fwc_revised_draft final activity report_uzbekistan_2009-223549

“Mid-Term Evaluation of the Enhancement of Living Standard Programme in

Uzbekistan (2005-2010)

Letter of Contract N°2009/223549

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

Prepared by:

Emilio Valli

September 2010

The European Union’s DCI-Asia Development Programme

The project is implemented by IBF International Consulting The project is financed by the European Union

2

“The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the contractor and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.”

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS At the European Commission, I wish to thank Messrs. Mario Ronconi and Soeren Klem as well as Ms Assunta Testa for the their support in communicating with national authorities and UNDP, and for their constructive comments to my deliverables throughout this evaluation. At IBF, I especially wish to thank Ms Laetitia Lemmens who provided invaluable assistance in quality control and improvement of the deliverables and in ensuring timely and positive communication with the European Commission.

4

TABLE OF CONTENT

Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................... 5

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6

I. Evaluation Objectives ............................................................................................................. 7

II. Evaluation Background and Methodology .............................................................................. 8

III. Activities Performed ............................................................................................................... 9

IV. Results ................................................................................................................................. 10

V. Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 11

Annex 1-Inception Report .............................................................................................................. 13

Annex 2 – Report from the Mission to Uzbekistan ......................................................................... 13

Annex 3 – Evaluation Report ......................................................................................................... 13

5

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS CA Central Asia CDP Community Development Plan DCI Development and Co-operation Instrument EC European Commission ELS Enhancement of Living Standards programme EU European Union FAFA Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement IP Indicative Programme LRRD Linking Relief Rehabilitation and Development MDG Millennium Development Goals MIRC Mahalla Information and Resource Centre PCM Project Cycle Management RDC Rural Development Centre TACIS Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States ToR Terms of Reference UNDP United Nations Development Programme WISP Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper

6

INTRODUCTION

The Enhancement of Living Standards Programme (ELS) in Uzbekistan is a poverty reduction programme that has been implemented in the three regions of the Fergana Valley-i.e. Namangan, Andijan and Fergana- since January 2005.

The overall objective of the ELS programme is “to increase the living standards of the vulnerable populations in Fergana Valley”. Though there is no explicit definition of ‘vulnerable populations’ in the project documents, the project interventions aim to benefit the households of most economically underdeveloped rural communities.

The ELS addresses three main issues: 1/ weak capacity of local government in development planning and delivery of basic social services; 2/ poor access to basic quality services by rural populations and inadequate capacity of rural communities to support social services delivery; 3/ inequitable access to rural development services and income generation opportunities by rural communities.

The ELS strategy to address these issues is articulated in three activity components: 1/ capacity building of regional and district level government institutions in local development planning and social services delivery; 2/ capacity building of local communities (mahallas) and rehabilitation of basic social services infrastructure; 3/ promoting equitable access to rural development services and to opportunities for income generation.

The four ELS projects in Fergana Valley have been implemented through Contribution Agreements with UNDP within the framework of EC/UN FAFA. The EC grant is 91% of the total amount and the UNDP contribution equals about 9% of the total programme cost.

The table below provides a list of the four projects.

Table 1 List of ELS projects implemented in Fergana Valley

Contract year

Contract nr Title Total

Amount EC Grant Regions Nature

Annual Action Programme

2004 091-225 Enhancement of Living Standards in Namangan Region

1100000 1000000 Namangan Contribution Agreement with UNDP

TACIS 2002

2006 116-796 Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Region

1100000 1000000 Fergana Contribution Agreement with UNDP

TACIS 2003

2007 142-128

Enhancement of Living Standards in Andijan and Namangan Phase II

1100000 1000000 Namangan Andijan

Contribution Agreement with UNDP

TACIS 2004

2008 163-878 Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Valley

3850000 3500000 Namangan Andijan Fergana


TACIS 2006

7

I. EVALUATION OBJECTIVES

This evaluation had two main specific objectives:

• to assess the overall ELS programme and the four individual ELS projects in Fergana Valley

• to suggest areas for further assistance “under the new poverty reduction/rural development programme funded by DCI” and actions to consolidate and further develop the results achieved

Poverty reduction remains a primary objective of the EC Regional Strategy for Assistance to Central Asia for the budgetary period 2007-2013, which is implemented under the new financial regulation, the DCI. The DCI is currently the main EC financial instrument to support developing countries and low middle-income transition countries in their efforts towards achieving the MDG.

The central objective of the DCI is the eradication of poverty in a context of sustainable development as well as the promotion of democracy, good governance and respect for human rights and the rule of law. The wide scope of the DCI has prompted the inclusion in the regulation of a “political content” reflecting the specific situation of Central Asian countries.

The EC Regional Strategy for Assistance to Central Asia recognizes that poverty reduction in the target regions requires long-term cooperation based on a community-based and demand-driven approach in line with the EC principle of “Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development” (LRRD) and the Millennium Development Goals

The first Central Asia (CA) Indicative Programme (IP) under the DCI, the CA IP 2007-2010, identifies “poverty reduction and increasing living standards” as one of the three areas of co-operation.

Under this area of co-operation, there is a focal sector titled “geographically targeted rural development schemes, regional and local community development “which corresponds to the former Tacis “track 3” of the Central Asia programme.

For Uzbekistan, the geographical focus for poverty reduction programmes under the IP 2007-10 continues to be the Fergana Valley. The EC strategic approach is indeed to implement poverty reduction programmes over time in particular geographical areas perceived as more vulnerable to destabilizing influences. This is an important element of the EC Regional Strategy for Central Asia 2007-2013, and one in line with the comprehensive approach to conflict prevention called for by the European Consensus on Development (December 2005).

The overriding objective of this evaluation was to provide lessons learned and recommendations for a future poverty reduction/rural development programme in Fergana Valley to be funded under the DCI. There were no attempt in the evaluation report to generalize findings and conclusions beyond the situational and contextual conditions of the three regions of Fergana Valley in which observations were made.

8

II. EVALUATION BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY The Mid-Term Evaluation of the ELS Programme in Uzbekistan was carried out by a poverty reduction expert from IBF International Consulting under letter of contract EuropeAid Nr 2009/223549.

The primary client of the evaluation was EuropeAid D2. The Unit has specific responsibility for the overall management and supervision of the ELS programme in Uzbekistan as well as for the identification of future poverty reduction programmes in the country.

In Uzbekistan, the immediate beneficiaries of the evaluation results will be the ELS project teams, the UNDP Country Office overseeing and contributing to the overall implementation of the programme in the field, the Ministry of Economy (Project Partner), the Cabinet of Ministers Office, the Regional Project Co-ordinators and Deputy Regional Governors in the three ELS target regions of Namangan, Fergana and Andijan in the Fergana Valley, and the district administrations concerned by the ELS programme. At grass-roots level, the ELS target communities (mahallas) and populations are expected to benefit from an improved effectiveness of the programme induced by the activation of the recommendations. Compared to the other regions of Uzbekistan, the population density in the three regions of the Fergana Valley covered by the ELS programme is high and the access to water and land resources is limited. The potential for social conflict exists. There are differences between regions and within regions between territories. Typically, living standards are lower in the rural settlements more remote from the urban centres, which were specifically targeted by the four ELS projects. Uzbekistan has prepared a Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP), the equivalent of a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. Through the WISP, the Government of Uzbekistan recognizes that poverty is largely concentrated in the rural areas and outlines the policies to increase economic growth and social service delivery to the poor.

The evaluation methodology was designed to meet the requirements and expectations of the Terms of Reference (ToR). The evaluation was carried out based on the five EC Project Cycle Management criteria. The focus was on relevance, effectiveness and sustainability.

The evaluation criteria including the evaluation sub-questions were detailed in the Evaluation Framework. The framework defined the performance indicators, sources of information and methods of information collection. One of the main limitations was the difficult or no access to statistics.

9

III. ACTIVITIES PERFORMED

Location Activity Month Working days Home office Collection and review of

documentation February 2010 4

Belgium (Brussels) Briefing at EuropeAid D/2 February 2010 1 Home office Elaboration of Evaluation

Framework February 2010 3

Home office Preparation of the Mission Programme and Itinerary

February 2010 2

Home office Writing the Inception Report

February 2010 3

Home office Preparation of Interview Guides and Projects

Evaluation Forms

March 2010 1

Uzbekistan (Tashkent, Fergana Valley)

-Projects sites visits and meetings with local beneficiaries and

stakeholders -Collection and analysis of

information

March 2010 17

Home office Preparation of Mission Report

March 2010 1

Home office Preparation of Mission Report

April 2010 2

Home office Preparation of Draft Evaluation Report

April 2010 3

Home office Preparation of Draft Evaluation Report

May 2010 4

Home office Preparation of Annex III to Mission Report

(Outcomes of meetings)

May 2010 4 Total: 45 working days

Reports written include:

Inception Report (including an annex with Evaluation Framework) Report from the Mission to Uzbekistan (including an annex with outcomes of meetings) Evaluation Report Vol I Evaluation Report Vol II

10

IV. RESULTS The evaluation has fulfilled its objectives fully. It has assessed the overall ELS programme and individual ELS projects in the context of the five PCM criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability. Moreover, the evaluation assessed the visibility of the ELS programme and the four ELS individual projects, including their EU visibility. The evaluation criteria, including the evaluation sub-questions, were detailed in the Evaluation Framework. The latter was the guide for the evaluation process.

The evaluation process started with the collection and review of documentation, covering country, EC, other donors and ELS project level documents. The documentary collection and review continued after the submission of the Inception Report and throughout the implementation period of the evaluation.

The site visits in Tashkent and Fergana Valley enabled to assess the performance of the projects, to collect ‘on the ground’ information and to carry out in depth consultation. Two main techniques were used during the field mission: interviews and focus groups.

The evaluation process led to the development of concrete and practical recommendations at programme and project levels for further assistance “under the new poverty reduction/rural development programme funded by DCI” and for short-term consolidation of the results achieved under the current ELS project.

11

V. RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations were formulated at programme level:

Recommendation 1. The wealth of experience and knowledge that have been accumulated through the implementation of the ELS programme and are institutionalized with UNDP Country Office together with the presence of UNDP in the Fergana Valley regions provide a platform for implementing a new poverty reduction programme under the DCI.

Recommendation 2. The new poverty reduction programme under the DCI should continue to support both basic social services infrastructure development and local economic development through income generation activities. The geographical coverage of the Fergana Valley should remain to match the long-term EC strategies commitment to the region. However, new districts and communities should be targeted to consolidate the results of the ELS programme in the Fergana Valley as a whole, before exit.

Recommendation 3. The next poverty reduction programme can contribute to the clarification of standards for social service provision to communities and beyond, not only in the context of public utilities, but also in health and education. For example, for users of health and education services, it is sometimes not exactly clear what services are provided free by government, and what not.

Recommendation 4. The new poverty reduction programme should allocate an increased share of its resources to capacity-building of local government to address the functional gaps in the planning and implementation of state programmes and the delivery of service provision. Focus should be not only on training development but also on systems development, such as the monitoring and evaluation system, already being piloted in Andijan region.

Recommendation 5. The future poverty reduction programme should continue to help regional and district authorities, not only in developing a core set of indicators to measure the impact of state programmes on poverty reduction, but also in developing functional activities and systems for sharing and verifying reliability of data.

Recommendation 6. Until an EC Delegation is open, the public relations specialist of the current ELS project should be trained in the development and dissemination of communication contents on EU policies, programmes and strategies for the region.

12

The following recommendations were formulated at project level:

For future projects under the DCI:

Recommendation 1. Under the DCI, duration of capacity-building projects should be extended to at least 3 years or more.

Recommendation 2. Future poverty reduction projects should be implemented each in one region only, avoiding covering two regions or more under the same project.

Recommendation 3 Future poverty reduction projects should encourage poor households to engage in market-oriented production and value-added market chain should be promoted, building on existing agro-co-operatives established and trained by the ELS projects.

Recommendation 4. In future poverty reduction projects, there should be more income generation activities that specifically target women and female-led households. One reason for that is that many adult males are migrants to Kazakhstan and Russia, and the number of female-led households in rural areas is an important share of all households.

Recommendation 5. Future poverty reduction projects should strengthen the links between community development activities, especially between Community Development Planning (CDP) and local economic development as job creation is an increasing core priority of most CDPs.

Recommendation 6

. Future projects should support the expansion and further development of community extension services by facilitating the linkage between the network of community extension agents and private seed companies, either directly or through the intermediation of the Rural Development Centres (RDCs), that the ELS programme has started to establish. This would create a partnership based on mutual interest between communities and private sector extension services that would provide rural communities with sustainable access to modern farm technologies, bringing higher income opportunities for poor community households.

13

ANNEX 1-INCEPTION REPORT

1. Evaluation Framework

2. (Indicative) Mission Programme and Itinerary in Uzbekistan

3. Table of Acronyms

ANNEX 2 – REPORT FROM THE MISSION TO UZBEKISTAN

1. List of Persons Met

2. Table of Acronyms

3. Outcomes of meetings

ANNEX 3 – EVALUATION REPORT

1. Volume I

2. Volume II

Mid-Term Evaluation of the ELS, Enhancement of Living Standards Programme in Uzbekistan

“MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE ENHANCEMENT OF LIVING STANDARD

PROGRAMME IN UZBEKISTAN (2005-2010)


INCEPTION REPORT

Prepared by:

Emilio Valli

February 2010



Mid-Term Evaluation of the ELS, Enhancement of Living Standards Programme in Uzbekistan 2



TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCOONNTTEENNTTSS

1 PROGRAMME OVERVIEW................................................................................................................... 4

2 EVALUATION PROFILE ....................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Objectives ......................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Key audiences ................................................................................................................................. 7

3 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 8

3.1 Evaluation criteria ............................................................................................................................ 8

3.2 Evaluation Framework ..................................................................................................................... 8

3.3 Documentary review ........................................................................................................................ 9

3.4 Project assessment ......................................................................................................................... 9

3.5 Interviews ........................................................................................................................................ 10

3.6 Focus groups .................................................................................................................................. 11

3.7 Analysis of information .................................................................................................................. 11

3.8 Validation of initial conclusions ................................................................................................... 11

4 WORK PLAN ....................................................................................................................................... 12

4.1 Responsibilities .............................................................................................................................. 12

4.2 Time schedule and inputs ............................................................................................................. 12

4.3 Reporting ......................................................................................................................................... 13

5 ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................................ 14

ANNEX I - EVALUATION FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................. 15

ANNEX II – (INDICATIVE) MISSION PROGRAMME AND ITINERARY IN UZBEKISTAN ...................... 19

ANNEX III – TABLE OF ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................ 20


11 PPRROOGGRRAAMMMMEE OOVVEERRVVIIEEWW A significant majority of the poor population in Uzbekistan lives in rural areas. Therefore poverty for the purpose of this evaluation is intended as a multi-dimensional issue beyond monetary income deprivation and lack of economic opportunity, and covers vulnerability and remote access to education and basic health services, lack of access to clean drinking water and basic utilities (e.g. electricity, gas), scarcity of power and influence, deprived social status and human dignity. Poverty reduction and the achievement of the other Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are major policy objectives of the Uzbek government supported by the international donor community, including the European Commission (EC). In 2007 the government of Uzbekistan has adopted a Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP), the equivalent to a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). The implementation of the WISP, prepared with technical assistance from the World Bank (WB), is supplemented by interventions of the major donors operating in the country which, apart from the EC and the WB, include the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the United Nations (UN), the Islamic Development Bank (IDB), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), as well as several bilateral aid agencies. Under the Action Programmes (AP) 2002-06, the total monetary value of the bilateral EC assistance committed to Uzbekistan has reached 47.750.000 Euro. These EC funds have been provided in the framework of the TACIS programme. The TACIS Central Asia programme is structured along three tracks:

1. Regional cooperation component with the objective of promoting good neighbourly relations in the areas with strategic interest for the EU, such as Justice and Home Affairs, energy and transport networks, and environment;

2. Regional support programme implemented at national level, to strengthen the links between assistance and political dialogue in the framework of the PCAs. Special emphasis is made to trade-related assistance and civil service development;

3. Poverty reduction and increase in living standards implemented in pilot regions, focusing on poverty alleviation, community and rural development and on the most vulnerable groups.

Over the period under scrutiny, the total EC allocation for the programme in poverty reduction (track 3) for Uzbekistan has been 7.500.000 Euro (or approximately sixteen percent of the total budget for EC bilateral co-operation under the AP 2002-06). In line with the multi-annual Indicative Programme (IP 2002-06), a predominant share of this budget has financed actions in the geographical area of Ferghana Valley in the south-east of the country. The total EC allocation to the “Enhancement of Living Standards (ELS) programme in Ferghana Valley” has indeed been 6.500.000 Euro (eighty seven percent of the total allocation to track 3 in Uzbekistan). Additional 1.000.000 Euro under the AP2002 was allocated for a complementary action in the autonomous region of Karakalpakstan, in the north-west of the country. All the ELS programme actions have been implemented by UNDP within the framework of specific Contribution Agreements, involving a co-financement of the actions by UNDP equivalent to 10% added to the EC contribution. The Ferghana Valley stretches from the territory of Uzbekistan across the border of Kyrgyzstan, into the Osh and Batken regions (oblasts), and to a lesser extent into Tajikistan (Sughd oblast). The Uzbek territory of the Ferghana Valley is the most densely populated, with small enclaves of Uzbek population extending through the Kyrgyz and Tajik provinces. Small inter-ethnics conflicts have occasionally spurred in the border areas among different ethnic rural communities, often around scarce water and land resources. The region is also perceived by the international community and the Central Asian governments, as prone to the risks of radical Islamic influences. A major popular uprising occurred in the Uzbek city of Andijan in March 2005.

http://www.delkaz.ec.europa.eu/pr/eng/Programmes_and_Projects/Geographic/TACIS/links_to_Tacis_CA_APs.htm�


The Uzbek part of the Ferghana Valley is administratively divided in three regions: Namangan, Ferghana and Andijan. According to official statistics the poverty rate in the three provinces is in average about four times higher than in the region of Tashkent, though the northern provinces of Uzbekistan and the autonomous region of Karakalpakstan have even lower standards of living. Reportedly, within each province there are significant differences between better off and worse off territories as well as between urban and rural areas. The EC has recognized that poverty reduction in these targeted regions requires long-term cooperation based on a community-based and demand-driven approach in line with the EC principle of “Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development” (LRRD) and the Millennium Development Goals. Moreover, due to the specific context of the Ferghana Valley, poverty reduction objectives will have to be combined as much possible with regional cooperation objectives. The ELS programme is not an ordinary poverty reduction action: it has also wider political and security dimensions that have to be taken into account, as they emerge, during the field phase of the evaluation.


22 EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN PPRROOFFIILLEE 2.1 Objectives

This evaluation services the purpose of improving the effectiveness of the poverty reduction programme in Uzbekistan. More specifically, the objectives of the evaluation are to review and assess the overall Tacis-funded ELS programme and the individual ELS projects in Ferghana Valley and to prepare recommendations for improving both the effectiveness of the on-going ELS project (see below) and the design and implementation of future EC programmes in the sphere of poverty reduction, to be funded under the new Development and Co-operation Instrument (DCI). There will be no attempt in this evaluation to generalize findings beyond the situational and contextual conditions in which observations are made. The timeframe under assessment is from 2005 to date. Poverty reduction continues to stand as one of the priorities of EC assistance to Central Asia, including Uzbekistan, also within the framework of the new financial instrument DCI. The latter has reconciled and simplified over 30 legal instruments used in the past (among them Tacis) into a limited number of thematic and general instruments. DCI will be the EC main vehicle to support developing countries in their efforts towards achieving the MDGs. The central objective of the DCI is the eradication of poverty in a context of sustainable development as well as the promotion of democracy, good governance and respect for human rights and the rule of law. The wide scope of the DCI has prompted the inclusion in the regulation of a “political content” reflecting the specific situation of Central Asian countries. The programming process under the DCI does not differ significantly from Tacis and the first Central Asia (CA) Indicative Programme (IP) under the new regulation, the CA IP 2007-2010, identifies “poverty reduction and increasing living standards” as one of the three main areas of co-operation and the first of two in terms of relative percentage of budgetary allocation for bilateral programmes. Moreover, under this main area of co-operation, a focal sector titled “geographically targeted rural development schemes, regional and local community development “ corresponds to the former Tacis “track 3” of the Central Asia programme. For Uzbekistan, the geographical focus for poverty reduction interventions will continue to be the Ferghana Valley. The evaluation will provide lessons learned and recommendations from the ELS programme in Ferghana Valley both for improving the effectiveness of the current ELS programme and for supporting the design and implementation of future poverty reduction programmes in Ferghana Valley under the DCI.


2.2 Key audiences

The primary client of the evaluation report will be EuropeAid D2. The Unit has specific responsibility for the overall management and supervision of the ELS programme in Uzbekistan as well as for the identification of future poverty reduction programmes in the country. In Uzbekistan, the immediate beneficiaries of the evaluation recommendations will be the ELS Programme Co-ordinator, the Programme Area and Task Managers, the UNDP Country Office Deputy Resident Representative overseeing the overall implementation of the programme in the field, the Ministry of Economy (Project Partner), the Cabinet of Ministers Office, and the local authorities (Kokhimiyats) of the three targeted administrative regions (oblasts) of Namangan, Ferghana and Andijan and of the districts (rayons) concerned by the programme. At grass-roots level, the community self-governing bodies (Mahallas) and the final target populations are expected to benefit from an improved effectiveness of the programme induced by the activation of the recommendations. During the field phase in Uzbekistan, the evaluator will listen to the views of local and international stakeholders, including representatives of the government and the international donors, with the necessary neutrality and independence.


33 EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN MMEETTHHOODDOOLLOOGGYY

3.1 Evaluation criteria

The methodology proposed in this section is designed to meet the requirements and expectations set out for the evaluation in the Terms of Reference (ToR). The approach is considered to be credible and appropriate for establishing whether the ELS programme in Ferghana Valley has delivered the intended benefits to the intended target groups and to capture unintentional positive or negative outcomes from the implementation of the programme. In essence, the evaluation will ask how, why, for whom, and under what conditions the programme has worked (or failed to work). These questions are important in determining the effective implementation and development of the programme. The evaluation will follow the criteria defined in the Project Cycle Management (PCM) Guidelines of the EC. In particular, the expert will assess the programme according to the following five evaluation criteria: • Impact: to the extent possible, an assessment will be made of what has happened in terms of poverty

reduction (improved living standards) as a result of the programme implementation: the intended (or unintended) effects that can be attributed to the programme in the targeted communities, and when feasible a comparison with non ELS targeted communities will be made.

• Relevance: an assessment will be made on whether the programme and the individual projects make sense in the context of their environment: the appropriateness of their objectives vis-à-vis the problems of the target groups they are supposed to benefit and the physical and policy environment within which they operate.

• Effectiveness: an assessment will be made of the contribution of the projects results to the achievement of the programme’s purpose: to what extent the purpose of the programme has (or is likely to be) been achieved, and an assessment of the quality of the services provided by the projects

• Efficiency: An assessment will be made of the individual projects results compared to the costs incurred (“value-for-money”). This may require exploring whether alternative approaches to achieving the same results have been compared by project management, to assess whether the most efficient process is likely to have been adopted.

• Sustainability: an assessment will be made of the likelihood of benefits produced by the projects to continue to flow after external funding has ended, with particular reference to local ownership and institutional capability, appropriate technology, gender and environmental issues.

In addition, the ToR requires the assessment of the ELS programme and individual projects visibility, and in particular of the visibility of the EU as a donor. Among the five evaluation criteria, the focus will be on relevance, effectiveness and preliminary indications of sustainability of results. Efficiency will also be addressed but rather in terms of lessons learned than a systematic performance audit (in particular project finances will not be systematically analysed). Impact will be assessed in terms of the range and types of effects (including unintended outcomes) that the implementation of the programme has had on poverty reduction for the different target groups in the selected communities and on the wider environment. The main evaluation criteria, including the evaluation sub-questions, are detailed in the Evaluation Framework.

3.2 Evaluation Framework

The Evaluation Framework systemises the methodology, identifying the issues to be addressed, sub-questions that provide elaboration; and the performance indicators (variables to be considered), sources of information and method of information collection for each issue. The evaluation issues and sub-questions are deemed to reflect what was set out in the Terms of Reference, but have been elaborated and re-organized. The Terms of Reference and the Evaluation Framework both contain retrospective issues that address historical performance, as well as forward-looking issues that will be used to inform future directions. Forward-looking issues do not relate to the achievement of results and, therefore, are not assigned indicators.


The evaluation framework sets out: • The evaluation issues (i.e. questions to be answered by the evaluation) • Sub-questions that elaborate on the evaluation issues • Performance indicators and/or variables to be considered • Key sources of information • Methods for information collection The table in Annex I provides an outline of the Evaluation Framework. If appropriate, it will be further detailed during the early stages of the field phase.

3.3 Documentary review The process of reviewing available country, programme and project level data started on 1 February 2010 and continued after the briefing of the expert in Brussels, on 3 February 2010. To date, the expert’s focus has been on gaining an understanding of the country context with particular emphasis on the poverty situation as well as on reviewing the EC strategic documents for the Central Asia (CA) region. More specifically, the expert has reviewed the final Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP) of Uzbekistan, as well as the EC Strategy for CA 2007-2013, the EC CA Indicative Programme (IP) 2007-2010, the EC CA IP 2002-2006, the Action Programmes (AP) 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006 and finally the Development and Co-operation Instrument (DCI) regulation. At project level, the evaluator is in the process of analyzing the available individual project Contribution Agreements, administrative reports and monitoring reports (including available background and response sheets). The collection and review of documentation will continue after the submission of the Inception Report and throughout the implementation period. In order to provide complete answers to the evaluation issues and sub-questions presented in the Evaluation Framework, collection and review of basic project level documentation should be completed, including for the Contribution Agreement and monitoring reports referring to the ELS project funded under the AP 2002, which have not as yet been made available. In addition, documentation will be collected and reviewed on other donor relevant assistance programmes in the target areas, on statistics from budget household surveys and other sources, progress reports on the implementation of the WISP (if available), UNDP internal evaluation report on the ELS programme, relevant technical reports produced by the projects (e.g. the report on capacity assessment of local authorities in the target areas produced by the on-going ELS project).

3.4 Project assessment Available project documentation is reviewed for the 4 ELS projects in Ferghana Valley in Uzbekistan financed from the TACIS 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006 APs and listed in the ToR of the evaluation (Table 1). This overall project portfolio assessment comprises the available project ToR, Project Documents, Contribution Agreements, Logical Frameworks, monitoring reports, inception, progress and final project reports and the other project documentation received prior to the submission of this evaluation Inception Report.

Further documents and project reports may be requested before and during the mission, including relevant technical reports. During the mission in Uzbekistan, a series of in-depth interviews will be carried out inter alia, with the UNDP country office and project offices, the main project partner (Ministry of Economy), other relevant donors, relevant public institutions and regional and local authorities, mahallas and ultimate beneficiaries in the project sites. There will also be an opportunity for an in-depth interview with the EC Programme Manager, whose mission partly overlaps with that of the expert.


In combination with interviews, focus groups will be implemented at the early stage of the mission, one with the UNDP project management from Tashkent and three with the project offices, with a view to mapping out the territory and to receiving an early insight of how management approaches, considers and constructs a subject (e.g. sustainability of results). To the extent possible, focus group discussions will also be used by the expert at a later stage, towards the end of the mission, including notably with final beneficiaries and informal control groups to explore and compare the impacts of the 4 ELS projects and to generate ideas for new indicators to measure impact. Moreover, during project site-visits, the expert will make use of observation to assess the performance of the on-going and completed projects. Table 1 List of ELS projects to assess

Contract year

Contract nr

Title Total

Amount EC

Contribution Regions Nature

Action Programme

2004 091-225

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Ferghana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

1100000 1000000 Namangan Contribution Agreement

with UNDP TACIS 2002

NA 116-796

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Ferghana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

1100000 1000000 Ferghana Contribution Agreement


2007 142-128

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Ferghana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

1100000 1000000 Namangan

Andijan

Contribution Agreement


2008 163-878

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Ferghana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

3850000 3500000

Namangan

Andijan

Ferghana



3.5 Interviews Interviews will be conducted to obtain quantitative and qualitative information on the overall ELS programme and on the specific projects as well as on the wider context. The interviews will provide rich and detailed data that will allow the expert to address the programme’s impact, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. In addition, the interview sessions will address the sub-questions listed in the Evaluation Framework. The process of generating data through the interviews will be both, systematic and flexible. Systematic in that there will be careful and detailed thought in planning the interviews about the type of data required and how to generate the information from the interviewee, and about ensuring some consistencies between interviews in the issues covered. However, the data collection process will also be flexible to reflect the uniqueness of each individual case and questions will be a combination of wide, open-ended questions and more probing questions to investigate the topic in depth. Interview guides will be designed by the expert in anticipation of the field mission to act as ‘aide memoire’ in the field, and help to ensure that there are no gaps in interview coverage. The guides will also be an important aspect of accountability to the client by providing a public document of an aspect of the evaluation that is otherwise difficult to describe in reports.


From previous experience, the expert has learned that note-taking is not sufficient to capture data in enough depth: the nuances and details which constitute the richness of interview data are lost, and the effort required in keeping pace with the notes impedes the interview interaction. For the above reasons, it is suggested that the expert may make use of a tape-recorder. There is a potential disadvantage that being tape-recorded changes what a participant says, or makes the interaction more formal and less relaxed. In practice though, the expert has observed in the past that people appear quickly to get used to the presence of a tape-recorder. Field notes will be useful to record what is heard or seen outside the main interaction of the interview.

3.6 Focus groups Focus groups work well in combination with interviews when the subject tackled provides opportunities for reflective discussion, as for example examining the effects of public services delivery in a community; for generating solutions to conceptual problems, as for example new indicators to measure impacts; or for providing information on less-sensitive subjects such as for example mapping the project outputs or explaining irrigation technologies being applied. In the context of this evaluation, focus groups working together (e.g. UNDP programme personnel) will be used to generate data and insights at the initial stage of the field phase in Tashkent. During the visits to the project sites, focus groups will be used to explore perceived causes or origin of poverty in the interpretation of the local authorities and communities, identify impacts of the projects, and generate recommendations on measuring poverty reduction. Careful consideration will be paid by the expert to the composition of the focus groups. For example, it may be difficult for individuals working together in an organization to express their views openly in a focus group setting if more senior members of staff from the organization are also in the group. Similarly, in the rural communities, it may not be as helpful to discuss subjects in mixed gender groups or mixed age groups. For these reasons, more than one focus group may be convened to cover an issue. Practical arrangements are also important: the location and timing of the group’s meeting can make a significant difference to who is willing to attend and to the extent possible the expert will take steps to make participation easy for people and to encourage and reassure them to attend. The role of the expert will also be to facilitate the focus group by helping each group to concentrate and structure the discussion, ensuring that all issues are covered and by encouraging everyone to participate in the debate. In order to strike a balance between encouraging attendance and the need for in-depth exploration of the issues, the size of each focus group will be between 4 and 8 participants.

3.7 Analysis of information Following the site visits, the expert will synthesise the overall results and develop a set of preliminary findings structured around the evaluation issues and sub-questions. In particular, the information on the specific projects will be analysed project by project based on a standard evaluation form designed for the projects. Project specific findings will be separated from the findings which are relevant for the overall ELS programme or for designing future actions. A draft synthesis report presenting the general and project specific findings will be drafted. Finally, preliminary conclusions and recommendations will be elaborated based on the findings.

3.8 Validation of initial conclusions After the analysis of information collected in the site visits, the expert will discuss the preliminary conclusions with the client and other key stakeholders. To ensure that a conclusion or recommendation is relevant and realistic, it must be discussed with the stakeholders before it is elaborated further and presented in the Draft Evaluation Report. Such validation is highly beneficial for the quality of the conclusions and recommendations and the subsequent report writing phase: factual errors can be avoided and the validation adds credibility and richness to the Draft Evaluation Report.


44 WWOORRKK PPLLAANN

4.1 Responsibilities The EC Task Manager for the evaluation facilitates data collection, entry visa in Uzbekistan, comments and approves reports and guides the evaluation. The expert plans and conducts the evaluation, including logistical arrangements, with the support of IBF Project Manager for international travel arrangements. The expert is primarily responsible for the timeliness and quality of the deliverables. He is the main interlocutor of the EC Task Manager during the field mission and keeps IBF Project Manager informed on any important issues raised. A local interpreter and translator from the Uzbek language will assist the expert during the field mission.

4.2 Time schedule and inputs Starting date of the Inception Phase has been 1 February 2010. The indicative planning provided by the Terms of Reference has been used as a basis for the below more detailed planning of the evaluation. The table on the next page summarises the revised planning.

Table 2 Revised planning

Indicative Timeframe Task Evaluator

01-02-2010 –

02-02-2010

Collection and analysis

of relevant documentation 2

03-02-2010 Briefing in Brussels 1

04-02-2010 –

05-02-2010

Further collection and analyses 2

08-02-2010 –

10-02-2010

Elaboration of the Evaluation

Framework 3

11-02-2010-

17-02-2010

Writing Inception Report & preparation

of indicative field mission itinerary 5

17-02-2010-

26-02-2010

Comments from EC Task Manager in

Brussels -

1-03-2010 –

10-03-2010

Further analyses & field mission

preparation 3

12-03-2010-

26-03-2010

Meetings and field visits in Uzbekistan &

analysis of information 15

01-04-2010 –

06-04-2010

Writing the Mission Report 3

07-04-2010 –

19-04-2010

Writing the Draft Mid-Term Evaluation

Report 7

19-04-2010 –

27-04-2010

Comments from EC Task Manager in

Brussels -

27-04-2010 –

29-04-2010

Writing the Final Mid-Term Evaluation

Report 2

29-04-2010

30-04-2010

Writing the Final Report 2

Total 45 The time schedule has been prepared based on the general assumptions that the expert will be given complete access to the relevant documentation, that comments on the reports will be provided within the indicated timeframe and that all stakeholders cooperate with the expert, including availability for interviews within the given timeframe of the field mission and provision of accurate and up-dated information upon request. Compared with the indicative planning provided by the Terms of Reference, the following modifications are deemed necessary:


As indicated by the EC during the briefing of 3 February, the expert will not have to use the remaining allocation of 5 days for debriefing missions to Brussels. It is therefore proposed to make use of this saving of 5 days, as follows: • 3 days for continuation of the data analyses and preparations for the mission during the period from 1

to 10 March as this will be crucial for the success of the mission. In particular: 1. The expert should finalize the collection and continue the analysis of the project related

documentation (Contribution Agreements, ToR, Project Documents, monitoring and other reports, logical framework matrixes).

2. The expert should prepare interview guides, project evaluation forms and other materials for the mission. These materials will translate the Evaluation Framework and Indicative Mission Programme and Itinerary into structured lists of questions to be asked during the interviews.

3. The expert should fix some key meetings in Tashkent in advance of the field mission. 4. The expert should organise local travel to project site visits, accommodation, as well as arrange

interpretation and translation services where needed. • 2 days for the writing of the Draft Mid-Term Evaluation Report between 7 and 19 April as the ToR

indicative allocation of 5 days for the report writing phase is deemed insufficient and the additional days will benefit the quality of the report.

This revised planning is in line with the total original time allocation of 45 days for the expert. As per the original planning provided by the ToR, the evaluation will be completed latest four months after the start date i.e. before 1 June 2010.

4.3 Reporting

The expert will deliver the following reports (all written in English), in the following order: • This Inception Report, comprising the Methodology and the Evaluation Framework (Annex I), the

revised Work Plan, and the (Indicative) Mission Programme and Itinerary (Annex II). • The Mission Report, after the mission in Uzbekistan, including a list of meetings and people met,

together with a brief description of the main outcomes of each meeting and for each project. • The Draft Mid-Term Evaluation Report, including a thorough record of evaluation findings, good

practices, conclusions and recommendations, and Annexes, by 19 April 2010 • The Final Mid-Term Evaluation Report incorporating the comments of the EC on the draft Mid-Term

Evaluation Report within 2 days of receiving the comments, latest 29 April 2010 • The Final Report describing how the required tasks were fulfilled, by 30 April 2010.


55 AANNNNEEXXEESS Annex I - Evaluation Framework Annex II – (Indicative) mission programme and itinerary in Uzbekistan Annex III -Table of acronyms


AANNNNEEXX II -- EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN FFRRAAMMEEWWOORRKK

e 0.1 Evaluation issues Sub–questions Indicators Sources of information Information collection Impact (when feasible) What has been the ELS programme’s contribution, if any, to poverty reduction (improved living standards) of the rural population in the target areas?

Have the programme/ projects been able to achieve an impact on the existing poverty situation? What impacts the programme has had? Has the programme produced any unintended impacts (positive or negative)? Which aspects of the programme have contributed to them? Has there been a real impact at the grass root level? What has been the impact in terms of specific outcomes for different groups of people? Have the benefits concentrated on the most vulnerable sections of the population (e.g. unemployed, underemployed, families with children, female-headed households)? Has the situation of individuals on the ground, particularly women, young people and children, improved? Has there been the beginning of change for the better? Has the local economy strengthened? Is local government more responsive to community concerns? How the situation in ELS target communities compares to the situation in non ELS communities? What could be new indicators to measure impact?

Evidence of: - increase in income and decrease in vulnerability of target populations ; -job creation and decrease in unemployment in the target areas -increase in health levels and dietary consumption in target populations -strengthened local economies in target areas -strengthened local government capacity to respond to community concerns in target areas ;

Indicators: -MDGs assessment reports -UNICEF multi-indicator cluster surveys -Budget households surveys of the State Statistics Committee (if presentation of statistics disaggregated by district) Other: project level documents EC programme manager Other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries Experts, managers from projects Mahallas and CSOs Informal ‘control’ groups

Documentary review focus group discussions of projects’ participants Interviews of key informants focus group discussions of informal ‘control’ groups for comparison Field observations


e 0.2 Evaluation issues Sub–questions Indicators Sources of information Information collection Relevance Has the ELS programme been consistent with and supportive of the policies outlined in the Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP) of the Uzbek government? How the ELS programme has been consistent with and supportive of the EC development and co-operation policies? What is the relevance of the ELS programme in the context of other EC and other donor interventions in the target regions? What is the relevance of the ELS programme in the context of parallel poverty reduction interventions of UNDP? What has been the individual projects’ relevance in the context of the ELS programme? How relevant have been the projects strategies and objectives to the needs of the target groups?

How well the programme has addressed the needs and target groups identified in the WISP? How consistent are the programme’s objectives and strategy with the policy priorities outlined in the WISP? How well the linkages with the WISP policies are described and consistency demonstrated? How well the programme has responded to EC policies of promoting gender equality and sustainable development? How consistent are the programme objectives with the objectives of the EC CSP and IP? What kind of complementarities exist with other EC and other donor interventions? How well the planning of ELS activities is co-ordinated with these other actions? How to strengthen complementarities? How to strengthen co-ordination? How the ELS programme is co-ordinated with parallel ABD programmes? How to strengthen co-ordination? How do the objectives and strategies of the individual projects contribute to the overall objective of the programme? To what extent the projects take into account the physical and policy environment within which they operate? Who are the projects’ participants? How they have been identified? How well needs analysis were implemented? How well local capacity issues were assessed?

Degree to which the programme’s objectives and strategy reflect the priorities of the WISP Extent to which the ELS project documents describe linkages and demonstrate coherence of the actions with the WISP priorities, target groups and resource commitments Extent to which ELS indicators reflect EC development policy themes and ELS objectives are coherent with the objectives of EC CSP and IP Degree of coherence between the objectives of the ELS programme and the objectives of other interventions in the target regions Level of operational coordination between the programme, beneficiary and other interventions in the target regions Level of operational co-ordination between ELS and ABD programmes Coherence between the general objective of the programme and the objectives of the individual projects Extent to which the individual project objectives address the identified needs Adjustments in projects due to changes in their environment Functional, social, economic and gender characteristics of the participants Share of the projects’ participants from poorest sections of the populations

Country and project level documents Government officials Experts, managers from projects EC and project level documents EC programme manager Experts, managers from projects EC programme manager Other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries Mahallas and CSOs Experts, managers from projects Other EC, donor projects documents ABD programme managers Project level documents Experts, managers from projects Project level documents Project level documents Experts, managers from projects Final beneficiaries Government officials Mahallas and CSOs EC programme manager Other donors

Documentary review Key informant interviews Documentary review Key informant interviews Documentary review Project interviews Key informant interviews Field observations Documentary review Project interviews Key informant interviews Field observations Focus group discussions


Effectiveness What has been the contribution of the projects results to the achievement of the poverty reduction objectives of the ELS programme?

Have the project results effectively contributed to the achievement of the poverty reduction objectives? Have the projects achieved their planned results? How the projects were experienced by the participants? How well have the project services being provided? What lessons can be learned from the projects in terms of their scope and results? Have there been any success stories/failures during the past years? Under what circumstances the projects have worked successfully? Why the projects have worked well for some groups and not for other? What is the projects’ contribution to capacity building within the beneficiary organisations? How could the lessons learned help improve the design of future EC projects in the region? What are the recommendations for future design and implementation of the poverty reduction/rural development programme under the Development and Co-operation instrument (DCI)?

Evidence of: - improved access to water, gas electricity, and to primary health care clinics for most vulnerable groups in target areas -increase in the number of households with access to clean drinking water in target communities -increased target communities participation in local development planning, -relevant training material for trainers in local development planning -trainers knowledge used in the training of local authorities -appropriate support to local authorities in the collection and management of socioeconomic data -increased availability of micro-credit to target populations -new co-operative registered and new jobs created in target areas -pilot demonstration plots with appropriate agricultural technologies in target areas -replication of appropriate agricultural technologies by target populations -Increase in agricultural produce output/yields of target populations -relevant and understandable training materials developed for facilitators of the RC in the target areas - use of acquired financial, marketing,accounting and business planning knowledge by facilitators in the provision of services to client populations.

Indicators: MDGs assessment reports t UNICEF multi-indicator cluster surveys Credit union financial statements Other: Project level documents EC programme manager Government officials Final beneficiaries Experts, managers from projects Mahallas and CSOs

Documentary review Project interviews Key informant interviews Field observations


Efficiency How the ELS programme results compare to its costs (“value-for-money”)?

At what cost have the project results being achieved? How well inputs have converted into activities? Have alternative options for delivering project services been systematically appraised by project management in terms of their ‘cost-effectiveness’? How well resources are shared with parallel poverty reduction programmes of UNDP? What lessons can be learned from the projects in terms of their efficiency?

Assessment of: - resources utilisation and costs - resources sharing with parallel UNDP programmes - UNDP’s systems and control - project management - equipment

Project level documents Experts, managers from projects UNDP personnel ABD programme managers Final beneficiaries Government officials EC programme manager


Sustainability What is the likelihood of the benefits produced by the projects to continue to flow after the EC funding has ended?

Has the likelihood been reinforced by adequately addressing cross-cutting issues, in particular technology, gender and environment? Has there been adequate participation of the beneficiaries in the projects assessment of the needs? Are the beneficiaries willing and capable to continue the activities without external technical assistance? Is community development planning still continuing in communities that were targeted by completed projects? Are the public services improved by the projects intervention in these communities still being maintained and supported? Are previous ELS micro-credit operations being recycled? Are the farmer co-operatives and demonstration plots being continued? What is the likelihood that the RCs created by the on-going project will be sustained ?

Measures taken to promote gender equality and environmental sustainability Measures taken to ensure economic and financial sustainability, to address socio-cultural aspects, and to use appropriate technology Measures taken to provide policy support and to strengthen institutional and management capacity

Project level documents EC programme manager and other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries Experts, managers from projects Mahallas and CSOs


Visibility What kind of visibility the programme and the individual projects have had in Uzbekistan? Both the visibility of the programme/projects and the visibility of the EU as the donor?

Perceived knowledge of stakeholders and wider public of the ELS programme/projects and the EU as the donor

Projects brochures, leaflets, web-site EC and other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries



AANNNNEEXX IIII –– ((IINNDDIICCAATTIIVVEE)) MMIISSSSIIOONN PPRROOGGRRAAMMMMEE AANNDD IITTIINNEERRAARRYY IINN UUZZBBEEKKIISSTTAANN

Date Activity Location 12-03-2010 – 13-03-2010

Meetings with NC Office, Ministry of Economy, UNDP Country Office, EH

Tashkent

14-03-2010 Travel by air /road to Namangan, meetings with UNDP project office

Namangan

15-03-2010 – 17-03-2010

Meetings with local authorities , project sites visits, meetings with local communities

Namangan

18-03-2010 – 21-03-2010

Travel by road to Ferghana, meetings with UNDP project office, local authorities, project site visits, meetings with local communities

Ferghana

22-03-2010 23-03-2010

Travel by road to Andijan, meetings with UNDP project office, local authorities, project site visits, meeting with local communities

Andijan

24-03-2010 – 26-03-2010

Travel by road to Tashkent meetings with other donors (including WB, UNICEF,JICA), Statistics Committee, EC PM, analysis of information and initial validation of conclusions with Project Steering Committee

Tashkent


AANNNNEEXX IIIIII –– TTAABBLLEE OOFF AACCRROONNYYMMSS

ABD Area Based Development ADB Asian Development Bank AP Action Programme CA Central Asia CSOs Civil Society Organizations CSP Central Asia Strategy Paper DCI Development and Co-operation Instrument EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EC European Commission EH Europa House ELS Enhancement of Living Standards programme EU European Union IDB Islamic Development Bank IP Indicative Programme LRRD Linking Relief Rehabilitation and Development MDGs Millennium Development Goals NC National Co-ordinator PCA Partnership and Co-operation Agreement PM Programme Manager PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper RC Resource Centres TACIS Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent

States ToR Terms of Reference UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNDP United Nations Development Programme WB World Bank WISP Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper


“Mid-Term Evaluation of the Enhancement of Living Standard Programme in

Uzbekistan (2005-2010)


REPORT FROM THE MISSION TO UZBEKISTAN

Prepared by: Emilio Valli

12 March-29 March 2010





1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................. 4

2 MISSION OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................... 5

3 ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................................................... 6

4 MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................ 8

5 SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS ....................................................................................... 11

6 MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 12

7 ANNEXES .......................................................................................................................................... 13

ANNEX I – LIST OF PERSONS MET .................................................................................................. 14

ANNEX II – TABLE OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................................. 18

ANNEX III - OUTCOMES OF MEETINGS .......................................................................................... 19


11 BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDD The Enhancement of Living Standards Programme in Uzbekistan is a poverty reduction programme that has been implemented in the three regions of the Fergana Valley-i.e. Namangan, Andijan and Fergana- since January 2005. The ELS addresses three main issues: 1/ weak capacity of local government for development planning; 2/ poor access to basic public services by rural populations and inadequate capacity of rural communities to support services delivery; 3/ poor access to rural development services and income generation opportunities in rural communities. The ELS strategy to address these issues is articulated in three mutually supportive activity components: 1/ to strengthen the capacity of regional and district government institutions to plan poverty reduction interventions; 2/ to improve access to and quality of basic public services for rural communities and strengthen community based groups; 3/ to increase access to rural development services and opportunities for income generation. The four ELS projects in Fergana Valley have been implemented through Contribution Agreements with UNDP. In line with the EC/ UN FAFA, UNDP has added 10% to the EC TACIS financial contributions. The table below provides a list of the four projects. Table 1 List of ELS projects implemented in Fergana Valley

Contract

year

Contract

nr Title

Total

Amount

EC

Contribution Regions Nature

Annual Action

Programme

2004 091-225

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Fergana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

1100000 1000000 Namangan Contribution Agreement


NA 116-796

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Fergana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

1100000 1000000 Fergana Contribution Agreement


2007 142-128

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Fergana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

1100000 1000000 Namangan

Andijan



2008 163-878

Enhancement of

Living Standards in

Fergana Valley,

Uzbekistan (ELS)

3850000 3500000

Namangan

Andijan

Fergana



The Mid-Term Evaluation aims to assess the overall ELS programme and individual ELS projects in terms of the five EC PCM Guidelines criteria plus visibility and to make recommendations for future actions in the sphere of poverty reduction in Fergana Valley. The evaluation assignment started on 1 February 2010. A one-day brief of the Expert by the EC Task Manager in Brussels on 3 February 2010, was followed by the further collection and analysis of country strategies, notably the WISP, EC strategies and project level documentation. The Inception Report was submitted on 17 February 2010. A detailed programme for the evaluation field mission in Uzbekistan was formulated, agreed with UNDP Country Office in Tashkent and submitted for GoU approval by 25 February 2010. GoU officially approved the programme by 16 March 2010, with in general a few marginal modifications. The significant change in the GoU approved programme was, however, that the Expert did not receive the authorisation to visit non-ELS communities. These visits were requested to strengthen the assessment process of the impacts which can be attributed to the ELS interventions.


22 MMIISSSSIIOONN OOBBJJEECCTTIIVVEESS In line with the ToR of the evaluation assignment and the additional guidance received from the EC Task Manager, the specific objectives of this evaluation mission were:

• To assess the appropriateness of the ELS programme approach for achieving its objectives; • To assess the present status of implementation of the ELS programme; • To assess the ELS programme organisation and management in terms of its efficiency,

effectiveness and sustainability; • To evaluate the continued relevance of the ELS project objectives, with respect to the ELS

programme objectives, taking into account the specific policy environment; • To review the efficiency and preliminary indications of effectiveness, impact and sustainability of

the supported actions; • To assess the local ownership of the ELS projects; • To assess the visibility of projects and of EU contribution; • To debrief the EC Task Manager and other main stakeholders and to present the Evaluation main

findings to the ELS Project Steering Committee Meeting on 26/03/2010. The evaluation mission was linked to a coming visit by the EC Programme Manager Mr. Soeren Klem who participated in the ELS Project Steering Committee meeting and met with the main project partner, the Ministry of Economy, represented by the Deputy Minister and National Coordinator, Mr. Rustam Shoabdurakhmanov.


33 AACCTTIIVVIITTIIEESS

The Expert arrived in Tashkent late evening on 11 March 2010. Meetings with the NCU and EH were held the following day and on 13 March 2010 the Expert carried out two focus group discussions: the first with the UNDP Deputy Resident Representative, the ELS Project Coordinator and the ELS Technical Advisor; the second was enlarged to the ELS National Experts and to the ELS Public Relations Officer. The mission to the regions started on 14 March 2010 in Namangan where focus group discussions were held with the members of the ELS team there, on 14 and 15 March 2010. Final approval by the CoM of the site visits programme was received one day later than anticipated, on the morning of 16 March 2010. The Expert made independent arrangements for transport and interpretation during the visit to the regions. Situation The interest of the project partners in the evaluation process and particularly in its findings and conclusions was quite pronounced. As a consequence, the mission took place in a very supportive and constructive environment. The level of co-operation and openness in sharing information and views by all ELS project partners was quite high throughout the duration of the mission. The only negative points were a denial of the request to visit non-ELS communities and a one day delay in the official approval of the programme by the CoM, which in turn led to a reshuffling of the schedule of meetings with officials in the three regions, and with other donors, as well as to a schedule of visits to the project sites curtailed by half a day in comparison to the original programme. In general, the Expert was able to meet with grass-root levels on the final receiving end of the ELS project interventions as well as with high level decision-makers and medium level cadres in the regional and district levels of government in the three target regions of Namangan, Andijan and Fergana. Each meeting with government officials lasted in average one hour, a sufficient duration for in-depth interviewing by the Expert. Debriefs were held in Tashkent for the NCU, MoE and UNDP. The EC Programme Manager (Mr Klem) participated in the debrief sessions to the Deputy Minister of Economy (Mr Shoabdurakhmanov) and to the UNDP Resident and Deputy Resident Representatives (Ms Nirody and Ms Postill). There was genuine interest in the concrete findings and conclusions of the evaluation mission and a positive feedback was received on the findings. The ELS PSC meeting held in Tashkent on 26 March 2010 validated the main findings, conclusions and recommendations made in the Power Point presentation by the Expert. Of particular interest and technical relevance, during the mission, was the interview with Mr Robert Davey, TL of the WB project ‘Drainage, Irrigation and Wetlands Improvement’ which confirmed the relevance and significance of the ELS programme results to the forthcoming FWRMP intervention of US$ 81,85 Million in three districts of FV (Oltyarik, Rishtan and Bagdad). FWRMP is scheduled to start implementation in April 2010. A meeting with the Centre of Economic Research (CER) established under the Adviser of the President, informed the Expert that the second poverty reduction strategy paper (WISP II) is currently under preparation with TA funding from ADB. This confirms the continuous policy support from GoU to an integrated and multi-dimensional approach to poverty eradication and is indicative of a continuous resource commitment to the implementation of poverty reduction programmes.


Methods and techniques used As anticipated in the evaluation methodology section of the IR, two main techniques were used during this field mission: interviews and focus groups. The main evaluation criteria, including the evaluation sub-questions, are detailed in the Evaluation Framework (see Annex I of the IR). Moreover, during project site-visits, the Expert made use of observation to assess the performance of the on-going and completed projects. Interviews were conducted to obtain quantitative and qualitative information on the overall ELS programme and on the individual projects as well as on the wider context. The interviews provided rich and detailed data that allowed the Expert to address the programme’s impact, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. In addition, the interview sessions addressed the sub-questions listed in the Evaluation Framework The process of generating data through the interviews was both, systematic and flexible. Systematic in that there was careful and detailed thought in planning the interviews about the type of data required and how to generate the information from the interviewee, and about ensuring some consistencies between interviews in the issues covered. However, the data collection process was also flexible to reflect the uniqueness of each individual case and questions were a combination of wide, open-ended questions and more probing questions to investigate the topic in depth. Interview and focus group guides were designed by the Expert in anticipation of the field mission to act as ‘aide memoire’ in the field, and helped ensuring that there were no gaps in coverage. Focus groups worked well in combination with interviews when the subject tackled provided opportunities for reflective discussion, as for example examining the effects of public services delivery in a community; for generating solutions to conceptual problems, as for example new indicators to measure impacts; or for providing information on less-sensitive subjects such as for example mapping the project outputs or explaining irrigation technologies being applied. Focus groups working together (i.e. ELS project teams) were used to generate data and insights at the initial stage of the field phase in Tashkent and in Namangan, Fergana and Andijan project offices. During the visits to the project sites, focus groups were used to explore perceived causes or origin of poverty in the interpretation of the local authorities and communities, identify impacts of the projects, and generate recommendations on measuring poverty reduction. Field notes were useful to record what was heard or seen outside the main interaction of the interview or focus group. Following the project site visits in the regions, the Expert started to synthesise the overall results and to develop a set of preliminary findings structured around the evaluation issues and sub-questions. Preliminary conclusions and recommendations were elaborated based on the findings; presented to the PSC meeting in Tashkent on 26 March 2010, and validated by the participants. A complete list of the persons met during the evaluation mission is in Annex I.


44 MMAAIINN FFIINNDDIINNGGSS AANNDD CCOONNCCLLUUSSIIOONNSS Appropriateness of the ELS approach and continued relevance of its objectives

• ELS objectives, approach and target groups are coherent with the WISP, country programmes for

rural development, EC CSP/IP and international development strategies-i.e. MDG • ELS project M&E indicators reflect EC policy themes and ELS project documents demonstrate

coherence of actions with govt rural development priorities, target groups and resources allocation

• Focus of ELS is on poorest communities but within communities an inclusive approach is implemented

• Holistic approach matched well with the needs: “soft” and “hard” components needed. • Complementarity and coordination with other projects significant, particularly with WB health II

programme and forthcoming WB Fergana Water Resource Management Programme (FWRMP). Present status of implementation of the ELS programme

• ELS AAP 2006 has to date only delivered 30% of the project budget due to a slow start. However

activities are pacing up. • A joint ELS/ABD capacity assessment of regional and district governments departments

delivering social and utility services to communities in the 5 target regions (3 ELS, 2 ABD) was undertaken during January-February 2010. UNICEF also participated.

• Based on the capacity needs identified 5 training modules (M&E, ICT, Strategic Planning, Budget Management and Energy Saving) of the duration of 10 days developed by the ASSC were adapted

• 15 trainers (5 per region) for the sustainable delivery of the training modules are in the process of being selected by the ASSC according to merit criteria, including pedagogical skills and experience. They will subsequently be trained in the delivery of the modules to local governments.

• In Andijan region, a pilot monitoring and evaluation system of MDGs and govt programmes is being developed by ELS in partnership with regional government and UNDP MDG Statistics project that includes the setting up of a computerised database with relevant indicators.

• Agricultural Extension Agents have been selected from community households, trained and some already equipped with low-cost and environmental sustainable technologies for demonstration plots. In particular, demonstration plots with greenhouse vegetable production have been prioritised by the communities and established in the Namangan and Fergana regions and their technologies are being replicated. Poultry and bee farming plots are in the process of being established and are currently completing the procurement stage.

• 201 communities have been selected for rehabilitation projects that will benefit a significant share of the 317,000 target population. The selection process was finalized in all target districts between December 2009 and February 2010. Rehabilitation projects completed in approximately 50% of communities. Still under implementation in over half the communities.

Effectiveness of the ELS programme

• Effectiveness enhanced by working through community based groups, CDP planning process

and synergies between project interventions and with other donors • Drinking water systems particularly successful: targets reached or exceeded. • Community rehabilitation projects (e.g. CVPs and kindergartens) have improved access to health

and education services by remote communities • Transfer of knowledge in low-cost, energy saving farming technologies to pilot community

households has increased the potential for replication of cost-effective technologies • Micro-credit schemes important but not combined effectively with other activities • Co-operatives above expectations: effectively increased opportunities of members to generate

additional income


Sustainability of the ELS programme results

• Strong sense of ownership by beneficiaries developed through the application of participatory, relevant and verifiable selection processes of communities in partnership with both district governments and communities

• Ownership enhanced by the mainstreaming of participatory local planning processes for community projects (CDP process) centred on community initiative groups and supported by MICs

• The building blocks approach to capacity building of district and regional governments in strategic management including a monitoring and evaluation framework promises to further enhance the sustainability of programme results

• Personnel and running costs of already established and functioning MICs are partially being financed by the Mahalla Fund and partially by fees from administrative support services to local population. Low income clients are exempts from fees.

• 2 co-operatives visited (macaroni/flour and machinery) have expanded business opportunities and number of employees

• Low-cost, high yield and environmental sustainable fruit and vegetable production technologies introduced by the programme are being replicated in communities (e.g. greenhouses, pruning)

• Women’s participation high particularly in micro-credit schemes • Rehabilitated services generally functioning and maintained either through community charges

(drinking water) or district funding and delivery supported by community initiative groups

Impact of the ELS programme

• District authorities more responsive to the needs of communities through support of and participation in the CDP process and increased capacity to target resources allocation to priority community needs through district annual investment plans

• Indicators are systematically used: evidence of improvement also found through focus groups and observation - to be attributed mainly to the ELS combined interventions. Effects strengthened by the co-ordinated interventions of govt and other donor programmes (e.g. WB health II, UNICEF). However reliability and accuracy of some indicators, notably health, to be addressed

• Most vulnerable groups benefitted most due to the nature of improved public services. Drinking water systems had positive impacts on health status of children and women in particular but also economic effects by reducing opportunity costs for females heads of households

Efficiency of the ELS programme management

• Preliminary evidence that sizeable cost-saving has been achieved through resource sharing with UNDP ABD programmes in Karapalkastan and Kashkadar in the spheres of personnel, training and procurement

• In general, outputs produced with the agreed means, modifications in resource utilisation however cumbersome

• Planning for procurement of equipment to community projects has taken into account seasonal factors

• UNDP internal systems and controls are applied to the ELS programme. They provide a framework of accountability including reporting and oversight mechanisms, control and procurement procedures, accounting systems and procedures. For the findings on the adequacy of this framework we refer to the final report of the verification mission carried out during November-December 2009


Visibility

• Visibility of the overall ELS programme in the 3 target regions is high among the populations. The high number of beneficiaries and long-term duration of the programme are the main explanatory factors.

• Visibility of the EC contribution in the field is also high and implementation of the EC Visibility Guidelines has progressively improved from project to project

• The information on the ELS programme web-site is relevant, complete and regularly updated in both English and Russian languages. The web-site is, however, not available in Uzbek language which is the main language used outside Tashkent. The design is generally consistent with the EC funding visibility requirements and the contents emphasize the concept of EC-UNDP partnership for development in Uzbekistan. Nevertheless, web-links are not updated and complete and do not include EC relevant websites.

• A wide range of information materials has been produced including brochures, manuals, leaflets and videos in Russian, Uzbek and English languages. Articles about the ELS projects outputs are published in local newspapers.

• Little or no ELS programme materials were found in the MICs • Key manuals and materials are often disseminated only in Russian when target groups in rural

areas only master Uzbek language • Materials in Uzbek language only produced using Latin alphabet and no Cyrillic alphabet which is

the only alphabet older population in rural areas can read


55 SSUUMMMMAARRYY OOFF TTHHEE MMAAIINN FFIINNDDIINNGGSS

• ELS project objectives continue to be relevant to the country programmes and target groups

• The mix of “soft” and “hard” components match well with the needs • Implementation of ELS 6 activities behind schedule but accelerating • Effectiveness is high by working through community based groups, CDP planning

process and because of synergies between project interventions and with other donors • Drinking water systems particularly successful: targets reached or exceeded • Micro-credit schemes are important but not effectively combined with other activities • Strong sense of ownership by beneficiaries developed through the application of

participatory, relevant and verifiable selection processes of communities in partnership with both district governments and communities

• Ownership enhanced by the mainstreaming of participatory local planning processes for community projects (CDP process) centred on community initiative groups and supported by MICs

• District authorities more responsive to the needs of communities through support of and participation in the CDP process and increased capacity to target resources allocation to priority community needs through district annual investment plans

• Indicators are systematically used, however accuracy and reliability are weak • The building blocks approach to capacity building of district and regional governments in

strategic management including a monitoring and evaluation framework promises to further enhance the sustainability of programme results

• Quantified measures provide initial evidence that sizeable cost-saving (to the extent of US$ 260000) has been achieved through resource sharing with UNDP ABD programmes in Karapalkastan and Kashkadar in the spheres of personnel, training and procurement

• Visibility of the overall ELS programme in the 3 target regions is high among the populations. The high number of beneficiaries and long-term duration of the programme are the main explanatory factors.

• Visibility of the EC contribution in the field is also high and implementation of the EC Visibility Guidelines has progressively improved from project to project

• The ELS web-site is regularly updated and generally consistent with EC visibility requirements. However it is not available in Uzbek language which is the main language used outside Tashkent. Also, links with relevant EC sites not inserted.

• Key manuals and materials are often disseminated only in Russian when target groups in rural areas only master Uzbek language


66 MMAAIINN RREECCOOMMMMEENNDDAATTIIOONNSS

• Both income generation and community rehabilitation projects are needed: the future project should strengthen the income generation activities and continue to support the rehabilitation of community infrastructure in new districts and new communities.

• Community rehabilitation projects should promote energy-efficient technologies in construction and the use of affordable alternative energy sources (e.g. bio-energy).

• The CDP process should be consolidated and enriched through the further development of networking activities among the MICs

• The concept of district Business Development Centres should be replicated to all new districts and expanded in current districts

• Resource centres under Regional Hokimyats should be established to collect and disseminate knowledge of best local and international practices in farming to support the development of BDCs and of a network of Extension Agents

• Capacity building of district and regional governments should concentrate on the further development of the network of trainers and the refinement and expansion of the monitoring framework being piloted in Andijan region, with particular attention to the relevance and reliability of indicators.

• Further activities can be explored notably in the area related to the MDG target on nutrition and vitamin A deficiency, including support for data selection, collection, analysis, verification jointly with UNICEF and support for small businesses in flour enrichment

• Projects information materials should be better targeted in terms of language • The ELS web-site should develop a version in Uzbek language and should insert web-links to

relevant EC sites • The implementation of the ELS funded micro-credit schemes should be co-ordinated with the

implementation of the income generation activities of the project • An exit strategy should be developed in the Inception Phase of the new project incorporating the

above elements


77 AANNNNEEXXEESS Annex I – List of persons met Annex II -Table of acronyms Annex III - Outcomes of meetings


AANNNNEEXX II –– LLIISSTT OOFF PPEERRSSOONNSS MMEETT

Name Title Organisation Location Ms Anna Nirody Resident

Representative UNDP

Tashkent

Ms Kyoko Postill Deputy Resident Representative

UNDP Tashkent

Ms Laura Rio ELS Programme Co-ordinator

UNDP Tashkent

Mr Kodir Bobojonov

ELS Technical Advisor

UNDP Tashkent

Ms Dildora Abidjanova

ELS National Expert on Community Dev.

UNDP Tashkent

Ms Laylo Zakirova ELS Public Relations Specialist

UNDP Tashkent

Mr Tom Thorogood

ELS International Consultant on Community Dev and Income Generation

UNDP

Tashkent

Mr Baktior Safidinov

ELS National Expert Income generation

UNDP Tashkent

Mr Dilshod Rasulov

ELS Project Manager UNDP

Namangan

Mr Abror Khodjaev

ELS Task Manager Community Dev

UNDP Namangan

Mr Ulugbek Dedabaev

ELS Task Manager Income generation

UNDP Namangan

Ms Gulchiroy Ishmatova

ELS Community Mobilization Officer

UNDP Namangan

Ms Maksuda Kenshibaeva

ELS Local Assistant on Community Dev

UNDP Namangan

Mr Tanuo Sunahara

First Secretary Japanese Embassy

Tashkent

Ms Sayaka Usui Programme Officer (GAGHSP)

Japanese Embassy

Tashkent

Mr Akram Tohtamirzaev

Loan Officer Nurafshon

Bagdad

Mr A. Askarov Executive Director Nurafshon Bagdad Mr A.K. Kadirov Adviser to Chairman Microcredit

Bank Tashkent

Mr M. Mahmudov Director Mahalla Information Centre

Besharik

Mr S. Begmatov Lead Specialist Ec Dept District Gov

Andijan


Name Title Organisation Location

Mr Shurat Ahmedov

ELS Project Manager UNDP Fergana

Ms Adila Tadjibaeva


UNDP Fergana

Mr Baktior Toshtemirov

ELS Task Manager Income Generation

UNDP Fergana

Mr Sardor Alimdjanov

ELS Project Manager UNDP Andijan

Mr Alisher Satahanov


UNDP Andijan

Mr Alisher Muradov


UNDP Andijan

Mr Ulugbek Olimov

Project Manager Statistical Capacity Building for MDG Monitoring project

UNDP Tashkent

Mr Pierre Paul Antheunissens

Co-ordinator EH Tashkent

Mr Hayrullo Malikov

Social Policy Officer UNICEF Tashkent

Ms Oyunsaihan Dendevnorov

Social Policy Specialist

UNICEF Tashkent

Mr Yakov Asutukin

Social Researcher “Tahlil” Centre for Social Research

Tashkent

Mr Ildus Kamilov Deputy Director Centre for Economic Research

Tashkent

Ms Muattara Rakhimova

Director Academy of State and Social Construction

Tashkent

Mr Bekzod Teshabaev

Director National Co-ordinating Unit

Tashkent

Mr Otabek Alimatov

Consultant National Co-ordinating Unit

Tashkent

Mr Robert Davey TL Drainage Irrigation Wetland Improvement project

Mott MacDonald

Tashkent

Ms M. Mamaktulova

Deputy Hokim for women affairs

District Government

Bagdad

Ms M. Karimova Leader Community Initiative Group

Tinchlik

Mr D. Urinov Trainee District Govt Izboskan



Mr Shukhrat Turdikulov

Regional ELS Project Co-ordinator and Deputy Governor

Regional Government

Fergana

Mr Shukhrat Shukurov


Regional Government

Namangan

Mr Shavkat Ibragimov


Regional Government

Andijan

Mr Rustam Shoabdurakhmanov

National Co-ordinator and Deputy Minister

Ministry of Economy

Tashkent

Mr Avazbek Rakhmanov

Head of Economic Department of Fergana Region

Ministry of Economy

Fergana

Mr Shavkat Kusanbaev

Head of Health Department of Fergana Region

Ministry of Health

Fergana

Mr Uktam Mavlanov

Deputy District Hokim for Social and economic development

District Government

Pap

Mr Bahodir Madaliev

Chairman Mahalla Fund Pap

Mr Bahodir Sultanov

Dep. Chairman Mahalla Fund Pap

Mr Zukhredin Isomidinov

Chairman Mahalla Committee

Vodiy

Mr Avazbek Temirov

Agricultural Extension Agent

Vodiy

Mr Muminjon Ergashev

Small Farmer Vodiy

Mr Alisher Bayhanov

District Hokim District Government

Chartak

Mr Hamidulo Jabbarov

First Deputy District Hokim

District Government

Chartak

Mr Mahmudjon VahobJonov

Chairman Mahalla Fund Chartak

Mr Ilhom Togibaev

Entrepreneur Macaroni and Flour Co-operative

Ayqiron

Mr A. Mahmadov Extension Agent Langor Mr Rustam Abdurahmanov


Langor

Mr I. Joraev Chairman Mahalla Committee

Ottizambar

Ms U. Naziralieva Director Kindergarten Ottizambar Mr E. Nazarov Chairman Mahalla

Committee Nabi

Mr. Dilshod Mamajanov

Lead Specialist Inf Analysis Unit

Ec Dept –Reg Govt

Andijan



Ms Jayrahon Hojieva

Chairman Mahalla Fund

Norin

Mr Bahodir Mahkamov


Akmal Ikramov

Mr Ergash Qodirov Farmer ‘Chinor’ Farm Norin Mr Abdhuramon Soliev


Guldirov

Mr B. Karimov Deputy District Hokim District Government

Besharik

Mr Baktior Turagulov

Chairman ‘Sardor Qobul Bogi’ Co-operative

Bagdad

Mr Axhmadon Tillaev

Accountant ‘Sardor Qobul Bogi’ Co-operative

Bagdad

Mr Fashodjan Hamdamov

Agricultural Extension Agent

Gayrat

Mr Ahmedov Hakimjon

Small Farmer

Gayrat

Mr. C. Rizubaev District Hokim District Government

Bagdad

Mr. M. Maksudov Director Mahalla Information Centre

Bagdad

Mr. A. Boltabaev Deputy District Hokim District Government

Akunbabaev

Mr. Karimov Chairman Mahalla Fund Akunbabaev Mr. B. Niazmatov Head of Economic

Department of Andijan Region

Regional Government

Andijan

Mr. A. Akbarov District Hokim District Government

Andijan

Mr. A. Jalolov Deputy District Hokim District Government

Andijan

Mr. J. Hodjiev Deputy District Hokim District Government

Izboskan

Mr. Salikh Khamzin Soil and water management expert

World Bank Oltiarik

Mr. Tohiajan Dadaboev


Oltiarik

Ms C. Khodjibaeva Chairman Mahalla Fund Norin Mr. Sherzod Alimov

Sales Support Manager

Sakata Vegetables Europe

Tashkent

Muhiddinovs Community household

Nabi


AANNNNEEXX IIII –– TTAABBLLEE OOFF AACCRROONNYYMMSS

AAP Annual Action Programme ABD Area Based Development ADB Asian Development Bank ASSC Academy of State and Social Construction BDC Business Development Centre CDP Community Development Plan CER Centre for Economic Research CoM Cabinet of Ministers CSP Central Asia Strategy Paper CVP Rural Medical Point DCI Development and Co-operation Instrument EC European Commission EH Europa House ELS Enhancement of Living Standards programme EU European Union FAFA Financial Administrative Framework Agreement FV Fergana Valley FWRMP Fergana Water Resource Management Programme GoU Government of Uzbekistan ICT Information and Communication Technology IP Indicative Programme IR Inception Report MDGs Millennium Development Goals M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MIC Mahalla Information Centre MoE Ministry of Economy NCU National Co-ordinating Unit PCM Project Cycle Management PSC Project Steering Committee TA Technical Assistance TACIS Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent

States TL Team Leader ToR Terms of Reference UN United Nations UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNDP United Nations Development Programme WB World Bank WISP Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper


AANNNNEEXX IIIIII -- OOUUTTCCOOMMEESS OOFF MMEEEETTIINNGGSS

NNaammee TTiittllee OOrrggaanniissaattiioonn MMeeeettiinngg LLooccaattiioonn

DDaattee MMaaiinn OOuuttccoommeess PPrroojjeecctt//AAAAPP

Mr Pierre Paul Antheunissens

Co-ordinator Europa House

Tashkent 12.03.2010 -discussed role of the EH within the context of projects’ EU visibility -Evaluator was informed that EH organised tour of ELS project sites for EU ambassadors. -discussed evaluator programme of site visits in Fergana Valley

ELS Namangan and Andijan/Tacis 2004 ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006

Mr Otabek Alimatov

Consultant NCU Tashkent 12.03.2010 -evaluator briefed NCU on the objectives and tasks of the evaluation -NCU requested to be debriefed at the end of field mission (NCU gets regular reports from local governments on ELS programme implementation and wanted to cross-check information with results of the evaluation) -NCU provided revised programme of site visits pending approval of cabinet of ministers

ELS Namangan/Tacis 2002 ELS Fergana/Tacis 2003 ELS Namangan and Andijan/ Tacis 2004 ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006

Ms Laura Rio ELS Programme Co-ordinator

UNDP Tashkent 12.03.2010 -discussed logistics of the site visits -evaluator was briefed on programme’s approach to implementation -evaluator was briefed on each activity component -Ms Rio highlighted to evaluator issue of role of EH in supporting EU visibility of project (low)


Participants Focus Group 1: Ms Laura Rio Ms Kyoko Postill Mr Kodir

ELS Programme Co-ordinator Deputy Resident Representative

UNDP UNDP UNDP

Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent

13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010

-communication with EC Task Manager frequent and very good -bi monthly telephone meetings, frequent emails, “open and frank discussion” -project steering committee meetings organised each time there is an EC mission

ELS Namangan/Tacis 2002 ELS Fergana/Tacis 2003 ELS Namangan and Andijan/ Tacis 2004




Bobojonov ELS Technical Advisor

-between AAPs communication from EC could be improved -in the beginning, much time was required to inform all levels of government partners about such a complex programme (UNDP instrumental for getting government on board) -steering committees crucial to in-depth communication with government and to give EU visibility (we ensure that EU not represented by proxy) -projects are implemented under UNDP National Execution Modality which by emphasizing use of national expertise facilitates government ownership - UNDP ABD budget filled time gaps between ELS projects -UNDP ABD cost-sharing with ELS in procurement, training, international expertise resulted in significant savings

ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006

Participants Focus Group 1 (continue): Ms Laura Rio Ms Kyoko Postill Mr Kodir Bobojonov

ELS Programme Co-ordinator Deputy Resident Representative ELS Technical Advisor

UNDP UNDP UNDP

Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent

13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010

-communication with EC good and frequent, but EC missions lack time to visit project sites -communication with EC has progressively improved -communication could be more effective if EC Delegation on the ground -ELS programme only programme in Uzbekistan allowed to operate at community level on such a large scale -main strength of UNDP are the national experts who bridge communication with government counterparts -before this programme, regions and communities had no experience of working with international organizations (trust has now been built)





Participants focus group 2: Ms Laura Rio Mr Kodir Bobojonov Mr Dilshod Rasulov Ms Dildora Abidjanova Ms Laylo Zakirova Mr Tom Thorogood Mr Baktiar Safidinov

ELS Programme Co-ordinator ELS Technical Advisor ELS Project Manager/Namangan Region ELS National Expert on Community Development ELS Public Relation Specialist ELS International Consultant on Community Development and Income Generation ELS National Expert

UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP

Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent

13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010

-each ELS project covered more communities than originally planned by ToR -ELS 2003 also covered two enclaves (‘conflict prevention’). -Government was not enthusiastic about working in enclaves but maybe wanted to show goodwill to EC -Logistics were very difficult and ensuing projects did not include enclaves (also because high remittances of migrants alleviating poverty) -main criteria for selection of communities (in order of priority):


Income Generation 1/distance from basic social services; 2/level of income; 3/level of unemployment; 4) community capacity; 5) presence of other donors -CDP is the main tool linking the three programme components -project follow-up advice continued to MIRCs established under previous ELS projects -would be helpful if contingency under




current ELS project could be used to consolidate sustainability of results achieved under previous ELS projects

Participants focus group 2 (continue): Ms Laura Rio Mr Kodir Bobojonov Mr Dilshod Rasulov Ms Dildora Abidjanova Ms Laylo Zakirova Mr Tom Thorogood Mr Baktiar Safidinov

ELS Programme Co-ordinator ELS Technical Advisor ELS Project Manager/Namangan Region ELS National Expert on Community Development ELS Public Relation Specialist ELS International Consultant on Community Development and Income Generation ELS National Expert Income Generation

UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP

Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent Tashkent

13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010 13.03.2010

-Component 2 provides ‘case scenario’ for capacity building of local government in policy development -through CDP communities influence resource allocation by district governments -CDP is sustainable in most cases but not always -in Andijan established database of indicators to monitor poverty related indicators -poverty mapping required a lot of capacity work and resources and was discontinued after ELS 2003 except in Andijan -local governments more responsive to community needs in terms of allocation of resources (thanks to CDP) -Dialogue between communities and local government through CDPs is result-oriented -Mahalla Information Centres main purpose is support mahallas in CDP and social and economic statistics processing (tables with computer) - MIC staff go to villages (pro-active) -Most MIC partly funded by Mahalla Fund not all -Performance varies between MIC -State Academy finalizing training modules for local governments -Trainers in the process of being identified


Mr Dilshod Rasulov

ELS Project Manager

UNDP Namangan 14.03.2010 -Reviewed programme of site visits -agreed logistics -discussed activities under first component,

ELS Namangan/Tacis 2002 ELS Namangan and Andijan/ Tacis 2004




notably M&E in Andijan -Using MDGs-related indicators Andijan district designed M&E system -M&E equipment funded by UNDP ABD programme (equipment received January 2010) -M&E needs special LAN system


Participants Focus group (3) Mr Dilshod Rasulov Mr Abror Khodjaev Mr Ulugbek Dedabaev Ms Gulchiroy Ishmatova Ms Maksuda Kenshibaeva

ELS Project Manager ELS Task Manager Community Dev ELS Task Manager Income General ELS Local Assistant To Community Dev Task Manager ELS Community Mobilizer

UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP UNDP

Namangan Namangan Namangan Namangan Namangan

15.03.2010 15.03.2010 15.03.2010 15.03.2010 15.03.2010

-discussed how procurement process works (rules, practices) -tenders announced on newspapers and UNDP web-site -tender commissions are formed by technical experts at district level -tender reports (signed by members of tender commissions) should be approved by Country Office -only CIS and EU companies eligible -seasonal planning for delivery of equipment -discussed synergies between component 2 and 3 -microcredit organisation selected after capacity assessment of 4 local institutions with help of international expert

ELS Namangan/Tacis 2002 ELS Namangan and Andijan/ Tacis 2004 ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006

Participants Focus group (3) continue Mr Dilshod Rasulov Mr Abror Khodjaev Mr Ulugbek

ELS Project Manager ELS Task Manager Community Dev ELS Task Manager

UNDP UNDP UNDP

Namangan Namangan Namangan Namangan

15.03.2010 15.03.2010 15.03.2010

-MoU with MCO signed December 2005 -micro-loans disbursed in target communities targeted poor families, mainly female-head of households, and were used for livestock mainly -Satisfaction survey (60% beneficiaries satisfied). 99% repayments -MCO could not re-register in November 2006. -Under component 3 tenders were launched for selecting business proposals.





Dedabaev Ms Gulchiroy Ishmatova Ms Maksuda Kenshibaeva

Income General ELS Local Assistant To Community Dev Task Manager ELS Community Mobilizer

UNDP UNDP

Namangan

15.03.2010 15.03.2010

Selection commission at regional level. Trainings on business planning preceded selection. Equipment grants between 14,000US$ and 24,000 US$ - Study tours were discussed.

Mr Alisher Bayhanov

Governor (Hokim) District Government

Chartak 16.03.2010 -project had a positive impact through basic social service infrastructure development in communities. -project complemented well various state programmes for rural areas.

ELS Namangan/Tacis 2002

Mr Hamidulo Jabbarov

First Deputy Governor (Hokim)

District Government

Chartak 16.03.2010 -district authorities supported the mobilization of communities and provided technical experts for community projects. -district authorities look at CDPs for preparation of annual public investment plans. -CDP process save time to our staff in terms of community needs’ assessment. -CDP process accelerated our awareness of community priorities.


Mr Mahmudjon Vahobjonov

Chairman District Mahalla Fund

Chartak 16.03.2010 -MoU was signed with the project. -Mahalla Fund covers the salaries of the MIC facilitators. -some of the staff in the MIC have changed since the project end, new staff need training. -in general, all MIC staff need specialist training. -performance of MIC differs, in Chust services very appreciated by communities.


Mr Ilhom Togibaev

Entrepreneur Macaroni and Flour Cooperative

Aygiron (Chartak District)

16.03.2010 See Box 2, pg 9, Vol II of the Draft Evaluation Report





Mr Abdhuramon Soliev


Guldirov (Chartak District)

16.03.2010 -rehabilitation of drinking water supply system reduced improved health and economic condition of the population. -CDP process has been working with low participation although mobilization activities were implemented by the project.


Ms Jayrahon Hojieva


Norin 16.03.2010 -MIC opened Nov 2009. -premises provided by district administration free of charges. -MIC developed data base with community infrastructure maps and community social passports. -Mahalla Fund signed MoU with project and finance salary of facilitator. -MIC assist Mahalla Committees not only with updating CDP but fundraising and updating social passports of communities. -data base is consulted by Mahalla Committees in advance and during of CDP process.

ELS Namangan and Andijan/ Tacis 2004

Mr Ergash Qodirov

Farmer Chinor Farm Kujaobod (Norin District)

16.03.2010 -farmer received equipment grant and high-yield tomato seeds for a total equivalent of US$ 2000 for greenhouse demonstration. -farmer did not remember preparing business plan to obtain grant. - harvest of tomatoes provided high yields but at a time when prices of tomatoes collapsed due to change in legislation. -this year farmer planted melon and watermelons. -he will establish a second greenhouse to plant high-yield tomato varieties. -follow-up advice is provided by ELS 2006 project.


Mr Bahodir Mahkamov


Akmal Ikramov (Norin District)

16.03.2010 -CDP improved quality of community plans. -mobilization trainings by the project





changed mind set of people. -MIC provided advice with project proposal for youth centre. -MIC helps statistical data processing and data base supports quality improvement of CDP. -project implemented rehabilitation of electricity grid which was first priority of CDP and resulted in more household businesses being established.

Mr Uktam Mavlanov

Deputy Governor (Hokim)

District Government

Pap 17.03.2010 -supply of equipment under second component underway. -local authorities helped with awareness raising in communities and were involved in mobilization activities. -project provided training collection and analysis of social economic data. -no plans to have the MIC under the Mahalla Fund. Will be registered as a separate NGO to develop as a service centre to communities charging fees for its services. - Mr Mavlanov considered very important the income generation activities, notably the establishment of 2 bee farms and 4 poultry farms, under component 3. -for greenhouses, no tender yet, people selected, the project will provide cover structures. - training has been provided by the project to farmers for the establishment of these farms. -sites for farms still under identification. Project to provide husbandry. -farmers were selected by a panel including district administration, farmers association, Mahalla Fund, Women Association and





veterinary services. It was the first experience for the administration to undertake such a selection process.

Mr Bahodir Madaliev


Pap 17.03.2010 -1 MIC is planned, equipment was delivered. -premises were selected in a building next to the District Administration identified for easy access (next to an education institution to involve young people to visit). -plan to develop a digital data base with information on communities. -no MoU with Mahalla Fund. Centre will be self-sustained by providing services to communities for a fee.


Mr Zukhredin Isomidinov


Vodiy (Pap District)

17.03.2010 -Chairman guided the visit to the Village Medical Point. -the VMP is being refurbished with project equipment and the work of 2 communities (Vodiy and Birlashkan) who will benefit from its services. Total cost of refurbishing is estimated at EUR 11,000 equivalent. -before the project, inhabitants of both communities had to walk about 15km to the district hospital. -the VMP applied to WB Health II project for certified medical equipment. -regional government budget will finance 15 medical staff and 1 administrative staff. -UNICEF Family Planning and Education project delivered training at the district administration in spring 2009 to women on community family planning.


Mr Avazbek Temirov

Community farmer / Extension Agent (Demoplot)


17.03.2010 -project provided equipment grant for greenhouse, including cover, steel poles and drip irrigation. Total valued to equivalent of US$ 1,300. Farmer contributed US$ 1,000 equivalent for





equipment and lemon and tomato seeds. -greenhouse established Dec 2009 includes nursery of seedlings for sale. -farmer signed a contract with project in which he undertakes to teach neighbours and keep demonstration plot open to them. -greenhouse already replicated by one neighbour. -income from greenhouse not yet realized but early harvest of tomatoes expected to multiply income. -all family works on the greenhouse.

Mr Muminjon Ergashev



17.03.2010 --project provided equipment grant for greenhouse including cover, steel poles and drip irrigation. Total valued to equivalent of US$ 1,300. Farmer contributed US$ 1,000 equivalent for equipment and high yield seeds of cucumbers. -farmer was learning from his neighbour about lemon-growing.


Mr Tilonazar Sohibnazarov

School teacher /community farmer


17.03.2010 -he learned from the other 2 greenhouses and replicated a smaller greenhouse with tomatoes planted. -he participated in seminars organized by the project on the demonstration greenhouses.


Participants Focus group (4) Mr Shurat Ahmedov Ms Adila Tadjibaeva

ELS Project Manager ELS Task Manager Community

UNDP

Fergana

17.03.2010

-participants explained process of selection of communities (level of income, rate of unemployment and distance from district centre are main criteria) -Selection panels of communities include district administrations and local associations (i.e. women associations, farmer associations) -community social infrastructure maps were

ELS Fergana/Tacis 2003 ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006




Mr Baktior Toshtemirov

Development Activity ELS Task Manager Income Generation Component

produced as part of the process of selecting priorities for CDP -CDP formats have evolved from project to project -micro-credit scheme was the most successful output of the ELS 2003 within the context of effectiveness and impact - micro-credit scheme continues to roll and is monitored by project team -process of establishment of co-operatives was also explained (e.g. selection of activities with communities, capacity buildlng trainings, equipment grants) -ELS 2006 trainings in income generation to community households to complement CDP processes - co-operatives members also act as trainers to communities in best agricultural production practices - MIRCs service provisions to communities were explained to expert, including for CDP preparation

Mr Shukrat Turdikulov


Regional Government

Fergana 18.03.2010 -Deputy Governor emphasized how microcredit was the most important output of the ELS 2003 project -Women groups benefitted most and loans were used mainly for livestock and subsistence husbandry and complemented well Ministry of Labour credit for livestock winter feeding -however, he pointed to some problems with the credit union which allegedly interrupted providing credit to the Fergana district between Jan 2009 and Aug 2009. -He wrote a letter to UNDP but received no reply and was not informed of UNDP audit of Credit Union

ELS Fergana/Tacis 2003 ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006




-Other important outputs of ELS 2003 project were the CDPs and rehabilitation projects (drinking water supply, village medical points). CDP concept was developed together with Regional Administration. -Community mobilization trainings changed mental habit of communities and increased participation and mobilization of resources for public services -MIRCs disseminate information and advice on economic development opportunities to communities, attract funding for community projects and support CDP mobilization - Regional government participated in selection of target districts for both ELS projects and undertook awareness trainings of lower level government bodies on aims of ELS projects, including EU visibility -Regional Social and Economic Assessments produced by ELS 2003 project, helped Regional Government respond to national government request for inputs in preparation of WISP

Mr Avazbek Rakhmanov

Head of Economic Department of Fergana Region

Ministry of Economy

Fergana 18.03.2010 -Mr Rakhmanov co-ordinated the ad hoc working group of social services department representatives participating in the ELS project capacity assessment -He did not seem to be very much informed about the outcomes and future steps -He did not know which themes the training modules will address


Mr Shavkat Kusanbaev

Head of Health Department of Fergana Region

Ministry of Health

Fergana 18.03.2010 -Mr Khusanbaev Informed about government policy to establish 293 VMP across Uzbekistan, the objective being to have a functioning VMP at a distance no longer than 5-7km of each community





-Mr Kusanbaev informed that VMP aim is preventive medicine. The most important function of VMP is a surveillance system of social threatening diseases in rural communities whereby medical staff of VMP visit rural households on a regular basis -he was informed that ELS 2006 project plans to refurbish 6 ELS VMPs in the region. They will serve a total of 70,000 persons -the activity will enable VMP to receive medical equipment under WB Health II Project -in Oltaryk a VMP has already been refurbished at a cost of approximately EUR 6,000 and has obtained WB medical equipment -future needs are professional development of VMP medical personnel. - Mr. Khusanbaev also informed that jointly with UNICEF, the ELS Project implemented 5 seminars in each of the districts to train VMP medical staff on good practices of raising awareness and monitoring infectious diseases -local research shows that VMP prevention activity has already contributed to reduce cost of curing children from infectious diseases by 2/3 and that the number of cases reported in district hospitals has declined sevenfold. -Mr Khusanbaev informed that local research reveals that 54% of children in Fergana region are vitamin A deficient and a new government programme supported by UNICEF aims to supplement vitamin A through 13 different forms including food




enrichment and flour enrichment. Mr A. Boltabaev Deputy Governor

(Hokim) District Government

Akhunbabaev 18.03.2010 -Mr Boltabaev informed that drinking water supply is the main problem in the district, pipelines are outdated, and new houses are not supplied by clean water. -18 ELS community projects have been identified, 8 of them are for the rehabilitation of drinking water supply systems and are planned to be phased in 2010. The second priority is gas supply and the agreement with the ELS project is that they will be implemented in 2011. The third priority is electricity, and the ELS community projects will rehabilitate the electricity local grids in 2012. -in total, out of 46 communities, 20 communities were preselected based on questionnaire survey, these were visited by a commission, and 14 were retained. The main criteria for the selection were 1/distance from district center;2/capacity to solve problems; 3/involvement of different social groups (women, disabled, elderly, men).


Mr Karimov Chairman Mahalla Fund Akhunbabaev 18.03.2010 -the MIC was opened in Jan 2010, and is now operational with 2 staff who are employed by the Mahalla Fund. -the premises were provided free of charges in a building adjacent to the district administration, and belonging to the Democratic Party. -the MIRC provides information resources to communities. It is equipped with 3 computers, 1 of them funded by the Mahalla Fund, and 2 by the project. Furniture is provided by the project. -little visibility of EU funding, no sign boards





and no materials from the project. - the RDC plans to open in the same building as MIRC, but demonstration plot of the RDC will be attached to the district agricultural college.

Initiative Group (20 persons)

Garmdon (Akhunbabaev district)

18.03.2010 -1/3 of the initiative group members are women. The project will provide drinking water supply for 40% of the community households lacking access. Will also refurbish 2 kindergarten. -works on community projects have already started, the evaluator was provided with pictures of the work progress. -for maintenance of the drinking water supply system, a water company will be established in the community, which will create employment and collect fees for maintenance of the service. For this purpose, 3-5 people are being trained by the project.


Mr Muhtar Nabiev


Langer (Akhunbabaev district)

18.03.2010 See Evaluation Report, Box ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006

Mr S. Ruzibaev Ms M Mamaktulova

Governor (Hokim) Deputy Governor (Hokim)

District government

Bagdad 19.03.2010 -the Hokim was only appointed in Jan 2010, before he was District Hokim of Rishtan. He knew the ELS project, and said that it was very effective in improving community lives in Rishtan. In particular, he mentioned how the CDP process was able to increase communities’ participation and contribution to the development of basic social services. -in Bagdad 15 communities were selected out of 55. -WB project Irrigation, Drainage, Wetlands Improvement active in the district. Hokim is satisfied with the co-ordination between ELS and this WB project.

ELS Fergana/Tacis 2003




-he mentioned micro-credit scheme from ELS 2003, one of the most important results. He seemed very informed about the results of the micro-credit scheme. Deputy Hokim mentioned how scheme benefitted women groups. -Hokim also mentioned the benefits of the 2 VMPs, refurbished by the project. Between 12,000 and 13,000 people have now access to primary health care. -he mentioned that one main impact of the project has been the change of mentality of the communities, their readiness to contribute more for public services. He mentioned 2 examples: Tinchlik, Tuvadok. -under the first activity component of the project, 11 staff from the economic and research department of the district were trained on techniques and practices of collection, verification and analysis of social economic data, and MDGs awareness. The knowledge acquired, according to the Hokim and Deputy Hokim, has enhanced the ability of this department to review and further develop communities’ proposals for community development. -district government plans to rehabilitate an old state farm for poultry which will create 540 new jobs. -government has supported the creation of small enterprises with credit lines in the sphere of poultry breeding, livestock breeding, textile. -Pahata (cotton bank) provided over EUR 30,000 equivalent in micro-credit to poor individual households in the district. -Micro Credit Bank allocated EUR 5,000




equivalent in micro-credit. Mr Maksudov Director MIRCs Bagdad 19.03.2010 -the MIRC was instrumental in preparing

successful grant applications to donors on behalf of communities As a result, Swiss Development Cooperation awarded funding for drinking water supply systems to 2 communities; WB awarded grant to train women in water resource management; Japanese Embassy financed drinking water supply system for 1 community. -MIRC also recently submitted 3 funding applications to a public fund under the Senate for 1 job centre, 1 youth centre, 1 drinking supply system to 1 community.



Tinchlik (Bagdad district)

19.03.2010 -about ½ the initiative group were women -ELS project rehabilitated artesian well on school ground and provided water pipe lines which distributed water to the community households and the school. Community contributed about 2/3 of total project cost, about EUR 32,000 equivalent (including cost of electric water pump). -water supply system has been operational since July 2007 and works started December 2006. -a water committee was established and trained by the project. - women participants indicated that water borne diseases for women and children have decreased, and that the time they consume to collect water has been reduced in average by 2/3. -one woman in particular from a neighbouring community explained how they were helped by the community of Tinchlik to connect their water infrastructure to the Tinchlik water supply system.





Mr Akram Tohtamirzaev Mr A. Askarov

Loan officer Executive Director

Nurafshon Credit Union

Quashqarmakey (Bagdad district)

19.03.2010 -Credit Union representatives explained that outstanding credit portfolio as of March 2010 was about EUR 56,000 equivalent. -distribution of loans was unequal between districts with Fergana getting about 13% of the share, Bagdad 40% and Rishtan 47%.


-the logistical difficulty of operating in the enclave communities, was the main reason for the low share in Fergana district. For this reason, the Credit Union interrupted the flow of credit for 2 months in that district in 2009, to put pressure on regional government to facilitate establishment of a Credit Union office in the enclave communities. However, this was unsuccessful. -Credit Union finds it still difficult to operate in Fergana because it does not have an office there. -women’s groups have received about 73% of the loans total share

Microcredit group

Quashqarmakey (Bagdad District)

19.03.2010 -the group was made up entirely of women. -They explained how loans were received and used. -Although credit was guaranteed by group, loans were used individually. -these individual loans were used to buy calves, which provided dairy products for the family, especially children, and for breeding. -offspring were sold on the market and revenues used to repay the loan, leaving a profit margin, and a new loan was applied for. -one woman explained that she was at the 4th cycle of the scheme, and started a new business by buying tablewares and renting





it for wedding. -Another woman intended to use the profit to open a sewing workshop for her daughter.

Medical staff of VMP

Quashqarmakey (Bagdad District)

19.03.2010 -the project refurbished the two- storey building, works were completed in July 2007. -medical staff was trained by UNICEF on early detection of infectious diseases and risks of self-cure. -according to medical staff, hepatitis has decreased in the 3 villages served by the VMP. -one of the possible reasons is the rehabilitation of 2 villages’ drinking water supply systems, 1 supported by the ELS project. -another possible reason is the implementation by the VMP medical staff of a surveillance system whereby medical staff visits rural households to detect infectious diseases and raise awareness of self-cure. -salaries of medical staff and operational costs of the VMP, as well as consumables and medicines are paid for by the regional government budget.





Mr Baktir Turagulov Mr Axhmadon Tillaev

Chairman Accountant

‘Sardor Qobul Bogi’ Cooperative ‘

Bagdad district 19.03.2010 -the project provided 1 tractor and the members of the co-operatives purchased tillers. -all members were trained, including through a 3-week study tour in France, where they learned best practice in co-operative management, as well as techniques of planting, irrigation and pruning of orchards. -the co-operave established 1 demonstration plot of orchards and one nursery of different varieties of fruit trees. -members were taught in the study tour how to share knowledge is beneficial for business in the long-term and is a key principle of co-operativism. They seem to have applied the lesson by training surrounding communities in best practices. -since the project, they have leased more land and their turnover has grown and 2 new tractors were bought for wheat harvest and planting.


Mr B. Karimov Deputy Governor (Hokim)

District government

Besharik 20.03.2010 -the district has a 150 km border with Tajikistan which is currently sealed, hindering cross-border trade which was an important source of income for communities. District is a few hundred metres above sea-level, at the entrance of the so-called Fergana Valley corridor (‘pereval’) between high mountains and battered by strong wind all year. -agriculture focuses on wheat, cotton and orchards. No vegetable growing. There are textile enterprises which export their products mainly to Russia. -finalization of the selection of ELS target communities was in February 2010. 15





communities out of 64 were selected. Main criteria applied: 1/remoteness from district centre; 2/gap in social and economic conditions compared to district centre; 3/local capacity. - the project carried out mobilization trainings in most target communities, however the majority of community projects had yet to start and equipment was at the procurement stage. -Deputy Hokim indicated that there was the need for closer co-ordination with ELS project management and wished to hold meetings with project management twice a month. -he gave a message to the EC: “Thank you for your assistance, but please don’t close the project in December because we will not be able to finalize all planned activities as they just started.”

Mr M Mahmudov

Director MIRCs Besharik 20.03.2010 -equipment had just been delivered and MIRC was not yet operational. -status of MIRC not yet clear, it is not planned that it will be registered under the Mahalla Fund .The district administration would like to have it registered as an independent centre providing consulting in business development. -one RDC is also planned to be established separately under the Farmers’ Association. Location has not yet been identified, buy will probably be in the Agricultural College, where 1 ha of land will be allocated for demonstration plot. The idea is to test in the demonstration plot new high yield varieties of fruit, cotton and wheat.






Ottizzambar (Besharik district)

20.03.2010 -see Box 1, pg 31 of Vol II, Draft Evaluation Report.



Nabi (Besharik district)

20.03.2010 -the initiative group comprised of 3 women and 17 men. -the project contributed to the instalment of 1750 mt of gas pipelines and the community paid for the substations. 1150 inhabitants now have access to gas in their homes. -the implementation started in December 2009 and was completed in February 2010. -a bee farm is also being established by the project and a poultry farm. None have yet been supplied with husbandry. -the project carried out 2 mobilization trainings of 4 days each. -next priority of the CDP after gas was drainage of water-logged farming land and irrigation. -the community school is being rehabilitated with government funds and community resources. -the VMP is 5km away and drinking water is 400 mt away. No library and no kindergarten.


Muhiddinovs Community household

Nabi (Besharik district)

-the family is one of those benefiting from the gas supply system co-funded by the project. -at the time of the visit, gas pressure in the home was good and the expert saw the gas burning, used for cooking. -the family comprises of 3 small children and 2 parents.





Mr Salikh Khamzin Mr Tohiajan Dadaboev

Soil and water management expert Chairman

World Bank’s Drainage, Irrigation and Wetland Improvement project Mahalla Committee

Navoi (Oltiarik district)

22.03.2010 -the local expert provided soil and water management training to the community benefiting from the ELS community project on rehabilitation of irrigation system. -the ELS community project was initiated December 2009 and completed in February 2010. -the project rehabilitated an artesian well and provided water pump for irrigating water to the garden plots of the 140 families of the community. Approximate cost: EUR 26,000 equivalent of which EUR 12,000 equivalent was the ELS project contribution. -the district is one of the target districts of the forthcoming WB FWRMP. Within the framework of the programme a farmer school will be established in the area.


Mr Fashodjan Hamdamov Mr Ahmedov Hakimjon

Community farmer / Extension Agent (Demoplot) Small farmer

Gayrat (Oltiarik district)

22.03.2010

-the greenhouse was equipped with drip irrigation by the ELS project and planted with a high yield variety of lemon tree seedlings. -neighbour households in the community replicated the greenhouse on a smaller scale. -neighbours considering buying drip irrigation but first would like to see results from the greenhouse of the extension agent.


Participants Focus group (5) Mr Sardor Alimdjanov Mr Alisher Satahanov

ELS Project Manager ELS Task Manager

UNDP

Andijan

22.03.2010

-Under ELS 2004, only first activity component was implemented in Andijan - 40 trainees (public officialsl were selected together with Hokimiat - a social economic assessment report was produced in 2008 (with inputs from international expert and working group) and presented to regional administration

ELS Namangan and Andijan/ Tacis 2004 ELS Fergana Valley/Tacis 2006




Mr Alisher Muradov

Community Dev. ELS Task Manager Income Generation

-working group prepared proposal for a M&E system at regional level -After approval by regional administration proposal was further detailed with technical assistance from UNDP MDG statistics project -First idea of M&E is a LAN network between departments at regional level and with district administrations plugged into a database server with MDG-related indicators for measuring performance of state programs. Output of the system are in the form of maps of indicators. -Under ELS 2006 results of capacity assessment were presented to local authorities and draft training modules presented by ASSC which got feedbacks of local authorities for improvements - Under ELS 2006 project works in 64 communities in 4 districts (second and third activity component -Under ELS 2006, 38 community projects completed so far. 36 need to be completed -under component 3 support is provided to the establishment of demonstration plots (e.g. greenhouse) and small farms (e.g. bee keeping, poultry breeding). Only about 50% of these activities have so far received start up equipment though trainings are being implemented.

Mr Shavkat Ibragimov


Regional Government

Andijan 23.03.2010 -the strategic focus of the regional government is SME development and the objective is to achieve 51% of the regional GDP produced by the service sector. -tax wavers have been enacted for SMEs. -the regional government manages benefits for low income families.





-there is an EBRD credit line of 15 million US$ for SME which is managed through Amkor Bank. -the Deputy Hokim participated in the study tour to Germany organized by the ELS 2004 project with focus on rural development planning. This was his first travel in the West and provided him with understanding of the basic principles of rural policymaking in a market context. -another important output of the ELS 2004 project according to the Hokim was the design of the monitoring and evaluation system which will benefit the regional government and improve its ability to respond with corrective measures to problems as they arise in state programmes’ implementation. -regional government is very interested in further development of the monitoring and evaluation system under the ELS 2006 project.

Mr B. Niazmatov Mr Dilshod Mamajanov

Head of Department Lead specialist Inf. Anal, Unit

Ministry of Economy

Andijan 23.03.2010 -the design of the monitoring and evaluation system was explained. -ELS provided trainings in collection and classification of MDG’s related indicators. -the UNDP MDG statistics programme helped design the monitoring and evaluation system, and provided equipment including software and hardware for the equivalent of US$ 10,000. -the system will include an electronic data base server and LAN connection to regional level departments and district administrations. -at the time of the visit, feasibility of these connectivities was being assessed.





-the system will facilitate consolidation of statistical information relevant to state programmes, both at horizontal and vertical levels. It is also expected to facilitate co-ordination between different departments in regional administration.

Mr A Akbarov Mr A Jalolov

District Governor (Hokim) Deputy District Governor (Hokim)

District government

Andijan 23.03.2010

-the main challenges for the district were irrigation water for communities on the hills and infrastructure development as well as environment for small business development. -SME development is the focus of the district administration and since 2007 tax revenue from SMEs has allowed the district budget not to rely any longer on subsidies from central budget. -the ELS 2004 project supported the reconstruction of drinking water supply system in 2 communities. The implementation of these two projects is completed. -under the first activity component 2 trainees from the district administration have taken part in a series of trainings on MDGs’ localization and social and economic statistics. -ELS target communities were selected according to two main criteria, 1/remoteness from the district centre; 2/closeness to the hills. - under the ELS 2006, a number of greenhouse demonstration are in the process of being established. The district administration sees this as a very positive development.


Mr J Hodjev

Deputy District Governor (Hokim)

District government

Izboskan 23.03.2010 -18 communities were selected out of 56 under the ELS 2006 project.





Mr D. Urinov Trainee -the criteria for selection of target communities were 1/lack of access to drinking water; 2/unemployment rate; 3/distance from district centre. -18 community rehabilitation projects were identifies which are still under implementation.

Mr. Shukrat Turdikilov


Regional Government

Namangan 23.03.2010 -the regional government has been very active both in the formulation of the ELS project proposals and the steering committee and has been the local partner of the ELS programme under the 2002, 2004 and 2006 projects. -there is a strong support for all the ELS programme components and their continuation in the future.


Ms Muattara Rakhimova

Director Academy of State and Social Construction

Tashkent 24.03.2010 -the ASSC was established by presidential decree in 2005. It provides capacity building training to local governments. The training modules are normally of short duration, between 3 and 10 days per module. - the ASSC Director participated in the co-ordination of the capacity assessment of local authorities carried out by the ELS 2006 project and the ASSC is now developing 5 training curricula on 1/ results based management; 2/monitoring and evaluation; 3/ICT; 4/budget management;5/local development planning. -trainers are being identified by the regions and will be selected from the regional administrations in particular departments of economy.





Ms Anna Nirody Ms Kyoko Postill Mr Soeren Klem

Resident Representative Deputy Resident Representative Programme Manager

UNDP UNDP EC

Tashkent 25.03.2010 -the expert provided a debriefing of the preliminary findings of the field mission -conversation continued between the EC programme manager and the UNDP reps. without presence of the expert


Mr Rustam Shoabdurakmanov Mr Soeren Klem

National Co-ordinator and Deputy Minister Programme Manager

Ministry of Economy EC

Tashkent 25.03.2010 -the expert briefed the NC about the preliminary findings of the evaluation. -in general, the NC agreed with the findings including the shortcomings of the programme, and highlighted the importance of the ELS programme which is a successful model of partnership for development between the EC, UNDP and government. He expressed the hope that EC would continue funding of the programme.


ELS Project Steering Committee Meeting

Tashkent 26.03.2010 -the expert provided a Power Point presentation of the findings and preliminary recommendations of the evaluation. -these were validated by the participants as realistic and concrete.


Mr Tanuo Sunahara Ms Sayaka Usui

First Secretary Programme Officer

Japanese Embassy

Tashkent 29.03.2010 -under the small grant mechanism of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan an US$ 84,000 equivalent was provided to an ELS target community in the district of Rishstan for the reconstruction of the water supply system. -the grant application was prepared with the support of the MIRC in Bagdad district.


Mr Robert Davey

Team Leader World Bank’s Drainage, Irrigation and Wetland Improvement project

Tashkent 29.03.2010 -Ministry of Agriculture main partner of new FWRMP has very little knowledge of management and interest in community development and small scale rural development .They have interest in large scale infrastructural rehabilitation





-Within the context of the new FWRMP there are two possible linkages with ELS 1/capacity building of water user groups at community level (ELS can do it FWRMP not) 2/rehabilitation of small scale irrigation systems at community level (ELS can do it, FWRMP not) -agricultural output of community households is 60% of total value added in agriculture -FWRMP would provide a platform (framework) facilitating small scale income generation activities by ELS -ELS benefitted from manuals produced by the Drainage, Irrigation and Wetland Improvement project of the WB -small scale drip irrigation is very cost-effective for vegetable production at household garden plot level -training people in small scale water irrigation infrastructure is a need

Mr Hayrullo Malikov Ms Shaloo Ashafanova Ms Oyunsahian Dendevnorov

Social Policy Officer Project Manager Family Planning and Education project Acting Deputy Representative and Social Policy Specialist

UNICEF Tashkent 29.03.2010 -Co-operation with UNDP started with UNDP ABD project in Kashkadarya within the context of the Community Development component -second area of co-operation with UNDP has been the further development of the concept of Results-Based Management for local authorities in partnership with ASSC, which UNICEF had already started to test -the third area of co-operation has been co-operation with the UNICEF Family Planning and Education project -the fourth area of co-operation was the capacity assessment of local authorities -UNICEF Family Planning and Education project provided training to basic social





service providers (e.g kindergartens teachers, medical staff of VMPs) -Cases were found in which ELS community projects were not effective (e.g. drinking water supply, gas supply) -On the other hand ELS refurbishment of VMPs has facilitated improvement of health levels in communities -capacity assessment of local authorities important but generated too wide information for use -interaction between ELS project and UNICEF Mother and Child project has been minimal -ELS project very good links to and reputation with local authorities that UNICEF does not have -Other strong points: work on MDG-related indicators; MIRCs established by ELS can be used by UNICEF projects in the future -In general the ELS project should be continued with corrections but the institutions created are important also for future interventions by other donors -impact indicators were also discussed within the context of health levels and UNICEF multiple clusters surveys


The project is financed by the European Union

The project is implemented by IBF International Consulting

«MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE ENHANCEMENT OF LIVING STANDARDS

PROGRAMME IN UZBEKISTAN (2005-2010) »

Letter of Contract N°«2009/223549»

FINAL DRAFT EVALUATION REPORT

VOLUME I

Prepared by:

Emilio Valli

August 2010

The European Union’s DCI-ASIA Development Programme



1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

2 INTRODUCTION 12

2.1 Description of the programme 12

2.2 Evaluation objectives 14

2.3 Evaluation background 15

2.4 Poverty in the target regions 15

2.5 The public policy context 17

3 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY 18

3.1 Evaluation criteria 18

3.2 Evaluation framework 19

3.3 Evaluation process 19

4 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 22

4.1 Relevance 22

4.2 Effectiveness 24

4.3 Efficiency 26

4.4 Impact 28

4.5 Sustainability 29

4.6 Visibility 31

5 LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32

5.1 At programme level 32

5.2 At project level 34

6 ANNEXES 37

6.1 Annex I - Evaluation Framework 38

6.2 Annex II – List of Persons and Organisations Consulted 42

6.3 Annex III – Table of acronyms 46

6.4 Annex IV – Terms of Reference 47

6.5 Annex V - ELS Projects Monitoring and Evaluation Tables used for internal monitoring 57


11 EEXXEECCUUTTIIVVEE SSUUMMMMAARRYY Introduction The Enhancement of Living Standards Programme (ELS) in Uzbekistan is a poverty reduction programme that has been implemented in the three regions of the Fergana Valley-i.e. Namangan, Andijan and Fergana- since January 2005. The programme has been implemented through project ‘direct agreements’ with UNDP. This evaluation had two main specific objectives:

• to assess the overall ELS programme and the four individual ELS projects in Fergana Valley • to suggest areas for further assistance “under the new poverty reduction/rural development

programme funded by DCI” and actions to consolidate and further develop the results achieved

A significant majority of the poor population in Uzbekistan lives in rural areas. Poverty for the purpose of this evaluation is intended as a multi-dimensional issue beyond monetary income deprivation and lack of economic opportunity, and covers vulnerability and remote access to education and basic health services, lack of access to clean drinking water and basic utilities (e.g. electricity, gas), scarcity of power and influence, deprived social status and human dignity. Compared to the other regions of Uzbekistan, the population density in the three regions of the Fergana Valley targeted by the ELS programme is high and the access to water and land resources is limited. The potential for social conflict exists. There are significant differences between regions and within regions between territories. Typically, living standards are lower in the rural settlements more remote from the urban centres. Uzbekistan has prepared a Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP), the equivalent of a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. Through the WISP, the Government of Uzbekistan recognizes that poverty is largely concentrated in the rural areas and outlines the public policies to increase economic growth and social service delivery to the poor. Poverty reduction is also a primary objective of the EC Regional Strategy for Assistance to Central Asia 2007-2013 which is implemented under the new financial regulation, Development Co-operation Instrument (DCI). The strategy recognizes that poverty reduction in the target regions (which include the Fergana Valley) requires long-term co-operation based on a community-based and demand-driven approach in line with the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). The TACIS Central Asia programme has been structured along three tracks, “track 3” is the poverty reduction scheme which also encompasses the ELS programme. Poverty reduction is also a central objective of the DCI. The first Central Asia Strategy and Indicative Programme (2007-2010) under the DCI, identify “poverty reduction and increasing living standards” as one of the three main areas of co-operation. Under this area of co-operation, there is a focal sector titled “geographically targeted rural development schemes, regional and local community development” which corresponds to the former “track 3” of the TACIS Central Asia Programme.


Evaluation methodology The evaluation methodology was designed to meet the requirements and expectations of the Terms of Reference (ToR). The evaluation was carried out based on the five EC Project Cycle Management criteria. The focus was on relevance, effectiveness and sustainability. Impact assessment was in terms of the type and range of effects on the living standards of the populations in the target communities, that could be attributed to the project. Efficiency and sustainability were addressed in terms of lessons learned. The evaluation criteria including the evaluation sub-questions were detailed in the Evaluation Framework. The framework defined the performance indicators, sources of information and methods of information collection. One of the main limitations was the difficult or no access to statistics. The evaluation process started with a review of documentation, covering country, EC, other donors and ELS project level documents. The documentary review continued after the submission of the Inception Report and throughout the implementation period of the evaluation. The site visits in Tashkent and Fergana Valley provided an opportunity to assess the performance of the projects, to collect ‘on the ground’ information and to carry out in depth consultation. Three techniques were used during the field mission: interviews, focus groups and observation. The monitoring and evaluation indicators developed by the ELS projects and presented in Annex V of the report, were generally relevant to the objectives. However, the reliability of the baseline and result values assigned by the ELS project management to the indicators could not always be objectively verified by the evaluator. This is because independent sources of verification for each indicator had not been systematically identified or because the sources were not always available, notably for the earliest projects. This observation does not mean that the progress by ELS projects towards their objectives could not be qualitatively assessed by this evaluation-e.g. through observation, interviews and focus groups discussions- but suggests that some of the measurements of progress by the ELS programme management presented in Annex V, may not be free of bias because the independent sources of verification for the indicators, that may have dismissed such a possibility, could not be reached by the evaluator because they were not clearly identified or available. Findings and conclusions on relevance Overall, the relevance of the ELS programme was found to be good. The programme was found to be in line with the WISP and the EC Country Strategy Paper (CSP). The ELS programme objectives were also relevant in the context of the UNDP Area Based Development (ABD) programme objectives in Uzbekistan and the intervention of the main multilateral donors, including in particular the World Bank (WB). Poverty in the target areas is the result of interrelated problems, including low productivity and incomes, rapid demographic growth and limited access to land and water, inadequate social infrastructure and services, weak institutional capacities and a level of insecurity in the border districts which hinders trade. The holistic, area based development approach of the ELS projects thus matched well with the needs on the ground. Considering the deteriorated conditions of economic and social infrastructure in the target regions, both “soft” and “hard” components were devised.


Findings and conclusions on effectiveness Overall, effectiveness of the ELS programme was good. The ELS programme contributed to the capacity building of more communities than originally planned. The allocation of small social infrastructure development grants from the projects improved access of the populations to basic social services: clean water, primary health care, gas, electricity, and pre-school education. These “hard” activities were matched by capacity development of community initiative groups. The effectiveness of the small social infrastructure development projects in providing improved access to basic social services should also be measured against the quality of the service provision. In most communities, the quality of services delivery was found to be reduced by wider infrastructural bottlenecks in public utilities, notably gas and electricity. The Community Development Planning (CDP) activity contributed to strengthen the effectiveness of the initiative groups and their capacity to attract funding from district government and other sources, including donors, but also engendered a pro-active approach by communities to the solution of their economic and social development issues, including through the formation of new income generation initiative groups. Their performance of the Mahallas Information and Resource Centres (MIRCs) has varied from district to district but the value of their services and advice to support the CDP was generally appreciated by the communities and their self-governing bodies, the Mahalla Committees. The rural enterprises and cooperatives established by the projects have generally improved income generation opportunities and access to finance for their members (almost exclusively men). The micro-credit schemes have increased income generation opportunities and access to finance mainly for women groups.

Transfer of farming and business skills to small farmers and poor households, has been occurring under two main complementary modalities: the demonstration greenhouses at community level and the Rural Development Centres (RDCs) at district level. The demonstration greenhouses activity, which has targeted community households has significantly facilitated the dissemination of farming skills and improved the opportunity of households to increase the productivity of and the incomes they derive from the cultivation of their garden plots with fruits and vegetables. The projects have introduced a coherent framework for local development planning by local authorities, based on MDGs. However, no sufficient evidence was found that the projects’ main outputs, namely the social and economic assessments, had actually been used to prepare development strategies at regional and district levels, though they were used at national government level for the preparation of the WISP. On the other hand, evidence was found that the priorities identified in the CDPs had informed the formation of district annual development plans and the allocation of resources by district authorities for community basic social services and infrastructure. Findings and conclusions on efficiency Overall, the efficiency of the programme was found to be less than good-i.e. satisfactory. All projects had delays averaging between 2 and 4 months in the start-up phase. The main reason was the length of UNDP recruitment process of the projects’ teams.


It was also noted that delays in utilization of resources had been higher in projects covering more than one region. In this case, the delays were due to the difficulty of reconciling the complexity of the projects participatory approach to planning and decision-making, with the breadth of the territorial coverage, which was further complicated by having to co-ordinate regional administrations with different approaches to the same objective. In general, project outputs were produced with the planned means, however, not all projects did. In order to make modifications in resource utilization, formal addenda were required to the EC contracts. Nevertheless, modifications also occurred without preparing formal addenda, in order to reduce delays in implementation. UNDP’s control and internal system procedures, while acting as additional safeguards for stewardship in resource utilization, also caused delays in implementation of projects activities. The dual subordination of the ELS Programme Co-ordinator to both, the UNDP Deputy Resident Representative and a UNDP Programme Manager (for economic development) did not facilitate decision-making on resource utilization. The day-today management of the projects has been executed by local teams in the three target regions. The local teams have been an important asset to the programme in terms of local knowledge, commitment, professional day-to-day communication with local authorities, communities and stakeholders as well as for their specific technical skills, notably in social mobilization, agricultural techniques and engineering. Communication between the programme office in Tashkent and the teams in the regions has been on a regular basis and communication between the three local teams has been systematic, particularly in terms of sharing lessons learnt. Notable savings were achieved through cost-sharing with other UNDP-funded ABD projects. Moreover, ELS projects were generally successful in the involvement of local partners and mobilization of their resources. In particular, local communities contributed up to 50% of the costs of basic social infrastructure rehabilitation projects, which has provided for substantial co-financing. Findings and conclusions on impact Overall, the impact of the programme was found to be less than good-i.e. satisfactory. The main reason for this (less than good) result was the short timeframe for the implementation of each project, further reduced by start-up delays. Measuring impact was difficult as projects indicators were not always relevant and/or reliable. Moreover, comparison could not be made with non-ELS communities. In spite of these limitations, indications were found that the programme had improved the livelihoods of communities through its mobilization and social infrastructure rehabilitation activities to bring access to clean water, and a notable effect has been the drop in intestinal diseases such as typhoid, hepatitis, and diarrhea, as a result of availability of cleaner water. The projects have had limited but potentially significant impacts on incomes and employment in the target areas. At community level, households have now the potential to achieve improved living standards through the acquisition of more productive and efficient technologies (i.e. greenhouses, drip irrigation, etc.) of farming fruits and vegetables, made accessible through the demonstration plots established by the projects. In terms of increased capacity of local governments to respond to community needs, use by the projects of MDGs as a starting point to support local development planning have in general helped fostering the dialogue with communities about addressing local development issues.


In general, the impacts of the projects have been enhanced by the successful co-ordination with relevant government programmes and other donor interventions in the target regions, which has enhanced the effects of the ELS projects in the context of the overall objective of the programme. Findings and conclusions on sustainability Overall, the sustainability of the programme was found to be satisfactory. Though participation of the local partners in the preparation of project proposals was adequate, the continuation of project results after the projects’ end could not always be confirmed. Ownership of the projects’ results by local partners was generally high, but mainly related to the community development activity. On average, projects made reasonable attempts to strengthen sustainability through capacity-building and human resource development of community institutions, although the needs of local governments required further attention as there is only mixed evidence that the outputs of the projects have been updated or used by the beneficiary local government, after the project end.

Continuation of project benefits in several cases depended on the financial viability of the rural organizations that had been established or strengthened through the projects’ activities. In general, specific purpose organizations such as the rural co-operatives, had better potential for financial sustainability than more general purpose institutions such as the Rural Development Centres (RDCs) and the MIRCs. The micro-credit schemes being single purpose, have been recycled and have had a strong gender-oriented (women beneficiaries) implementation.

There are indications that the demonstration plots at community level are generating replication of new farming technologies in communities. Findings and conclusions on visibility Overall, the visibility of the ELS programme was found to be good. Visibility was high in the Fergana Valley, mainly due to the wide coverage of the programme, its duration and the number of beneficiaries involved in the community development activity. The visibility of the ELS programme web-site was enhanced by its integration in the UNDP web-portal. The EU formal visibility has generally been implemented well, though substance wise, visibility activities by the programme focused on the concept of ‘partnership for development’ between EU and UNDP, but in reality with no communication about EU. This is partly the result of the absence of an EC Delegation on the ground, and the consequent lack of an active information and communication activity on EU- related issues. Recommendations at programme level Recommendation 1

. The wealth of experience and knowledge that have been accumulated through the implementation of the ELS programme and are institutionalized with UNDP Country Office together with the presence of UNDP in the Fergana Valley regions provide a platform for implementing a new poverty reduction programme under the DCI.

Recommendation 2

. The new poverty reduction programme under the DCI should continue to support both basic social services infrastructure development and local economic development through income generation activities. The geographical coverage of the Fergana Valley should remain to match the long-term EC strategies commitment to the region. However, new districts and communities should be targeted to consolidate the results of the ELS programme in the Fergana Valley as a whole, before exit.


Recommendation 3

. The next poverty reduction programme can contribute to the clarification of standards for social service provision to communities and beyond, not only in the context of public utilities, but also in health and education. For example, for users of health and education services, it is sometimes not exactly clear what services are provided free by government, and what not.

Recommendation 4

. The new poverty reduction programme should allocate an increased share of its resources to capacity-building of local government to address the functional gaps in the planning and implementation of state programmes and the delivery of service provision. Focus should be not only on training development but also on systems development, such as the monitoring and evaluation system, already being piloted in Andijan region.

Recommendation 5

. The future poverty reduction programme should continue to help regional and district authorities, not only in developing a core set of indicators to measure the impact of state programmes on poverty reduction, but also in developing functional activities and systems for sharing and verifying reliability of data.

Recommendation 6

. Until an EC Delegation is open, the public relations specialist of the current ELS project should be trained in the development and dissemination of communication contents on EU policies, programmes and strategies for the region.


Recommendations at project level For future projects under the DCI: Recommendation 1

. Under the DCI, duration of capacity-building projects should be extended to at least 3 years or more.

Recommendation 2

. Future poverty reduction projects should be implemented each in one region only, avoiding covering two regions or more under the same project.

Recommendation 3

Future poverty reduction projects should encourage poor households to engage in market-oriented production and value-added market chain should be promoted, building on existing agro-co-operatives established and trained by the ELS projects.

Recommendation 4

. In future poverty reduction projects, there should be more income generation activities that specifically target women and female-led households. One reason for that is that many adult males are migrants to Kazakhstan and Russia, and the number of female-led households in rural areas is an important share of all households.

Recommendation 5

. Future poverty reduction projects should strengthen the links between community development activities, especially between Community Development Planning (CDP) and local economic development as job creation is an increasing core priority of most CDPs.

Recommendation 6

. Future projects should support the expansion and further development of community extension services by facilitating the linkage between the network of community extension agents and private seed companies, either directly or through the intermediation of the Rural Development Centres (RDCs), that the ELS programme has started to establish. This would create a partnership based on mutual interest between communities and private sector extension services that would provide rural communities with sustainable access to modern farm technologies, bringing higher income opportunities for poor community households.

For the on-going ELS project: Recommendation 1. A time extension of about 6-7 months should be provided to the project to enable completion of the activities originally planned and already under implementation, notably under the community development component. The project should provide the EC with an updated and complete workplan and timetable (disaggregated per district) for the implementation of the community development activities to the extended project end. Recommendation 2. The agreement with the ASSC should include a clear timetable and performance indicators to be submitted to and approved by the Project Steering Committee (PSC). Recommendation 3. The logical framework matrix should be updated and reconciled with the internal monitoring and evaluation framework of the project. The sources of verification for the indicators should be clearly identified. Indicators should be reviewed and adjusted to reflect the quality of project results. Recommendation 4. A specific assessment of the rehabilitation works in the district of Besharik where the problems were detected, is recommended. The assessment should be planned by the project office in Tashkent and implemented with human resources from the project offices in other regions and address both technical and local management aspects (e.g. possible decision-making weaknesses).

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline


Recommendation 5. The training curricula developed by the ASSC should be independently reviewed preferably by a peer institution in the region or in the EU for relevance of contents, usefulness and user-friendliness to the target groups. Recommendation 6

. The project should develop and implement an exit strategy for the MIRCs addressing: focal tasks description, standard of services to be achieved, further trainings to be developed, training of trainers, identification of the needs of potential institutional clients, funding mechanisms including the possibility of membership fees from communities.

maene

Underline


22 IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN 2.1 Description of the programme

The Enhancement of Living Standards Programme (ELS) in Uzbekistan is a poverty reduction programme that has been implemented in the three regions of the Fergana Valley-i.e. Namangan, Andijan and Fergana- since January 2005. The overall objective of the ELS programme is “to increase the living standards of the vulnerable populations in Fergana Valley”. Though there is no explicit definition of ‘vulnerable populations’ in the project documents, the project interventions aim to benefit the households of most economically underdeveloped rural communities. The ELS addresses three main issues: 1/ weak capacity of local government in development planning and delivery of basic social services; 2/ poor access to basic quality services by rural populations and inadequate capacity of rural communities to support social services delivery; 3/ inequitable access to rural development services and income generation opportunities by rural communities. The ELS strategy to address these issues is articulated in three activity components: 1/ capacity building of regional and district level government institutions in local development planning and social services delivery; 2/ capacity building of local communities (mahallas) and rehabilitation of basic social services infrastructure; 3/ promoting equitable access to rural development services and to opportunities for income generation. The four ELS projects in Fergana Valley have been implemented through Contribution Agreements with UNDP within the framework of EC/UN FAFA. The EC grant is 91% of the total amount and the UNDP contribution equals about 9% of the total programme cost. The table below provides a list of the four projects. Table 1 List of ELS projects implemented in Fergana Valley

Contract year

Contract nr Title Total

Amount EC Grant Regions Nature

Annual Action Programme

2004 091-225 Enhancement of Living Standards in Namangan Region

1100000 1000000 Namangan Contribution Agreement with UNDP

TACIS 2002

2006 116-796 Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Region

1100000 1000000 Fergana Contribution Agreement with UNDP

TACIS 2003

2007 142-128 Enhancement of Living Standards in Andijan and Namangan Phase II

1100000 1000000 Namangan Andijan


TACIS 2004

2008 163-878 Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Valley

3850000 3500000 Namangan Andijan Fergana


TACIS 2006

In order to provide a better understanding of how the ELS programme works, we have modeled the information from the project documents as follows:


Table 2 ELS programme model Inputs

1. EC grant finance 2. UNDP direct and indirect coverage of total programme costs 3. Local communities contributions in kinds and finance 4. ELS international co-ordinator and specialists 5. ELS national technical advisor, experts, PR specialist 6. ELS regional manager, area managers, task managers, community mobilizers, administrative and financial

assistants 7. UNDP Deputy Resident Representative (field supervision) 8. UNDP Country Office procurement, finance and human resource teams 9. UNDP Regional Office in Bratislava (technical assistance) 10. Equipment, materials

Activities

1. Capacity building of regional and district governments in local development planning 1.1 Capacity assessment of local authorities in social services delivery 1.2 Development of training modules on local development planning techniques 1.3 Training of regional trainers to deliver the training modules 1.4 Training of regional and district government policy managers and analysts 1.5 Technical support and training for the management and reporting of socio-economic statistics 1.6 Support for the preparation of MDG baseline reports and advocacy materials

2. Capacity building of local communities and rehabilitation of basic social services 2.1 Selection of communities (mahallas) based on needs and capacity assessments 2.2 Mobilisation and training of selected communities in strategic planning , fund-raising and advocacy skills 2.3 Facilitating dialogue between communities and district governments on resources allocation to communities

development priorities 2.4 Supporting the rehabilitation and maintenance of community social services infrastructure 2.5 Setting-up of Mahallas Information and Resource Centres (MIRCs) and training of facilitators 2.6 Supporting the MIRCs in the development and provision of knowledge-based resources to communities 2.7 Promoting networking of communities and dissemination of communities best practices

3. Promoting equitable access to rural development services and income generation opportunities 3.1 Analysis of economic opportunities in selected communities 3.2 Mobilisation and training of economic initiative groups 3.3 Capacity assessments of local economic institutions 3.4 Design and implementation of income generation schemes 3.5 Development of agricultural extension services 3.6 Supporting the establishment and training the staff of the Rural Development Centres (RDCs)

Outputs

1. Capacity building of regional and district governments in local development planning 1.1 Training modules in local development planning 1.2 Regional trainers in local development planning 1.3 Trained policy managers and analysts 1.4 Operational database with electronic maps of socio-economic statistics 1.5 Community baselines of MDG indicators and MDG advocacy plans

2. Capacity building of local communities and rehabilitation of basic social services 2.1 Trained community initiative groups 2.2 Community Development Plans (CDPs) 2.3 Process format for dialogue between communities and district authorities 2.4 Community infrastructure rehabilitation projects 2.5 Operational MIRCs 2.6 Operational community networks including with Area Based Development programmes in Karapalkastan and

Kashkadarya 3. Promoting equitable access to rural development services and income generation opportunities

3.1 Trained economic initiative groups 3.2 Rural co-operative and private enterprises 3.3 Micro-credit schemes 3.4 Agricultural demonstration plots 3.5 Trained network of agricultural extension agents 3.6 Operational RDCs


Outcomes 1. Capacity building of regional and district governments in local development planning

1.1 More efficient and effective management of staff and budget resources for social services delivery 2. Capacity building of local communities and rehabilitation of basic social services

2.1 Increased community resources mobilization in support of social services delivery 2.2 Self-help attitude of communities in addressing social and economic development challenges 2.3 Improved access to better quality social services

3. Promoting equitable access to rural development services and income generation opportunities 3.1 Increased equitable access by residents of rural communities to new skills, technologies, credit and work

opportunities

2.2 Evaluation objectives

This evaluation had two main specific objectives:

• to assess the overall ELS programme and the four individual ELS projects in Fergana Valley • to suggest areas for further assistance “under the new poverty reduction/rural development

programme funded by DCI” and actions to consolidate and further develop the results achieved

Poverty reduction remains a primary objective of the EC Regional Strategy for Assistance to Central Asia for the budgetary period 2007-2013, which is implemented under the new financial regulation, the DCI. The DCI is currently the main EC financial instrument to support developing countries and low middle-income transition countries in their efforts towards achieving the MDG. The central objective of the DCI is the eradication of poverty in a context of sustainable development as well as the promotion of democracy, good governance and respect for human rights and the rule of law. The wide scope of the DCI has prompted the inclusion in the regulation of a “political content” reflecting the specific situation of Central Asian countries. The EC Regional Strategy for Assistance to Central Asia recognizes that poverty reduction in the target regions requires long-term cooperation based on a community-based and demand-driven approach in line with the EC principle of “Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development” (LRRD) and the Millennium Development Goals The first Central Asia (CA) Indicative Programme (IP) under the DCI, the CA IP 2007-2010, identifies “poverty reduction and increasing living standards” as one of the three areas of co-operation. Under this area of co-operation, there is a focal sector titled “geographically targeted rural development schemes, regional and local community development “which corresponds to the former Tacis “track 3” of the Central Asia programme. For Uzbekistan, the geographical focus for poverty reduction programmes under the IP 2007-10 continues to be the Fergana Valley. The EC strategic approach is indeed to implement poverty reduction programmes over time in particular geographical areas perceived as more vulnerable to destabilizing influences. This is an important element of the EC Regional Strategy for Central Asia 2007-2013, and one in line with the comprehensive approach to conflict prevention called for by the European Consensus on Development (December 2005). The overriding objective of this evaluation is to provide lessons learned and recommendations for a future poverty reduction/rural development programme in Fergana Valley to be funded under the DCI. There will be no attempt in this report to generalize findings and conclusions beyond the situational and contextual conditions of the three regions of Fergana Valley in which observations have been made.


2.3 Evaluation background This draft Mid-Term Evaluation Report of the ELS Programme in Uzbekistan has been prepared by a poverty reduction expert from IBF International Consulting under letter of contract EuropeAid Nr 2009/223549. The draft Mid-Term Evaluation Report is the third deliverable of the evaluation. The first deliverable was the Inception Report submitted in February 2010. The report explained the Consultant’s own understanding of the ToR (Annex IV), outlined the evaluation methodology and organisation of the work, the Evaluation Framework with questions and sub-questions, and defined the itinerary of the field mission in Uzbekistan. The major elements of the evaluation methodology are presented again in Chapter 3 of this Report. The second deliverable was the Report from the Mission to Uzbekistan submitted in April 2010, immediately after the end of the field mission to the ELS programme sites. The report included preliminary findings and conclusions. The primary client of the evaluation is EuropeAid D2. The Unit has specific responsibility for the overall management and supervision of the ELS programme in Uzbekistan as well as for the identification of future poverty reduction programmes in the country. In Uzbekistan, the immediate beneficiaries of the evaluation results will be the ELS project teams, the UNDP Country Office overseeing and contributing to the overall implementation of the programme in the field, the Ministry of Economy (Project Partner), the Cabinet of Ministers Office, the Regional Project Co-ordinators in the three targeted regions of Namangan, Fergana and Andijan and the local authorities in the districts (rayons) concerned by the ELS programme. At grass-roots level, the targeted communities (mahallas) and populations are expected to benefit from an improved effectiveness of the programme induced by the activation of the recommendations. 2.4 Poverty in the target regions The territory of the Fergana Valley spans across three Central Asian states: Uzbekistan, the Kyrgyz Republic and Tajikistan. The total population is estimated at 14 million, of which approximately 60% (or about 8 million) live in the three Uzbek regions of Namangan, Fergana and Andijan, which have been targeted by the ELS programme. Compared to other regions of Uzbekistan, the population density in the three regions of the Fergana Valley is high and the amount of land per person small. In average about 85% of the population lives in rural areas and living standards in rural settlements are low. Population in rural communities continues to grow rapidly and the average nuclear family is about 6 persons. Within each region of the Fergana Valley there are significant differences between better off and worse off territories. Typically, living standards are lower in the rural settlements more remote from the regional urban centers. Most households in rural settlements rely on agriculture as the main source of family subsistence and cash income. Small businesses are mainly in agriculture and their number has been increasing, though their productivity and profitability remain generally low. Entrepreneurial activity outside agriculture is mainly small trade, at times textile or food production (e.g. flour mills)-all activities employing predominantly women. Social benefits (e.g. pensions, social allowances) and salaries of public servants account only for a small proportion of family income.


About 30% of the population living in rural settlements is not economically active, a share that is in majority of women and includes unemployed who have renounced seeking work. The official rate of unemployment is in average 5% (source: Mahalla Committees). However, this figure does not include those in working age who are not seeking employment.

Cash income is generally low and a majority of the population (60% in some districts) reportedly live with less than 1 US$ equivalent per person per day. Out-migration, mainly for seasonal work, affects young men but has been declining with the recent economic downturn in Russia and the return of migrants is a new challenge for rural communities.

Livestock production, cattle and poultry, is widespread and has an important role to families. Calves are kept for milk as well as for fattening and subsequent sale. Because prices of livestock have been growing overtime many families have invested in livestock, often drawing on micro-credit, to protect and increase their savings.

The typical household in rural community settlements has a small garden plot, in average 0.1 ha, which is used for fruit and vegetable production, both for self-consumption and sale of produces on the market. The value of garden plots production is an important share of the value of total agricultural production, and an important source of income for rural households.

Private farms, averaging about 20 ha of land, are engaged in cotton, wheat and orchard production. The latter production is the most profitable. Dekhan farms, not including garden plots, are currently a declining percentage in terms of land occupation.

Typically, all households in the rural settlements have limited access to basic social services such as water, gas, electricity, primary health care, sanitation. Sewerage infrastructure is practically inexistent. Most remote communities are particularly affected as they are generally not connected to the main utilities infrastructure.

District (raion) government budgets are generally in need of subsidies from the central budget, and subsidies normally make up between 30% and 50% of a raion budget.

To summarize, poverty in the Fergana Valley is localized, with higher incidence in remote rural settlements, and is the result of interrelated problems, comprising low productivity and incomes, rapid demographic growth and limited access to land and water, inadequate social infrastructure and services, weak institutional capacities and a level of insecurity in the border districts which hinders trade.

However, conditions in rural areas in Fergana Valley have not been static. Reportedly, a large majority of the population has now easier access to improved drinking water sources.

Some of the districts (e.g. Andijan, Izboskan districts) have reported higher budget revenues from a larger number of small rural businesses since 2007, and as a result some district budgets are no longer subsidized by the central budget: a likely indication of sustained economic growth and a possible result of the recent fiscal decentralization measures implemented under the WISP (see 2.5 below).

Moreover, signs of recent public expenditure in the rehabilitation of infrastructure are apparent in rural towns, though much less in areas of small rural settlements. .

New foreign investors mainly from China, India, one also from the UK, have recently set up small business joint ventures in textile and agriculture. Reportedly a Chinese businessman is testing new rice sorts, which do not require irrigation, in the district of Bagdad. International private agricultural extension service companies are opening offices in the Fergana Valley.

In every communities visited by the expert construction of new houses is taking place to accommodate a growing population. As a result, the demand for basic public services is increasing.

.


2.5 The public policy context The Government of Uzbekistan (GoU) signed the Millennium Declaration and its policies are oriented towards the achievement of the first seven MDG directed at reducing poverty in its multiple dimensions: lack of income, malnutrition, poor access to education and health care, gender inequality, child mortality, poor maternal health, HIV/tuberculosis, environmental degradation. The national planning document is the Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP). The Interim WISP (I-WISP) was adopted in November 2004 and the full WISP (2008-10) in November 2007. They are the equivalent of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and outline the public policies to increase economic growth and improve social services. Through the WISP, GoU recognizes that poverty is largely concentrated in rural areas, which are characterized by a fast growing population requiring job creation and responsive social service delivery systems that reach the poor. GoU goals include boosting agricultural productivity, supporting the growth of small businesses, and strengthening the delivery of basic social services in energy, water, sanitation, education, health and social protection for vulnerable households. In the crucial water sector, GoU has identified access of the rural settlements to improved water drinking sources and improved irrigated lands as priorities. In the energy sector, delivery of gas to remote and sparsely populated rural settlements is one of the objectives. Decentralization of public administration is one of the main stated objectives of the WISP, and aims primarily to improve the management of resources for social service delivery to the populations. Regional and district administrations (Khokymiats) can form their local budgets to implement economic and social development programmes, through an increased authority to generate their own tax revenue. Regional social policy is carried out through the implementation of territorial targeted programs––reform and development of education, health care, and rural social infrastructure; drinking water and gas supply to the rural population; creation of jobs; and state programs for social protection of socially vulnerable population groups and others, administered through the Mahallas Committees (the lowest level of government consisting of elected community leaders). A crucial instrument of social policy implementation is the Employment Fund (run under the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection), which provides credits at subsidized interest rates to vulnerable households for supporting home-based income-generating activities, family businesses and home-based livestock development. Eligible households are identified and selected through the Mahallas Committees. The year 2009 was decreed by the President of Uzbekistan as the National Year for Rural Development. As a result a series of specific decrees have been enacted to allocate public funding, among others for the rehabilitation of public services infrastructure in rural towns and villages; for private housing development in rural communities; and for improving access of the rural populations to quality primary healthcare services. A specific objective in primary health care is that each rural community has access to a functioning Village Medical Point (VMP) within a range of 5-7 km and a ‘surveillance system’ is implemented by the VMPs to monitor, diagnose and register socially threatening diseases (e.g. hepatitis, typhoid, malnutrition, etc.) in rural communities, and in particular for mothers and children.


33 EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN MMEETTHHOODDOOLLOOGGYY 3.1 Evaluation criteria

The methodology used for this evaluation was proposed in the Inception Report which was approved by the EC on 7 March 2010. The methodology was further elaborated during the initial stages of the field mission. The methodology was designed to meet the requirements and expectations set out in the ToR. It was considered credible and appropriate for identifying and assessing the results attributable to the ELS programme in Fergana Valley, given the range of information available, the limited time and the resource constraints. . The evaluation was carried out in accordance with the Official Development Assistance (ODA) criteria as defined in the Project Cycle Management (PCM) Guidelines of the EC. In particular, the expert assessed the programme according to the following five evaluation criteria: • Relevance

•

: an assessment was made on whether the programme and the individual projects make sense in the context of their environment: the appropriateness of their objectives vis-à-vis the problems of the target groups they are supposed to benefit and the physical and policy environment. Effectiveness

•

: an assessment was made of the contribution of the projects results to the achievement of the programme’s objectives: to what extent the objectives of the programme have been (or are likely to be) achieved, and an assessment of the quality of the services provided by the projects. Efficiency

•

: an assessment was made of the individual projects results compared to the costs incurred (“value-for-money”). Impact:

•

to the extent possible, an assessment was made of what has happened in terms of poverty reduction (improved living standards) as a result of the programme implementation: the intended (or unintended) effects that could be attributed to the programme in the targeted communities, although it was not feasible to carry out comparisons with non ELS targeted communities. Sustainability

: an assessment was made of the likelihood of benefits produced by the projects to continue to flow after external funding has ended, with particular reference to local ownership and institutional capability, appropriate technology, gender and environmental issues.

In addition, the ToR required the assessment of the ELS programme and individual projects visibility

, including notably the visibility of the EU as a donor.

Among the five evaluation criteria, the focus was on relevance, effectiveness, and sustainability of results. The expert assessed the relevance of the ELS programme and the individual projects vis-à-vis the priorities of the WISP as well as the relevance of the ELS approach to the needs of the target groups. The expert also appraised the programme’s complementarity and co-ordination with other relevant donor projects and UNDP’s other projects, including the parallel ABD programmes. The expert also considered whether the results were achieved and had effectively contributed to the programme’s original objectives. Efficiency was addressed but rather in terms of lessons learned than a systematic value for money audit (in particular project finances were not analysed). Impact was assessed in terms of the range and types of effects (including unintended end outcomes) that the implementation of the programme has had on poverty reduction for the different target groups in the selected communities.


3.2 Evaluation framework

The main evaluation criteria, including the evaluation sub-questions, were detailed in the Evaluation Framework.

The Evaluation Framework systemised the methodology, identifying the issues to be addressed, sub-questions that provided elaboration; and the performance indicators (variables to be considered), sources of information and method of information collection for each issue. The evaluation issues and sub-questions were deemed to reflect what was set out in the ToR, but were elaborated and re-organized. The ToR and the Evaluation Framework both contain retrospective issues that address historical performance, as well as forward-looking issues to be used to inform future directions. Forward-looking issues do not relate to the achievement of results and, therefore, were not assigned indicators. The evaluation framework sets out: • The evaluation issues (i.e. questions to be answered by the evaluation) • Sub-questions that elaborate on the evaluation issues • Performance indicators and/or variables to be considered • Key sources of information • Methods for information collection The Evaluation Framework is presented in Annex I. Compared with the Evaluation Framework which was presented in the Inception Report, this slightly revised version accommodates comments received during the early stages of the field mission. In terms of methodology, the expert could not always objectively verify the reliability of the baseline and result values assigned to the monitoring and evaluation indicators by the ELS project management and presented in Annex V to this evaluation report, This was due to the general lack of independent sources of verification, which limited the evaluator’s ability to assess the potential bias in the measures assigned by management to the projects’ indicators. 3.3 Evaluation process

The expert started the Inception Phase of the evaluation on 1 February 2010 by selecting and reviewing available country, programme and project level information from his home office. The process continued after the briefing of the expert in Brussels, on 3 February 2010. In particular, the expert has reviewed the I-WISP and full WISP 2008-2010 of Uzbekistan, the EC Regional Strategy for Assistance to Central Asia for the budgetary period 2007-2013, the EC Central Asia Strategy Paper and Indicative Programme 2007-2010, the Tacis Action Programmes (AP) 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, the DCI regulation, the United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks (UNDAF) for Uzbekistan for the periods 2004-2009 and 2010-2015. At project level, ToR, UNDP project proposals, available Contribution Agreements, inception, progress and final reports, monitors reports, the monitoring and evaluation framework, the project report of the capacity assessment of social services delivery, the independent draft verification report on the ELS 2003, UNDP internal audit report on the second micro-credit scheme, information on cost-sharing with UNDP managed ABD projects in the two regions of Karapalkastan and Kashkadarya, the draft exit strategy, a sample of regional and district development strategies and local Community Development Plans (CDP), general information on demonstration plots and community rehabilitation projects, formats of business plans, manuals, leaflets, ELS web-site, ELS Organizational Chart.


The documentary review continued after the submission of the Inception Report and throughout the implementation period of the evaluation. The field mission in Uzbekistan took place from 12 to 29 March. A list of persons and organisations consulted is presented in Annex II. Two main techniques were used during the field mission: interviews and focus groups. Moreover, during project site-visits, the expert made use of observation to assess the performance of the on-going project. Interviews were conducted to obtain quantitative and qualitative information on the overall ELS programme and on the individual projects as well as on the wider context. In addition, the interview sessions addressed the sub-questions listed in the Evaluation Framework. The process of generating data through the interviews was both, systematic and flexible. Systematic in that there was careful and detailed thought in planning the interviews about the type of data required and how to generate the information from the interviewee, and about ensuring some consistencies between interviews in the issues covered. However, the data collection process was also flexible to reflect the uniqueness of each individual case and questions were a combination of wide, open-ended questions and more probing questions to investigate the topic in depth. Interview and focus group guides were designed by the expert in anticipation of, and fine-tuned during, the field mission to act as ‘aide memoire’, and helped ensuring that there were no gaps in coverage. Focus groups worked well in combination with interviews when the subject tackled provided opportunities for reflective discussion, as for example examining the effects of social services delivery in a community; for generating solutions to conceptual problems, as for example new indicators to measure impacts; or for providing information on neutral subjects such as for example mapping the project outputs or explaining irrigation technologies being applied. Focus groups working together (i.e. ELS project teams) were used to generate data and insights at the initial stage of the field phase in Tashkent and in Namangan, Fergana and Andijan project offices. During the visits to the project sites, focus groups were used to explore perceived causes or origin of poverty in the interpretation of the local authorities and communities, identify impacts of the projects, and generate recommendations on measuring poverty reduction. In particular focus groups were employed with the following Community Initiative Groups (CIG), micro-credit groups and professional groups:

• CIG of the village of Tichlik; • medical personnel of VMP in the village of Quashqamarkey; • micro-credit group of the village of Quasqamarkey; • CIG of the village of Nabi; • CIG of the village of Ottizzambar; • CIG of the village of Garmdon.

Field notes were useful to record what was heard or seen outside the main interaction of the interview or focus group. Following the projects sites visits to the regions, the expert started to synthesise the overall results and to develop a set of preliminary findings and conclusions around the evaluation issues and sub-questions.


Findings and conclusions as well as initial recommendations were presented to the Project Steering Committee meeting in Tashkent on 26 March 2010, and validated by the participants. The expert used a simple scoring mechanism to the 4 ELS individual projects to arrive at an overall assessment of the main evaluation criteria: A = very good; B = good; C = problems; and D = serious deficiencies. The complete versions of these project specific evaluation reports are presented in Volume II of this evaluation report.


44 FFIINNDDIINNGGSS AANNDD CCOONNCCLLUUSSIIOONNSS

4.1 Relevance An assessment was made on whether the ELS programme and the individual projects made sense in the context of their environment: the appropriateness of their objectives vis-à-vis the problems of the target groups they are supposed to benefit and the physical and policy environment within which they operate. The expert addressed the consistency of the programme and individual projects’ objectives with the partner government poverty reduction policies, relevant EC international development strategies, other donor and UNDP interventions in poverty reduction in rural areas, requirements of the beneficiaries. Relevance of the implementation modality of using a direct agreement with UNDP was also considered. The evaluation applied a scoring to each of the four individual ELS projects. The methodology used was presented in Chapter 3. The individual project evaluation reports, including the value of scores for each project, are presented in Volume II of the evaluation report. For relevance, the 4 individual ELS projects scored a B (good). Moreover, relevance was evaluated together with the quality of project design. The projects as such would have scored even higher for relevance but flaws in the projects design kept the score at B. During the first half of the ELS programme period, Uzbekistan had in place an Interim Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (I-WISP), the equivalent of a first Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. A second WISP was adopted in late 2007 for the period 2008-2010. Both WISPs are broad ranging national planning documents with common denominator the improvement of living standards of the population, especially in rural areas. The overall objective of the ELS programme, being the enhancement of the living standards of the population in the rural areas of the Fergana Valley, is therefore relevant in the context of the WISP. The EC Country Strategy Paper for Central Asia 2002-2006, the corresponding TACIS Indicative Programmes for 2002-2004 and 2005-2006 set the overall and specific objectives for the EC Central Asia Poverty Reduction Scheme. The objectives set in the IPs were for 2002-2004 “to assist local communities in 2-3 target regions in their efforts to tackle poverty, particularly amongst the most vulnerable sections of the populations, through measures designed to improve local governance, food security, social protection and employment opportunities”. Moreover, it was stated that “efforts will, wherever possible and appropriate, also promote cross border co-operation at the local level”. For 2005-2006, the approach was similar: “to assist the most vulnerable sections of the populations in the target areas in their efforts to tackle poverty and facilitate economic and social development”. In particular, attention was paid “to community driven development measures designed to improve their income, food security, local governance, social protection and employment opportunities” as well as to “activities geared at women and female-led households” and “to strengthen the local authorities’ capacities for comprehensive medium-term planning”. Not only cross-border co-operation but also “specific actions towards conflict prevention” were mentioned. The objectives set in the IPs were further elaborated in the project fiches of the TACIS annual Action Programmes for 2002-2006. Already the first fiches in 2002 spelled out more explicitly that “reducing the potential for social conflict” was part of the overall objective. The initial focus on agriculture and social services was from 2003 onwards complemented with regional trade and market access objectives.


The objectives of the EC Central Asia Poverty Reduction Scheme go therefore beyond poverty reduction, to embrace conflict prevention and cross-border co-operation. The ELS programme objectives are coherent with the poverty reduction objectives of the EC Scheme and the choice of the Fergana Valley regions and focus on bordering districts are security motivated and aim to support the conflict prevention objective of the EC Scheme. The ELS programme objectives are also relevant in the context of the UNDP ABD programme objectives in Uzbekistan. ABD is an integrated concept to the solution of the multi-dimensional aspects of poverty: monetary income deprivation, lack of job opportunities, underemployment, poor access to healthcare and education, etc. The rationale for an ABD approach in Uzbekistan is the concentration of the multi-dimensional issues of poverty in specific localities, and notably in rural communities. The declared ABD programme objectives are welfare improvement and increased living standards of the population in disadvantaged rural areas. The objectives and approach of the ELS programme are fully coherent with the objectives and approach of the UNDP ABD programme. In fact, ABD and ELS are two different terms to define the same projects, in the context of the Fergana region. From the perspective of UNDP, the ABD programme has always included the ELS projects. In addition to the ELS projects, the ABD programme includes two projects in the north-west regions of Karapalkastan and Kashkadarya. Among the multilateral donors, the World Bank has been operating in the Fergana Valley with the Health projects and the Irrigation, Drainage and Wetlands Improvement projects. The Health projects have aimed to improve the quality and overall cost-effectiveness of healthcare services, including through supporting the development of Village Medical Points with the provision of certified medical equipment matching international standards. The Irrigation, Drainage and Wetland Improvement projects have aimed to increase productivity of irrigated agriculture and to improve water management. UNICEF has had two projects in the Fergana Valley: the Family Planning and Education project and the Child and Mother Care project. The first project aimed to provide education in reproductive health, water and sanitation, nutrition, HIV/AIDS prevention, gender equality and subjects related to community family planning. The second project, funded by the EC, addressed similar issues. The Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Japan and UK have provided small grants for community development institutions and social infrastructure rehabilitation. The objectives of the ELS programme have been complementary to the aims of these other donor interventions. Moreover, a major new WB programme is about to initiate-i.e. the Fergana Water Resource Management Programme (FWRMP) - which will be implemented from mid-2010 to mid- 2016 and aims to promote sustainable irrigated agriculture production, increase employment and generate farm incomes by improving drainage and irrigation systems; to reduce damage to private and private infrastructure and improve environmental and public health conditions by controlling water logging. In this perspective, the ELS programme support for capacity building of rural communities and income generation is very relevant in the context of the FWRMP

.

Poverty in the target areas is the result of interrelated problems, comprising low productivity and incomes, rapid demographic growth and limited access to land and water, inadequate social infrastructure and services, weak institutional capacities and a level of insecurity in the border districts which hinders trade. The holistic, area based development approach of the ELS participatory rural development projects thus matched well with the needs on the ground. Considering the deteriorated conditions of economic and social infrastructure in the target regions, both “soft” and “hard” components were devised.


4.2 Effectiveness The expert looked for evidence that the individual ELS projects have achieved their planned results and contributed to the capacity building of local government, of rural communities, improved rural households income generation opportunities, increased the percentage of women and female-led households benefiting directly from the projects services, an whether projects produced any unforeseen results, either positive or negative. More in particular, the expert looked for evidence to substantiate the claim that projects had increased households’ access to clean drinking water, gas, electricity, quality health care, strengthened the capacity of rural communities to prioritize and address their development needs, and the capacity of regional and district administrations to support the communities aspirations through local development planning and allocation of resources, increased the creation of micro and small rural enterprises and cooperatives, facilitated the transfer of skills and improved the availability of sources of credit to the poor and especially, the woman poor. Achievement of the projects’ results was judged from the beneficiaries’ perspectives, the EC, the UNDP, as well as other stakeholder perspectives, notably the MoE, the NCU, and other donors. This also brought into view the effectiveness of projects targeting and the success (or failure) of the projects to reach their intended beneficiaries. In addition, the expert looked for lessons to be learned from the projects in terms of their design and results and whether these lessons learned could help formulate recommendations to improve the design of a future EC-funded poverty reduction/rural development project in Fergana Valley under the DCI. The evaluation applied a scoring to each of the four ELS projects. The methodology used was presented in Chapter 3. The individual project evaluation reports, including the value of scores for each project, are presented in Volume II of the evaluation report. For effectiveness, 3 projects scored a B and 1 project scored a C, giving an average score of B (good). Overall, the ELS programme contributed to the capacity building of the targeted rural communities. More communities than originally planned benefitted from the allocation of small social infrastructure development grants from the projects to improve access of the populations to basic social services: clean water, primary health care, gas, electricity, and pre-school education. These “hard” activities were matched by capacity development of community self-help groups or initiative groups. In the four ELS projects combined:

• Small social infrastructure development grants were allocated to a total of 379 communities with approximately 850,000 inhabitants (between 10% and 11% of the combined population of the three regions of the Fergana Valley). These grants were used to complement community resources for the implementation of community infrastructure projects completed or under completion;

• About 500 community initiative groups with average membership of 20 persons were formed, uniting about 10,000 inhabitants in the 379 communities. These groups received trainings on the basic principles of social mobilization, fund raising, project management, strategy planning, budget management and in co-ordination with UNICEF awareness raising on water and sanitation, AIDS/HIV prevention, gender equality, community family planning. Initiative groups from the last three projects were also trained in income generation.

A central activity has been the support provided to CDP, a concept well integrated in the local communities tradition of village plans realized through the allocation of community resources (“ashar”), but reinforced through the project mobilization trainings.


The CDP activity contributed to develop the effectiveness of the initiative groups and their capacity to attract funding from district government and other sources, including donors, but also engendered a pro-active approach by communities to the solution of their economic and social development issues, including through the formation of new income generation initiative groups. The conceptual framework of the CDPs is the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs). The process is as follows: MDGs are used by the Community Initiative Groups (CIP) as a starting point to identify social and economic development priorities in the communities. Priorities are then preliminary ranked in order of perceived importance and profiled (e.g. definition of justifications, objectives, brief description of the activity, overall budget, estimate of community contribution, assessment of sustainability, identification of potential institutional partnerships within and outside the community, time frame). Each priority is then voted in the order presented by the CIG, during a community meeting. Depending on the results of the voting the order of priorities can be changed. The document is then finalized by the CIG and endorsed by the Mahalla Committee (the lowest level of local government). The CDPs have durations of 3 to 5 years and are generally updated on annual basis. During the update, the CIG reports on implementation of the activities. Funding comes from a mix of community contributions, local government and external donor projects, such as ELS. Thirteen (13) MIRCs were established in the three target regions in the first 3 ELS projects (Nr 2004/091225; 2006/116796; 2007/142128) and 12 more are in the process of being established under the current project (Nr 2008/163878). The main role of the MIRCs has been to facilitate the CDP process and support the implementation of the Community Development Plans in the ELS target communities and to replicate the process in non-target communities. Their performance has varied from district to district but the value of their services and advice is generally appreciated by the communities and their self-governing bodies, the Mahalla Committees. The effectiveness of the small social infrastructure development projects in providing improved access to basic social services should also be measured against the quality of the service provision. In most communities, such quality is affected by wider infrastructural bottlenecks in public utilities, notably gas and electricity. In the case of project Nr. 2008/163-878, funded from the AP 2006, problems of quality in the flow of services generated by the community infrastructure development projects may have been amplified by the time pressure to deliver, due to the insufficient timeframe allocated for implementation of these actions. Eight (8) rural enterprises and cooperatives were established and 12 more are in the process of being established under the current ELS project. Those established have generally improved income generation opportunities and access to finance for their members. In addition, about 400 micro-credit groups (the vast majority women groups) with average membership of 5 persons, increased their access to finance and income generation opportunities.

Transfer of farming and business skills to small farmers and poor households, has been occurring under two main complementary modalities: the demonstration greenhouses at community level and the RDCs at district level. The targeting of the demonstration greenhouses activity shifted, in the current ELS project (Nr.2008/163878), from small farmers to community households and, since each community household has a cultivated garden plot, this change of focus has significantly facilitated the dissemination of skills and improved the opportunity of households to increase the productivity of and the incomes they derive from their garden plots.


The RDCs, the first two were established October 2009 and are not yet fully operational, are intended to act as extension services and in the longer run also as business resource centres, for small farmers and communities. They still have to demonstrate their effectiveness. Evidence of the projects’ effectiveness in building the capacity of local government to prepare and implement local development plans is less clear. On one hand, the projects have facilitated the development of a coherent framework based on MDGs for local strategy development. On the other hand, there is no sufficient evidence that the projects’ outputs have been used to prepare development strategies at regional and district levels, though they have been used for the preparation of the national poverty reduction strategy, the WISP. However, there is evidence (projects Nr 2007/142128; Nr 2008/163878) that the priorities identified in the CDPs have informed the formation of district annual development plans and related budgets for the provision of community basic social infrastructure rehabilitation. 4.3 Efficiency An assessment was made of the individual ELS projects results as compared with the costs incurred in their realisation. In other words, how economically the resources and inputs such as funds, expertise, time etc. were converted into results, the so-called “value-for-money”. This implied exploring how well has the availability and usage of inputs been managed; how well has the implementation of activities been managed; whether the local partners contribution and involvement have been working. Efficiency was assessed rather in terms of lessons learned than as a systematic performance or financial audit. In particular, the expert did not systematically analyse project finances. Based on the individual projects assessments, general conclusions have been drawn on the efficiency of the ‘direct agreement’ implementation modality with UNDP. The evaluation applied a scoring to each of the four ELS projects. The methodology used was presented in Chapter 3. The individual project evaluation reports, including the value of scores for each project, are presented in Volume II of the evaluation report. For efficiency, 2 projects scored a B and 2 projects scored a C, giving an average score between B and C- i.e. ‘satisfactory’. The evaluator has noted that, in terms of resource utilisation, there has been an inverse correlation between efficiency and the number of regions covered by the individual projects. For example, delays in utilisation of resources have been higher in projects Nr 2007/142128 and Nr 2008/163878 covering respectively two and three regions. One of the reasons for the delays was that the project had to reconcile the slowness of the project participatory approach to decision-making, for example in the selection of target communities, with a wider territorial coverage. This was further complicated by having to coordinate regional administrations with different administrative and substantive approaches towards the achievement of the same objective. In the case of project Nr 2007/142128, the additional complexity for project management was that the implementation of the activity components was not uniform across the two regions. Project outputs were not always produced with the planned means: the approved budgets and the kind of inputs (quality and nature of inputs) that had been agreed in advance (projects Nr 2006/116796 and Nr 2007/142128). In the case of project Nr 2006/116796, revisions were proposed to the EC to reallocate resources towards full expenditure, e.g. that unspent amounts on one budget line could be reallocated to a faster spending budget line. In most cases, addenda were prepared but not always (project Nr 2004/091225).


In order to make modifications in the resource utilisation, formal addenda were required to the EC contracts. This caused delays in implementation. The inflexible nature of EC contracts undermined efficiency in project implementation. More flexibility in resource utilisation, combined with the recognition of UNDP full financial responsibility, and with accountability monitored ex-post through external audits rather than ex-ante EC financial control, would have contributed positively to efficiency in project implementation. On the other hand, UNDP own control and internal system procedures were also time consuming. For example, any disbursements by the projects had to receive ex-ante approval from the UNDP Country Office. Decisions about resource utilizations were also delayed by dual subordination of the ELS Programme Co-ordinator, to both the UNDP Deputy Resident Representative and a UNDP Programme Manager (for economic development). UNDP procurement rules intended to safeguard transparency and ensure ‘economic’ purchase of inputs through competitive tendering, did require significant allocation of time by Project Management. The projects, however, achieved notable savings through cost-sharing with other UNDP-funded ABD projects (Karapalkastan and Kashkadaryia) as well as parallel ELS projects for the periods they were running concurrently (all projects). Additional savings were reaped through free access for the ELS projects to the experts and other knowledge resources (e.g. manuals, case studies, concept papers, summaries of lessons learned from similar international projects, etc) of UNDP Regional Bureau in Bratislava. Within the framework of UNDP National Execution Modality and related emphasis on the use of national expertise and close co-ordination with government counterparts, the ELS projects were generally successful in the mobilization of contributions and involvement of local partners. Memoranda of Understanding were signed with the 3 regional governments under each ELS project and a Project Steering Committee, including representatives of the 3 regions and the Ministry of Economy, has been operational throughout the 4 ELS projects. The ELS Programme Co-ordinator based in Tashkent, held chief responsibility for strategy development, co-ordinating procedures with UNDP Country Office, information and communication with the main Project Partner (Ministry of Economy), the international organisations, other stakeholders, the general public, for reporting to the EC, for guiding and supervising the teams in the regions . The Co-ordinator was supported by a National Technical Advisor, a Public Relations Specialist and three National Experts (one per activity component), each with clear and not overlapping job descriptions. The day-today management of the projects has been executed by local teams in the three target regions. The local teams have been an important asset to the programme in terms of local knowledge, commitment, professional day-to-day communication with local authorities, communities and stakeholders as well as for their specific technical skills, notably in social mobilization, agricultural techniques and engineering. Communication between the programme office in Tashkent and the teams in the regions has been on a regular basis and communication between the three local teams has been systematic, particularly in terms of sharing lessons learnt. Local communities contributed up to 50% of the costs of basic social infrastructure rehabilitation projects, which has provided for substantial co-financing.


4.4 Impact An assessment was made of the contribution of the individual ELS projects to the overall objective of the ELS Programme (to increase the living standards of the vulnerable populations in Fergana Valley). The evaluator looked for evidence of effects (including unintended outcomes) on the existing poverty situation (realized or potential) that can be attributed to the projects. In particular, the expert looked at those indicators that contributed to, or could be used as proxy, for poverty reduction, such as:

• Increase in income and wealth; • Decrease in vulnerability; • Job creation • Increase in health levels

Moreover, the evaluation looked at indicators mentioned in AP 2003 and AP 2004:

• Strengthened local economies • Strengthened local government capacity to respond to community concerns

The evaluation applied a scoring to each of the four ELS projects. The methodology used was presented in Chapter 3. The individual project evaluation reports, including the value of scores for each project, are presented in Volume II of the evaluation report. For impact, 2 projects scored a B and 2 projects scored a C, giving an average score between B and C- i.e. ‘satisfactory’. There were a number of factors contributing to this satisfactory result, however one negative observation is relevant to all projects and this is the short period of implementation of each project, considering the capacity-building nature of the programme and the rotation of each project to new districts and communities. The average period of the projects (less than 24 months) was further reduced by start-up delays averaging between 2 and 4 months. A positive observation for all projects is the generally successful co-ordination with relevant government programmes and other donor interventions in the target regions, which has enhanced the effects of the ELS projects in the context of the overall objective of the programme. One example of this is the rehabilitation of Village Medical Points whereby the ELS projects’ intervention was co-ordinated with the State Healthcare programme, World Bank Health projects, and UNICEF Family-Planning and Education projects. In general, there were noted improvements in the livelihoods of communities where the ELS projects have brought access to clean water, and a reported effect has been the drop in intestinal diseases such as typhoid, hepatitis, and diarrhea, as a result of availability of cleaner water. The effect was enhanced by the intervention of a health surveillance system implemented and funded by government in rural areas. Such a system promotes hygiene, raises awareness of infectious diseases, risk of self-cure, and monitors children and mothers’ health by diagnosing and reporting their health conditions. However, the statistics of the ELS projects’ health indicators are not fully accurate and reliable in measuring actual impacts, reflecting a general weakness of the statistical system and the data sources in Uzbekistan. The projects have had limited but potentially significant impacts on incomes and employment in the target areas. An unexpected impact of the rehabilitation of the drinking water supply systems in the ELS target communities, notably in the Namangan region, has been the creation of paid jobs through the creation of community-based water utilities that collect water charges, carry out water sanitation and repair the infrastructure (projects Nr 2004/091225; Nr 2007/142128; Nr 2008/163878).


Some of the rural enterprises and co-operatives established under the first three ELS projects have had a positive but very restricted (in numbers) effect on the creation of new jobs (e.g. project Nr 2004/091225) and/or were successful in increasing income for their members (project Nr 2006/116796). An unexpected impact of some of the co-operatives, however, might be in terms of higher yields in agriculture for the surrounding communities through the demonstration plots that some of them have established to disseminate knowledge of new farming techniques acquired through the ELS projects (project Nr 2006/116796). The likelihood for even greater impacts on employment and income of the small farm enterprises (e.g. bee farms; poultry farms) being established under project Nr 2008/163878 is high, considering the process that has led to the selection of economic activities and their integration in the CDPs of the communities concerned. At community level, households have the potential to achieve improved living standards through the acquisition of more productive and efficient technologies (i.e. greenhouses, drip irrigation) of farming fruits and vegetables in their garden plots, through the demonstration plots established by the projects ( Nr 2008/163878). The impact of the first micro-credit scheme (project Nr 2004/091225) was unlikely due to its short duration (i.e. 6 months). The impact of the second micro-credit scheme, especially on female single heads of household, is likely but will be limited in scale. In terms of increased capacity of local governments to respond to community needs, use by the projects of MDGs as a starting point to support local development planning, and the prioritization of problems by communities through the community development planning process, have in general helped fostering the dialogue with communities about addressing local development issues. However, it is not certain that the outputs of the projects under this activity have always been used by regional and district governments for local development planning (projects Nr 2004/091225; Nr 2006/116796).

4.5 Sustainability

An assessment was made of the likelihood of benefits produced by the ELS projects to continue to flow after external funding had ended. Sustainability was assessed in terms of lessons learned, with particular reference to cross-cutting themes (gender, technology, environment); and to local ownership and institutional capability issues. For the first 2 ELS projects, which ended a few years ago, it was possible to confirm the continuation of long-term benefits (project Nr 2004/091225; Nr 2006/116796). One other project had just ended (project Nr 2007/142128) and one is still on-going (project Nr 2008/1638786), so it was too early for these 2 projects to confirm the continuation of long-term benefits, although it was possible to ascertain the likelihood of their continuation. The evaluation applied a scoring to each of the four ELS projects. The methodology used was presented in Chapter 3. The individual project evaluation reports, including the value of scores for each project, are presented in Volume II of the evaluation report. For sustainability, 2 projects scored a B and 2 projects scored a C, giving an average score between B and C- i.e. ‘satisfactory’. The ELS projects’ proposals were generally prepared by UNDP in consultation with the national and local government partners, notably the MoE and the Regional Governments. After the project had started, local communities were selected through the application of participatory, relevant, and verifiable selection processes, in partnership with both, district governments and communities’ self-governing bodies (Mahalla Committees). At community level, the needs were identified through different participatory planning techniques, including Rapid Rural Appraisals.


This participatory approach was a common denominator of all ELS projects, and has been conducive to the observed high sense of ownership of the projects’ results, by national, local authorities and local communities. However, this sense of ownership has been mainly related to the Community Development activity and only to a lesser extent to the other two components. Continuation of the Community Development Planning activity cannot be confirmed for the first ELS project (Nr.2004/091225), not only with respect to the process but also the substance: in terms of substance it is not certain that prioritization of issues is still informed by the MDG framework introduced by the project and in some communities (e.g. the community of Guldirov) it has been noted that priorities are formed without a specific reference framework, with the risk of inducing the prevailing of the interests of more influential groups over the interest of the community majority. One of the reasons has been the weak support from under-resourced MIRCs. However, the reinforcement of the CDP approach and methodology in the second project (Nr 2006/116796), and the greater involvement and support of the local authorities for the process and role of the MIRCs in facilitating community development planning, together with additional resources for the MIRCs from other donors, has resulted in the replication of the CDP after the project end in many communities. The flow of services from the rehabilitated community social infrastructures (i.e. water supply systems, gas, electricity supply systems, village medical points, kindergartens) has continued to be supported by community initiative groups trained by the ELS projects, or by the transfer of the services provision to the relevant public utilities (i.e. water, gas, electricity) or government departments (i.e. health, education). On average, projects made reasonable attempts to strengthen sustainability through capacity building and human resource development of community institutions, although the needs of the MIRCs should be looked at more carefully in terms of additional transfer of skills for the facilitators if their services are to remain valuable to communities in the future. The needs of the local governments require further attention as there is mixed evidence that the outputs of the projects have been updated or used over time, after the project end. For example, the social and economic assessments (projects Nr 2004/091225; Nr 2006/116796) have not been updated by the partner regional governments. The exception, however, is the regional government of Andijan where ownership of the project outputs was found to be high, and these were used to introduce a pilot monitoring and evaluation system for state programmes in the region (project Nr 2007/142128). Continuation of project benefits in several cases depended on the financial viability of the rural organizations that had been established or strengthened through the projects activities. In general, specific purpose organizations such as the rural co-operatives had better potential for financial sustainability than more general purpose institutions such as the RDCs and MIRCs. For the latter two types of institutions, long-term financial sustainability will ultimately depend on the quality of the services to communities and their prospect to broaden the range of institutional clients, whether state or other donors or private businesses. This, in turn, requires further transfer of skills. The microcredit schemes being single purpose have been recycled and have had a strong gender-oriented (women beneficiaries) implementation. There are already indications from observation in the field that the demonstration plots at community level have generated replication of environmental sustainable and energy and water efficient technologies (i.e. greenhouses, drip irrigation, use of manure as fertilizer, cotton balks for greenhouse heating, etc.) of fruit and vegetable production in the target rural areas (project Nr 2008/183878).


4.6 Visibility An assessment was made of the visibility of the programme and of the individual projects, and the visibility of the EU as the donor. The evaluation applied a scoring to each of the four ELS projects. The methodology used was presented in Chapter 3. The individual project evaluation reports, including the value of scores for each project, are presented in Volume II of the evaluation report. For visibility, 3 projects scored a B and 1 project scored a C, giving an average score of B (good). The visibility of the overall programme was high in the Fergana Valley, mainly due to its wide coverage, its duration and the number of beneficiaries involved in the community development activity component. The ELS programme web-site has the advantage from a visibility perspective of being integrated in the UNDP portal and appears to be the most important source of information about the programme for the national and international stakeholders and the general public. It is published in the English and Russian languages and the information is regularly updated, making the site always relevant. Its great limitation is that it is not published in the Uzbek language, which is the only language spoken by the majority of people outside Tashkent, and notably in the rural areas. The EU visibility on the web-site in form is adequate but in substance (contents) is absent and no links to EU/EC sites are available. At the project level, a lot of attention had been paid to formal visibility aspects (all projects). The EU visibility was generally implemented well: information materials, manuals, equipment, project site banners etc. were generally equipped with EU logos and text normally according to the EU Visibility Guidelines. Formal visibility aspects have improved from project to project and the most visible from this perspective is the current one (project Nr 2008/163878). Projects used different means to disseminate information and to increase visibility. In addition to standard leaflets and technical documents, press releases and video-materials were produced and distributed, as well as articles about the projects were published in national newspapers . Substance wise, visibility activities focused on the so-called concept of ‘partnership for development’ between EU and UNDP, but in reality there is no communication about EU. No major information and communication activities seemed to have been undertaken on general EU-related issues in the target regions. This is partly the result of the absence of an EC Delegation on the ground with an information and communication officer, to help the project communicate more effectively on EU-related issues.


55 LLEESSSSOONNSS LLEEAARRNNEEDD AANNDD RREECCOOMMMMEENNDDAATTIIOONNSS 5.1 At programme level

Lesson learned 1

. The ELS programme was effective because it was implemented through complementary projects of consistent design over time and without changes of the implementing agency. The choice of UNDP as the implementing agency ensured access to a global knowledge resource on MDGs and poverty reduction which served well the programme.

Moreover, UNDP had already an active and permanent presence in the field of development in Uzbekistan with its ABD programme. The choice of this organization presented two additional advantages: its reputation for political neutrality which was essential for operating in Fergana Valley, and the National Execution Modality (NEX) approach to project implementation which by promoting the use of national expertise and a consensual decision-making process involving government bodies at all levels, greatly facilitated the implementation of activities. Recommendation 1

. The wealth of experience and knowledge that have been accumulated through the implementation of the ELS programme and are institutionalized with UNDP Country Office together with the presence of UNDP in the Fergana Valley regions provide a platform for implementing a new poverty reduction programme under the DCI.

Coherence and complementarity of the projects under a new programme are important assets that should be preserved to ensure long-term EC presence in the Fergana Valley regions. Alternative implementation modalities are difficult to find for the absence of other organizations that have had long-term presence in Fergana Valley in the sphere of rural development/poverty reduction. Lesson learned 2

. The causes of poverty in the target areas are multiple and localized. They comprise low productivity and incomes, rapid demographic growth and limited access to water, inadequate social infrastructure and services, weak institutional capacities and the level of insecurity in the border districts which hinders trade.

The complexity and multi-dimensional character of poverty in the target area, justified the relevance of the area-based development approach of the ELS programme design which matched well with the needs on the ground. In particular, considering the deteriorated conditions of the economic and social infrastructure in the target areas, both “soft” and “hard” activity components were devised. Recommendation 2

. The new poverty reduction programme under the DCI should continue to support both basic social services infrastructure development and local economic development through income generation activities. The geographical coverage of the Fergana Valley should remain to match the long-term EC strategies commitment to the region. However, new districts and communities should be targeted to consolidate the results of the ELS programme in the Fergana Valley as a whole, before exit.

Lesson learned 3

. The quality of social services provision to communities has not been sufficiently addressed by the ELS programme. In most communities, for example, the quality of water supply, gas, electricity is affected by wider infrastructure bottlenecks in public utilities which in turn have affected the quality of the services stemming from the social infrastructure rehabilitation of the ELS programme. In this respect, the programme has not paid sufficient attention to the issue of definition of minimum quality standards for the delivery of such services.


This observation applies to health and education services as well. The programme rehabilitated communities’ primary healthcare posts (Village Medical Points) and communities’ kindergartens in co-ordination with the intervention of government and other donors to increase access to these services. However, no indicators were developed to measure the quality of the access to the services provided. Recommendation 3

. The next poverty reduction programme can contribute to the clarification of standards for social service provision to communities and beyond, not only in the context of public utilities, but also in health and education. For example, for users of health and education services, it is sometimes not exactly clear what services are provided free by government, and what not.

The first step should be for the new programme to help define indicators to measure the quality of access to social services in communities and test the validity of these indicators in the context of the social service delivery activity of the ELS programme. Support for the development of standards in social services provision should be part of an exit strategy for the new programme, which obviously has to involve the relevant local government departments. Lesson learned 4

. Establishing a link between capacity-building of local government activity with the community development and income generation activities has been the main challenge of the ELS programme and a broad measure of its success or failure. The area-based development approach of the programme ultimately aimed at supporting state reforms through pilot local projects which are pathfinders for state policies to address poverty issues.

The ELS programme has not unequivocally succeeded as yet in consolidating this link. The activity of the programme to strengthen the targeted local administrations’ capacity as services provider, has been lagging behind the other two activity components, but it is nevertheless crucial to reinforce the link between pilot projects and wider state policies in the sphere of poverty reduction. Recommendation 4

. The new poverty reduction programme should allocate an increased share of its resources to capacity-building of local government to address the functional gaps in the planning and implementation of state programmes and the delivery of service provision. Focus should be not only on training development but also on systems development, such as the monitoring and evaluation system, already being piloted in Andijan region.

Lesson learned 5

. Indicators to measure the impact of poverty reduction are systematically used by local authorities but the quality of the statistics is not always reliable and accurate. The ELS programme has provided capacity-building support to local authorities in collection and analysis of social statistics related to the MDGs. This activity has however not sufficiently addressed the weak co-ordination in this sphere between different departments in regional governments, and the issue of data verification systems.

Recommendation 5

. The future poverty reduction programme should continue to help regional authorities, not only in developing a core set of indicators to measure the impact of state programmes on poverty reduction, but also in developing functional activities and systems for sharing and verifying reliability of data.

Lesson learned 6. A lot of attention had been paid to formal visibility aspects in all ELS projects. The EU visibility was generally implemented well. Substance wise, however, visibility activities focused on the so-called concept ‘partnership for development’ between EU and UNDP, but in reality, there is no evidence of communication about EU. No major information and communication activities seemed to have been undertaken on general EU-related issues in the target regions. The EU visibility on the website in form is adequate, but in substance (contents) is absent and no links to EU/EC sites are available. This is partly the result of the absence of an EC Delegation on the ground, with an information and communication officer, to help the project communicate more effectively on EU-related issues.


Recommendation 6

. Until an EC Delegation is open, the public relations specialist of the current ELS project should be trained in the development and dissemination of communication contents on EU policies, programmes and strategies for the region.

5.2 At project level For future projects under the DCI: Lesson learned 1

. Almost all projects suffered from delays in the start-up phase. As a result, the time left for implementation was too short, in particular considering the adopted holistic, area-based development approach. One of the reasons for the delays was that the projects had to reconcile participatory planning and decision-making processes with a time frame that does not meet the requirements of the area-based development approach and capacity building nature of the activities.

Recommendation 1

. Under the DCI duration of capacity-building projects should be extended to at least 3 years or more.

Lesson learned 2

. Under the ELS programme, projects delays in implementation were also caused by implementation of activities in more than one region at the time. Regional administrations have different approaches towards the achievement of the same objective. Co-ordination by project management is therefore complex.

Recommendation 2

. Future poverty reduction projects should be implemented each in one region only, avoiding covering two regions or more under the same project.

Lesson learned 3

. CDPs have been shifting their focus increasingly on local economic development, and a greater market-orientation is supported at national level, which is likely to induce more and more people out of subsistence production towards production for the market.

Recommendation 3

. Future poverty reduction projects should encourage poor households to engage in market-oriented production and value-added market chain should be promoted, building on existing agro-co-operatives established and trained by the ELS projects.

Lesson learned 4

. Although all ELS projects had identified women and female-led households as specific target groups, the income generation activities apart from micro-credit which had successfully targeted women, mainly benefited men as almost all members of agro-cooperatives and the agricultural extension agents were male.

Recommendation 4

. In future poverty reduction projects, there should be more income generation activities that specifically target women and female-led households. One reason for that is that many adult males are migrants to Kazakhstan and Russia, and the number of female-led households in rural areas is an important share of all households.

Lesson learned 5

. Employment creation by the four ELS projects has not reached a level where it could sustain poverty reduction. Although the assistance resulted in some form of employment (i.e. agro-cooperatives, micro-credit schemes, community-based water companies), the scale was limited. Nevertheless, especially the agro-cooperatives created a form of sustainable, not temporary, employment, which can be replicated.


Recommendation 5

. Future poverty reduction projects should strengthen the links between community development activities, especially between Community Development Planning and local economic development as job creation is an increasing core priority of most CDPs.

Lesson learned 6

. One of the most successful activities of the ELS projects has been the development of community extension services through a network of household demonstration plots at community level. This activity started to bring new income opportunities to poor households through the dissemination of cost-efficient and environmental sustainable farming technologies, particularly for the production of fruits and vegetables which are the main source of income and subsistence for many rural households.

Recommendation 6

. Future projects should support the expansion and further development of this activity by facilitating the linkage between the network of community extension agents and private seed companies, either directly or through the intermediation of the RDCs, that the ELS programme has started to establish. This would create a partnership based on mutual interest between communities and private sector extension services that would provide rural communities with sustainable access to modern farm technologies, bringing higher income opportunities for poor community households.

For the on-going ELS project Lesson learned 1. The capacity-building nature of the design and extended coverage of the project to include 13 districts and 201 new communities, appear too ambitious a combination for the two-year project duration. The selection of target communities in partnership with local authorities could only be finalized 13 months after the start date of the project. The selection process took 50% more time than the average time of the selection process in previous ELS projects but the number of new communities targeted by the current project was increased by 330%. Recommendation 1. A time extension of about 6-7 months should be provided to the project to enable completion of the activities originally planned and already under implementation, notably under the community development component. The project should provide the EC with an updated and complete workplan and timetable (disaggregated per district) for the implementation of the community development activities to the project end. Lesson learned 2. Under the first activity component, the development of training curricula and the training of trainers activity have been lagging well behind the timeframe of the workplan. The project management has essentially delegated the implementation of this activity to the Academy for State and Social Construction (ASSC) without proper supervision. Recommendation 2. The agreement with the ASSC should include a clear timetable and performance indicators to be submitted to and approved by the Project Steering Committee (PSC). Lesson learned 3. The tables of the project’s monitoring and evaluation indicators (see Annex V of the report) are not reconciled with the indicators of the logical framework matrix. Moreover, the sources of verification for the indicators are not clearly identified. The identified indicators are also overwhelmingly quantitative and do not reflect the quality of the project results. As a result, both the relevance and reliability of the project internal monitoring system are affected and external monitoring and evaluation processes are not facilitated. Recommendation 3. The logical framework matrix should be updated and reconciled with the internal monitoring and evaluation framework of the project. The sources of verification for the indicators should be clearly identified. Indicators should be reviewed and adjusted to reflect the quality of project results.

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline


Lesson learned 4. The social infrastructure rehabilitation activities of the project in the target communities do not always deliver the expected services (for example in the community of Ottizzambar-see report Vo II pp.31,32). Recommendation 4. A specific assessment of the rehabilitation works in the district of Besharik where the problems were detected, is recommended. The assessment should be planned by the project office in Tashkent and implemented with human resources from the project offices in other regions and address both technical and local management aspects (e.g. possible decision-making weaknesses). Lesson learned 5. The results of the capacity assessment of local authorities were not adequate to support the design of the training curricula being developed by the ASSC. The assessment was conducted only in one ELS target region and the international expert who provided overall guidance to the process was quite critical of the outcomes while the local working group in the selected target region (i.e. Fergana) did not seem to have a defined understanding of the conclusions of the assessment (see report Vol.II, pp.32-33). Recommendation 5. The training curricula developed by the ASSC should be independently reviewed preferably by a peer institution in the region or in the EU for relevance of contents, usefulness and user-friendliness to the target groups. Lesson learned 6

. The long-term sustainability of the Mahalla Information and Resource Centres (MIRCs) and their capacity to continue providing value-added to the Community Development Planning depends on a number of factors, including further development of their staff skills, focus on one single main purpose (i.e. serving the communities development planning and implementation process), the further development of networking links among them, and with institutional clients (e.g. state and international organizations).

Recommendation 6

. The project should develop and implement an exit strategy for the MIRCs addressing: focal tasks description, standard of services to be achieved, further trainings to be developed, training of trainers, identification of the needs of potential institutional clients, funding mechanisms including the possibility of membership fees from communities.

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline

maene

Underline


66 AANNNNEEXXEESS Annex I - Evaluation Framework Annex II – List of persons and organizations consulted Annex III -Table of acronyms Annex IV – Terms of Reference Annex V- ELS Projects Monitoring and Evaluation Tables used for internal monitoring


6.1 Annex I - Evaluation Framework

e 0.1 Evaluation issues Sub–questions Indicators Sources of information Information collection Impact (when feasible) What has been the ELS programme’s contribution, if any, to poverty reduction (improved living standards) of the rural population in the target areas?

Have the programme/ projects been able to achieve an impact on the existing poverty situation? What impacts the programme has had? Has the programme produced any unintended impacts (positive or negative)? Which aspects of the programme have contributed to the impacts? Has there been a real impact at the grass root level? What has been the impact in terms of specific outcomes for different groups of people? Have the benefits concentrated on the most vulnerable sections of the population (e.g. unemployed, underemployed, families with children, female-headed households)? Has the situation of individuals on the ground, particularly women, young people and children, improved? Has there been the beginning of change for the better? Has the local economy strengthened? Is local government more responsive to community concerns? What could be new indicators to measure impact?

Evidence of: - increase in income and decrease in vulnerability of target populations ; -job creation and decrease in unemployment in the target areas -increase in health levels and dietary consumption in target populations -strengthened local economies in target areas -strengthened local government capacity to respond to community concerns in target areas ;

Indicators: -MDGs assessment reports -UNICEF multi-indicator cluster surveys -Budget households surveys of the State Statistics Committee (if presentation of statistics disaggregated by district) Other: project level documents EC programme manager Other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries Experts, managers from projects Mahallas and CSOs Informal ‘control’ groups

Documentary review focus group discussions of projects’ participants Interviews of key informants focus group discussions of informal ‘control’ groups for comparison Field observations


e 0.2 Evaluation issues Sub–questions Indicators Sources of information Information collection Relevance Has the ELS programme been consistent with and supportive of the policies outlined in the Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper (WISP) of the Uzbek government? How the ELS programme has been consistent with and supportive of the EC development and co-operation policies? What is the relevance of the ELS programme in the context of other EC and other donor interventions in the target regions? What is the relevance of the ELS programme in the context of parallel poverty reduction interventions of UNDP? How relevant have been the projects strategies and objectives to the needs of the target groups?

How well the programme has addressed the needs and target groups identified in the WISP? How consistent are the programme’s objectives and strategy with the policy priorities outlined in the WISP? How well the linkages with the WISP policies are described and consistency demonstrated? How well the programme has responded to EC policies of promoting gender equality and sustainable development? How consistent are the programme objectives with the objectives of the EC CSP and IP? What kind of complementarities exist with other EC and other donor interventions? How well the planning of ELS activities is co-ordinated with these other actions? How to strengthen complementarities? How to strengthen co-ordination? How the ELS programme is co-ordinated with parallel ABD programmes? How to strengthen co-ordination? To what extent the projects take into account the physical and policy environment within which they operate? Who are the projects’ participants? How they have been identified? How well needs analysis were implemented? How well local capacity issues were assessed?

Degree to which the programme’s objectives and strategy reflect the priorities of the WISP Extent to which the ELS project documents describe linkages and demonstrate coherence of the actions with the WISP priorities, target groups and resource commitments Extent to which ELS indicators reflect EC development policy themes and ELS objectives are coherent with the objectives of EC CSP and IP Degree of coherence between the objectives of the ELS programme and the objectives of other interventions in the target regions Level of operational coordination between the programme, beneficiary and other interventions in the target regions Level of operational co-ordination between ELS and ABD programmes Extent to which the individual project objectives address the identified needs Adjustments in projects due to changes in their environment Functional, social, economic and gender characteristics of the participants Share of the projects’ participants from poorest sections of the populations

Country and project level documents Government officials Experts, managers from projects EC and project level documents EC programme manager Experts, managers from projects EC programme manager Other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries Mahallas and CSOs Experts, managers from projects Other EC, donor projects documents ABD programme managers Project level documents Experts, managers from projects Project level documents Project level documents Experts, managers from projects Final beneficiaries Government officials Mahallas and CSOs EC programme manager Other donors

Documentary review Key informant interviews Documentary review Key informant interviews Documentary review Project interviews Key informant interviews Field observations Documentary review Project interviews Key informant interviews Field observations Focus group discussions


Effectiveness What has been the contribution of the projects results to the achievement of the poverty reduction objectives of the ELS programme?

Have the project results effectively contributed to the achievement of the poverty reduction objectives? Have the projects achieved their planned results? How the projects were experienced by the participants? How well have the project services being provided? What lessons can be learned from the projects in terms of their scope and results? Have there been any success stories/failures during the past years? Under what circumstances the projects have worked successfully? Why the projects have worked well for some groups and not for other? What is the projects’ contribution to capacity building within the beneficiary organisations? How could the lessons learned help improve the design of future EC projects in the region? What are the recommendations for future design and implementation of the poverty reduction/rural development programme under the Development and Co-operation instrument (DCI)?

Evidence of: - improved access to water, gas electricity, and to primary health care clinics for most vulnerable groups in target areas -increase in the number of households with access to clean drinking water in target communities -increased target communities participation in local development planning, -relevant training material for trainers in local development planning -trainers knowledge used in the training of local authorities -appropriate support to local authorities in the collection and management of socioeconomic data -increased availability of micro-credit to target populations -new co-operative registered and new jobs created in target areas -pilot demonstration plots with appropriate agricultural technologies in target areas -replication of appropriate agricultural technologies by target populations -Increase in agricultural produce output/yields of target populations -relevant and understandable training materials developed for facilitators of the RC in the target areas - use of acquired financial, marketing, accounting and business planning knowledge by facilitators in the provision of services to client populations.

Indicators: MDGs assessment reports t UNICEF multi-indicator cluster surveys Credit union financial statements Other: Project level documents EC programme manager Government officials Final beneficiaries Experts, managers from projects Mahallas and CSOs



Efficiency How the ELS programme results compare to its costs (“value-for-money”)?

At what cost have the project results being achieved? How well inputs have converted into activities? Have alternative options for delivering project services been systematically appraised by project management in terms of their ‘cost-effectiveness’? How well resources are shared with parallel poverty reduction programmes of UNDP? What lessons can be learned from the projects in terms of their efficiency?

Assessment of: - resources utilisation and costs - resources sharing with parallel UNDP programmes - UNDP’s systems and control - project management - equipment

Project level documents Experts, managers from projects UNDP personnel ABD programme managers Final beneficiaries Government officials EC programme manager


Sustainability What is the likelihood of the benefits produced by the projects to continue to flow after the EC funding has ended?

Has the likelihood been reinforced by adequately addressing cross-cutting issues, in particular technology, gender and environment? Has there been adequate participation of the beneficiaries in the projects assessment of the needs? Are the beneficiaries willing and capable to continue the activities without external technical assistance? Is community development planning still continuing in communities that were targeted by completed projects? Are the public services improved by the projects intervention in these communities still being maintained and supported? Are previous ELS micro-credit operations being recycled? Are the farmer co-operatives and demonstration plots being continued? What is the likelihood that the RCs created by the on-going project will be sustained ?

Measures taken to promote gender equality and environmental sustainability Measures taken to ensure economic and financial sustainability, to address socio-cultural aspects, and to use appropriate technology Measures taken to provide policy support and to strengthen institutional and management capacity

Project level documents EC programme manager and other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries Experts, managers from projects Mahallas and CSOs


Visibility What kind of visibility the programme and the individual projects have had in Uzbekistan? Both the visibility of the programme/projects and the visibility of the EU as the donor?

Perceived knowledge of stakeholders and wider public of the ELS programme/projects and the EU as the donor

Projects brochures, leaflets, web-site EC and other donors Government officials Final beneficiaries



6.2 Annex II – List of Persons and Organisations Consulted

Name Title Organisation Location Mr Mario Ronconi Deputy Head of Unit EuropeAid Brussels Mr Soeren Klem Programme Manager EuropeAid Brussels Ms Assunta Testa Programme Manager EuropeAid Brussels Ms Anna Nirody Resident Representative UNDP Tashkent Ms Kyoko Postill Deputy Resident Representative UNDP Tashkent Ms Laura Rio ELS Programme Co-ordinator UNDP Tashkent Mr Kodir Bobojonov ELS Technical Advisor UNDP Tashkent Ms Dildora Abidjanova ELS National Expert on Community Dev. UNDP Tashkent Ms Laylo Zakirova ELS Public Relations Specialist UNDP Tashkent Mr Tom Thorogood ELS International Consultant on Community

Dev and Income Generation UNDP Tashkent

Mr Baktior Safidinov ELS National Expert Income generation

UNDP Tashkent

Mr Dilshod Rasulov ELS Project Manager UNDP Namangan Mr Abror Khodjaev ELS Task Manager

Community Dev UNDP Namangan

Mr Ulugbek Dedabaev ELS Task Manager Income generation

UNDP Namangan

Ms Gulchiroy Ishmatova ELS Community Mobilization Officer UNDP Namangan Ms Maksuda Kenshibaeva

ELS Local Assistant on Community Dev

UNDP Namangan

Mr Tanuo Sunahara First Secretary Japanese Embassy

Tashkent

Ms Sayaka Usui Programme Officer (GAGHSP) Japanese Embassy

Tashkent

Mr Akram Tohtamirzaev Loan Officer Nurafshon Bagdad Mr A. Askarov Executive Director Nurafshon Bagdad Mr A.K. Kadirov Adviser to Chairman Microcredit

Bank Tashkent

Mr M. Mahmudov Director Mahalla Information Centre

Besharik

Mr S. Begmatov Lead Specialist Ec Dept District Gov

Andijan


Name Title Organisation Location Mr Baktior Toshtemirov ELS Task Manager Income Generation UNDP Fergana Mr Sardor Alimdjanov ELS Project Manager UNDP Andijan Mr Alisher Satahanov


UNDP Andijan

Mr Alisher Muradov


UNDP Andijan

Mr Ulugbek Olimov Project Manager Statistical Capacity Building for MDG Monitoring project

UNDP Tashkent

Mr Pierre Paul Antheunissens Co-ordinator EH Tashkent Mr Hayrullo Malikov

Social Policy Officer UNICEF Tashkent

Ms Oyunsaihan Dendevnorov

Social Policy Specialist UNICEF Tashkent

Mr Yakov Asutukin Social Researcher “Tahlil” Centre for Social Research

Tashkent

Mr Ildus Kamilov Deputy Director Centre for Economic Research

Tashkent

Ms Muattara Rakhimova Director Academy of State and Social Construction

Tashkent

Mr Bekzod Teshabaev Director National Co-ordinating Unit

Tashkent

Mr Otabek Alimatov Consultant National Co-ordinating Unit

Tashkent

Mr Robert Davey TL Drainage Irrigation Wetland Improvement project

Mott MacDonald

Tashkent

Ms M. Mamaktulova Deputy Hokim for women affairs District Government

Bagdad

Ms M. Karimova Leader Community Initiative Group

Tinchlik

Mr D. Urinov Trainee District Govt Izboskan Mr Shurat Ahmedov ELS Project Manager UNDP Fergana Ms Adila Tadjibaeva ELS Task Manager Community Dev UNDP Fergana


Name Title Organisation Location Mr Shukhrat Turdikulov


Regional Government

Fergana

Mr Shukhrat Shukurov Regional ELS Project Co-ordinator and Deputy Governor

Regional Government

Namangan

Mr Shavkat Ibragimov Regional ELS Project Co-ordinator and Deputy Governor

Regional Government

Andijan

Mr Rustam Shoabdurakhmanov National Co-ordinator and Deputy Minister

Ministry of Economy

Tashkent

Mr Avazbek Rakhmanov Head of Economic Department of Fergana Region

Ministry of Economy

Fergana

Mr Shavkat Kusanbaev Head of Health Department of Fergana Region

Ministry of Health

Fergana

Mr Uktam Mavlanov Deputy District Hokim for Soc. and Ec. development

District Government

Pap

Mr Bahodir Madaliev Chairman Mahalla Fund Pap Mr Bahodir Sultanov Dep. Chairman Mahalla Fund Pap Mr Zukhredin Isomidinov Chairman Mahalla

Committee Vodiy

Mr Avazbek Temirov Agricultural Extension Agent Vodiy Mr Muminjon Ergashev Garden plot farmer Vodiy Mr Tilonazar Sohibnazarov Biology teacher and garden plot farmer Vodiy Mr Alisher Bayhanov District Hokim District

Government Chartak

Mr Hamidulo Jabbarov First Deputy District Hokim District Government

Chartak

Mr Mahmudjon VahobJonov Chairman Mahalla Fund Chartak Mr Ilhom Togibaev

Entrepreneur Macaroni and Flour Coop

Ayqiron

Mr A. Mahmadov Extension Agent Langor Mr Rustam Abdurahmanov Chairman Mahalla

Committee Langor

Mr I. Joraev Chairman Mahalla Committee

Ottizambar

Ms U. Naziralieva Director Kindergarten Ottizambar Mr E. Nazarov Chairman Mahalla

Committee Nabi

Mr. Dilshod Mamajanov Lead Specialist Inf Analysis Unit

Ec Dept –Reg Govt

Andijan


Name Title Organisation Location Ms Jayrahon Hojieva Chairman Mahalla Fund Norin Mr Bahodir Mahkamov Chairman Mahalla

Committee Akmal Ikramov

Mr Ergash Qodirov Farmer ‘Chinor’ Farm Norin Mr Abdhuramon Soliev


Guldirov

Mr B. Karimov Deputy District Hokim District Government

Besharik

Mr Baktior Turagulov Chairman ‘Sardor Qobul Bogi’ Co-operative

Bagdad

Mr Axhmadon Tillaev Accountant ‘Sardor Qobul Bogi’ Co-operative

Bagdad

Mr Fashodjan Hamdamov Agricultural Extension Agent Gayrat Mr Ahmedov Hakimjon Small Farmer Gayrat Mr. C. Rizubaev District Hokim District

Government Bagdad

Mr. M. Maksudov Director Mahalla Information Centre

Bagdad

Mr. A. Boltabaev Deputy District Hokim District Government

Akunbabaev

Mr. Karimov Chairman Mahalla Fund Akunbabaev Mr. B. Niazmatov Head of Economic Department of Andijan

Region Regional Government

Andijan

Mr. A. Akbarov District Hokim District Government

Andijan

Mr. A. Jalolov Deputy District Hokim District Government

Andijan

Mr. J. Hodjiev Deputy District Hokim District Government

Izboskan

Mr. Salikh Khamzin Soil and water management expert World Bank Oltiarik Mr. Tohiajan Dadaboev Chairman Mahalla

Committee Oltiarik

Ms C. Khodjibaeva Chairman Mahalla Fund Norin Mr. Sherzod Alimov Sales Support Manager Sakata

Vegetables Europe

Tashkent

Muhiddinovs Community household Nabi Muhtar Nabiev Extension Agent Langer


6.3 Annex III – Table of acronyms

ABD Area Based Development AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome AP Action Programme ASSC Academy of State and Social Construction CA Central Asia CDP Community Development Plan CSOs Civil Society Organizations CSP Country Strategy Paper DCI Development and Co-operation Instrument EC European Commission ELS Enhancement of Living Standards programme EU European Union FAFA Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement FWRMP Fergana Water Resource Management Programme GoU Government of Uzbekistan IP Indicative Programme I-WISP Interim Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper LRRD Linking Relief Rehabilitation and Development MCB Micro Credit Bank MCO Micro Credit Organisation MDGs Millennium Development Goals MIRC Mahalla Information and Resource Centre MoE Ministry of Economy MoU Memorandum of Understanding NCU National Co-ordinating Unit NEX National Execution Modality NGO Non-Governmental Organisation ODA Official Development Assistance OVI Objectively Verifiable Indicators PCM Project Cycle Management PM Programme Manager PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper PSC Project Steering Committee RDC Rural Development Centre SoV Sources of Verification TACIS Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States ToR Terms of Reference UN United Nations UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNDP United Nations Development Programme VMP Village Medical Point WB World Bank WISP Welfare Improvement Strategy Paper


6.4 Annex IV – Terms of Reference


6.5 Annex V - ELS Projects Monitoring and Evaluation Tables used for internal monitoring AP 2002

Monitoring and Evaluation Data Enhancement of Living Standards in Namangan region

SO 1 Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive. Indicators Baseline Result 2006 OVI.1 Number of community development plans supported with local govt funds outside project budget 0 25 R1. Improved capacity of f local authorities to support delivery of basic services OVI. 1 Number of local govt officials with increased capacity to advocate gender sensitive policy formulation, implementation and service delivery in FV

0 30

OVI. 2. Number of communities that know how to incorporate in the CDPs needs statement and budget lines needs related to youth, women and low income priorities

0 63

OVI.3. Number of consultations between Mahalla and local govt on the CDPs and the proposed projects 0 3 OVI.4. Number of regional and district govt officials who know how to collect socioeconomic sex disaggregated data and use it for local planning, monitoring and evaluation

0 30

OVI.5. Number of community projects established that require technical contribution from two or more local govt. Khokimiyats departments.

0 61

SO 2 Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley. Indicators Baseline Result 2006 OVI.1 Number of people with access to Gas 12865 30078 OVI.2 Number of people with access to Water 43039 72308 OVI.3 Number of people with access to electricity 2104 3312 OVI.4 Number of people with access to irrigation water No data No data OVI.5. Number of community rehabilitation projects that contribute directly to women’s needs 0 63 OVI.6 Number of projects supported by resources other than those provided by ELS 0 25 R. 2.1. Improved public service delivery Indicator Baseline Result 2006 OVI.1. water borne disease incidence as recorded by Mahalla 4299 859 OVI.2. Average number of female members in each initiative groups who know how to apply project management cycle

0 3

R.2.2 Organizational capacity of 200 Mahallas reinforced Indicator Baseline Result 2006


OVI.1. Number of Mahalla based Information & Resource Centres equipped and operational 0 3 OVI.2. Number of centre facilitators identified & trained in community & resource mobilization, budget preparation, and need prioritization

0 6

OVI.3. Number of CDPs developed in project target area 0 63 OVI.4. Number of CDPs developed with support of IRC outside project target area 0 95 OVI.5. Number of projects funded with sources other than that provided by ELS 0 251 OVI.6 Value of funding sourced from other sources than ELS (Project Area) 0 USD 442 857 OVI.7. Total number of projects financed by ELS 0 61 SO 3 Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities. Indicator Baseline OVI.1. Number of cooperatives/businesses supported 0 3 OVI.2 .Number of new jobs created 0 3442 OVI.3. Number of micro credits disbursed 0 648 (as of Dec

2006) R.3.1.Increased equitable access by communities to rural development services and business Indicator OVI.1. Number of cooperatives supported 0 3 OVI.2. Number of people trained on business planning, marketing and accounting 0 170 OVI.3. Number of people trained on micro-crediting 0 316 OVI.4. Number of people trained on biological pest control 0 40 OVI.5. % of people with improved family status (micro-credit clients), according to satisfaction survey 0 59% OVI.6. Value of micro credits delivered 0 237,021 USD

Legend SO: specific objective OVI: objective verifiable indicator R: Result Baseline=current situation before the project start on which the project will build and which is the starting point for result monitoring.

1 The majority of these projects were road construction projects. 2 95% of jobs created due to micro credits.


AP2003 Monitoring and Evaluation Data Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana region SO 1 Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive. Indicators Baseline Result OVI.1 Number of community development plans supported with local govt funds outside project budget 0 26 R1. Improved capacity of f local authorities to support delivery of basic services OVI. 1 Number of local govt officials with increased capacity to advocate gender sensitive policy formulation, implementation and service delivery in FV

0 40


0 54


0 40


0 59

SO 2 Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley. Indicators Baseline Result OVI.1 Number of people with access to Gas 136817 159715 OVI.2 Number of people with access to Water 86790 172962 OVI.3 Number of people with access to electricity 135020 157631 OVI 4 Number of people with access to Irrigation water 149407 151024 OVI.5. Number of community rehabilitation projects that contribute directly to women’s needs 0 59 OVI.6 Number of projects supported by resources other than those provided by ELS 0 189 R. 2.1. Improved public service delivery Indicator Baseline Result OVI.1. water borne disease incidence as recorded by Mahalla 248 161 OVI.2. Average number of female members in each initiative groups who know how to apply project management cycle

0 4

R.2.2 Organizational capacity of 200 Mahallas reinforced Indicator Baseline Result


OVI.1. Number of Mahalla based Information & Resource Centers equipped and operational 0 53 OVI.2. Number of centre facilitators identified & trained in community & resource mobilization, budget preparation, and need prioritization

0 10

OVI.3. Number of CDPs developed in project target area 0 54 OVI.4. Number of CDPs developed with support of IRC outside project target area 0 42 OVI.5. Number of projects funded with sources other than that provided by ELS (Project Area) 0 189 OVI.6 Value of funding sourced from sources other than ELS4 0 227 807 USD OVI.7. Total number of projects financed by ELS 0 59 SO 3 Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities. Indicator Baseline Result OVI.1. Number of cooperatives/businesses supported 0 2 (cooperatives) OVI.2 .Number of new jobs created 0 4455 OVI.3. Number of micro credits disbursed 0 410 (figures for

beginning of 2009)

R.3.1.Increased equitable access by communities to rural development services and business Indicator Baseline 2009 OVI.1. Number of cooperatives supported 0 2 OVI.2. Number of people trained on business plans 0 30 OVI.3. Number of people trained on new microfinance product development 0 5 OVI.4. Number of people trained on simplified accounting system 0 10 OVI.5. Number of people trained on agricultural production issues 0 88 OVI.6. Value of micro credits delivered 0 USD 95 297.9

*) 95% jobs created due to micro credit. Figures taken from the general report for AP2003. Legend SO: specific objective OVI: objective verifiable indicator R: Result Baseline=current situation before the project start on which the project will build and which is the starting point for result monitoring.

3 This includes four Information Resource Centres established at the district level as well as one established at the regional level 4 This is predominately funding from the communities own contributions or funding sourced from the Khokimyat. 5 95% jobs created due to micro credit.


AP 2004

Monitoring and Evaluation Data Enhancement of Living Standards in Andijan and Namangan regions

SO 1 Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 OVI.1 Number of community development plans supported with local govt funds outside project budget 0 47 R1. Improved capacity of f local authorities to support delivery of basic services OVI. 1 Number of local govt officials with increased capacity to advocate gender sensitive policy formulation, implementation and service delivery in FV

0 40


0 61


0 40


0 59

SO 2 Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 OVI.1 Number of people with access to Gas 96107 130598 OVI.2 Number of people with access to Water 76303 128091 OVI.3 Number of people with access to electricity 176020 178570 OVI.4 Number of people with access to irrigation water No Data No Data OVI.5. Number of community rehabilitation projects that contribute directly to women’s needs 0 59 OVI.6 Number of projects supported by resources other than those provided by ELS 0 47 R. 2.1. Improved public service delivery Indicator Baseline Result 2009 OVI.1. water borne disease incidence as recorded by Mahalla 7461 1492 OVI.2. Average number of female members in each initiative groups who know how to apply project management cycle

0 4

R.2.2 Organizational capacity of 200 Mahallas reinforced Indicator Baseline Result 2009 OVI.1. Number of Mahalla based Information & Resource Centres equipped and operational 0 4 OVI.2. Number of centre facilitators identified & trained in community & resource mobilization, budget preparation, and need prioritization

0 8


OVI.3. Number of CDPs developed in project target area 0 61 OVI.4. Number of CDPs developed with support of IRC outside project target area 0 164 OVI.5. Number of projects funded with sources other than that provided by ELS (Project Area) 0 47 OVI.6 Value of funding sourced from other sources than ELS (Project Area) 0 USD 554 482 OVI.7. Total number of projects financed by ELS 59 SO 3 Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities. Indicator Baseline Result 2009 OVI.1.Number of cooperatives/businesses supported 0 3 OVI.2 Number of new jobs created 0 30 OVI.3. Number of community based rural development centres established 0 2 R.3.1.Increased equitable access by communities to rural development services and business Indicator Baseline Result 2009 OVI.1 Number of initiative business plans developed 0 4 OVI.2 Number of business plans supported 0 3 OVI.3 Number of people trained on business plan development and administration 0 115 OVI.4. Number of people trained on agricultural production issues 0 143 OVI.5 Number of pilot demonstration plots established 0 3 OVI.6 Number of people replicating plots 0 1 OVI.7. Number of manuals and leaflets developed 0 4



AP 2006 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Valley 2008/163-878 Uzbekistan

Namangan region

SO 1 Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of community development plans supported with local govt funds outside project budget

0 6 16

OVI.2 Number of regional and district authorities that have received and accepted capacity assessment methods as an effective planning tool

0 0 5

R1. Improved capacity of f local authorities to support delivery of basic services OVI. 1 Number of local govt officials with increased capacity to advocate gender sensitive policy formulation, implementation and service delivery in FV

0 0 40


0 31 36

OVI.3. Number of consultations between Mahalla and local govt on the CDPs and the proposed projects

0 4 4

OVI.4. Number of regional and district govt officials who know how to collect socioeconomic sex disaggregated data and use it for local planning, monitoring and evaluation

0 0 40


0 31 36

SO 2 Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of people with access to Gas 164189 176070 180186 OVI.2 Number of people with access to Water 78628 136277 213411 OVI.3 Number of people with access to electricity 199084 199084 202901 OVI 4 Number of people with access to Irrigation water 149653 149653 149653 OVI.5. Number of community rehabilitation projects that contribute directly to women’s needs 0 31 36 OVI.6 Number of projects supported by resources other than those provided by ELS 0 2 35 R. 2.1. Improved public service delivery Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. water borne disease incidence as recorded by Mahalla 24322 15371 4864 OVI.2. Average number of female members in each initiative groups who know how to apply project management cycle

0 3 4

R.2.2 Organizational capacity of 200 Mahallas reinforced


Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. Number of Mahalla based Information & Resource Centres equipped and operational 0 4 0 OVI.2. Number of centre facilitators identified & trained in community & resource mobilization, budget preparation, and need prioritization

0 8 8

OVI.3. Number of CDPs developed in project target area 0 45 22 OVI.4. Number of CDPs developed with support of IRC outside project target area 0 0 30 OVI.5. Number of projects funded with sources other than that provided by ELS (Project Area) 0 6 16 OVI.5 Value of funding sourced from other sources than ELS (Project Area) 0 USD227716 USD 130000 SO 3 Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities. Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1.Number of cooperatives/businesses supported 0 0 8 OVI.2 Number of new jobs created 0 0 40 OVI.3. Number of community based rural development centres established 0 0 2 R.3.1.Increased equitable access by communities to rural development services and business Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of initiative business plans developed 0 0 15 OVI.2 Number of business plans supported 0 0 8 OVI.3 Number of dehkans and households trained on business plan development 0 199 0 OVI.4. Number of pilot demonstration plots established 0 22 8 OVI.5 Number of people replicating plots 0 0 5 OVI.6 Number of extension service providers supported 0 0 2 OVI.7. Number of Manuals developed 0 1 2 OVI.8 Number of people trained on agricultural production issues 0 0 332 OVI.9 Number of visits to extension agents or extension service providers 0 0 600

Fergana region

SO 1 Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010

OVI.1 Number of community development plans supported with local govt funds outside project budget

0 0 37


0 0 5

R1. Improved capacity of f local authorities to support delivery of basic services


OVI. 1 Number of local govt officials with increased capacity to advocate gender sensitive policy formulation, implementation and service delivery in FV

0 0 40


0 37 30


0 10 8


0 0 40


0 37 33

SO 2 Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of people with access to Gas 116561 125183 136134 OVI.2 Number of people with access to Water 91364 130761 165597 OVI.3 Number of people with access to eElectricity 180316 181815 183115 OVI 4 Number of people with access to Irrigation water 137977 151456 155095 OVI.5. Number of community rehabilitation projects that contribute directly to women’s needs 0 37 33 OVI.6 Number of projects supported by resources other than those provided by ELS 0 46 98 R. 2.1. Improved public service delivery Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. water borne disease incidence as recorded by Mahalla 26701 21167 15532 OVI.2. Average number of female members in each initiative groups who know how to apply project management cycle

0 305 43

R.2.2 Organizational capacity of 200 Mahallas reinforced Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. Number of Mahalla based Information & Resource Centers equipped and operational 0 4 0 OVI.2. Number of centre facilitators identified & trained in community & resource mobilization, budget preparation, and need prioritization

0 10 0

OVI.3. Number of CDPs developed in project target area 0 37 30 OVI.4. Number of CDPs developed with support of IRC outside project target area 4 10 OVI.5. Number of projects funded with sources other than that provided by ELS (Project Area) 46 98


OVI.5 Value of funding sourced from other sources than ELS (Project Area) USD 238 387 USD 476 773 SO 3 Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities. Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. Number of cooperatives/businesses supported 0 0 8 OVI.2. Number of new jobs created 0 0 40 OVI.3. Number of community based rural development centers established 0 0 5 R.3.1.Increased equitable access by communities to rural development services and business Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. Number of initiative business plans developed 0 0 36 OVI.2. Number of business plans supported 0 0 8 OVI.3. Number of dehkans and households trained on business plan development 0 0 117 OVI.4. Number of pilot demonstration plots established 0 31 0 OVI.5. Number of people replicating pilots 0 0 At least 5 OVI.6. Number of Manuals developed 0 2 2 OVI.7. Number of people trained on agricultural production issues 0 82 635 OVI.8. Number of people visited to extension agents 0 0 600

*) Will depend on which businesses/cooperatives supported as part of Economic Grants.

Andijan region

SO 1 Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of community development plans supported with local govt funds outside project budget

0 0 20


0 0 5

R1. Improved capacity of f local authorities to support delivery of basic services OVI. 1 Number of local govt officials with increased capacity to advocate gender sensitive policy formulation, implementation and service delivery in FV

0 0 40


0 29 38



0 4 4


0 0 40


0 29 38

SO 2 Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley. Indicators Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of people with access to Gas 117274 128237 158404 OVI.2 Number of people with access to Water 97522 139505 177119 OVI.3 Number of people with access to electricity 206626 206626 209885 OVI 4 Number of people with access to Irrigation water 182848 182848 182848 OVI.5. Number of community rehabilitation projects that contribute directly to women’s needs 0 29 38 OVI.6 Number of projects supported by resources other than those provided by ELS 0 0 8 R. 2.1. Improved public service delivery Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. water borne disease incidence as recorded by Mahalla 3155 2712 1763 OVI.2. Average number of female members in each initiative groups who know how to apply project management cycle 0 4 5

R.2.2 Organizational capacity of 200 Mahallas reinforced Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1. Number of Mahalla based Information & Resource Centres equipped and operational 0 4 0 OVI.2. Number of centre facilitators identified & trained in community & resource mobilization, budget preparation, and need prioritization 0 8 8

OVI.3. Number of CDPs developed in project target area 0 29 38 OVI.4. Number of CDPs developed with support of IRC outside project target area 0 0 20 OVI.5. Number of projects funded with sources other than that provided by ELS (Project Area) 0 0 8 OVI.5 Value of funding sourced from other sources than ELS (Project Area) 0 0 $180,000 SO 3 Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities. Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010


OVI.1.Number of cooperatives/businesses supported 0 0 8 OVI.2 Number of new jobs created 0 0 40 R.3.1.Increased equitable access by communities to rural development services and business Indicator Baseline Result 2009 Target 2010 OVI.1 Number of initiative business plans developed 0 0 56 OVI.2 Number of business plans supported 0 0 8 OVI.3 Number of dekhans and households trained on business plan development 0 80 0 OVI.4. Number of pilot demonstration plots established 0 19 22 OVI.5 Number of people replicating pilots 0 0 5 OVI.6 Number of extension service providers supported 0 0 6 OVI.7. Number of Manuals developed 0 0 3 OVI.8 Number of people trained on agricultural production issues 0 20 636 OVI.9 Number of people visited to extension agents or extension service providers 0 0 600



The European Union’s DCI – ASIA Development Programme

The project is financed by the European Union

The project is implemented by IBF International Consulting

«MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE ENHANCEMENT OF LIVING STANDARDS

PROGRAMME IN UZBEKISTAN (2005-2010) »

Letter of Contract N°«2009/223549»

DRAFT EVALUATION REPORT

Volume II

Prepared by:

Emilio Valli

May 2010

2


3

TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCOONNTTEENNTTSS 1 PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT A ............................................................................................ 4 1.1 Project data ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Summary of conclusions ......................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Key observations ...................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Brief description of the project objectives............................................................................. 5 1.5 Relevance and quality of design ............................................................................................. 5 1.6 Effectiveness ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.7 Efficiency ................................................................................................................................... 8 1.8 Impact ........................................................................................................................................ 9 1.9 Sustainability .......................................................................................................................... 10 1.10 Visibility ................................................................................................................................... 11 1.11 Strengths / weaknesses ......................................................................................................... 11 2 PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT B .......................................................................................... 12 2.1 Project data ............................................................................................................................. 12 2.2 Summary of conclusions ....................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Key observations .................................................................................................................... 12 2.4 Brief description of the project objectives........................................................................... 13 2.5 Relevance and quality of design ........................................................................................... 13 2.6 Effectiveness ........................................................................................................................... 14 2.7 Efficiency ................................................................................................................................. 17 2.8 Impact ...................................................................................................................................... 18 2.10 Visibility ................................................................................................................................... 20 2.11 Strengths / weaknesses ......................................................................................................... 20 3 PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT C ......................................................................................... 21 3.1 Project data ............................................................................................................................. 21 3.2 Summary of conclusions ....................................................................................................... 21 3.3 Key observations .................................................................................................................... 21 3.4 Brief description of the project objectives........................................................................... 21 3.6 Effectiveness ........................................................................................................................... 23 3.7 Efficiency ................................................................................................................................. 25 3.8 Impact ...................................................................................................................................... 26 3.10 Visibility ................................................................................................................................... 27 3.11 Strengths / weaknesses ......................................................................................................... 28 4 PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT D ......................................................................................... 29 4.1 Project data ............................................................................................................................. 29 4.2 Summary of conclusions ....................................................................................................... 29 4.3 Key observations .................................................................................................................... 29 4.4 Brief description of the project objectives........................................................................... 29 4.6 Effectiveness ........................................................................................................................... 31 4.7 Efficiency ................................................................................................................................. 33 4.8 Impact ...................................................................................................................................... 34 4.9 Sustainability .......................................................................................................................... 34 4.10 Visibility ................................................................................................................................... 35 4.11 Strengths / weaknesses ......................................................................................................... 35

4

11 PPRROOJJEECCTT EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN RREEPPOORRTT AA 1.1 PROJECT DATA

Project name Enhancement of Living Standards in Namangan Region Project number 2004/091-225 Source of financing TACIS Central Asia Action Programme 2002 Project location Namangan region Starting date March 2005 End date Planned: 30 November 2006 Actual: 31 December 2006 Budget € 1,100,000 Disbursed: € 1,090,848

1.2 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS

1. Relevance and quality of design B 2. Effectiveness B 3. Efficiency B 4. Impact C 5. Sustainability 6. Visibility

C C

Note: a = very good; b = good; c = problems; d = serious deficiencies 1.3 KEY OBSERVATIONS • The objectives of the project were relevant but the design of the three activity

components (development strategies, empowering local communities, income generation) could have been more effectively integrated

• Project mobilization and infrastructure rehabilitation activities reached more communities than originally planned and drinking water supply systems in particular have improved life conditions

• Infrastructure rehabilitation projects are maintained and results supported • Impact of project strategy work on regional and district governments capacity is

unclear • Micro-credit scheme stopped after only six months in operation due to the effects of

intervening legislation on CSOs but capital was finally recuperated and scheme resumed early in 2010.

• The co-operative enterprises established under the project are still active, some have expanded creating new jobs

• Project management was flexible in adapting the design of the second component to the changes in the policy environment by shifting the focus on traditional forms of Civil Society Organisations and notably on the Mahalla Committees

• Sustainability of Community Development Planning in the target communities not always evident

.

5

1.4 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES According to ToR, the project was launched to increase the living standards of Namangan oblast in the Fergana Valley, considered the most vulnerable of the 3 regions of the Valley and the one which had received the least attention from donors. It was to be implemented in 3 districts and 50 target communities. The project consisted of three interconnected activity components: i) Regional and local development strategies; ii) Empowering local communities; and iii) Income generation. The project’s overall objective

was formulated as “to improve livelihoods of local communities in Namangan region through empowerment of local communities, income generation and job creation”

Each of the project’s components had its Specific Objective and Outputs/Results. For the three components, the specific objectives• To support the authorities and local communities to develop and implement regional/local

development strategies.

were as follows:

• To empower local communities to engage in their socio-economic development. • To increase and diversify access of low income population/farmers to finance (and business

services)

1.5 RELEVANCE AND QUALITY OF DESIGN The project objectives were highly relevant to the needs of the target areas and some of the project activities were relevant to the preparation of the full WISP 2008-2010, the equivalent in Uzbekistan to a first Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. In particular, the social and economic assessment outputs of the project, under the first activity component, provided both information analysis and new methodologies to the preparation of the WISP. The project was designed around three components, each with their own specific objective and results. The objectives are consistent with the objectives of the EC CSP and IP 2007-2010. The design is also informed by an Area Based Development concept of UNDP, applied in a parallel ELS project in Karapalkastan, which emphasizes the integration of development actions within the framework of a community approach. However, the integration between activity components is not fully explicated in the design. For example, between the income generation component and the community empowerment component, the linking activity of Community Development Planning (CDP) is not made explicit. The central linkage between first and second activity components, which is a mechanism of integration between CDP and the development of district strategies, is also not explicated. Within the individual activity components the hierarchy between the three levels of intervention was broadly consistent, though the first specific objective “to support the authorities and local communities to develop and implement regional/local development strategies” is rather formulated as an activity. Another strong limitation of the design is the formulation of results in terms of outputs rather than outcomes for the beneficiaries. The logical framework matrix was revised once in October 2005 to reflect changes in the first two activity components, which were designed to adapt to the new legal environment for Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and to the negative feasibility outcome for establishing a Social Investment Fund. However, though approved by the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and welcomed by the EC, these changes were not confirmed by an amendment to the agreement and reporting continued using the activities and outputs formulation of the first logical framework matrix.

6

In general, both logical framework matrixes failed to define Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) and Sources of Verification (SoV) that could measure results and higher level objectives. 1.6 EFFECTIVENESS The project activity covered three districts-e.g. Chartak, Kasansay, Mingbulak-and 63 communities compared to the 50 communities originally planned. The main criteria applied for the selection of communities were distance/remoteness from basic social infrastructure facilities and the social-economic indicators as reported in the so-called ‘communities social passports’ or socio-economic profiles, updated annually by the Mahallas Committees. The selection was carried-out in two stages: first a pre-selection based on the results of a survey of communities carried out through questionnaires and second, district level workshops with the pre-selected communities, where each community presented and defended arguments before a joint project-local government commission inclusive of administrators and technical specialists; decisions on selection were finally taken at the workshops before the participants. The majority of outputs delivered to the target communities were small infrastructural grant projects which were co-financed by communities up to the equivalent of 50% and sometimes a higher percentage of the total cost. Grants were not in the form of cash but of equipment procured through the project. The great majority of the community projects rehabilitated water supply systems providing access to clean drinking water to an estimated 118,000 people. Box 1 below illustrates the case of Guldirov visited by the expert.

Box 1-Rehabilitation of Drinking Water Supply System in Guldirov Guldirov is today a community of approximately 2,000 inhabitants which counted 1,800 inhabitants in 2006 at the time of the ELS project intervention. The community is located 15 km away from the district administrative and market center which is in the town of Chartak. About 1/3 of the population are children below 15 years old and women are over 1/2 the total population. The main sources of income are from agricultural production (wheat, cotton, fruits and vegetables production) and small trade. The village has been connected to the main electricity grid since the ‘80s but power cuts are recurrent. Connection to the main gas pipeline was financed from the district budget in 2006. Gas pressure has been generally lower in winter seasons. Problem The main water supply system constructed in 1982 demanded major repairs and had been unused since 1996. Water was either collected from the open streams which criss-cross part of the village or women had to walk 2 ½ km to collect clean drinking water from an artesian well Prioritization of problems The ELS project team facilitated a one-day general meeting with community leaders, using MDGs and MDGs targets to prioritize problems. The previous year Community Development Plan (prepared before project) advocated village roads asphalt as the first priority and drinking water as only the second priority. Establishment of the Initiative Group. 6 one-day meetings on community mobilization resulting in the establishment of an initiative group of 20 persons

7

Training of the Initiative Group 4 trainings of the Initiative Group were carried out on community mobilization, project design and fundraising, project monitoring, water sanitation. Project budget preparation. Testing of underground water by district health specialists An epidemiological test of the underground water was carried out. Resource mobilization ELS project contribution –procurement, delivery and installation of new water pump, 570mt of steel pipeline, 450mt of power cables, 1 control unit-equivalent to 67% of total cost Community contribution- cleaning the well, water tower, fencing of pump, transport of equipment, maintenance and sanitation-33% of total estimated cost Results Beneficiaries of the project are the whole population of the village in particular women say that they can now fetch the water twice a day from water collection points on the village main street and the time to collect water has been more than halved. The increased access to clean water sources has reportedly reduced the number of schooldays lost by children for sicknesses attributed to water borne bacteria. Eliminated cost of community for periodically having to import clean water by truck. These results are perceived by the beneficiaries as having empowered the community by freeing economic and human resources for other social and economic purposes. The expert did not receive negative remarks from the final beneficiaries on the quality of the outputs (e.g. quality of water supplied) delivered to communities by the rehabilitation projects.

Moreover, the micro-credit scheme complemented well the activities of the project in the target communities. 316 non-collateral micro-loans were disbursed, before the Microcredit Organisation (MCO) failed to comply with the new rules for registration enacted by government, and as a result the scheme was stopped almost in its infancy after only six months in operations. Though after so many years it was not possible to identify beneficiaries of the scheme, reportedly, according to local authorities and project staff, the beneficiaries were mainly low income women, and loans were mainly used for livestock acquisition.

The project succeeded in achieving the specific objective “to empower local communities to engage in socio-economic development”. How this was achieved is exemplified in the case-study of Guldirov (see Box 1 last paragraph). In terms of the objective “to increase and diversify access of the poor/farmers to finance”, it is unlikely that the objective was achieved considering the short duration of the micro-credit scheme. However, if other income generation activities are taken into consideration, for example the equipment grants and training of small co-operative businesses, the objective was achieved in that they have expanded their businesses, and increased and diversified their access to finance (e.g. the macaroni and flour co-operative in Ayqiron).

Finally, in terms of the objective “to support the authorities and local communities to develop and implement regional/local development strategies”, the results of the capacity building activities of the project (for example the formal acceptance by local authorities of MDG-based methodologies and analytical tools for strategy development) have in principle facilitated the establishment of a coherent framework for the vertical integration of the Community Development Planning with district and regional development strategy work and with the national planning process for the WISP. In practice, however, the project main outputs at regional and district government levels were social and economic assessment reports and not development strategies, the definition used in the project

8

documents. Moreover, they were developed with significant inputs from an international expert and only limited participation of an ad hoc working group comprising staff of the economic and social departments of the regional and target district governments. Whether and to what extent the social and economic assessment reports have been used by the regional and district governments to prepare development strategies is unclear from the reviewed documentation and the interviews, The assessments have been used, however, at national level for the preparation of the WISP.

1.7 EFFICIENCY There was a delay of at least 3 months in the start of the project due to UNDP practice of starting activities only after receiving payment of the first EC instalment, a delay increased by the length of UNDP recruitment process. All project staff was recruited by end March 2005, about 4 months after signature of the contract. However, the project managed to recuperate much of the initial delay. By the end of the second year about 99% of the inputs were used (though a time extension of 1 month for the implementation of activities had to be requested and was obtained from the EC). An international Project Co-ordinator based in Tashkent, held chief responsibility for the project strategy development, co-ordinating procedures with UNDP Country Office, information and communication with the main Project Partner (Ministry of Economy), the international organisations, other stakeholders, the general public, and for reporting to the EC. The international project co-ordinator was supported by a National Technical Advisor, a Public Relations Specialist and three National Experts (one per activity component). The day-today management of the project was executed by a Project Management Office in Namangan. Some of the key staff continued to work in the follow-up ELS projects. UNDP Country Office provided essential support services to the project operations, notably through its centralized procurement, finance and personnel units. Moreover, one internal audit and value for money evaluation were carried out under the responsibility of the UNDP Deputy Resident Representative. Procurement of equipment was by competitive tendering, informed by the principle of ‘economic’ purchase of inputs. A missed opportunity for additional cost cutting in the procurement of project equipment was the lack of co-ordination in this sphere with the parallel ELS project in Karapalkastan: in terms of combining lots for the two projects to obtain lower procurement prices. Interviewed beneficiaries are generally satisfied with the quality of the equipment procured. One beneficiary (i.e. from the macaroni and flour co-operative in Ayqiron) who was invited as observer of the tender evaluation, explained through a detailed account how the evaluation was carried out with all the safeguards for openness and transparency. UNDP also provided access by the ELS project to the technical resources of its Regional Bureau in Bratislava.

Within the framework of UNDP National Execution Modality (NEX) agreement with GoU, a high level official from the regional government (i.e. the Deputy Regional Governor –or Hokyim) was appointed as direct counterpart for the project in Namangan, which greatly facilitated the implementation of activities in the region. Under the same modality, a PSC was established jointly with the parallel ELS project in Karapalkastan. The PSC met regularly on a bi-annual basis.

9

Communication between UNDP Country Office and the first EC Task Manager was strained as UNDP tended to refer to FAFA as the ruling agreement while the EC tended to view the Contribution Agreement (or contract) as superseding. Communication improved somehow with the arrival of a new EC Task Manager. However, communication issues had no significant effect on the timely delivery of inputs. More important in this respect were the time consuming contractual procedures for the reallocation of finances between project budget items. The first addendum to the budget was signed in March 2006 and was requested to use the contingency funds for covering the project activity in 13 additional communities. The second addendum was signed end November 2006 and was requested in conjunction with a one-month time extension for the completion of all the planned activities. Local communities contributed up to 50% of the costs of basic social infrastructure rehabilitation projects, which has provided for substantial co-financing. Cost-sharing with other ABD programmes, notably the ELS project in Karapalkastan, and ELS in Fergana, generated savings through sharing the costs of trainings (including study tours), of short-term international technical assistance (e.g. in support for the preparation of regional and district strategies), of PSC meetings. 1.8 IMPACT There were noted improvements in the livelihood of communities where the project has brought access to clean water, and a notable effect was the reported drop in intestinal diseases, such as typhoid, hepatitis and diarrhea as a result of availability of cleaner water combined with health surveillance from a regional funded programme, which promotes hygiene, raises awareness of and monitors infectious diseases. An unexpected impact of the rehabilitation of water supply systems has been the creation of paid jobs in the communities through the creation of community-based drinking water limited liability companies that collect water charges, carry out water sanitation and repair to the infrastructure. The advantages and disadvantages of these arrangements are discussed below in the Sustainability section. In the case of micro-credit, the scheme was certainly of a too short-duration-i.e. barely 6 months- to have had an impact.

Box 2- The Macaroni and Flour Cooperative in Ayqiron The cooperative enterprise was set up with an equipment grant from the ELS project and benefited from a study tour in Italy. The co-operative started with 3 members and its business has grown to employ 10 persons. Moreover, recently the co-operative has received a loan from a regional fund to buy additional equipment. With the additional equipment they are planning to hire 7 new employees for the current activity and to expand to the sowing business, planning to hire 10 new employees (all women). In terms of increased capacity by local government to respond to community needs, use by the project of MDGs as a starting point to support the preparation of regional and district levels development strategies, and the prioritization of problems by communities through the CDP process, have helped fostering the dialogue with communities about addressing local development issues. However, it is not clear if the main outputs of the social and economic assessment reports have been used by regional and district governments to prepare development strategy documents.

10

1.9 SUSTAINABILITY The expert noted that in the target communities visited, the water supply systems rehabilitated by the ELS project were functioning, water charges collected, maintenance of infrastructure and water sanitation provided for by community-based limited liability companies borne from the original water committees created with the project support. These arrangements have advantages and disadvantages from the community perspective: on the one hand limited liability companies are subject to legal rules that has increased the transparency in the management of water charges and created paid jobs in the community, on the other hand they have increased water charges to include the cost of salaries now paid by the community for the staff of the companies. The increase in water charges, however, appears not to have affected access by more vulnerable and poor households, which are subsidised by district-funded social assistance programmes. Ownership by the communities of the Community Development Planning is less clearcut. For example, the Chairman of the Mahalla Committee of one of the villages (i.e. Guldirov), remarked that participation in the mobilization activities related to the CDP preparation was low. Communities are not monolithic blocs. Particular sections of a community population may feel that their influence is threatened by the CDP process. However, sustainability of the CDP process depends heavily on the level of participation of a community in the decision-making about development priorities. In the target communities of the project, there is mixed evidence about the continuation of Community Development Planning. Other Chairmen of the Mahalla Committees reported, however, that the Community Development Plans (CDPs) are regularly reviewed and if necessary updated by the communities annually between October and December of each year to feed into the preparation of the district public investment plans. It is unclear however if the review of priorities is still informed by the MDG framework introduced by the project or priorities are formed without a specific framework of references. In the latter case, the risk is the prevailing of sectional interests over the general interest. In this respect, the quality of the commitment of district authorities to the CDP process is of crucial importance. The district Mahalla Information and Resource Centres (MIRCs) are still operational under the funding by the Mahalla Fund. However, they are not sufficiently resourced to meet the demand of the CDP process in all communities. The typical MIRC has two staff. One facilitator for Community Development Planning and one staff which is assigned to provide fee-based services to community clients (e.g. photocopying, typing, etc.). The skills of the facilitators need to be strengthened in both breadth and depth if the MIRCs services are to remain valuable to communities in the future. The co-operative enterprises (i.e. 3 bio-pest, 1 macaroni and flour) are still operational and expanding their businesses, and the bio-pest co-operatives have contributed to disseminate environmentally sustainable techniques of pest control. The micro-credit scheme was resumed only under the Micro Credit Bank (MCB) in 2010. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between UNDP and MCB was signed in December 2009. The capital recuperated from the 2006 scheme was about 222,000 US$, above the start up capital. According to MCB, the outstanding credit portfolio is about 60,000 US$ for the three regions of Namangan, Fergana and Andijan. The credit is collateral free and group based. It is delivered through MCB regional branches. Reportedly, about 80% of the scheme beneficiaries are women involved in home-based micro-enterprises, notably weaving and sowing.

11

Regional and district government ownership of the social and economic assessments produced by the project is limited, and there is no clear evidence that the assessments have been updated overtime. 1.10 VISIBILITY Information materials, particularly the factsheets on community rehabilitation projects and the leaflets on the micro-credit scheme provide a clear and concise overview of the activities. The EU visibility of the factsheets, however, is not clear. Materials were produced in 3 languages, but it is not possible to assess after over 3 years since the project closed, and in the absence of a visibility plan, whether sufficient materials were translated and printed in Uzbek language to meet the needs in rural areas. After several years, visibility of the project sites cannot always be identified. Some of the rehabilitation projects have still EU visibility sign posts but no information is displayed about the output, including information about ELS and community resource contributions. 1.11 STRENGTHS / WEAKNESSES Strengths of the project • Choice of UNDP that has a global knowledge base on MDG and poverty reduction, an active and

permanent presence in the field of development in Uzbekistan, and the status of an international organisation with a reputation for political neutrality so important to operate in Fergana Valley

• A project design that combines “hard” and “soft” components matching well with the needs • Effective management in terms of implementation (‘getting things done’). • The emphasis of building activities through strengthening partnerships with existing local

institutions and using local knowledge. Weaknesses of the project • The project proposal did not provide a clear analysis of the issues and bottlenecks to be

addressed. It remained at a fairly general level of noting the shortcomings of the region in general and referred to a number of policy documents in place.

• Insufficient connectivity between the three activity components • The absence of an exit strategy for the first activity component in the 3 target districts • Lack of a detailed communication and visibility plan as requested in ToR

12

22 PPRROOJJEECCTT EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN RREEPPOORRTT BB 2.1 PROJECT DATA

Project name Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Region Project number 2006/116796 Source of financing TACIS Central Asia Action Programme 2003 Project location Fergana region Starting date July 2006 End date Planned: 31 December 2007 Actual: 31 December 2007 Budget € 1,100,000 Disbursed: € 1,095,095


1. Relevance and quality of design B 2. Effectiveness B 3. Efficiency B 4. Impact C 5. Sustainability 6. Visibility

C B

Note: a = very good; b = good; c = problems; d = serious deficiencies 2.3 KEY OBSERVATIONS • Co-ordination with other donor interventions enhanced the results of the “Community Development” activity • The rehabilitation of the Village Medical Points was a successful example of how government funding,

other donor interventions and ELS project intervention can be co-ordinated • The effectiveness of the results of the ”Community Development” activity was strengthened by associating

income generation training to Community Development Planning • Micro-credit has been recycled and has improved access by women to economic activity, though access

to loans between target districts has not been equal • The project has been less effective in terms of increasing the capacity for policy planning of regional and

district governments • Cost-savings were achieved through co-ordination with ELS projects in Namangan and Karapalkastan • Ownership of the project results is high at all levels (national,regional , district, community) but is mainly

related to the “Community Development” component and to a lesser extent, because results were more limited in scale, to the “Income Generation” component

.

13

2.4 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES According to ToR, the project was to be implemented in 3 districts and 50 target communities. The project consisted of three interconnected activity components formulated as follows:

i) Community mobilization for regional development strategic mechanisms; ii) Increased social welfare iii) Sustainable livelihood development.

The project’s overall objective

was formulated as “to support the economic and social development of vulnerable populations in the Fergana Valley by strengthening local economies, local administration capacity to respond to communities concerns, reducing the potential for social conflicts”

Each of the project’s components had its Specific Objective and Outputs/Results. For the three components, the specific objectives

• To improve communities’ participation in making decisions that concern their own development through community participation and local Government’s capacity to formulate participatory local development plans

were formulated as follows:

• To improve social welfare through rehabilitation of social services infrastructure • To improve rural livelihoods through support to income generation and job creation

At the end of the inception phase and during implementation several changes were introduced in the project design, including in the formulation of the objectives. It is unclear from the documentation in possession of the expert if these were formalised in contract amendments. In the final project report the overall objective is reformulated

as “to put in place the conditions for sustained poverty reduction in four districts of the Fergana region” and the three activity components are revised as follows:

i) Policy and donors co-ordination ii) Community development iii) Income generation and rural development

The specific objectives in their final formulation

• To increase capacity for policy planning at regional and local levels were:

• To reinforce the development capacity of local governance • To create and strengthen pilot income generation schemes

2.5 RELEVANCE AND QUALITY OF DESIGN The objective of ‘conflict prevention’ was explicitly added in the original ToR (“reducing the potential for social conflicts”) and apparently justified the selection of the disputed enclave district of Sokh (in the territory of Kyrgyzstan) as one of the four districts for the project activities, and of a second enclave of several communities in the district of Fergana. The objectives of the ToR were consistent with the EC CSP objectives (poverty reduction and improving stability and security), though in the design of the ToR the ‘conflict prevention’ objective was not expected to be achieved through cross-border co-operation activity, which would not have been feasible considering the heavy constraints to cross-border mobility at the time (and today).

14

The project objectives were also consistent with the I-WISP objectives 1-“stimulation of decentralization of public institutions and social services, involving the population in public processes at primary level”; 2- “improvement of the quality and equal access to basic social services”; 3-”creation of sustainable sources of income and its increase”. Moreover, the concept of the project matched well the integrated approach advocated in the I-WISP. A number of changes were introduced in the first and second activity components during project implementation and were endorsed by the PSC meeting of April 2007. The changes did provide a platform for training activities that promoted greater linkages between all the three components, including the income generation component, chiefly through a broader mobilization approach to Community Development Planning. In the final design, the specific objective “to reduce the potential for social conflicts” was dropped, though implicitly still relevant particularly to the enclave territories. Under the second activity component-i.e. community development-the project did coordinate rehabilitation of village medical points with trainings delivered by UNICEF Family Planning and Education project to medical personnel and World Bank Health II programme delivery of medical equipment. The quality of the project design was improved during implementation. The most significant improvement was the streamlined number of project results to 6. The improvement should have facilitated the management and reporting of performance. However, the main limitation was in the formulation of results and OVIs which remained too heavily output-oriented to be helpful with respect to project management and monitoring. The hierarchy of objectives was appropriate and presented no particular problems. 2.6 EFFECTIVENESS The project activity covered four districts-e.g. Bagdad, Rishtan, Sokh, Fergana-and 54 communities compared to the 50 communities originally planned. As for the first ELS project in Namangan, the main criteria applied in Fergana for the selection of communities were distance/remoteness from basic social infrastructure facilities and the social-economic indicators as reported in the so-called ‘communities social passports’ or socio-economic profiles, updated annually by the Mahallas Committees. In addition all the communities of the 2 enclaves were selected for their vulnerability to potential conflict with neighboring communities in Kyrgyzstan, particularly over water supply. The effectiveness of CDP was energized with the inputs of an international expert following remarks about the sustainability and effectiveness of the process by the monitors. A new mobilization concept was introduced that added training on income generation to training on strategy planning and fundraising. This new mobilization approach, always combined with the implementation of small infrastructural grant projects, has increased the self-help attitude of communities and in this way shown communities that the objectives of the CDP were achievable through self-reliance. Box 2 provides an example of how this new approach increased the effectiveness of CDP in the community of Bedarak (Bagdad District).

15

Box 1- The Increased Development Capacity of CDP in Bedarak The community of Bedarak has a fast growing population and in 2007 the project provided 3 new sub-stations and 1 new transformer of higher voltage capacity to supply electricity to 1600 inhabitants (about 40% of the total community population). This was the first priority of the Community Development Plan. The infrastructural grant project was combined with a series of mobilization trainings by an international expert including this time on income generation . The community contributed 50% of the total cost of the infrastructure project (electricity poles, cables, transport of equipment, labour). The community then moved to the implementation of the second priority project of the CDP which was a community centre for youth including sport facilities. The cost was covered 100% by the community. Equally important to the effectiveness of CDP was the active support by the regional government to the development and dissemination of the concept. The Mahalla Information and Resource Centres (MIRCs) established by the project in the 4 target districts also played a key role in support of the CDP and fund raising for the implementation of the plans.

Box 2- The Mahalla Information and Resource Centre of Bagdad The centre was established under the Mahalla Fund and received equipment and training from the ELS project. The centre has been particularly active in fund-raising for community projects identified under the CDP. In 2010 the centre has helped 3 villages in preparing and submitting 3 funding applications to a public fund under the Senate. The applications concerned the establishment of 1 job centre, repair of 1 drinking water supply system, and the construction of 1 youth center for a total amount equivalent to 10,000 €. In 2009 the centre had supported 2 villages in successful funding applications to the Swiss Development Co-operation for the reconstruction of their drinking water supply systems. The project small infrastructure grant mechanism co-financed community actions, including rehabilitation of village medical points, drinking water supply systems, gas and electricity supply systems. The rehabilitation of village medical points, in particular, has increased the access of communities to healthcare by reducing the distance to functioning primary healthcare facilities and improving the quality of healthcare services by catalyzing other resources: funding by the regional health department for qualified medical staff and operational budget, medical equipment from World Bank’s Health II programme, training from UNICEF.

Box 3- The Reconstruction of the Village Medical Point in Quashqarmakey The three contiguous villages of Quashgarmakey, Tuvadok and Tinchlik had no functioning primary healthcare post and decided to join resources to repair and refurbish a two-storey building on the territory of Quashgarmakey which had been abandoned since independence. The ELS project supported the communities through mobilization trainings and by procuring materials such as windows and door frames, paint, linoleum for floor, bricks, steel sheets for gutter and water drains and other supply materials. The works were finished by July 2007. Today the medical point has 1 general practitioner, 1 pediatrician, 1 ginecologist and 1 dentist. In addition there are 31 nurses and administrative staff, all funded from the budget of the regional government.

16

The registry shows that there are between 60 and 80 visitors a day, mainly women and children. The most important service of the medical point is a’ surveillance system’ whereby medical staff systematically visits rural households to raise awareness of infectious diseases, risk of self-cure, monitor children and mothers health by diagnosing and registering their health conditions and then ensuring the follow-up. It is a way to reach most remote households as well. The regional health department provides drugs and consumables. The World Bank Health programme has provided medical equipment. Nurses and two doctors participated in UNICEF Family Planning and Education project training seminars at the district centre in Bagdad where they were taught on raising awareness of breastfeeding techniques, early detection of infectious diseases in mothers and children, raising awareness of the risks of self-cure. A combined population of approximately 6,000 has now access to higher quality and timely medical aid and preventive medical care. The micro-credit scheme was collateral-free and based on a group guarantee. Though requested by groups, credit amounts were used individually, predominantly by women, single heads of households, for the purchase and resale of subsistence husbandry, generally at a small profit. Beneficiaries consider the services useful and the scheme is now at his fourth cycle of credit. The total number of loans had reached 1235 in March 2010, doubling the number since the project end date of 31 December 2007. Two agro-cooperatives were established by the project: one in Rishtan and one in Bagdad district. Box 4 below illustrates the results of this activity for the agro-cooperative of Sardor Qobul Bogi in Bagdad district, visited by the expert.

Box 4- The Sardor Qobul Bogi agro-cooperative in Bagdad district The cooperative has 9 members and the ELS project supported its establishment and initial development through the procurement of a tractor and trainings in business planning, cooperative management and agricultural techniques and practices , including a three weeks study tour in France for its members. The tractor was initially provided for leasing outside the cooperative but the cooperative has acquired additional agricultural land and the tractor is now only used by members. Moreover, two additional tractors and several tillers have been purchased for the cultivation of wheat. The cooperative has currently 133ha of land cultivated with cotton, wheat and orchards. The cooperative has also established two orchard demonstration plots where new varieties and techniques are tested. The plots are open to neighboring communities for observation and members of the cooperatives use them to provide training on new techniques of pruning, planting and irrigation learned from the study tour in France and the trainings provided to the members by an international specialist. In addition the plots, already in their third year, are expected to provide additional revenue from this year. A 1ha nursery has also been established for commercialization of new varieties of fruit tree seedlings. The main project outputs under the first activity component were 1 regional and 4 district social and economic assessments which built on the information provided by the ELS target communities socio-economic baselines, developed within an MDG framework. The activity was developed with the significant inputs of an international expert and only the limited involvement of district and regional administrations. It is therefore not possible to conclude, from the feedbacks of local authorities, how the outputs have been used by regional and district governments; though the assessments were reportedly used at national level in the preparation of the WISP 2008-2010.

17

In conclusion, the project was successful in terms of the specific objective “to reinforce the development capacity of local governance” through the CDP process, the related mobilization activities and the implementation of social infrastructure rehabilitation projects in 54 communities, that have provided access to and improved the quality of basic social services (clean water, electricity, gas, primary healthcare) for a total population of about 160,000. The micro-credit has achieved the objective “to create and strengthen pilot income generation schemes”, though access to the benefits of the scheme has not been equal among the target districts, and only a small percentage of the scheme beneficiaries are resident of the Fergana and Sokh districts. The main reason for this has been the lack of presence of the Credit Union Nurafshon in these two districts. The problem could not be redressed during the project for lack of immediate adequate alternatives to the selected organization and it is hoped that the territorial balance can be restored in the future through capacity development of the Credit Union, generated also by a reduction of the costs of operating in the two districts. In terms of the objective “to increase capacity for policy planning at regional and local levels” both the trainings and the work with the regional and district social and economic assessments, fail to provide sufficient evidence that the outputs were used by the intended beneficiaries and that the objective was achieved; though all outputs were delivered. 2.7 EFFICIENCY There was a delay of 2 months in the start of the project due to UNDP practice of starting activities only after receiving payment of the first EC instalment and the recruitment process of the project team in Fergana. However, the initial delay was largely recuperated and by the end of the second year about 99.7% of the inputs were used, according to the final project report. Such a high level of spending was made possible through two budget revisions in March (meaning within one year after the project start) and in November 2007 (one month prior to its end). Both aimed at reallocating unspent resources towards full expenditure. Overall, project funds seem to have been made available on time to the project staff and local experts as well as to the few partners subcontracted for specific inputs. None of them has expressed any concerns regarding the way funds were managed and disbursed during project implementation. The project team in Tashkent was the original team of the first ELS project in Namangan and for the overlapping period between the two projects (about 6 months) the responsibilities and costs of the team were shared between the two projects. Other costs were shared, including notably the cost of an international expert for the delivery of the regional and district social and economic assessments. The day-today management of the project was executed by a Project Management Office in Fergana. Some of the key staff recruited has continued to work in the following ELS projects. As part of the NEX approach to implementation, relationships with local partner government institutions were formalised through Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) with the regional and district authorities who throughout the project were key in facilitating the implementation of activities. A PSC was also established and met at regular intervals. Local communities contributed up to 50% of the costs of basic social infrastructure rehabilitation projects, which has provided for substantial co-financing.

18

2.8 IMPACT The kind of effects on the livelihood of rural populations brought about by the CDP process, in combination with the small infrastructure development grants, are illustrated in Box 5 below.

Box 5- Decline of hepatitis in the community of Tinchlik In Tinchlik (3,300 inhabitants) the project contributed to the rehabilitation of the drinking water supply system by providing the materials for the rehabilitation of the artesian well located on the school ground and by supplying steel pipelines. The community with its own resources bought and installed a new water pump. Less than ½ km away from Tinchlik, the project also contributed to the rehabilitation of the village medical point of Qashqarmakey (see box 3 above) which also serves the population of Tinchlik . The rehabilitated drinking water supply system and the village medical point have been operational since July 2007. The village medical point, within the framework of a government sponsored health surveillance system, has been monitoring the cases of hepatitis in the village of Tinchlik since January 2008 and in two years the village medical point reports a drop of 15% in the number of cases of hepatitis in Tinchlik. Moreover, the reinforcement of the CDP approach and methodology discussed under “Effectiveness” provided the communities with a self-help mentality to approach issues of development and induced positive effects beyond those originally intended. For example, the ELS project mobilization activities induced the village of Qashqarmakey to mobilize additional resources for the connection of the village with the main gas pipeline network. The Mahalla Information and Resource Centre of Bagdad attracted a grant of US$ 7,000 from the WB Drainage, Irrigation and Wetlands Improvement Project for training women in water management. The above are illustrative examples of how the project, under the “Community Development” activity component, has achieved in practice the Overall Objective “to put in place the conditions for sustained poverty reduction in four districts of the Fergana region”. The scale of the impact of the “Community Development” activity is potentially large for the activity has encompassed all 54 target communities. In the case of micro-credit, the scheme has the potential to achieve the Overall Objective, though on a limited scale. Much of the credit share has been used by female-heads of households usually to buy 1 calf for breeding, milk production, fattening and resale at a profit. Repaid the first loan, an additional higher loan amount was usually obtained from the Credit Union and used the same way. It was noted that after the third loan some of the beneficiaries were able to establish sustained income generating activities with the profits accumulated net of the loans and interest amounts repaid. One of the women interviewed in Bagdad district said that she invested the small capital generated by the micro-credit scheme in tableware, that she leases for weddings and the earnings from this additional activity will enable her to expand the service to additional communities. Another woman was planning to open a sowing workshop in her community. However, the scale of the potential impact will be limited though the number of loans has more than doubled since the end of the project. The impact of the 2 agricultural co-operatives is limited to their members but potentially significant for the surrounding communities, in terms of job creation and higher yields in agriculture through the demonstration plots to disseminate the new techniques acquired through the project. The impact of the first activity component at regional and district government levels is not demonstrated. First, the development strategies were in fact socio-economic assessments with a focus on development needs prioritization. Thus, they were not for immediate implementation. Secondly, despite the setting up of an ad hoc working group, it seems that the documents were

19

drafted with significant inputs from an international expert. Although trained in policy planning, it is unclear whether representatives of local governments have learnt from this "policy development" process. The development plans they have produced since the project ended do not present much difference compared to those issued before the project started. Without detracting from the value of the training carried out by the project, it is felt that its impact still has to manifest itself. The situation is better at the national level. Explicit references are made in the WISP 2008-2010 to the use of the ELS project social and economic assessments, for the preparation of the national development strategy. . 2.9 Sustainability Ownership of the results achieved through the community social infrastructure projects is very high and the flow of services is supported not only by the resources of local beneficiary communities but for certain services (notably healthcare) also by local government budgets, as demonstrated in the case of the Village Medical Points (see Box 3 above). In the communities visited, CDP is being replicated and the process and related resource mobilization methodology is being supported by the project trained facilitators of the MIRCs. It was noted that the services that the district MIRCs provide to local communities are generally highly valued in terms of supporting CDP and their implementation. However, not all district MIRCs are necessarily operating with the same effectiveness and level of funding as the example of Bagdad provided above (Box 2). The MIRCs future financial viability is not yet ensured and to a great extent relies on their prospect to broaden the range of institutional clients and to attract government grants and other donors funding. This might be easier to achieve in the two districts of Bagdad and Rishtan with the inception of the new long-term Fergana Water Resource Management Programme funded by a World Bank loan. The 2 agro-cooperatives are operational and at least one (see box 4) has growing financial viability from the expansion of business. Members regard them as their own enterprises and feel entirely accountable for the results. Through their demonstration plots they share knowledge of sustainable techniques of irrigation and soil management. The outstanding credit portfolio of the micro-credit scheme has been expanding to the equivalent of about 56,000 € as of March 2010 and 73% of the beneficiaries are women. Ownership by regional governments, but most notably by district governments, of the social and economic assessments of the project has been found to be limited partly because their inputs did not go beyond providing social and economic data, partly because the training in policy planning was too short-lived to enable for the transfer of sufficient skills to elaborate strategic documents from the assessments and no training sustainability mechanisms (e.g. training of trainers) were envisaged. It was not felt that lack of funding was also a possible explanation for the low sense of ownership, for decentralization of fiscal resources has in fact being progressing since the adoption of the I-WISP.

20

2.10 VISIBILITY Information materials, particularly the brochures on the overall project activity, the factsheets on community rehabilitation projects, and the leaflets on the micro-credit scheme provide clear, relevant and generally accurate information, The EU visibility of the materials is good. The materials were produced in the 3 languages (English, Russian, Uzbek), however with no communication/visibility plan for the project period it is difficult to have an overview of the materials and their allocation, as well as of the other public information actions. The visibility of the project objects (e.g. community rehabilitated infrastructure) was good, including the EU visibility. 2.11 STRENGTHS / WEAKNESSES Strengths of the project • Project management actively learnt from the lessons of prior ELS projects in Namangan and

Karapalkastan and applied the lessons with flexibility by innovating methodologies (e.g. CDP) and adapting design of activities

• The strong support for the project activities from national, regional, district governments and local communities

• Though within a limited scope, the Community Development activity was successfully co-ordinated with government funding and other donors interventions

Weaknesses of the project • The Policy Planning activity was developed in isolation from the other two components and the

results were not sustained • Mechanisms for the development and sustainability of training to regional and district

governments were not envisaged • A sustainability plan for the MIRCs addressing future financial viability and training of trainers was

not prepared • Community Development and Income Generation activities were not effectively coordinated

21

33 PPRROOJJEECCTT EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN RREEPPOORRTT CC 3.1 PROJECT DATA

Project name Enhancement of Living Standards in Andijan and Namangan Phase II Project number 2007/142128 Source of financing TACIS Central Asia Action Programme 2004 Project location Andijan and Namangan regions Starting date November 2007 End date Planned: 31 October 2009 Actual: 31 October 2009 Budget € 1,100,000 Disbursed: € 900,000 (as of March 2009)


1. Relevance and quality of design B 2. Effectiveness B 3. Efficiency C 4. Impact B 5. Sustainability 6. Visibility

B B

Note: a = very good; b = good; c = problems; d = serious deficiencies 3.3 KEY OBSERVATIONS • The project was highly relevant in terms of its objectives, target groups and timing • The effectiveness of the results of the community development activity noticed in previous ELS projects

was confirmed in this one but quality of community infrastructure project results was reduced by the quality of public utilities main infrastructure

• Important activities were behind schedule mainly due to project management delays • Positive impacts are already noticeable for the community development activity and there are good

prospects that the other activity components will have a good impact too • Project results under component 2 are financially sustainable and were replicated in non-ELS communities • Future financial viability of RDCs is not yet ensured • Visibility of the project and EU visibility were enhanced compared to previous projects

.

3.4 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES Like the previous two ELS, the project consisted of the same three interconnecting activity components (capacity building of local government, capacity building of rural communities, local economic development). The project’s overall objective was formulated in the ToR as “to contribute to enhanced living standards in Andijan and Namangan regions”. For the three components, the specific objectives


• To increase regional and local authorities capacity in regional development planning in Andijan region (Objective 1)

• To improve living standards in 50 communities in Namangan region (Objective 2) • To provide innovative, alternative income mechanisms to small private farmers in Namangan

region (Objective 3)

22

The ToR also excluded the replication of a micro-credit scheme under this new project. In the Inception Report, the strategy to achieve the three specific objectives was outlined as follows: -In Andijan, Objective 1 would be achieved by testing and replicating the participatory development planning approaches, already implemented by the ELS programme in Karapalkastan, Namangan- Phase I, and Fergana region: with focus on capacity building of regional government in regional development planning and piloting of Community Development Planning (CDP). -In Namangan, Objective 2 would be achieved by reinforcing the capacity of the communities targeted under Phase I and by expanding the Community Development approach to new communities in four additional districts. Objective 3 would be achieved by focusing on equitable access to working capital, produce markets, and to agricultural extension services. 3.5 Relevance and quality of the design The objectives of the project were consistent with the aims of the full WISP 2008-2010 and more generally with a major strategic objective of the WISP, which is facilitating an area-based development programme approach to increase living standards of the populations in the regions. Moreover, the objectives of the project acquired additional relevance when the President of Uzbekistan decreed 2009 as the year of Rural Development, which contributed to unlock government funding for community development projects in rural areas. There was also coherence between this project and the EC’s Regional Strategy for Central Asia 2007-2013 and its CSP/IP 2007-2010. These strategy documents focus on geographically targeted rural development schemes, regional and local community development and support to sector reform in agriculture and social protection as instruments against poverty reduction and towards improving living standards. Complementarities and synergies were developed in the design with the other ELS projects, notably with the one in Fergana region, and with the continuing UNDP’s ABD programmes in Karapalkastan and Kashkadarya. Co-ordination with UNICEF Family Planning and Education project and the World Bank Health II programme were taken into account in the design for the community development activity. Co-ordination with UNDP Statistical Capacity Building for MDG project, was also considered in relation to the capacity building of local government activity. The strategies and objectives of the project addressed the target groups identified in the ToR and the processes developed in previous ELS projects, proposed for application in this project, were relevant to a correct identification of needs and assessment of local capacities. This project was therefore highly relevant in terms of its timing, its target groups, its objectives and the processes adopted to identify and assess needs and capacities. The intervention logic (hierarchy of objectives) is clearly defined in the logical framework matrix; results and indicators of achievement were improved and less output-oriented when compared with the design of previous ELS projects, though indicators were not time specific and sources of verification (SoV) were too generally defined. Assumptions did prove valid. A risk management plan was attached to the Inception Report, though never updated afterwards. The ToR requested a detailed visibility plan, which was only delivered for the second year of project implementation.

23

The main local partners, MoE and the two regional government administrations of Namangan and Andijan were involved in the project design and aware of the project objectives and target groups. The administration in Namangan was already familiar with the ELS programme strategies from phase I, so was the MoE. Compared to the original ToR and project proposal by UNDP, the Inception Report modified the design slightly but significantly in the political context of the Andijan region at the time, by introducing CDP and infrastructure rehabilitation for 2 rural communities in that region. 3.6 EFFECTIVENESS Under the first objective the project satisfied the quantitative indicators of achievement of the project result –defined as “improved theoretical understanding of poverty issues and practical application of poverty alleviation policies and techniques by local authorities in Andijan”. 40 regional and district government officials were trained, including some through a study tour to Poland and Slovakia organized with the support of the UNDP Regional Centre in Bratislava. In quality terms, the study tour was found useful by the participants in that it increased their understanding of monitoring and evaluation techniques, familiarized them with the principles of result-based management and with a range of MDG-related concepts and issues relevant to local development planning (such as increased living standards through rural development, concept of human development, gender equality, MDG literacy). One of the positive outcomes of the study tour was the design at the regional government level in Andijan of a pilot monitoring and evaluation scheme for national and regional social and economic programmes, including a database of MDG-related indicators also consistent with the indicators developed in the 2 pilot CDPs. The Community Development Planning approach of the project was introduced in two communities of Andijan district and 61 new communities in 4 new districts of the Namangan region: Norin, Chust, Yangikurgan, Namangan. In addition the project supported with innovative mobilization techniques (including income generation training) the second cycle of CDPs in 56 communities already targeted under phase I. In Namangan facilitators of the MIRCs were associated to the mobilization trainings. In Andijan, district and regional government officials were. In Andijan, the direct involvement of government officials with communities to familiarize them with the CDP process complemented well the other trainings delivered by the project in local development planning.

Box 1- Experience with CDP in Akmal Ikromov (Norin district) In Akmal Ikromov (2,200 inhabitants) the project contributed to the expansion of the electricity grid. This was the first priority of the Community Development Plan elaborated with project support. According to the Mahalla Committee, the project mobilization training and follow-up support from the Mahalla Information and Resource Centre have increased both the functional capacity of the Mahalla Committee in terms of preparing quality CDP documents and implementing them and enhanced the self-help attitude of community groups to undertake income generation activities. After participating in the project mobilization activities, a group of women from the community went to Andijan to receive training in sowing and opened a sowing workshop on return. The first priority of the CDP is to create jobs. The Mahalla Committee provided land to a returning migrant carpenter who opened a workshop creating 30 new jobs. The CDP next priority projects are gas supply and the establishment of a sweets factory.

24

The regional social and economic assessment report for Andijan provided a consolidated overview of poverty according to MDG-related social and economic indicators that was used for the development of the monitoring and evaluation database. Under the second objective, the project provided small social infrastructure development grants to 59 communities in the Namangan region and 2 in the Andijan region. The communities were selected in partnership with local authorities based on priorities outlined in district annual public investment plans, after 13 meetings held at district level. The indicators in the logical framework are broadly appropriate but do not provide a measure of the quality of the services made available through these actions. For example, reporting against these indicators the final project report indicates that the project’s support for community infrastructure rehabilitation in Namangan has increased access to clean water in the target communities by 30 % but says nothing about the quality of the water supply provision (e.g. how many breaks in water supply due to power cuts or drinkability of the water). In this respect, whether in quantity terms the project may have achieved the result “improved public service delivery in Namangan”, in quality terms the effectiveness of the infrastructure rehabilitation may have been reduced, in a majority of communities, in the case of water supply systems, by the as yet unresolved issues with the electricity infrastructure. Four new Mahalla Information and Resource Centres (MIRCs) were established in the four target districts of the Namangan region under the Mahalla Fund. There is evidence that they have contributed to the result “organizational capacity of Mahallas reinforced in Namangan”.

Box 2- The Mahalla Information and Resouce Centre of Norin The centre was opened to the public in November 2009, right at the end of the project. The centre is established in premises made available by the district government, An electronic database is operational, containing maps of infrastructure and social passports (or profiles) of district communities , with updated MDGs-related social and economic indicators. The staff includes one facilitator, trained by the project and one accountant. The salary of the facilitator is paid by the Mahalla Fund while operational expenses and the salary of the accountant are covered by the provision of administrative support services (e.g. typing, computer input, binding, printing, photocopying) on a fee base except free of charge for poor families. A registry of visitors indicates that the database is consulted mainly by members of the Mahalla Committees, in anticipation or during the Community Development Planning period between November and January. This was confirmed to the expert by the Chairman of the Mahalla Committee of Akmal Kromov, who also added how the Centre helped with the mobilization of resources for a CDP project to establish a sport centre in the community.

According to the project final report, only two of the three originally planned Rural Development Centres (RDCs) were established. These were set up at the end of the project under the Farmers Association. The plans to establish a third centre in Yangkurgan district were abandoned because of project delays and not sufficient time to build the centre capacity. The expert could not visit any of the centres because it was not in the final version of the itinerary approved by government.

25

Box 3- Demonstration greenhouse in Norin district The expert visited a demonstration greenhouse in Norin district (e.g. Chinor farm) set up with a grant in kind from the project on a private farmer land, a few kilometers away from the community centre and few hundred meters from the main road. The location was not too easily accessible, and the particular farmer was not too satisfied with the results. Indeed the greenhouse had been planted with a new variety of tomato seeds provided by the project that reaped high yields and in the greenhouse delivered early harvests that could not be sold or stored, at a time when prices of tomatoes had collapsed reportedly due to the introduction of a ban on their exports. The farmer had now reverted to melons and watermelons. There was no evidence from the interview with the farmer that a business plan had been prepared to obtain the grant in kind from the project worth approximately US$ 2,000. In spite of the initial losses, the farmer plans to establish a second greenhouse entirely paid for with his own resources and plant it with tomato seeds. For, he was very positive about the yields obtained.

From the evidence related to the demonstration greenhouse accessed by the expert on the ground, it may not be concluded that under the third objective the project has achieved the result “community economic productivity improved in Namangan”. 3.7 EFFICIENCY In general, activities were implemented according to plans. Where they were not on time or changed, measures were identified to rectify the situation. Evidence of this is given in the progress reports where such activities are identified and the actions planned are given in a tabular form. There was no evidence of any shortfalls in funding for project initiatives, nor in the timing of the availability of funds. The project had increased its average budget for community development projects from EUR 5,000 to EUR 7,500 due to increases in costs, particularly those for construction materials. Nevertheless, there were some notable delays in the delivery of planned outputs. For example, the establishment of the MIRCs was at the end of the project period though the training of facilitators was carried out in April according to the planned work schedule. The Rural Development Centre in Namangan district was also opened only at the end of the project period and the expert understood from interviews in the field mission that as of March 2010 none of the two opened RDCs had been registered yet nor had land been formally secured for the long-term crop demonstration sites. Also, the implementation of the 2 pilot community projects (reconstruction of water supply systems) in Andijan was delayed to the project end, mainly for delays in procurement and delivery of equipment. Local communities contributed up to 50% of the costs of basic social infrastructure rehabilitation projects, which has provided for substantial co-financing. The regional administration in Namangan and the administrations of the target districts have also demonstrated their financial commitment by funding from State programmes budgets emanating from the Presidential Decree on the Year of Rural Development a number (7) community projects in non-ELS communities that have replicated the ELS social infrastructure development projects and were prioritized in CDPs. The Mahalla Fund financed the salaries of the MIRCs facilitators and the target district provided premises free of charge.

26

3.8 IMPACT Positive impacts are already apparent under the project second objective and were brought about by the small infrastructure development grants, as illustrated in Box 4 below.

Box 4 –Electricity to all benefits local economy in Akmal Ikromov In Akmal Ikromov (2,200 inhabitants) the project supplied a low-tension electricity line pylon and electricity wire to complement the community resources mobilized to expand the community electricity grid. Before the project intervention only 40% of the population had access to electricity. After the project intervention 100% of the community population has access to electricity. According to the local Mahalla Committee, children can now do their home works in the evening and one unexpected benefit has been the start up of new house-based micro-enterprises (especially sowing) as women can now work in the late evening.

Under the project third objective, the potential for impact could be even higher, though the delays in implementation of the RDCs and the demonstration greenhouses have had a negative effect on the impact prospects. The trainings of the RDC facilitators have, according to the monitors, been of a satisfactory level. However, the delays in the ‘logistics’ for the establishment of the centers might have focused the project management more on ‘hard’ components than planning and implementing broader and deeper training for the facilitators, which would have helped increasing the skills of the RDCs facilitators to a level that could contribute already to the local economic development of the communities. Concerning the demonstration greenhouses, the choice of the project to establish them on farmers land rather than household garden plots has had the effect of reducing the access by communities to learning lessons from the plots successes and failures. Nevertheless, the introduction of the greenhouse technologies in the Namangan region is an innovation which through trials and errors will eventually have a positive impact on the productivity and levels of income of the local economy and continues to raise interest and support from farmers. In this perspective, the project successfully started to develop direct links between the demonstration greenhouses and private seeds companies. Under the project first objective, the regional socio-economic assessment in Andijan has been used by the authorities in the process of setting up a monitoring and evaluation system for state programmes implemented in the region and has the potential to be used in the future for regional strategy planning, as the authorities are committed to its update. The future potential impact of this activity component is increased by the synergies developed through the regional government database with the Community Development Planning implemented in two pilot mahallas. 3.9 Sustainability Overall, the results achieved by the project continue to be financed. The 4 new MIRCs are partly funded by the Mahalla Fund and partly by charges collected for providing general administrative type of services to the general population. Some district authorities (e.g. Norin) are exploring the possibility of charging a levy on communities (a kind of communities membership fees) to cover the cost of the facilitation/advisory/information support in local economic and social development that the MIRCs, at least the most dynamic of them, already provide to communities.

27

The 2 RDCs established by the project in Chust and Norin districts are registered as branches of the Farmers Association and reportedly, in the short-term, the centres are being financially supported from the profits of their demonstration greenhouse and the salaries of the facilitators paid for six-months by the Farmers Association. An information which could not be verified by the expert, however, since visits to the RDCs and/or Farmer Association were not included in the itinerary of the expert as approved by government. The demonstration greenhouses continue to be supported by the recipient farmers who have come to appreciate the potential benefits in terms of income that greenhouse technologies can bring to them. The future financial viability of the MIRCs and RDCs is, however, not ensured. For the RDCs, future financial sustainability will depend on the quality of the extension and business advisory services they will be able to provide to clients, which will determine the latter readiness to pay for the services. This will require time and further training on more specific technical topics, such as farm management, marketing, etc. In this respect, the project failed to produce an exit strategy. For the MIRCs also, future financial viability will ultimately depend on the quality of their services to communities and their prospect to broaden their range of institutional clients. The public services achieved through the community social infrastructure development projects (e.g. drinking water supply, electricity, gas) continue to be sustained by either local (in the case of drinking water) or national public utilities. Ownership of these services is very high in the project target communities, and community social infrastructure projects were replicated in 28 non-ELS communities with government co-financing. . In the communities visited, CDP is being replicated and the process and related resource mobilization methodology is being supported by the project trained facilitators of the MIRCs. It was noted that the services that the district MIRCs provide to local communities are generally highly valued in terms of supporting CDP and their implementation. Sense of ownership by the regional government of Andijan of the outputs of the first activity component was found to be high. 3.10 VISIBILITY A website of the ELS programme (www.els.uz) was launched during this project and a written communication strategy and two annual visibility plans developed for 2008 and 2009. The plans were broadly implemented. The web-site featured more than 30 news flashes about the project, together with information about the overall programme. Information was however only presented in Russian and English languages, not in the Uzbek language which is the main language spoken outside Tashkent: internet access is generally also available in rural towns. Visibility of the EU on the web-site is nevertheless mainly limited to logos and no web-links, for example, with relevant EC sites are available. In this respect, the EC could have been more pro-active about proposing and delivering contents. More than 20 articles were also published at local newspapers and several ones posted in the different UNDP global magazines and brochures, amongst others, about the project.

http://www.els.uz/�

28

Information materials (e.g. brochures, leaflets) were produced in three languages (English, Russian, Uzbek) and were well written and illustrated with images and photos about the project. Training manuals were found to have been produced at times only in Russian (which is not widely accessible to the populations in rural areas). The MIRCs visited in Norin had no printed information materials about the project or manuals produced by the project displayed, or electronic versions of information materials and relevant manuals. The visibility of the project objects (e.g. community rehabilitated infrastructure) was good, including the EU visibility. 3.11 STRENGTHS / WEAKNESSES Strengths of the project • Design coherent with government policies and other donor and UNDP interventions in the target

regions • Ownership of the project services/results by national, local authorities and communities very high • Prospects for positive impacts under the three activity components are good

Weaknesses of the project • There were significant delays in the delivery of some planned outputs. The MIRCs and RDCs

were only established at the end of the project period and the implementation of the 2 pilot community projects in Andijan was also affected by delays related to project management

• Trainings to MIRCs and RDCs staff were of adequate quality but not of adequate depth and breadth

• Sustainability plans to address future financial viability of RDCs were not prepared

29

44 PPRROOJJEECCTT EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN RREEPPOORRTT DD 4.1 PROJECT DATA

Project name Enhancement of Living Standards in Fergana Valley Project number 2008/163-878 Source of financing TACIS Central Asia Action Programme 2006 Project location Andijan , Fergana, Namangan regions Starting date December 2008 End date Planned: 31 December 2010 Budget € 3,850,000 Disbursed: € 1,160,000 (as of March 2010)


1. Relevance and quality of design B 2. Effectiveness C 3. Efficiency C 4. Impact B 5. Sustainability 6. Visibility

B B

Note: a = very good; b = good; c = problems; d = serious deficiencies 4.3 KEY OBSERVATIONS • Design remains highly relevant and its quality has improved compared to previous ELS projects, but is too

ambitious for the timeframe • Effectiveness of the activities was weakened by delays in implementation which may affect in the end the

quality of results notably under the second activity component • The results of the capacity assessment of local authorities were not adequate to support the design of the

training curricula • Prospects for impacts and sustainability of results are good, provided a sufficient time extension of the

project is granted

.

4.4 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES The initial project design was reviewed in the Inception Phase to accommodate the curtailed duration of the project from 3 to 2 years. The three general activity components were defined along the lines of the previous ELS projects, and notably the parallel ELS project in Andijan and Namangan regions: capacity building of local government, capacity building of rural communities, local economic development. The project’s overall objective was formulated in the Inception Report as “to improve living standards in Fergana Valley”. For the three components, the specific objectives


• Regional/local institutions are strengthened to support poverty reduction initiatives in Fergana Valley that are sustainable, effective and gender responsive (Objective 1)

• Increase the capacity of rural communities to participate in local development processes and undertake self-help initiatives to improve basic services in Fergana Valley (Objective 2)

30

• Communities have increased equitable access to rural development services and business opportunities (Objective 3)

4.5 Relevance and quality of the design The objectives of the project are fully coherent with Uzbekistan’s national planning document, the WISP 2008-2010 and are supportive of the on-going State Programme related to the proclaimed National Year of Rural Development and Welfare in 2009. This programme has made available substantial budget funds to regional and district governments to improve the living standards of rural towns and communities. There is a strong complementarity between the objectives and target groups of the State Programme and the objectives and target groups of the ELS project. Both programmes operate in the same territories and aim to achieve self-reliance of communities, improve basic social services delivery and promote local economic development. Stakeholders and beneficiaries are aware of these complementarities and the potential for co-ordination between the government and project initiatives is high. The project is consistent with the EC’s Regional Strategy for Central Asia 2007-2013 and its CSP/IP 2007-2010. These strategy papers focus on geographically targeted rural development schemes as instruments against poverty reduction and towards improving living standards. The project is also compliant with UNDP own Area Based Development approach and the MDGs-related priorities outlined in the UNDAF 2004-2009 and 2010-2015. Synergies were identified in the Inception Report with the parallel ELS project in Andijan and Namangan regions, with UNICEF Family Planning and Education project, the World Bank Health III programme, the Irrigation, Drainage, Wetlands Improvement project, UNDP Statistical Capacity Building for MDG project, UNDP Area Based Development (ABD) Programmes in Karapalkastan and Kashkadarya. Such level of coherence with government and donor policies and programmes emphasizes the high degree of relevance of this ELS project and its responsiveness to the needs of the target groups. The quality of the project design was improved in the Inception Phase by identifying more precisely the contents of the activities and expected results. This in particular applied to the first activity component, with the new specific activity “conduct a capacity assessment of local authorities” for social services delivery to local communities, the results of which would be used for the development of training modules to address the functional capacity gaps in local authorities. The activity was designed by the UNDP Regional Centre in Bratislava and planned for implementation jointly with UNICEF. The other main innovative element in the project design was introduced in the third activity component (local economic development), with a new focus on establishing agricultural demonstration plots at community households level, hence on the provision of extension services directly at community level (rather than through isolated private farmers or at district level as with the RDCs in the previous ELS project). This shift of focus in the third activity component also facilitated the potential integration between local economic development initiatives and CDP process under the second activity component of the project (capacity building of rural communities), hence the inclusion in CDPs of economic development priorities next to social infrastructure priorities.

31

Though the changes in design were not, strictly speaking, formulated jointly with the local partners they were discussed with the main counterparts in the MoE and regional governments, and supported.

The hierarchy of objectives is logical but their formulation in the logical framework is not always consistent. For example, Specific Objectives 1 and 3 are formulated as results. Moreover, too many indicators per each objective and result were developed in the logical framework for the later to be an effective supporting tool in project management. The identified indicators are also overwhelmingly quantitative and do not really measure the quality of the project results. The internal monitoring and evaluation system of the project, derived from the logical framework and inclusive of baselines and annual targets, is of little practical use for corrective actions and the reliability of information is often undercut by the quality of the identified Sources of Verification. In spite of the flaws identified above, the monitoring framework also presents some strong points: in particular the coherence with MDG indicators and the inclusion of indicators measuring cross-cutting issues and notably gender equality. In general, however, the capacity-building nature of the design and extended coverage of the project to include 13 districts, appear too ambitious a combination for the two-year project duration. 4.6 EFFECTIVENESS The selection of 201 new communities in 13 new districts could only be finalized 13 months after the start date of the project. The selection lasted 50% more time than the average time of the selection process in previous ELS projects but the number of communities covered by the current project was increased by 330%. Because of the length of the selection process, by the time of the evaluation mission most outputs under Objective 2 and 3 were not yet achieved, though implementation was underway in all visited districts. Under Objective 2, the relatively short time left for implementation may have put pressure on project management to cut edges and result in the poor quality of services delivered by the project to communities. This was in particular the case in one of the visited communities: Ottizambar in Besharik district (see Box 1 below).

Box 1 –Drinking Water Supply and Gas Supply in Ottizambar: A non-success story Ottizzambar (2,635 inhabitants) is a remote community in the windy hills of Besharik district. It is also one of the 7 communities jointly targeted by the ELS project and UNICEF’s Family Planning and Education project. ELS has supported the refurbishment of the local kindergarten, the construction of a drinking water supply system sourced by an artesian well, and the connection of the kindergarten and 70 households to the main gas supply infrastructure. UNICEF agreed to deliver training in water sanitation and hygiene to the staff of the kindergarten and provided teaching materials. When the expert visited the community it appeared that the drinking water supply system of the project was not operational and epidemiological tests were being carried out. According to UNICEF, the underground water table in Ottizambar is not suitable for drinking. According to the local population, 78% had access to artesian water before the project intervention but because of frequent power cuts, supply of water was rarely available for the electric water pump could not operate. The ELS project installed a new electric water pump and 1km of steel water pipelines. Was this the right decision? Will the water supply system deliver clean drinking water or put at risk the health of the local population? Will the new electric water pump be in a condition to operate with so many frequent power cuts? Time pressure to deliver “outputs” fast seems, in this particular situation, to have led the

32

ELS project management and the local partners to have overlooked these key questions at a risk for the quality of the “outcomes”. Equally, the ELS project supported the connection of the kindergarten and 70 households with the main gas pipeline but pressure has been too low in winter and spring time for the community to have gas supply at all. Again, in this situation, it would appear that the pressure to deliver the “outputs” on time led the project management and the local partners to cut the edges on the usual ELS programme well established process of feasibility assessment of community projects

On the positive side, it was noted that the innovative approach of the project to the demonstration greenhouses at community level-i.e. demonstration greenhouses established in the garden plots of community households – was quite a popular approach to the development of extension services, which promises, if given enough time, to achieve the result of “community economic productivity improved”.

Box 2 –The demonstration greenhouse in Langer: a success story Muhtar Nabiev is the Agricultural Extension Agent selected by the ELS project in the small community of Langer (Fergana region). He has a wife and 3 children 10, 9, 3 years old and a garden plot of 0.1 ha. He was trained by the project in farm management, soil management, organic pest control and other technical trainings including on drip irrigation. The project supported him in preparing a business plan and supplied a drip irrigation system (cost of approximately 120 Euro equivalent) and a cover and steel poles for the greenhouse. He reaps 12 times the average market price of vegetables (tomatoes and cucumbers) because of earlier supply to market. Drip is according to Muhtar advantageous because of time saving, allows mixing water with manur, reduce salinity of ground. First three harvest of cucumbers were sold at 6000 sums a kg. Later harvests were sold at 500 sums a kg. Neighbours are often on Muhtar garden plot to observe and learn. The community has benefitted also from an ELS drinking water supply project. This has reduced distance from previous clean water source for the Nabiev family by 2/3.

Under Objective 1, the result “improved capacity of local authorities to support delivery of basic services” has also not yet been achieved as only the first activity “conduct a capacity assessment of local authorities to deliver local services” was completed and the second activity “prepare training materials” was still being implemented at the time of the expert visit in March 2010, by the Academy for State and Social Construction (ASSC), the institution selected by the project for the development of 5 short-term training modules to address 5 functional gaps of local authorities. The capacity assessment of local authorities was only conducted on a pilot basis in one only of the three ELS target regions (i.e. Fergana) and simultaneously in two UNDP funded ABD programmes in Karapalkastan and Kashkadarya. The international expert who provided guidance to the process, was quite critical of the way the assessment was conducted by the project team concluding in the final report that “our scope has gone too broad, and it is difficult to come up with concrete conclusions to act on”. In Fergana, the Deputy Head of the Regional Economic Department who co-ordinated the ad hoc working group, did not seem to have a defined understanding of the objectives and outcomes of the assessment. It did not appear that the findings of the assessment could be used for the development of the training modules.

33

A study tour of 10 days to Germany was also organized for the 3 deputy governors and 1 representative of the MoE. The study tour was organized jointly with the 2 deputy governors of the ABD programme regions. The tour focused on the theme of rural economic development, and included meetings with relevant federal ministries, regional and local associations and visits to small and medium rural enterprises, including co-operative enterprises. From the feedback received by the expert from one of the three deputy governors, the activity provided a unique first exposure to the complex inter-links between the different dimensions of rural development in a market context. It also helped to reinforce top officials support for the objectives of the ELS programme and their advocacy for change in the context of Uzbekistan. Though, no concrete examples were provided on how the knowledge acquired influenced policy-making at regional level. In conclusion, it is unlikely that the project will be in a position to achieve its 3 Specific Objectives by the planned end date. Moreover, in spite of the commitment and professionalism of the project teams, the interest and support of local partners and beneficiaries, corrective measures will have to be taken to ensure the quality of certain outputs, particularly those produced under the first and second activity components. For example, in light of the weaknesses of results of the pilot capacity assessment of local authorities, it will be necessary to pay particular attention to review the quality of the training modules being developed by the ASSC, before they are adopted. With respect to the outputs of component 2, the quality of the services delivered by the project to communities should be the object of a specific assessment and result in the definition of basic standards of provision and, when feasible, corrective measures should be taken on that basis by the project teams. 4.7 EFFICIENCY The project activities officially started on the month of signature of the contract (December 2008) but only by the beginning of April 2009 all the project teams had been fully recruited. Beside recruitment, significant time was spent in the preparation of the Inception Report delivered in June 2009. Following recommendations of the monitors in May 2009, the project management took measures to realize economies of scale in the utilization of inputs by co-ordinating activities with the UNDP ABD programmes in Karapalkastan and Kashkadaryia. For example, the co-ordination of the capacity assessment of local authorities and study tours abroad realized economies of cost for the ELS project and ABD programmes alike. In the field of procurement, however, the opportunity for economy of scales with other projects, including the parallel ELS project in Namangan and Andijan, were limited as the two projects were at different stages of implementation, especially in relation to the community infrastructure rehabilitation actions under the second activity component. A table provided by the Programme Co-ordinator to the expert, provides details of the savings achieved through co-ordination with the ABD programmes. These are estimated to the equivalent of US$ 250,000. The rent of the ELS project office in Tashkent appears to be entirely funded by the UNDP ABD programme. Savings realized through the co-ordination of procurement between projects was limited to a 10% discount obtained on the purchase of 3 vehicles. The bulk of savings were realized on cost-sharing of international and national project experts, administrative staff of the project office in Tashkent, and Study Tours abroad. There is no quantification on savings through co-ordination with the overlapping ELS project in Andijan and Namangan, though savings here too were probably realized through the cost-sharing of project teams’ remunerations and the joint Steering Committee meetings.

34

A 40% salary increase for all ELS project personnel under UNDP contract (i.e. all ELS national project teams and the international ELS Programme Co-ordinator) kicked off in May 2009, following an administrative order by UNDP headquarters. This additional cost may not be absorbed by the project budget in the case of a time extension which brings back the project closer to its originally intended duration of 36 months, unless offset by additional cost-savings in other areas. As of March 2010, however, only about 30% of the total budget had been disbursed, mainly due to a late start of equipment procurement for community infrastructure projects caused by the length of the communities selection process which was finalized only in February 2010. However, other activities as well are lagging behind the timeframe of the workplan, particularly under the first activity component (e.g. development of training curricula, ToT). While it is expected that the disbursements from the procurement activity will accelerate over the coming months, there was no indication of corrective measures being taken to address the delays in schedule under the first activity component, though a time extension for the overall project has been requested to the EC. The departure of the Programme Co-ordinator at the end of March 2010 may retard further corrective measures, at least until a new Programme Co-ordinator is recruited. The PSC which was convened three times since the beginning of the project, the last time being end March 2010, has been particularly supportive of the project activity and supported an overall time extension request to the EC, while demanding a swift recruitment of a new international Programme Co-ordinator. 4.8 IMPACT Positive impacts are already apparent under activity component three, notably the demonstration greenhouses, as illustrated in Box 2 above. The small farm enterprises (e.g. bee farms, poultry farms) are still in the process of being established, and it is too early to assess their impacts. However, the potential effects of these small farms are high, considering the process leading to the selection of activities and their integration in the CDPs of the communities concerned, as well as the generally positive impacts for the same type of activity implemented in previous ELS projects. Concerning the second activity component (capacity building of rural communities), given the similarity between ELS projects and considering the improvements introduced in the present project, it is realistic to expect the same positive impacts as those achieved previously, although the limited time for implementation of the community infrastructure projects may jeopardize the quality of the services delivered and result also in possible negative effects. However, the potential for enhanced positive effects of the community projects also come from the additional funding made available by government under the State Programme for rural development, to finance community infrastructure development projects included in the CDPs. The new MIRCs are either not yet operational (e.g Besharik district) or still in their infancy (e.g. Akhunbabaev district). They are expected, however, to facilitate the partnership between local government and communities as they have done in previous ELS projects as well as to attract additional funding from state or other donor grants. 4.9 SUSTAINABILITY The ToT strategy under the first activity component is likely to be sustainable for, the 5 trainers to be selected for each region, will be from the ranks of the regional governments and the training curricula are in principle to be updated by the ASSC. The regional trainers will in turn train 40 middle level

35

officials from regional, district governments and the public utilities. The skills transfer is therefore expected to be further disseminated with little financial support from local administrations. Furthermore, the ASSC is a long-term state institution and can provide guidance to the new trainers after the project ends. Concerning the activities under the second component (capacity building of rural communities) most of the new MIRCs will have the same arrangements as in previous ELS projects, under the Mahalla Funds. However, in some districts (e.g. Pap) different arrangements are being explored to register the MIRCs as independent NGOs that can more easily attract external funding from donors and public foundations. Overall, they have good prospects of being sustainable. Arrangements for the RDCs are expected to be similar to those in the ELS Namangan and Andijan project, where long-term sustainability will have to be ensured through the provision of quality services to community clients at a fee. 4.10 VISIBILITY Visibility of the project in the 3 regions is high among the populations and in local government mainly due to the long term duration of the ELS programme in the 3 regions, and the number of beneficiaries involved, especially in the second activity component. The project objects in the communities are well identified by sign posts and EU visibility has been enhanced also through a more wide and systematic application of the Visibility Guidelines. The ELS web-site contains updated information about the project actions, though not in the local official language but only in Russian and English. Information materials (e.g. brochures, leaflets) were produced in three languages (English, Russian, Uzbek) and were well written and illustrated with images and photos about the project. Training manuals were found to have been produced at times only in Russian (which is not widely accessible to the populations in rural areas). The MIRCs visited in Akhunbabaev district had no printed information materials about the project or manuals produced by the project displayed, or electronic versions of information materials and relevant manuals. 4.11 STRENGTHS / WEAKNESSES Strengths of the project • Competent and professional project teams, which have developed a wealth of knowledge about

the programme and the regions • Strong synergies with government programmes and other donor interventions • Potential for extended positive impacts due to the high number of the population involved and the

replication of community projects co-financed by government Weaknesses of the project • Too ambitious design and coverage for the duration of the project • Insufficient attention to the quality of results both under the first and second activity components • Project management slow in taking corrective measures

fwc_revised_draft final activity report_uzbekistan_2009-223549

Documents

evaluation report

standard programme

poverty reduction programme

evaluation background

evaluation objectives

inception report

invaluable assistance

ms assunta testa