that these recommendations express and summarize very well the results of the evaluation, and we are very happy that they were formulated by the project leaders themselves, after our reflection together.
We have already given our recommendations in the text of the report, and will not add any more recommendations here. In summary, we want to express our sincere thanks to the team for a good and fruitful cooperation, wishing that all the things we learnt together will lead to a successful second phase of the project.