External evaluation of programs and projects of 2012. Mid-term Assessment of DECO and HIV-AIDS projects

Background:
Misión Alianza de Noruega en Ecuador (MANE) began its diaconal work in Guayaquil Canton in 1994, and in 1998 expanded its scope of action to the field of community development. Programa de Desarrollo Comunitario (DECO), now covers six sectorial areas at the northwest of the city. The program has a comprehensive approach based on people and their self-management skills, with the goal of contributing to improvement of the quality of life and enhancement of the capacity of communities and its local partners. In 2009, the HIV / AIDS component was separated from DECO, structuring itself as a project called Hablemos de VIH/SIDA. The project’s objectives are to contribute to the decrease of HIV/AIDS incidence, promote awareness and responsibility of the population against HIV and promote the inclusion of people living with HIV/AIDS as subjects of law.

Purpose/objective:
• Analyze and measure to what extent the objectives and results of the projects have been fulfilled, and the factors that hinder or contribute to the results.
• Analyze the consistency between objectives and strategies of the projects compared to the identified needs and interests of the communities and institutions.
• Analyze and measure how the available resources have been invested in accordance with the objectives and goals.
• Assess the extent to which the social intervention of the projects have generated changes, positive and/or negative effects, intended or unintended effects in the communities where projects are implemented.
• Analyze the extent to which existing target groups could maintain valid the changes achieved by the projects.
• A financial assessment requested by Digni which involved observing the general and specific administrative and financial procedures of DECO and HIV.

Methodology:
Review of documentation of each project, direct interviews with executive and technical staff of the MANE and the directors of selected schools, group interviews with officials of health and education, focus groups with teachers and members of the fathers/mothers committees of schools, leaders and members of community-based organizations, and children and youth trained in issues of sexual and reproductive health and HIV/AIDS, as part of both projects.

Key findings:

Relevance and coherence:
• Highly relevant
• Design influenced by context changes and/or in alignment with the Plan Estratégico Institucional (PEI). 
• Conceptual and structural weaknesses in planning.
• Good progress in the monitoring system, but lack strategic approach and qualitative indicators. 
• Efforts to improve the institutional structure and mechanisms, but more harmonization with the PEI and the projects required.

Efficacy:
• The Project has achieved good progress, with tendency to achieve beyond the requirements, especially in hiv/aids; however, there is weakness in the programming and/or registration process.
• Weakest result: Political advocacy of networks and access of people living with hiv/aids to microcredit.
• Inadequate communication mechanisms.

Efficiency:
• Actual expense of DECO (as of 2011): 21% in excess of the programmed budget, including in the accounting a contribution from the State.
• Hiv/Aids Project within budget.
• Inventory of fixed assets not updated nor cross-checked with accounting.
• The administrative skills of the partners have improved, but require more follow-up.

Terms of Reference Transverse Axis: Gender, Diaconia, Violence
• Confusion with the Transversal Axis of MANE.
• Lack of policies, strategies, indicators and goals. Gender is better.
• Good attempt in introducing the gender in the methodologies and projects.
• Perspective without a strategic approach.
• Diaconate operation based on values, transverse in all the interventions.
• Very well assessed.
• Violence approached in a marginal way.
• Holistic Mission with more progress in gender.

Governance:
• Instrument of participation and governability: Empowering Methodology.
• Very important, but complex phases and activities, with risk to sacrifice quality and sustainability.
• Designed for grassroots committees.
• In the current form, not sufficiently adjusted to other types of partners.

Projects sustainability:
• Guaranteed sustainability in health and education projects and processes.
• Social organizations fulfill the requirements of social and organizational sustainability.
• Good-to-very good level of development.
• Community organizations and old partners in better position.

Institutional sustainability:
• Not updated Agreements with the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education, but with possibility of continuing under new conditions and issues.
• National funds raising not subject to the Law.
• Alternative of developing a new figure with national and international dimensions, in order to expand access to national and international funds.

Recommendations:

Relevance and coherence:
• To adjust the strategic framework of the PEI and the partners’ plans to the political changes, and to improve their technical and strategic quality.

Efficacy:
• Within the framework of revision of the institutional plans, goals need to be updated. 
• To review the D-Miro mechanisms, in order to improve the access of people living with hiv/aids to microcredit.
• It is recommended to establish a Second Phase of hiv/aids, by analyzing the methodologies, developing incidence and articulating a holistic health project.

Efficiency:
• Revise the budget methodology of DECO, to prevent fraud and imbalances in MANE’s financial operation.
• To update the MANE’s inventory and provide permanent follow-up.
• To strengthen support of administration capacity of partners.

ToR Transverse Axis: Gender Diaconate, Violence
• Define MANE’s transverse axis and develop comprehensive policies, indicators and methodology for mainstreaming them in projects to be assumed by all members of the institution.

Governance:
• To assess relevance to simplify procedures and phases.
• To make adjustments for partners, such as networks, churches and government partners.

Projects sustainability:
• To analyze sustainability of current groups to make decisions related to support of the groups that show more possibilities of sustainability and contribution to the socio-economic development of their communities.

Institutional sustainability:
• To formulate a policy of sustainability with a holistic approach.
• To develop a feasibility study, in order to analyze options, assess opportunities and risks, and to establish a transition plan