paf annual report 2014 - paf nepal annual report_2014... · the world bank and the international...

PAF

Poverty Alleviation FundNepal

2014Annual Report

Annual Report 2014

Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF)Kathmandu

Nepal

Community organizations (COs) are at the heart of the Poverty Alleviation Fund’s (PAF) functioning. PAF has helped to form over 25 thousand COs in its 40 programme districts. Over 650 thousand poor households are direct beneficiaries, of which 76 per cent are women and 65 per cent are ultra-poor—with food sufficiency for less than 3 months a year.

Eleven years on the ground, PAF is now a households name as one out of ten Nepali is directly benefiting from its programmes. Reaching out to the most vulnerable groups, especially those who are disadvantaged due to gender, caste, ethnicity or physical isolation, PAF has demonstrated that even a modest amount of resources given to the community can help poor families get on a sustainable path out of poverty.

PAF is currently working in 40 programme districts and 19 Innovative Window Programme Districts. A multi-year innovative programme is under implementation in three districts, namely Chitwan, Makwanpur and Kanchanpur, focusing on the uplift of women, indigenous communities and former bonded labourers, among others. Over 75 per cent of the total budget of PAF reaches directly to the COs of the poor.

Recently, PAF selected 59 partner organizations (POs) for the new set of 15 districts, and the programme shall be launched in these additional districts by the end of the current fiscal year. The remaining 20 districts will be covered through the poverty pocket approach later.

Currently, a total of 360 POs are working with PAF to facilitate COs to carry out social mobilization, provide technical support for need identification, prioritization, preparation and implementation of community sub-projects, among others.

Some important initiatives that were introduced during the reporting year include an amendment in the Cooperative Bylaws, allowing PAF COs to form cooperatives. This would pave the way for aspiring COs to form cooperatives. The new provision, approved by the Department of Cooperatives, allows only PAF CO members to establish and run cooperatives to serve their financial needs. As part of our emphasis to work with the media— at both national and local level, we awarded the PAF National Journalism Award 2071 to three journalists who reported widely on poverty issues.

On the basis of own ground-level experience, feedback and research, we are adjusting our approach in relation to maximum coverage of hard core poor and pocket-based development approach, among others, to make the COs self-sustaining in the long run. PAF is working with its exit strategy, focusing on its strategic thrust to enable the community to go on a sustained path to get out of poverty within a stipulated five-six years of time.

Because PAF targets a specific set of population, these organizations tend to have weak institutional capacity in the beginning. Regular oversight and technical support from NGOs, coupled with easy access to the revolving fund, ensure that these COs become self-sustaining over time. Many have now come together to form cooperatives and federations, and are working beyond just improving the livelihoods of a limited number of people by contributing to agriculture commercialization and institutional strengthening, for example. PAF is currently developing a CO “graduation” strategy. Given the government’s recognition of cooperatives as the “third pillar” of the economy, PAF is in the right direction to ensure sustainability of its interventions.

FOREWORD

Annual Report 2014IV

PAF has forged a strong partnership with the government, at both central and local levels, and non-government organizations (NGOs) at the grass roots level. Local NGOs are central to the operation of PAF as they link it with the COs and facilitate day-to-day activities. PAF has been working closely with the line agencies of the Ministry of Local Development and the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives in the planning and implementation of sub-projects, as well as in securing additional resources.

PAF lays special emphasis on the capacity building of COs, POs and PAF, while coordination and collaboration is accorded high priority. PAF is also strengthening the systematic grievance handling process with stakeholders’ views on Performance Management System of COs, POs and the PAF Secretariat.

As always, the annual budget of PAF is limited to meeting the demands and expectations of the stakeholders—be it the community, POs and PAF secretariat. In some cases, PAF has not been able to allocate budget for many COs that are already registered with it. Expansion of the PAF programme to additional districts also demands additional funding. Therefore, provision of adequate funding is considered necessary to make PAF capable of working effectively to help poor people in programme districts.

Whatever PAF has achieved is the result of the government’s support to it, and it is expected that the government will provide required support so as to continue the work at the grass roots level.

I look forward to receiving support of all in our crusade against poverty.

Yuba Raj PandeyVice Chairperson January 2015

Annual Report 2014 V

The overriding objective of the development efforts in Nepal is poverty alleviation. Through the Tenth Plan (Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2002–2007), Government of Nepal has shown its strong commitment to achieve this. The PRSP’s sole objective was to bring sustainable reduction in poverty through reduction in income poverty level and improving human development indicators. Even after the completion of the Tenth Plan, all the interim periodic plans have laid their special emphasis on poverty alleviation, inclusive growth and development.

Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF) was established in 2004 to address the exclusive needs of the poor and marginalized by putting them in the driving seat of development efforts. PAF is contributing to bringing the level of poverty down as per the long-term goals of GoN and the Millennium Development Goals.

Poverty is a multi-dimensional phenomenon. We need to understand its complexity and intricacies before chalking out strategies and work plan to deal with it. Equally important is the fact that no individual organization or programme would be able carry out its efforts in relation to poverty alleviation alone. Keeping this fact in mind, PAF, from the very beginning, has adopted a strategy to work together with all development actors—be it an individual or agencies.

PAF would like to express its acknowledgment and gratitude to all the supporters and well-wishers for their support and guidance. Without them, PAF would not have been able to realize its objectives and goals. It gives us immense pleasure to inform that PAF has covered over 650 thousand poor households, who are organized in over 25 thousand COs in 40 programme districts.

I would like express my sincere gratitude to all board members, officials from the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development, Ministry of Poverty Alleviation and Cooperatives, National Planning Commission, District Development Committees, Village Development Committees and different development partners for their incessant guidance, understanding and collaboration with PAF.

The World Bank and the International Fund for Agriculture Development, who have not only provided financial grants but also their global experience and expertise in relation to targeting the ultra poor, have been key partners of PAF.

Most importantly, I would like to acknowledge and commend the support of our COs, POs, CO networks, CO federations, national and local media and civil society representatives, among others. We will continue to work together with these institutions and individuals in the days to come as well.

Last but not the least, I would like to thank PAF Vice-chair and all the members of staff for their support in making the publication of this annual report a success.

Chabi Raj PokhrelActing Executive DirectorFebruary 2015

Acknowledgments

Annual Report 2014VI

Annual Report 2014 VII

Foreword ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... iii

Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... v

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ..............................................................................................................................................................................xi

Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................xiii

CHAPTER 1: PAF BRIEF INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 The Strategy ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.3 The Approach ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.4 Institutional Arrangements ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2

CHAPTER 2: PAF PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENTS ...................................................................................... 3

2.1 Annual Achievements against Targets .................................................................................................................................................. 3

2.2 Component-wise Progress Status ............................................................................................................................................................ 3

2.2.1 Social Mobilization ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.2.2 Income Generation and Micro-enterprise ...................................................................................................................................... 8

2.2.3 Community Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................................................................11

2.2.4 Capacity Development of COs .............................................................................................................................................................19

2.2.5. Capacity Development of POs .............................................................................................................................................................20

2.2.6. Capacity Development of PAF Secretariat ............................................................................................................................................................21

CHAPTER 3: INFORMATION, MONITORING AND GRIEVANCE HANDLING. ............................................... 23

3.1 Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................................................24

3.2 Results of Monitoring Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................................................24

3.2.1 Social Re-assessment/Beneficiaries’ Assessment......................................................................................................................24

Table of Contents

Annual Report 2014VIII

3.2.2 Status of Revolving Fund ..........................................................................................................................................................................24

3.3 CO Maturity Assessments ............................................................................................................................................................................25

3.4 Communications, Outreach and Publications ................................................................................................................................25

3.5 Grievance Handling in PAF ..........................................................................................................................................................................25

CHAPTER 4: PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION .................................................................................... 22

4.1 Partnership with MoFALD ...........................................................................................................................................................................27

4.2 Partnership with MoAD ................................................................................................................................................................................27

4.3 Partnership with WFP .....................................................................................................................................................................................27

4.4 Partnership with Heifer and LFLP ...........................................................................................................................................................28

4.5 Partnership with Helvetas ...........................................................................................................................................................................28

4.6 Partnership with AEPC...................................................................................................................................................................................28

CHAPTER 5: OUTCOMES AND RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 29

5.1 Monitoring and Impact Evaluation Results .....................................................................................................................................29

5.2 Performance Audit Report (2012) ..........................................................................................................................................................31

CHAPTER 6: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT...................................................................................................... 33

6.1 Financial Planning and Management ..................................................................................................................................................33

6.2 Budget Expenditure ........................................................................................................................................................................................34

6.3 Financial progress Status .............................................................................................................................................................................34

6.4 Disbursement to COs .....................................................................................................................................................................................35

6.5 Disbursement to Partner Organizations ..............................................................................................................................................35

6.6 Additional Funding--Current Status and Future ............................................................................................................................35

CHAPTER 7: LESSONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS ...................................................................................... 37

7.1 Lessons ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................37

7.2 Challenges .............................................................................................................................................................................................................37

7.3 The Future Strategy ..........................................................................................................................................................................................38

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS .............................................................................................................................. 39

Annual Report 2014 IX

List of Tables Table 1: Annual Achievements against Targets for FY2013/14...................................................................................................................3

Table 2: CO Registration, CO Agreement and Sub-project Agreements..............................................................................................4

Table 3: PAF Investment in Community Sub-projects .....................................................................................................................................4

Table 4: Status of POs ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................5

Table 5: CO Member Beneficiaries ...............................................................................................................................................................................6

Table 6: Sector-wise Income Generation Activities by Households and PAF Investment .........................................................9

Table 7: PAF Investment in Agriculture Sector by Category......................................................................................................................10

Table 8: Distribution of Infrastructure by Type ..................................................................................................................................................12

Table 9: Infrastructure Activities and Benefited Households ....................................................................................................................13

Table 10: PAF Investment in Different Infrastructure Schemes (in million) .....................................................................................13

Table 11: Community Contribution in Infrastructure Schemes ..............................................................................................................14

Table 12: Contribution from Local Bodies in Different Schemes ...........................................................................................................14

Table 13: Investment from Different Sources .....................................................................................................................................................15

Table 14: Ratio of Investments by Different Agencies in PAF Community Infrastructure (Cumulative) ........................15

Table 15: Ratio of Investments by Different Agencies in PAF Community Infrastructure (Reporting Year) ................16

Table 16: Per Capita Cost Total Investment and PAF ......................................................................................................................................16

Table 17: Per Household Community Contribution ......................................................................................................................................17

Table 18: Investments by Different Agencies in Rural Access ..................................................................................................................17

Table 19: Salient Features and Per Unit Cost ......................................................................................................................................................17

Table 20: Investments by Different Agencies in Buildings .........................................................................................................................18

Table 21: Salient Features and Per Unit Cost ......................................................................................................................................................18

Table 22: Investments by Different Agencies in Rural Energy .................................................................................................................18

Table 23: Salient Features of Investments by Different Agencies in Rural Energy ......................................................................18

Table 24: Investments by Different Agencies in Small Irrigation ...........................................................................................................18

Table 25: Investments by Different Agencies in Water Supply and Sanitation .............................................................................19

Table 26: Infrastructure (under construction) ....................................................................................................................................................19

Table 27: Types of Infrastructure.................................................................................................................................................................................20

Table 28: Communities Contribution for Projects Under Construction ............................................................................................20

Table 29: List of Projects Implemented in Partnership with WFP ..........................................................................................................27

Table 30: List of Projects Implemented in Partnership with AEPC ........................................................................................................28

Table 31: Disbursement Expenditure to COs (in Million) ......................................................................................................................... 163

Table 32: Disbursement Expenditure to POs ................................................................................................................................................... 164

Annual Report 2014X

ANNEXES

Annex 1: Current Board Members (as of January 2015) ..........................................................................................................51

Annex 2: CO registration, agreement for sub-project and disbursement status (FY2012/13 only) .............52

Annex 3: CO registration, agreement for sub-project and disbursement status (Cumulative) ......................53

Annex 4: POs, COs and Coverage FY2012/13 only) ....................................................................................................................55

Annex 5: POs, COs and Coverage (cumulative to date) ...........................................................................................................57

Annex 6: PAF in Terai Border VDCs .........................................................................................................................................................59

Annex 7: PAF in Karnali .................................................................................................................................................................................59

Annex 8: Community Institutional Development .......................................................................................................................61

Annex 9: Status of ongoing innovative sub-projects ................................................................................................................63

Annex 10: Details on Capacity Development of COs ..................................................................................................................64

Annex 11: Capacity Development Status of POs ............................................................................................................................68

Annex 12: PAF Result Matrix .........................................................................................................................................................................71

Annex 13: Year-wise Target versus Achievements .........................................................................................................................73

Annex 14: Details of expenditure Up to July 15, 2013 (Cumulative PAF-I and PAF-II) ..............................................73

Annex 15(1): Programme Funding Statue of FY2069/70 “FY2012/13 only ...........................................................................73

Annex 15(2): District-wise Target versus Achievement in FY2069/70 (2012/13 only) ...................................................74

Annex 16: Poverty Alleviation Fund Project – II Progress Status ...........................................................................................76

Annex 17: PAF II CO registration, agreement for sub-project and disbursement status (cumulative) ..........77

Annex 18: PAF II Expenditure .......................................................................................................................................................................78

Annex 19: Summary Result of Follow-on Impact Survey 2010—by TU and the World Bank .............................79

Annex 20: Partnership with AEPC for Rural Energy Sub-projects .........................................................................................82

Annual Report 2014 XI

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

AEPC Alternative Energy Promotion Centre

CBS Central Bureau of Statistics

CEDA Centre for Economic Development and Administration

CO Community Organization

CB Capacity Building

CBOs Community-based Organ izations

DDC District Development Committee

GOs Governmental Organizations

GON Government of Nepal

IG Income Generation

IDA International Development Agency, World Bank

IFAD International Fund for Agriculture Development

IWP Innovative Window Programme

MDGs Millennium Development Goals

MIS Management Information System

NEA Nepal Electricity Authority

NGOs Non Governmental Organizations

NPC National Planning Commission

OAG Office of the Auditor General

O&M Operation and Maintenance

OPMCM Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers

PAF Poverty Alleviation Fund

PO Partner Organization

PM Portfolio Manager

RBB Rastriya Banijya Bank

REDP Rural Energy Development Programme

TAC Technical Appraisal Committee

USD United States Dollar

VDC Village Development Committee

WFP World Food Programme

WB World Bank

Annual Report 2014XII

Annual Report 2014 XIII

Executive Summary

By the end of the reporting period, a total of 25,139 community organizations (COs) of the poor were registered with the Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF), and agreements were signed with 23,924 COs to carry out different income generation and community infrastructure-related schemes at community level.

During the reporting year alone, agreements amounting to Rs.1.45 billion were signed with 2,077 COs to implement 2,690 sub-projects, which include 2,076 income generation (IG) and 614 infrastructure-related schemes. In cumulative terms, a total of 23,661 IG and 5,126 infrastructure sub-projects were implemented through 27,850 agreements signed with COs to the tune of Rs.14. 56 billion, of which Rs.13.89 billion has already been disbursed to the COs.

With the demand of the communities, different activities related to IG and infrastructure sub-projects are currently being implemented. IG activities are related to agriculture/cropping, livestock, micro-enterprises/cottage industries, trade and skill-based services, while infrastructure sub-projects are related to micro-irrigation, trails, link roads, culverts, bridges, ropeways, electricity/micro-hydro, water mills, water supply, sanitation and community building such as school, health posts/clinics, storage market centres, etc.

PAF has undertaken various initiatives to strengthen the capacity of the COs and to promote them to higher institutions so as to sustain their efforts in the long run. Revolving fund management and training manuals have been updated and enforced to strengthen the revolving fund which is established at the community level. PAF has started enlisting COs in the record of the respective VDCs. Also, informal networks of COs have been formed at VDC level. These networks have helped to raise the voices of the poor in an organized way. It has also helped to establish linkages and pool resources from local government and other development partners to meet the needs of poor communities. The networks have helped to spearhead infrastructure-related projects and establish cooperatives to manage production and marketing.

The Department of Cooperatives, through an amendment in its rules, has allowed PAF COs to form cooperatives with the involvement of only CO members. A pilot cooperative has been registered and established in Dhading district. PAF has also awarded the PAF National Journalism Award 2071 to three journalists who reported on poverty issues. Prime Minister and Chairperson of PAF Board Rt. Honorable Sushil Koirala gave away the award at a function marked to commemorate the International Day for Eradication of Poverty on October 17, 2014.

As part of its emphasis on institutional development, PAF is encouraging COs to consider other models of institutional development such as cottage industries and micro-enterprises, among others. A concept note on activity-based pocket area development has been prepared to encourage quality production and activities. A pocket area development guidelines has been prepared and endorsed by the Board. A CO graduation assessment manual is being implemented at the local level to assess the level of maturity of COs.

During the reporting year, PAF has achieved 78 per cent of the physical targets and 75.87 per cent of the financial targets of the programme. Community institutionalization process is also emerging in some of the districts where community has felt the need to federate themselves to carry out certain functions.

Reaching out to the Excluded Poor Community Beneficiaries and Social InclusionPartner organizations (POs) selected by PAF are facilitating COs of the poor. As such, a total of 360 POs are working with communities. As of the end of the reporting period, these POs are facilitating the PAF programme in 1,692 VDCs (355 in Initial 6 Districts, 805 in Additional 19 Districts, 474 in 15 B1 Districts, 58 in Innovative Window Programme [IWP] Districts). Most importantly, a total of 701,528 poor households (HHs) are now being served: 191,867 in Initial 6 Districts, 393,472 in Additional 19 Districts, 96,795 in Additional 15 B1 Districts and 19,394 in IWP Districts.

Annual Report 2014XIV

Additional 14,227 households have also benefitted through the NDM-World Bank Programme in 77 additional VDCs. So far, PAF has covered 662,028 poor households as CO member beneficiaries. Among CO beneficiary members, 64.8 per cent fall under the hard core poor category (food sufficiency less than 3 months among the criteria fixed by the community), 25.6 per cent fall under the medium poor category (food sufficiency more than 3 months but less than 6 months), 9 per cent fall under the poor category (food sufficiency more than 6 months but less than a year) and 0.2 per cent fall under the marginalized non-poor category.

Likewise, among CO member households, 27 per cent are Dalit, 30 per cent are Janajati, 3 per cent are Muslim, 29 per cent are Brahmin/Chhetri and 11 per cent belong to other ethnicity. Gender-wise, 76 per cent of the CO members are women.

Similarly, of the key position holders in the COs such as President, Treasurer and Secretary, 32 per cent are Dalit, 30 per cent are Janajati, 28 per cent are Brahmin/Chettri, 9 per cent from other ethnicity and 3 per cent

are Muslim. Gender-wise, 64 per cent of the key position holders in COs are women.

When percentage beneficiaries of PAF by ethnicity is compared with district percentage ethnicity composition of 25 PAF districts, it becomes clear that PAF is focusing on socially excluded groups such as Dalits and Janajatis. PAF covered almost 100 per cent of the Dalits in these initial 25 districts. Overall, PAF has till now benefited nearly 100 per cent of the poor households in 25 districts (473,958 poor households out of CBS data, 412,220 poor households in 25 districts).

All five districts of the Karnali zone are covered by the programme. Till date the programme has reached 134 VDCs, i.e. 100 per cent of 134 VDCs in Karnali, benefitting 59,491 poor households.

Out of the 146 border VDCs of Bara, Bardiya, Chitwan, Dhanusa, Kanchanpur, Kapilbastu, Mahottari, Parsa, Rautahat, Saptari, Sarlahi and Siraha districts, PAF has helped in the formation of 1,195 COs, covering 103 VDCs (i.e. 71% of the VDCs in Terai border VDCs), benefiting 32,107 CO member households.

Beginning from the current fiscal year, PAF is planning to introduce income-generating schemes, skill development and sanitation programmes for the benefit of the urban poor amid a rise in urban poverty.

Programme Cost SharingPAF is investing 78 per cent (i.e. Rs.14,594 million) of the total sub-project cost. Community sharing is 16 per cent (6% in cash, i.e. Rs.1,131 and 10% in kind, i.e. Rs.1,796 million) of the total sub-project cost, whereas VDC/DDC and other development partners are sharing 6 per cent (i.e. Rs.1,231 million) in the total sub-project cost. In IG sub-projects, community is sharing 9 per cent in cash and 2 per cent in kind, whereas in infrastructure sub-projects, it is 2 per cent in cash and 21 per cent in kind. Apart from community contribution, DDC/VDCs

Fig. : District Population Ethnicity Composition Vs PAF Beneficiary in 25 Districts

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Oth

ers,

70%

District CO Member Bebeficiaries

Oth

ers,

46%

Jana

jati,

19%

Jana

jati,

25%

Dal

it, 1

2% Dal

it, 2

9%

Perc

enta

ge

Fig. : CO Members Beneficiary Category

Hardcore Poor 64.8%

Medium Poor 25.9%

Poor 9.2%

Marginalized Non-poor 0.2%

Fig. : Contribution in Subprojects

PO 0%Others 4%

DDC/VDC 2%

CO Kind 10%

CO Cash 6%

PAF 78%

Annual Report 2014 XV

are sharing 4 per cent and other collaborating partners are sharing 13 per cent of the cost in infrastructure sub-projects.

Out of the total PAF investments, 70 per cent have been made in IG sub-projects and 30 per cent in infrastructure sub-projects. About 87 per cent of the PAF investments in IG sub-projects have been established as revolving fund being managed by COs at the community level.

Collaboration in Sub-project ImplementationCollaborative efforts are going on to supplement and complement different programmes running in the district to bring discernible impact in considerably less time. There are several examples of collaboration with line agencies, local governments and donor agencies to implement the programme and sub-projects in the communities at district level. Several memorandums of understanding (MoUs) have been signed with different organizations at central level to facilitate different tasks as well as to facilitate collaboration in implementation of sub-projects at the community level.

Community Capacity BuildingThe ultimate goal of PAF is capacity enhancement of COs. PAF has been imparting various training/orientations related to their entrepreneurial capacity development, skill enhancement and institutional development-related training, orientation and exposure to enable them to become independent and self-managing beyond the PAF programme. PAF has been conducting various training for the CO members.

Among the various types of training provided to the COs, the major ones are: leadership and group management training, to enhance skills of the CO members to lead and manage their organizations; training in account-keeping, to enhance capacity to keep up-to-date book-keeping of the organization; training in revolving fund, to manage the revolving fund effectively; training in entrepreneurial skill enhancement; and training

in technical skill enhancement, to transfer skills and technology to members to carry their business/activities effectively. Furthermore, leading members of COs are taken to appropriate sites and venues to expose them to, and share with them, successful and innovative approaches adopted by other organizations and institutions.

PAF has been conducting various training for the CO members. The following table shows the cumulative progress under this category.

To cope with and fulfil the demand for technical human resources, different technical training, including boring for water, basic furniture-making, electrician, driving, mason, among others, are being conducted at the community level.

Among the various types of training provided to the CO members, the major ones are: leadership and

Fig. : PAF investment Income Generation Vs Infrastructure

IG 70%

INFRA 30%

Table: Training for CO MembersSN Component Output Indicator Output as of July 15, 2014

1 Animal husbandry No. of events 139

2 Agriculture No. of events 9, 743

3 AC and RF management No. of events 3, 5320

4 Technical training No. of events 44,717

5 Social mobilization No. of events 17,490

6 Co-graduation No. of events 6

7 Skill development No. of events 29

8 Pocket area development No. of events 60

9 Star and Improve Your Business (SIYB) No. of events 9,061

10 Orientation/training to COs No. of event 69

Annual Report 2014XVI

group management training, to enhance skills of the CO members to lead and manage their organizations; account-keeping training, to enhance the capacity to keep up-to-date book-keeping of the organization; training in revolving fund, to manage the revolving fund effectively. Similarly, training in entrepreneurial skill enhancement and training in technical skill enhancement to transfer skills and technology to members to carry out their business/activities more effectively. Furthermore, the leading members of COs are taken on exposure visits to share knowledge and innovative approaches adopted by different organizations and institutions.

Outcomes and ResultsDuring the reporting period, a social re-assessment of 40,085 households of the sample COs with maturity period of three years or more was carried out. A comparative analysis of the social re-assessment data with the baseline social assessment shows that household-level assets and school enrolment of children, food sufficiency duration for individual households, and construction and use of toilet has increased.

The household-level gross income (from all sources) of the re-assessed 4,085 households has increased by 68.5 per cent in real terms. Similarly, the household-level income of about 68 per cent of the total households has increased by at least 15 per cent.

The results show that the percentage of households with food insufficiency of 3 months or less dropped from 63.9 per cent to 37.2 per cent, with a reduction of 58.3 percentage points, for the CO member households.

This effect is seen stronger for Janajati households. The proportion of food insecure households among Janajati decreased from 56.7 per cent to 18.0 per cent—a reduction of 68.2 percentage points. While for Dalit households, the percentage decrease of food insecure households is 85.4 to 35.7, with a reduction of 58.2 percentage points.

The revolving fund assessment carried out during the reporting period shows that communities have been managing their revolving fund satisfactorily. Revolving funds have provided an opportunity to the poor to access funds—otherwise inaccessible— through formal financial institutions, to initiate income generation activities. COs are managing and operating these funds by themselves and are responsible for setting interest rates and loan payment conditions.

The revolving fund data of 10,328 COs shows that the fund provided to the COs by PAF has increased by 19 per cent, which includes the interest charged against

the loans taken by members, community contribution and funds collected from other sources. Similarly, 93.0 per cent of the 290,783 CO members have accessed the fund at least for one time to initiate income-generating activities. Out of the total members accessing the fund from the revolving fund, 60 per cent have used the fund two times or more. The assessment also shows 87.5 per cent of the total fund has been invested as loan to members, rest of the fund is in banks and cash in hand in COs.

The assessment further shows that the average rate of interest on loan is 9.9 per cent. However, the interest rate is slightly higher in newer COs. Furthermore, the average rate of loan repayment is 78.4 per cent.

Furthermore, during the reporting period, CO Institutional Capacity Assessment was carried out. The assessment assessed the capacity of the COs in terms of various aspects of institutional development, identified the areas of strength and weaknesses of COs, and developed a strategy for CO graduation to make them able to operate in a sustainable way. The assessment was done among 12,870 COs against 30 indicators1, which were graded into four groups by the sum of indicator scores (each on the scale of 1-4, making the maximum score of 120). Around 12 per cent of the COs were found fully mature and able to function without additional capacity building or supervision support; around 82 per cent required some additional capacity-building support in managing the organization or needed further social mobilization efforts. The remaining COs still needed substantial hand-holding for some time.

Budget ExpenditureThe total expenditure in FY060/61 (2003/04), FY2061/62 (2004/05), FY2062/63 (2005/06), FY2063/64 (2006/07), FY2064/65 (2007/08), FY2065/66 (2008/09), FY2066/67 (2009/10), FY2067/68 (2010/11), FY2068/69 (2011/12), FY2069/70 (2012/13) and FY2070/71 (2013/14) were Rs.5.78 million, Rs.247.32 million, Rs.493.50 million, Rs.1,210.30 million, Rs.1,875.48 million, Rs.1,647.20 million, Rs.2,481.5 million, Rs.2,601.28 million, Rs.2,998.69 million, Rs.2,342.25 million and Rs.2,322.02 million respectively.

By the end of FY2070/71, out of the total expenditure of Rs.2,322,022,043.45, a total of Rs.2,158,873,106.86 was spent on programme implementation through COs and POs (COs: Rs.1,677,254,520.34 and POs; Rs.481,618,586.52), Rs.64,395,482.93 in Monitoring, Training, Studies and Workshop, Rs.9,988,657.85 in capital cost and Rs.88,764,795.81 in PAF operation/recurrent cost.

1 Each of the following six assessment categories has five indicators: (i) social situation; (ii) economic situation; (iii) capital and resource mobilization; (iv) coordination, partnership and communication; and (v) good governance and institutional development; and (vi) capacity building and sustainability.

Annual Report 2014 XVII

The total expenditure of PAF till FY2070/71 stands at Rs.18,225 million.

Out of the total PAF expenditure of Rs.18,225 million till FY2070/71 (2013/14), 93.92 per cent was on Programme Implementation through COs and POs (COs: 76.63% and POs: 17.29%), 2.19 per cent on Monitoring, Training, Studies and Workshops, 0.45 per cent on capital investment for PAF, 0.01 per cent on identity card distribution cost and 3.43 per cent on PAF operation/recurrent cost.

Out of the total PAF expenditure up to FY2070/71 (2012/13), 90.09 per cent is from the International Development Agency (IDA-the World Bank) grant, 1.54 per cent from the International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD) grant, 4.87 per cent from the Trust Fund and the remaining 3.50 per cent from the Government of Nepal (GoN) sources.

Future PlanSince FY2071/72 (2014/15), the programme has been expanded to 15 additional districts from the list of deprived districts categorized by the CBS/NPC based on 28 poverty-related socioeconomic indicators, bringing the total number of PAF programme districts to 55.

For FY2014/15, PAF has earmarked a total budget of Rs.2,572,721,000 to implement 2,503 income generation schemes, 767 infrastructure schemes and 236 activities related to product development, market linkages and piloting of innovative schemes. PAF has allocated a budget of Rs.638,354,000 for social mobilization and capacity building through POs to achieve the targets.

Fig.: Ratio of Cumulative Expenditure up to FY2070/71

Programme implementation through COs and POs: 93.92% (CO: 76.63%, PO:17.29%)

ID cards related cost :0.01%

Monitoring, training/workshop & programme supervision cost: 2.19%

Recurrent cost: 3.43%Capital cost; 0.45%

Annual Report 2014XVIII

Annual Report 2014 1

1.1 IntroductionNearly a quarter of the Nepalese population still live below poverty line. The majority of the poor live in rural areas and are engaged in traditional and subsistence farming on small plots of low quality land, have limited access to credit, infrastructure, markets and basic social services, often because of remoteness, and rely heavily on seasonal migration and remittance.

Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF) was established in 2004 as a special and targeted programme to bring the poor and disadvantaged groups and excluded communities in the mainstream of development by putting them in the driving seat of development efforts. PAF is contributing to bringing the level of poverty down to 10 per cent in twenty years in pursuant with the long-term goal of the Government of Nepal (GoN) and reduce poverty by half by the year 2015 as per the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). With the recent addition of 15 districts, the total number

of programme districts of PAF has reached 40. The remaining thirty-five districts will be covered through the poverty pocket approach.

1.2 The Strategy PAF has taken the strategy of enabling the poor through social mobilization and capacity building to organize themselves and obtain quality basic services in a cost-effective and sustainable manner with their direct involvement. It uses partner organizations (POs) to help poor vulnerable people and their community groups or organizations to implement the programme components, and they include local bodies, NGOs/CBOs and private sector organizations. It also seeks to build partnership with various organizations working in its areas of operation at the village, district and national levels to ensure holistic development interventions in order to bring discernible impact on poverty reduction and scaling up the programme in considerably little time.

1CHAPTER PAF: BRIEF INTRODUCTION

Annual Report 20142

1.3 The ApproachPAF has followed six guiding principles: namely (a) Targeted at the poor (Antodaya); (b) Social Inclusion (Samabesi); (c) Demand-driven approach (Maag Anusar); (d) Transparency (Pardarsita); (e) Direct funding of community organizations of the poor (Prataksha Bhuktani); and (f ) Community Institutional Development (Samudayako Sansthagat Bikash).

Social mobilization, Income generation, Small community infrastructure development and Capacity building are the four major programme components of PAF. The target beneficiaries of PAF are poor women, Dalit, Janajatis and vulnerable communities living below poverty line.

1.4 Institutional ArrangementsEstablished by an ordinance in 2004, PAF is being governed by an Act since 2006. Thus, PAF is an autonomous, independent and professional organization governed by separate law. The twelve-

member governing board, chaired by the Prime Minister, is responsible for policy guidance and programme approval.

Vice-chairperson and five members are appointed by the government from among development professionals, while five other ex-officio members include National Planning Commission (NPC) Secretary, chairperson of the Association of District Development Committees of Nepal (ADDCN), chairperson of the Association of Village Development Committees of Nepal (AVDCN), chairperson of the National Women Commission (NWC) and chairperson of the National Dalit Commission (NDC).

The PAF secretariat consists of over six dozen members of staff, mostly professionals, recruited on competitive basis. A total of 360 POs work on behalf of the poor in different districts, including through regular and innovative programmes.


This chapter gives an overview of the annual achievements against the targets and overall implementation status of different programme components during the reporting period as well as the cumulative achievements.

2.1 Annual Achievements against TargetsAs part of its annual planning, PAF had set targets in its key components: social mobilization, income generation, community infrastructure, capacity building and innovative sub-projects. Table 1 summarizes the achievements of the reporting year against the annual targets.

During the reporting year 2013/14, the achievement in income generation sub-projects was far above the target, i.e. 89 per cent, while for infrastructure-related projects, the achievement was 73 per cent. In the case of innovative sub-projects, PAF had set an annual output of 195 sub-projects, while the achievement has stood at 37 (19%). Similarly, in case of expenditure, the achievement was 75.87 per cent out of the project expenditure target of Rs.3,060,658,640.00.

2.2 Component-wise progress status

2.2.1 Social Mobilization

The objective of social mobilization is to build the capacity of the community in preparation, design, implementation, operation and management of community sub-projects to enhance their livelihoods.

Demand-driven Community Proposal and Direct Funding

COs, Sub-projects and InvestmentsAs of the end of the reporting year, a total of 25,139 COs were registered with PAF (5,496 in the Mountain

Region, 10,517 in the Hilly Region and 8,570 in the Terai Region and 556 in the Innovative Window Programme [IWP] districts).

Of the total registered COs, PAF has inked agreements with 23,924 COs (5,320 in Mountain, 9,837 in Hilly and 8,237 in Terai districts and the remaining 530 in the IWP districts) to carry out different IG and community infrastructure-related sub-projects.

2CHAPTER PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENTS

Table 1: Annual Achievements against Targets (FY2013/14) Description Annual Target Physical Progress Progress (in %)

Income generation sub-projects 2,317 2,054 89

Infrastructure sub-projects 815 599 73

Innovative sub-projects 195 37 19

Total sub-projects 3,327 2,690 81

Beneficiary HHs (including infrastructure sub-projects) 60,000 38,139 64

Programme funding status for the reporting year Rs.3,060,658,640.00 Rs.2,322,022,043.45 75.87

Annual Report 20144

In the case of income generation, the activities most demanded by the communities are related to agriculture, livestock, cottage industries, trade and skill-based services. Similarly, infrastructure sub-projects are related to micro-irrigation, link roads, culverts/bridges, ropeways, electricity/micro-hydro, water mills, water supply, sanitation, school and health post building, among others.

Till the end of previous fiscal year 2012/13, agreements amounting to Rs.13,118.796 million were signed with 21,847 COs, while, during the reporting year, agreements amounting to Rs.1,467.587 million were signed with additional 2,077 COs. In cumulative terms, agreements amounting to Rs.14,593.908 million were signed with 23,924 COs till the end of the reporting year, i.e. FY2013/14.

Programme Cost Sharing (investment—IG versus Infrastructure, PAF versus Community)PAF invested Rs.715.507 million in IG activities during the reporting year against the total cumulative investment of Rs.10,217.713 million till the end of the reporting year. In case of infrastructure schemes, PAF invested Rs.752.080 million during the reporting year, while cumulative investment stood at Rs.4,376.195 million.

Overall, out of the total PAF investment, 70 per cent has been made in income-generating sub-projects and 30 per cent in infrastructure-related sub-projects.

Region-wise, PAF has invested the highest amount in IG sub-projects in the Hilly Region, followed by the Terai, Mountain and IWP districts. Similarly, investment trend is maintained in the infrastructure sub-projects.

In cumulative scenario, average community sharing is 16 per cent (6% in cash and 10% in kind) of the total sub-project cost, whereas VDCs and DDCs and other development partners share 6 per cent of the total sub-

project cost. In total, PAF has invested 78 per cent of the community sub-projects cost.

In the case of income-generating sub-projects, community shared 9 per cent in cash and 2 per cent in kind, while in the case of infrastructure sub-projects, it is 2 per cent in cash and 21 per cent in kind. DDC and VDC contributions are significant with 4 per cent in the case of infrastructure sub-projects, while other

Fig. 1: PAF investment

IG

IG IG

IG

Infra

Mountain InnovativeDistricts

Hill Terai

Infra

Infra

Infra

4,500.004,000.003,500.003,000.002,500.002,000.001,500.001,000.00

500.000

Table 2: CO Registration, CO Agreements and Sub-project AgreementsCategories FY 2013/14 Cumulative

No. of regd COs

Agreement No. of regd COs

Agreement

No. of COs No. of agreements

No. of COs No. of agreements

Mountain 321 373 538 5,496 5,320 6,778

Hill 805 1,093 1,389 10,517 9,837 11,496

Terai 495 587 726 8,570 8,237 8,907

Innovative Districts 27 24 37 556 530 669

Grand total 1,648 2,077 2,690 25,139 23,924 27,850

Table 3: PAF Investment in Community Sub-projectsCategories FY2070/71 (Million Rs.) Cumulative (Million Rs.)

IG Infra Total IG Infra Total

Mountain 123.147 243.688 366.835 2,247.006 1,599.275 3,846.280

Hill 369.715 334.113 703.828 4,023.689 1,761.490 5,785.180

Terai 217.606 156.850 374.455 3,780.566 898.577 4,679.143

Innovative Districts 5.040 17.429 22.469 166.452 116.853 283.305

Grand Total 715.507 752.080 1,467.587 10,217.713 4,376.195 14,593.908


organizations contributed 13 per cent of the total cost in infrastructure sub-projects.

Facilitation of Community through POs POs are selected by PAF to facilitate COs of the poor. The facilitation work of POs includes organizing COs, enhancing COs’ capacity development in planning activities, carrying out detailed feasibility, survey design and estimates, proposal writing during preparatory phase, and providing technical assistance and monitoring and supervision during implementation phase.

As such, 354 POs are working with communities in 40 programme districts. Furthermore, six POs are working for Innovative NDM-World Bank Programme.

Table 4: Status of POs

DescriptionNo. of POs

workingNo. of VDCs

covered

Regular 40 districts 354 1,634

Innovative Programme 6 58

Total 360 1,692

Fig. 2: Contribution in Subprojects (INFRA)

PAF 60%

PO 0%

Others 13%

CO cash 2%

CO kind 21%

DDC/VDC 4%

Fig. 3: Contribution in Subprojects (Cumulative)

PO 0%Others 4%

DDC/VDC 2%

CO Kind 10%

CO Cash 6%

PAF 78%

Annual Report 20146

Till the end of the reporting year, the POs are involved in facilitation work in 1,692 VDCs (355 in Initial 6 Districts, 805 in Additional 19 Districts, 474 in 15 B1 Districts, 58 in IWP Districts) and COs are working in those VDCs.

Reaching out to the Poor and Social Inclusion PAF has taken the strategy of the poor community organizing themselves to prepare, implement and manage their programmes and sitting in the driving seat, with decision-making authority.

The participatory social assessment and community well-being ranking process identified the poor community members as primary beneficiaries at the settlement level. They are organized into COs to plan, implement and manage their sub-projects. As entry point of PAF programme at settlement level, social mapping and participatory social assessment are the primary social mobilization steps. The settlement-level social assessment has shown that 69.8 per cent of all households are identified as poor households and thus included as CO members in the PAF programme.

CO MembersDuring the reporting year, PAF was able to reach out to 38,685 poor households and organize themselves as CO members to carry out different activities aimed at improving their livelihood. Till the end of the reporting year, a total of 662,088 CO member households benefited from PAF assistance.

Table 5: CO Member BeneficiariesProgramme Areas FY2070/71 Cumulative

Mountain 7,506 141,368

Hill 19,160 286,310

Terai 11,429 218,778

Innovative Districts 590 15,632

Total 38,685 662,088

Of the total 662,088 CO members as of the end of the reporting year, a total of 38,685 were covered during the reporting year alone. The coverage ratio is the highest

in the Hilly Region. When the region-wise breakdown of the CO members is compared, the Hilly Region holds the highest share, with 43 per cent, followed by the Terai and Mountain regions, with 33 and 21 per cent respectively, while IWP districts have a meagre share of 3 per cent.

CO Members by Poverty Ranking Among beneficiary members of COs, 64.8 per cent fall under the hard core poor (Ka) category (food sufficiency less than 3 months among the criteria fixed by the community), 25.9 per cent fall under the medium poor (Kha) category (food sufficiency more than 3 months but less than 6 months), 9.2 per cent under the poor (Ga) category (food sufficiency more than 6 months but less than a year) and a very small percentage of members fall under the marginalized non-poor (Gha) category.

Similarly, in terms of distribution of members by programme area, the Terai region has the highest number of hard core poor, with 72 per cent, followed by the Mountain Region, with 65 per cent, and the Hilly Region, with 60 per cent.

CO members by Caste and EthnicityOut of the total 662,088 CO member households till the end of the reporting year, 27 per cent are Dalit, 30 per cent are Janajati, 24 per cent are Chhetri, 5 per cent are

Fig. 5: CO Members-Beneficiary category

Ka 64.8%

Kha 25.9%

Ga 9.2%

Gha 0.2%

Fig. 6: Poverty Ranking-wise CO Members

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0

Mou...Hill

Terai

Inno...

Num

bers

Region

A

AA

A

B

B

B

BCC

C CD DD D

Fig. 4: Region-wise CO Member HHs

33%21%

43%

3%

g Mountain

g Hill

g Terai


Brahmin, 3 per cent are Muslim and 11 per cent belong to other ethnicity.

Caste and ethnicity-wise distribution of CO members by region shows that Dalit dominate in the Terai region, Janajati in the Hilly Region and Chhetri in the Mountain Region.

CO Members by GenderFemale CO members have the lion’s share, with 76 per cent. They are highest in the Hilly Region, followed by the Terai and Mountain Regions.

CO Members by Key Position Holders The president, treasurer and secretary are considered as key positions in COs. There are a total of 69,975 key position holders within the COs. Gender-wise and ethnicity-wise breakdowns of key position holders are presented in charts. Of the total key position holders in the PAF-supported COs, 63 per cent are female in line

with PAF’s affirmative approach of the empowerment of poor women. Caste and ethnic representations in key positions show that 34 per cent are Dalits, followed by 28 per cent Janajatis and Brahmin/Chhetris each, 2 per cent Muslim and 8 per cent other ethnicity. At the

regional level, Dalits dominate as key position holders in the Terai and Chhetris dominate in the Hilly Districts. Janajati dominate in the Mountain Region and IWP districts.

Community Institutional Building Community institutionalization process is also emerging in some of the districts where the community has felt the need for federating themselves for certain functions. A total of 92 multipurpose cooperatives

Fig. 7: CO Members by Ethnicity

Dalit 27%

Janajati 30%

Chhetri 24%

Others 11%

Muslim 3%

Brahmin 5%

Fig. 9: CO Members by Gender

Male 24%

Female 76%

Fig. 11: Key Position Holders by Caste/Ethnicity

Dalit 33.9%

Janajati 28.1%

Brahmin/Chhetri 28.0%

Others 8.0%

Muslim 2.0%

Fig. 8: Key Position Holders by Gender

Female 64%

Male 36%

Fig. 10: CO Members by Region and Gender

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0Mountain Hill Terai Innovative

Num

bers

Region

Male

Male Male

Male

Female

FemaleFemale

Female

Annual Report 20148

and 1,013 federations of COs have been formed as per the felt need of the community. Informal networks of COs are being formed in each VDC in the process of institutionalization. Based on ground experience, PAF is working on formulating strategies for sustainable institutional development of COs.

During the reporting year, PO evaluation criteria were revised to make them more simple, based on experience, and a CO graduation assessment guideline was approved. Another equally important document is the draft for pocket area (activity-based) development: implementation guidelines and concept paper for cooperative development, among others.

2.2.2 Income Generation and Micro-enterprise

A wide range of income generation activities are being supported at the community level, based upon the potentials and opportunities available. The potentials include the availability of raw materials and resources, access to market, skills and traditional occupations, etc.

POs provide information to community members and facilitate them to identify potential income generation activities. Nepal being an agricultural country, more than 80 per cent of its population relies on this sector. Income generation activities supported by PAF are related to agriculture and livestock sectors as majority of the Nepalese are landless or nearly landless but make their sustenance through the agriculture sector.

IG Activities: Sector, households and investmentBy the end of FY2070/71, PAF has signed agreements with 23,924 COs to implement 27,850 sub-projects. Out of these sub-projects, 23,661 are related to income

generation activities. The ratio of number of IG sub-projects to the total number of sub-projects increased from 55 per cent in FY2061/62 to 83.64 per cent in FY2064/6, and it stands at 76 per cent in FY2070/71.

In terms of investment, the share of the IG sector in the total investment continuously increased to 83.5 per cent in FY2063/64 from 61 per cent in FY2061/62, then it started to decrease and it stands at 49.7 per cent in FY2070/71. The trend of PAF investment shows that investment in the IG sector continuously increased till FY2063/64 and then started to decrease. Income generation activities being the first choice of the poor, IG investment again increased in FY2067/68 due to increased coverage in 15 new districts and then it started decreasing.

IG activities investment by sector and region Income generation activities can be grouped into different sectors like agriculture, livestock, service, trading, manufacturing and others. PAF investment by sectors as well as households involved in each sector is presented in table and chart. The following data on PAF

Fig. 12: PAF’s Investment in COs

% o

f tot

al in

vest

men

t

90.00

80.00

70.00

60.00

50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

061/62

60.84

32.48

4.86

1.82

IG

Infra

CB

M&E

62/63

65.15

26.47

5.91

2.46

64/65

74.16

18.03

4.99

2.82

65/66

72.04

20.45

4.41

3.10

66/67

64.74

28.78

3.73

2.76

67/68

75.50

22.50

1.30

0.60

68/69

54.3

44.4

0.9

0.5

69/70

54.8

43.7

0.9

0.5

70/71

49.7

49.5

0.5

0.3

63/64

83.54

7.61

5.97

2.87


investment in income-generating sub-projects does not include the investment related to capacity building of COs and their institutional management cost.

People living in rural areas have limited access to basic infrastructures like road, electricity, market and information, resulting in higher demand for livestock activities as income generation sub-projects.

The livestock sector shows the largest portfolio of IG activities by investment as well as households involved. About 72 per cent of PAF support is disbursed to this sector and 69 per cent of IG beneficiary households are engaged, followed by trade-related activities (16%), agriculture-related activities (7%), service sector (4%), manufacturing and other activities (approximately 1%).

In terms of investment, out of the total 402,000 households involved in livestock husbandry, about 34 per cent are engaged in milk production through buffalo and cow raising, 59 per cent in meat production, 5 per cent in ox/he-buffalo raising for farming/breeding and the remaining 2 per cent in transportation. Out of the total investment of Rs.6,614.53 million in the livestock sector, about 48 per cent is in meat production, followed by 44 per cent in milk production, 5 per cent in breeding/farming and 3 per cent in transportation.

The variations in communities’ demand across geographical regions and accessible and non-accessible areas show that the communities are smart in selection of activities based on accessibility, existing natural resources and potential markets opportunities.

In the Terai region, market for fresh milk is relatively high and accessible, and products can easily be marketed with little time and effort for collection and transportation. Nearly 56 per cent of the households (with 70% of total investment in the livestock sector in the region) pursuing livestock as part of their income generation activity in the Terai region are rearing buffaloes and cows for milk production, followed 31 per cent (19% of total investment) for meat production and the remaining 13 per cent (11% of total investment) for farming/breeding purpose. The trend has not changed over many years.

Similarly, in the Hilly Region, 67 per cent of the households (61% of the total amount) have been found engaged in meat production by rearing goat, pig and poultry, among others. In the same region, 24 per cent of the households (35% of the total amount) of livestock raising is done for milk production, followed by 9 per cent of the households (4% of the total amount) for farming/breading and transportation purposes. In the case of the Mountain Region, 75 per cent of the households (70% of the total amount) are involved in meat production, followed by 18 per cent (21% of the

Fig. 13: Investment in IGAs by Sector

Agriculture 7% Service

4%

Trading 16%

Livestock 72%

Manufacturing 1%

Table 6: Sector-wise Income Generation Activities by Households and PAF Investment

S.N. Sectors

FY2070/71 Cumulative achievements till FY2070/71

HHsAmt

(in M)HHs (%)

Investment (%) HHs

Amt (in M)

HHs (%)

Investment (%)

1 Agriculture 2,714 48.27 9.6 7.8 63,525 643.70 10.9 7.0

2 Livestock 21,722 477.58 77.2 77.5 402,493 6,614.53 69.3 72.2

3 Service 704 14.93 2.5 2.4 21,014 324.40 3.6 3.5

4 Trading 2,822 70.79 10.0 11.5 79,544 1,432.54 13.7 15.6

5 Manufacturing 185 4.30 0.7 0.7 14,058 140.55 2.4 1.5

Total 28,147 615.87 100.0 100.0 580,634 9,155.72 100.0 100.0

Annual Report 201410

total amount) in milk production and the remaining 7 per cent in transportation purpose.

In addition to animal husbandry, PAF has provided support in its associated areas such as animal treatment fund, establishment of veterinary services and developing village-level health workers to supplement the livestock component. In view of the largest investment portfolio in the livestock sector, due emphasis has been laid on establishing linkages with market and services.

Apart from livestock, the communities have demanded diverse activities in the agriculture sector. The activities thus demanded are the system of rice intensification (SRI), vegetable farming in open field to tunnel house, seed multiplication, cash crop production and fruit farming.

Out of the total 63,308 households, 59 per cent are engaged in vegetable farming, followed by 15 per cent in fruit farming, 14 per cent in agro-forestry, 7 per cent in cash crop farming, about 4 per cent in beekeeping and the rest in fishery and others.

Vegetable farming has been found very lucrative and effective in increasing the income of the poor within a short interval of time in areas where market is easily available for fresh vegetables. Under the IWP, PAF has also supported landless and marginalized people in Chitwan district to engage in vegetable farming in lease land. This programme has helped increase income of the poor, thereby creating full-time employment for them.

In mountain districts like Bajura, green vegetable farming was outright impossible during winter season before PAF intervention. But following PAF intervention, commercial vegetable farming is being practised even in winter season with the introduction of pit green house and solar tunnel house. Such vegetable farming technology/methodology has been successfully demonstrated, and this proven and tested case has shown high potential for scaling up in other areas in the days ahead.

Irrespective of better yield but comparatively longer gestation period, the demand for fruit farming is low. Nonetheless, a promotional activity of fruit farming

Fig. 14: Investment in IGAs by Sector

g Vegetable farming

59%

g Cash crops 7%

g Cereal crops

1%

g Fruit farming

15%

g Bee keeping 4%

g Agro forestry

13%

g Fishery 1%

Fig. 15: Investment in Business by Type

Garment 4%

Electrical goods

2%

Agri & forest 8%

Livestock related

7%

Retail Shop 75%

Others 4%

Table 7: PAF Investment in Agriculture Sector by Category

Sub-sector

FY2070/71 Cumulative till FY2070/71

HH PercentageAmount

(in million) Per cent HH Percentage

Amount (in

million) Percentage

Agro-forestry 54 2.0 0.99 2.0 8,444 13 33.1 5

Fruit farming 143 5.3 2.17 4.5 9,370 15 50.0 8

Cereal crops 16 0.6 0.46 0.9 542 1 3.5 1

Cash crops 598 22.0 9.37 19.4 4,361 7 51.3 8

Vegetable farming 1,779 65.5 33.16 68.7 37,176 59 456.6 71

Beekeeping 118 4.3 2.00 4.2 2,727 4 32.8 5

Fishery 5 0.2 0.10 0.2 688 1 10.8 2

Other support activities 0 0.0 0.03 0.1 5.7 1

Total 2713 100.0 48.27 100.0 63,308 100 643.7 100


undertaken by the communities has widened the scope for scaling up this intervention in coming days.

Trading is the second largest portfolio among IG activities. Altogether 79,544 households are engaged in trading businesses, where PAF has invested Rs.1,432.54 million. Of the total investment, 75 per cent is in retail shop, followed by 8 per cent in agriculture and forest-related enterprises, 7 per cent in livestock and livestock product-related businesses, 4 per cent in garment business and the rest in other different types of activities.

Within the trading sector, retail business has the largest investment in all ecological belts: more than 65 per cent in the Terai, 85 per cent in mountain districts and more than 87 per cent in Hilly Districts. Animal business, wood product business, agricultural inputs, food item-related business are other major activities in this sector.

Overall, 23,000 households are engaged in the services sector, where PAF has invested about Rs.324.4 million. Out of the total investment, Rs.315 million has been invested in income-generating social services and the rest in social services like support for school and health posts, scholarships, etc. Tailoring business, having 29 per cent investment, is one of the largest components of the social sector, followed by transportation (28%), small hotels/teashops (14%), repair and maintenance (7%), and the rest is in other activities like livestock support, agro-vet services, etc.

A total of 14,058 households are involved in manufacturing businesses, where PAF investment is about Rs.140.5 million. Out of the total investment, about 51 per cent is in non-agro product-related

manufacturing activities, followed by 43 per cent in forest product-related, agro-processing-related (4%) and the rest is in fruit processing.

Diverse IG activities are undertaken by the community members. Of them, livestock sector is the major activity as compared to other IG activities. It means, there is still great challenge to provide informed choices to the people so that they are able to select suitable IG activities based on their needs, local resources, knowledge, skills and market potentials. A lion’s share of investment in the livestock sector demands development of a mechanism for providing adequate veterinary services in rural areas. To sustain the diverse interventions, PAF should accord high priority to enhance the qualitative capacity of both POs and COs.

Others 5%

Sewing and cutting 30%

Livestock support 2%

Agro-processing 5%

Hotel/restaurant 14%

Barber 2%

Repair and maintenance 9%

Metal work 3%

Transportation 28%

Communication 2%

Fig. 16: Investment in Service sector by Category

Fig. 17: Investment in Manufacturing Sector by Category

Agro-processing

7%

Forest product 43%

Fruit processing 1%

Other off-farm related

49%


2.2.3 Community Infrastructure

Number of ActivitiesTill the end of the reporting year, a total of 4,993 infrastructure-related sub-projects were completed under the PAF programme. During FY2013/14 alone, 634 sub-projects were completed.

Regarding distribution of schemes by type for the reporting year, drinking water supply and sanitation-related sub-projects, numbering 226, stand at the top, followed by 140 small irrigation-related sub-projects and 112 community building sub-projects. Similarly, a total of 78 sub-projects were related to Rural access, i.e. transportation, while 71 sub-projects were related to rural energy.

In cumulative scenario, water supply and sanitation activities stand at the top, with 1,822 activities, followed by irrigation activities, at 991, community building sub-projects, at 623, and Rural access sub-projects, at 470. Also, a total of 358 rural energy-related sub-projects were constructed and 729 miscellaneous activities, including Ghatta (mill), drainage, improved stove, river training, rice mills, etc, among others.

Table 8: Distribution of Infrastructure by Type

Infrastructure Activity

Total Number of Sub-projects

FY2070/071 Cumulative

Rural access 78 470

Community building 112 623

Rural energy 71 358

Small irrigation 140 991

Water supply and sanitation 226 1,822

Miscellaneous 7 729

Total Sub-projects 634 4,993 Benefited Households During the reporting year, Rural access has benefited maximum number of households, while cumulatively, water supply and sanitation activities have benefited the most. Maximum demands were made for Rural access, while overall, demand for Water Supply schemes is maximum in rural area.

Box: PAF Supporting Rural Artisans through JSDF ProjectJapan Social Development Fund has provided a grant of US$2,646,777 million to enhance the quality of life of the poor people who are engaged in artisanship and cultural industries. Signed on February 17, 2012, the project is now being implemented in nine districts, namely Terahthum, Dhanusha, Lalitpur, Gorkha, Myagdi, Rupandehi, Kapilbastu, Dailekh and Bajura. Most of these districts are regular programme districts of PAF.

The project will be launched first in Terahthum, Dhanusha, Lalitpur and Gorkha districts and then move to other districts.

PAF has hired Asian Heritage Foundation, based in New Delhi, as Technical PO in August, 2014 in order to support artisans in multiple design development and marketing of their products. Similarly, PAF will mobilize existing local POs for social mobilization and institutional development of artisan communities.

In order to launch the JSDF project in the districts, a district-level visit programme was organized in Dhanusha and Terahthum districts in December 2014 by a team comprising PAF, AHF and WB personnel. The objective of the visit was to assess the existing skill set of artisans. During the field visit AHF team (Technical PO) assessed the skills sets of artisans and decided to intervene with Mithila Art and Sikki Grass Crafts in Lohana VDC and Janakpur Municipality Ward no. 12, 14, 15 and 16 of Dhanusha district on pilot basis. Similarly, Dhaka products in Jaljale, Oyakjung and Solma VDCs of Terahthum district were selected.

The World Bank is the administrator and PAF is the implementing agency of the project. The project is entitled “Making Markets Work for Conflict Affected in Nepal”.


Table 9: Infrastructure Activities and Benefitted Households

SN Infrastructure Activity

Sub-project-wise Beneficiary Households


1 Rural access 57,044 49,102

2 Community building 58,194 48,697

3 Rural energy 49,530 38,313

4 Small irrigation 31,081 25,554

5 Water supply and sanitation 58,999 50,407

6 Miscellaneous 5,131 4,917

Total 42,989.00 259,979.00

PAF Investment in Community Infrastructure During the reporting year, 112 community building were completed and Rs.126.35 million (19.7% of PAF investment in infrastructure) invested in these buildings, while Rs.203.21 million (28.6% of PAF investment in

infrastructure) has been invested in 226 water supply and sanitation schemes.

Similarly, in cumulative scenario, a total of Rs.848.39 million (29.59% of PAF investment) were invested in water supply and sanitation, which is higher than any other categories of infrastructure. This is mainly due to the higher number of water suppy-related schemes in cumulative terms.

Table 10: PAF Investment in Different Infrastructure Schemes (in million Rs)

SN Category of Infrastructure

PAF Investment (in million)


1 Rural access 147.90 485.43

2 Community building 126.35 583.46

3 Rural energy 155.50 585.90

4 Small irrigation 130.36 413.99

5 Water supply and sanitation 203.21 848.39

6 Miscellaneous 4.94 50.72

Total 768.26 2,967.89

Community’s Contribution in Infrastructure-related InvestmentTo construct infrastructures, communities are also contributing to the total investment. They are contributing in cash as well as in kind. Collection of local materials and labour is the main job of community while executing community infrastructures. So, there is a variation in community contribution between different types of infrastructure. Rural access schemes which were completed during the reporting year have highest contribution from communities. They have contributed Rs.57.87 million for Rural access schemes, which is 26.0 per cent of the total cost. It is followed by the Water supply sub-projects, with 24.6 per cent contributions, while Community Building has attracted the least contribution of 20 per cent. On average, there is 23 per cent community contribution in the infrastructures completed during the reporting year.

Fig. 18: Distribution of Infrastructure by Type (Cumulative)

g Rural accessg Rural energyg Water supply and sanitation

g Community buildingg Small irrigationg Miscellaneous

15%

12%

7%

20%

37%

9%

Fig. 19: Distribution of Infrastructure by Type (FY2070/071)



36%

22%

12%1%

18%

11%


Similarly, in cumulative scenario, infrastructures under miscellaneous category have maximum contribution (26.8%) from the communities, followed by Rural access (26.1%). In total, 24.3 per cent contribution has been made by the community for community infrastructures.

Contribution from local bodies DDC and VDC are also contributing in PAF-supported infrastructure sub-projects. These institutions have contributed Rs.60.92 million during the reporting year alone and a total of Rs.220.18 million in cumulative terms. Their contribution in rural energy is the highest, followed by Rural access. This shows that local bodies are more interested in rural energy and Rural access. They have contributed Rs.170.06 million in cumulative and 46.61 million for rural energy sub-projects during the reporting year. This shows that coordination between PAF and local bodies is increasing in recent days. The DDCs and VDCs have contributed Rs.7.78 million for Rural access schemes completed during the reporting year, while Rs.27.85 million has been invested in Rural access in cumulative scenario. Further analysis shows that communities are forcing local bodies to contribute to sub-projects that demand larger investment.

Investment from other sourcesBesides DDC and VDC, other donor and line agencies, including the Alternative Energy Promotion Centre (AEPC), rural energy Development Programme (REDP) and District

Education Offices (DEOs) have invested in PAF-supported infrastructure schemes. They have invested Rs.587.73 million in cumulative terms and Rs.148.49 million during the reporting year alone for infrastructures. Out of the total investment, 87 per cent is in the rural energy sector in both cumulative scenario and reporting year.

Ratio of investments by different agencies In cumulative terms, local bodies and other development agencies are more interested in coordination in rural energy. They are contributing 9.9 per cent and 31.0 per cent of the total cost of infrastructure respectively. Contribution from PAF is the highest, with 74.8 per cent for community building category of sub-projects, which include health posts, school buildings, rustic stores, market sheds, cooperative buildings, etc and the lowest for rural energy, where PAF’s contribution is only 36.70 per cent of the total cost. Percentage of community contribution is the highest (26.8%) for Miscellaneous and the least (22.4%) for rural energy-related sub-projects. On average, PAF has contributed 65.70 per cent of the total cost, whereas CO’s contribution is 24.30 per cent, DDC and VDC’s contribution is 2.72 per cent and other’s contribution is 7.3 per cent.

For infrastructures completed during the reporting year, PAF, communities, DDCs/VDCs and other line agencies have contributed 67.04, 22.58, 2.92 and 7.46 per cent of the total cost of infrastructure respectively. Contribution

Table 11: Community Contribution in Infrastructure SchemesSN

Category of Infrastructures

Investment of Community


Amount (million) Percentage Amount (million) Percentage

1 Rural access 57.87 26 194.86 26.1

2 Community building 32.47 20 176.76 22.6

3 Rural energy 88.65 21 347.37 22.4

4 Small irrigation 39.49 23 138.02 22.8

5 Water supply and sanitation 69.58 25 304.57 24.9

6 Miscellaneous 1.40 21 12.31 26.8

Total 289.46 23 1173.89 24.3

Table 12: Contribution of Local Bodies in Different SchemesSNS.No.

Category of Infrastructure

Investment of Local Bodies

FY 2070/71 Cumulative


1 Rural access 7.78 3.5% 27.85 3.7 %

2 Community building 2.14 1.3% 6.89 0.9 %

3 Rural energy 46.61 11.1% 170.06 9.9 %

4 Small irrigation 0.31 0.2% 4.83 0.8 %

5 Water supply and sanitation 4.08 1.4% 10.55 0.9 %

6 Miscellaneous - - - 0.1 %

Total 65.11 2.72% 220.18 2.92 %


from PAF is the highest (77.3%) for Community Building sub-projects and the lowest for rural energy, where PAF’s contribution is only 37.1 per cent of the total cost. Percentage of community contribution is the highest (25%) for Rural access and the lowest (19.9%) for Community Building sub-projects.

Per Capita Cost–Total investment and PAFThe PAF rules require the upper ceiling of per capita investment to be Rs.5,500 for infrastructure-related sub-projects. But in reality, the per capita cost of PAF investment is Rs.2,993.09 for the sub-projects completed during the reporting year, while the cumulative per

capita cost is Rs.1,875.24. For infrastructures completed during the reporting year, per capita cost is the highest for Miscellaneous sub-projects, with Rs.3,258.58, and the lowest for community building, with Rs.2,123.49.

Per capita cost in total is the highest for rural energy-related infrastructures for both reporting year and in cumulative terms. Its value is Rs.6,288.61 and Rs.5,575.56 for the reporting year and cumulative respectively. For Community Building, it is the lowest, with Rs.2,748.02, in the reporting year and for Rural access Rs.2,306.79 for cumulative.

Table 13: Investment from Different SourcesSN

Category of Infrastructure

Investment from Other Sources



1 Rural access 9.58 4.3 16.46 3.5

2 Community building 2.55 1.6 10.58 1.7

3 Rural energy 128.86 30.7 510.13 31.0

4 Small irrigation 1.35 0.8 24.52 4.6

5 Water supply and sanitation 5.79 2.0 25.32 2.2

6 Miscellaneous 0.36 5.4 0.72 0.8

Total 148.49 7.46 587.73 16.3

Table 14: Ratio of Investments by Different Agencies in PAF Community Infrastructure (Cumulative—in percentage)

S.N. Category of Infrastructure PAF CO (cash) CO (kind)

CO (total) DDC/VDC Others

1 Rural access 66.7 1.0 25.1 26.1 3.7 3.5

2 Community building 74.8 0.2 22.4 22.6 0.9 1.7

3 Rural energy 36.7 4.9 17.5 22.4 9.9 31.0

4 Small irrigation 71.8 .45 22.4 22.8 0.8 4.6

5 Water supply and sanitation 72.0 0.2 24.7 24.9 0.9 2.2

6 Miscellaneous 72.3 6.0 20.8 26.8 0.1 0.8

Total:- 65.7 2.1 22.2 24.3 2.72 7.3

Fig. 20: Investment from Other Sources (FY2070/71)

87%

1% 4% 0% 6% 2%



Fig. 21: Investment from Other Sources (Cumulative)

Rural energy 87%

Small irrigation 4%

Water supply and sanitation

4%Community

building 2%

Rural access 3%

Miscellaneous 0%


Per Household Community Contribution For sustainability of infrastructure, PAF enforces community to take its ownership. Furthermore, they are also contributing through their labour and work related to the collection of non-local materials. On

average, community has contributed Rs.19,351.84 and Rs.13,692.12 for recently completed and cumulative infrastructures respectively. It is the highest for Water supply infrastructures among the recently completed infrastructures and in cumulative terms.

Table 15: Ratio of investments by different agencies in PAF community infrastructure (Reporting year, in percentage)

S.N. Category of Infrastructure PAF CO Cash Co Kind CO total DDC/VDC Others

1 Rural access 66.3 1.8 24.1 25.9 3.5 4.3

2 Community building 77.3 0.2 19.7 19.9 1.3 1.6

3 Rural energy 37.1 4.7 16.4 21.1 11.1 30.7

4 Small irrigation 76.0 0.2 22.8 23.0 0.2 0.8

5 Water supply and sanitation 71.9 0.1 24.5 24.6 1.4 2.0

6 Miscellaneous 73.7 0.7 20.2 20.9 - 5.4

Total:- 67.04 1.30 21.28 22.58 2.92 7.46

Table 16: Per Capita Cost, Total Investment and PAF

Category of Infrastructures

Beneficiaries Population Per capita cost with PAFPer Capita cost with respect to Total Cost

FY2070/71 Cumulative FY2070/71 Cumulative FY2070/71 Cumulative

1 Rural access 47,935.00 327,639.00 3,085.47 1,481.61 4,654.89 2,306.79

2 Community building 59,501.00 339,860.00 2,123.49 1,716.77 2,748.02 2,360.85

3 Rural energy 66,727.00 291,151.00 2,330.39 2,012.36 6,288.61 5,575.56

4 Small irrigation 36,509.00 199,447.00 3,570.63 2,075.69 4,697.75 3,250.92

5 Water supply and sanitation 56,605.00 367,120.00 3,589.97 2,310.93 4,993.55 3,214.47

6 Miscellaneous 1,516.00 30,663.00 3,258.58 1,654.11 4,419.53 3,840.85

Total 268,793.00 1,555,880.00 2,993.09 1,875.24 4,633.72 3,424.91

7,000.00

6,000.00

5,000.00

4,000.00

3,000.00

2,000.00

1,000.00

0.00

Rural ac

cess

Comm

unity Build

ing

Small

irrigati

on

Water s

upply an

d sanita

tion

g FY070/71g Cumulative

Miscella

neous

Rural energ

y

Fig. 22: Per Capita Cost versus Total Cost


Salient Features of PAF-supported Infrastructure and Per Unit Cost

Infrastructure for Rural AccessDuring the reporting year, 4 bridges (RCC: 2, Suspension: 2, of 113 m length), 14 culverts (73 m length), 68 rural roads (146 km length) and 4 trail roads (10 km length) were completed. Cumulatively, 34 bridges (1,454 m length), 140 culverts (592 m length), 280 rural roads (509 km length) and 18 trail roads (39 km length) have been completed.

Here, the per unit cost of bridge in recent fiscal year is higher than that the cumulative figure because the recently constructed bridges were shorter than the earlier ones.

BuildingsTill now, PAF has supported construction of schools, health posts, community building and agriculture-related buildings (cellar store, market shed, milk/vegetable collection centre). In FY2070/71, 57 school buildings (rooms: 189) were constructed and maintained. Four health posts (18 rooms), 35 agriculture-related buildings (266 rooms) and 16 other types of community building

(29 rooms) were constructed, whereas, cumulatively, the figures are 416 school buildings (1,719 rooms), 15 health posts (15 rooms). During the reporting year, 396 rooms, having 16,898 m2 plinth area, were constructed and 2,635 rooms, having 95,460 m2 plinth area, were constructed in cumulative terms. The unit cost of the recently completed buildings is Rs.227,400/room and Rs.6,277/m2 area and in cumulative, its value is 345,090/room and 8,087/m2 plinth area in the reporting year.

70%

26%

1%

Fig. 24: Cumulative

3%

g PAF g CO Total g DDC/VDC g Others

Fig. 23: FY2070/71

68%

26%

4% 2%

g PAF g CO Total g DDC/VDC g Others

Table 18: Investments by Different Agencies in Rural AccessPAF CO Cash CO Kind CO Total DDC/VDC Others Total

Cumulative 66.7 1.0 25.1 26.1 3.7 3.5 100

FY2070/71 66.3 1.8 24.1 25.9 3.5 4.3 100

Table 19: Salient Features and Per Unit CostSN Rural access Salient Features Per Unit Cost (PAF investment)

Unit FY2070/71 Cumulative FY2070/71 Cumulative

1 Bridges m 113 1,454 46,449.00 25,239.00

2 Culverts m 73 592 142,271.00 103,244.00

3 Road and its maintenance km 146 509 853,393.00 757,714.00

4 Trail road km 10 39 294,668.00 224,721.00

Table 17: Per Household Community Contribution

SNTypes of

Infrastructure

Per HH community Contribution

FY 2070/71 Cumulative

1 Rural access 18,622.77 10,731.34

2 Community building 13,304.20 12,270.71

3 Rural energy 13,862.89 15,495.90

4 Small irrigation 23,586.03 16,005.80

5 Water supply and sanitation 23,651.07 17,545.39

6 Miscellaneous 23,084.11 10,103.59

Total 19,351.84 13,692.12


Rural energyElectric line extension and micro hydropower are sub-projects under the rural energy category. In the fiscal year, 10 units of electric line extension (24.73 km extension), 61 micro hydro sub-projects (1,123 kw) were completed and, in cumulative terms, 57 units of electric line extension (294.73 km extension), 254 micro hydro sub-projects (4,796 kw) and 59 solar systems were completed. Here, the cost per Kw of MHP is Rs.382,818 for recently completed and Rs.318,850 in cumulative terms.

Small irrigationPAF is providing different types of schemes such as deep boring, artisan boring, treadle pump, drip, sprinkle, water harvest tank, plastic pond, earthen pond, well, lift and surface to community based on local topography, available water and command area. In the fiscal year, 140 irrigation sub-projects (1,398 hectare [ha]) were completed, which included construction of 68 surface irrigation, one lift irrigation, 3 earthen pond projects. This has helped to irrigate more than 6198 ha of land.

Water supply and sanitationGravity, lift, tubewell, dugwell, rainwater harvesting, waste pit and toilets were constructed with PAF assistance.

During the reporting year, a total of 212 gravity water supply schemes (1,587 taps/water points), 6 lift water supply, 8 sub-projects of tubewell were completed.

In cumulative scenario, 1,125 gravity water supply schemes (7,778 taps/water points), 25 lift water supply, 3 rainwater harvesting, 1,188 tubewell sub-projects, 46 dugwell sub-projects and 1,962 toilets (2,476 units) sub-projects were completed.

Table 20: Investments by Different Agencies in Community BuildingPAF CO Cash CO Kind CO Total DDC/VDC Others Total

Cumulative 74.8 0.2 22.4 22.6 0.9 1.7 100

FY2070/71 77.3 0.2 19.7 19.9 1.3 1.6 100

Table 21: Salient Features and Per Unit CostSN Building Salient Features Per unit cost


1 Building Room number and plinth area

396/room and 16,898 sq.m. plinth area

2,635 rooms and 95,460 sq.m. plinth area

Rs.345,090/room and Rs.8,087 per sq.m.

Rs.227,400/room and Rs.6,277 per sq.m.

Table 22: Investments by Different Agencies in Rural Energy (in percentage)

Types of infrastructure PAF CO Cash CO KindCO

TotalDDCVDC Others

Total

Cumulative 36.7 4.9 17.5 22.4 9.9 31.0 100

FY2069/070 37.1 4.7 16.4 21.1 11.1 30.7 100

Table 23: Salient Feature of Investments by Different Agencies in Rural EnergySN Rural energy Salient Features Per unit cost


1 Micro Hydro kw 1,123 4,796 382,818 318,850

Table 24: Investments by Different Agencies in Small IrrigationTypes of Infrastructure PAF CO Cash CO Kind CO Total DDC/VDC Others Total

Cumulative 71.8% .45% 22.4% 22.8% 0.8% 4.6% 100%

FY 2067/68 76.0% 0.2% 22.8% 23.0% 0.2% 0.8% 100%


Infrastructure (under construction) There are 836 infrastructures sub-projects under construction as of July 2014 and most of them are expected to be completed by the end of the next year. Among them, water supply and sanitation sub-projects are at the top position, whereas infrastructure under

the Miscellaneous category (Ghatta, river training) sub-projects are minimum. The maximum number of households will benefit from Rural access, which is 18,136 (29.8%). It is followed by Water supply, from which will benefit 14,049 households (23.08%).

PAF has signed agreements amounting to Rs.1,030.63 million with communities to construct these infrastructures. It will invest Rs.283.57 million in water supply and sanitation-related schemes. This is the highest amount among the under-construction sub-projects. PAF’s second highest investment is in Rural access-related schemes, where PAF has invested Rs.262.79 million.

Community contributions for projects under constructionCommunity has committed to contributing Rs.366.53 million for under-construction infrastructures. Their commitment is the highest for rural energy (Rs 98.78 million) and the least for Miscellaneous (Rs.1.00 million).

With respect to the total cost, community’s commitment for contribution is 20.79 per cent on average. This is the highest for water supply and sanitation (25.27% of total cost), followed by small irrigation (22.92%) and least for Rural access (17.84%).

2.2.4 Capacity Development of COs

2.2.4.1 Enterprise Development Training for Income GenerationEnterprise development is essential to generate income of the rural people at individual level. Entrepreneurship skill development of CO members is one of the major objectives of PAF. Hence, CO members are imparted

Table 25: Investments by Different Agencies in Water Supply and Sanitation (in percentage)Types of Infrastructure PAF CO Cash CO Kind CO Total DDC/VDC Others Total

Cumulative 72.0 0.2 24.7 24.9 0.9 2.2 100

FY2067/68 71.9 0.1 24.5 24.6 1.4 2.0 100

Table 26: Infrastructure (Under Construction)SN

Type of Infrastructures No. of Sub-projects

Benefited

Household Population

1 Rural access 177 18,136 100,714

2 Building 110 9,604 56,269

3 Rural energy 70 10,685 63,511

4 Small irrigation 172 8,071 48,298

5 Water supply and sanitation 295 14,049 83,087

6 Miscellaneous 12 323 2,013

Total 836 60,868 353,892

Fig. 25: No. of Sub-projects

21%

8%

35%

21%

13%

2%



Fig. 26: Benefited Households

18%

13%16%

23%

30%

0%

g Rural accessg Rural energyg Water Supply



the 'Start and Improve Your Business (SIYB)' and 'Micro-enterprise Creation and Development (MECD)' training through POs. The training is conducted before the demand-led proposal preparation of COs. A total of 1,586 members of COs have been trained in entrepreneurship skill development and marginalized group business management. These training themes help CO members to identify appropriate and marketable micro-enterprises and income-generating activities in the local context.

2.2.4.2 Institutional Development and Institutional Model Development-related Capacity Development ActivitiesThe ultimate goal of PAF is the institutional development of COs. PAF has been providing grants to COs to launch various income-generating and infrastructure-building activities. Community Revolving funds are created from the grant provided for income-generating activities. Hence, institutional strengthening of COs is imperative for sustainable management and utilization of the community revolving fund. Therefore, apart from income-generating training, PAF has been conducting institutional development-related training like account, revolving fund and savings and credit management, leadership development and group management, public audit, institutional model development (cooperative education and creation) to the CO members concerned.

A total of 2,255 CO members were trained in institutional development-related themes like account,

revolving fund and savings and credit management, leadership development and group management and public audit.

2.2.4.3 Animal Husbandry, Agriculture-related Capacity Development ActivitiesApart from income-generating and institutional development-related activities, PAF also imparts awareness creation and their small IG-related training and orientation to CO members. A total of 3,984 CO members received training and orientation related to animal husbandry.

2.2.5 Capacity Development of POsCapacity development of COs is interlinked with the capacity development of POs. Hence, capacity development of POs is necessary to deliver capacity and institutional development of COs. Hence, PAF has been imparting institutional development-related Training of Trainers (ToT), refresher training and orientation to POs so that they can impart the same training themes to COs through POs. They include social mobilization, leadership development, group management, account, revolving fund and savings and credit management, social audit and institutional model development, i.e. cooperative education, cooperative creation and cooperative business plan preparation.

A total of 1,152 PO staff members were trained in institutional development and institutional model

Table 27: Types of Infrastructure

Type of Infrastructure

Contribution in Million (Rs)

SN PAF Community Others DDCVDC

1 Rural access 262.79 75.41 72.81 11.66

2 Community building 144.12 40.96 1.86 1.29

3 Rural energy 166.31 98.78 221.36 43.77

4 Small irrigation 169.34 51.92 4.39 0.84

5 Water supply and sanitation 283.57 98.46 5.38 2.24

6 Miscellaneous 4.5 1.00 0.06 0

Total 1030.63 366.53 305.86 59.8

Table 28: Community Contributions for Projects Under Construction

Type of Infrastructures

Cost Contribution (in percentage)

SN PAF Community Others DDCVDC Total

1 Rural access 62.17 17.84 17.23 2.76 100

2 Building 76.57 21.76 0.99 0.69 100

3 Rural energy 31.37 18.63 41.75 8.26 100

4 Small irrigation 74.77 22.92 1.94 0.37 100

5 Water supply and sanitation 72.78 25.27 1.38 0.57 100

6 Miscellaneous 80.94 17.99 1.08 0.00 100

Total 58.46 20.79 17.35 3.39 100


development-related themes, followed by 408 staff members in enterprise development, i.e. Start and Improve Your Business (SIYB) and Value Chain, 767 staff members in PAF implementation process, i.e. revolving fund guidelines, IG, Infrastructure; PAF special programme for marginalized communities, pocket area development; nutritional guidelines and improved agriculture technology; 95 staff members were trained in participatory planning monitoring and evaluation and project management and participatory rural appraisal; 143 in proposal writing, success story and news writing, group facilitation skills and organizational development. Similarly, 15 events of coordination and review meeting were organized with DDCs and lines agencies in order to coordinate and strengthen the PAF programme in the district.

Similarly, in order to integrate the safe migration perspective in the PAF social mobilization process, one-day training 'Linking Safer Migration to Social Mobilization' was organized in July 2012. The training was conducted in collaboration with Free the Slaves (FTS), an INGO. Altogether 25 participants from twelve districts, namely Jhapa, Bara, Sindhupalchowk, Rasuwa, Kathmandu, Ramechhap, Bajura, Jajarkot, Kailali, Bardiya, Kapilbastu and Pyuthan participated in the training. The objectives of the training were to strengthen the training in safer migration; enhance conceptual understanding of trafficking and slavery and the consequences of trafficking and unsafe migration/forced migration; and develop an action plan to link safer migration to the PAF social mobilization processes. During the training, the participants got an opportunity

to learn and reflect on the concept of trafficking and national and international policies on the issue.

2.2.6 Capacity Development of PAF SecretariatCapacity development is one of the major factors for organizational development. Capacity development of POs and COs is also linked to capacity development of the PAF secretariat. PAF has internalized this from the very beginning and has been organizing capacity development initiatives for PAF staff. The following are the capacity development activities conducted by for capacity strengthening of the PAF secretariat.

(a) In-house Workshops and MeetingsIn order to review and strengthen the PAF programme in the districts, a two-day Programme Review Meeting was organized on February 5–7, 2014 at the PAF Secretariat. All Portfolio Managers participated and presented the progress of the districts as well as share the lessons learned and challenges they faced.

During the reporting year, PAF organized an orientation programme to welcome and introduce and give orientation on the PAF Programme for newly appointed staff. This orientation has built the capacity of the newly appointed staff to introduce and know the process and working modalities of PAF. In addition, it organized dozens of workshops and in-house meetings for PAF staff members.


(b) Participation in seminars and workshopsPAF staff members participated in different meetings and workshops—both national and international.

PAF Executive Director, Mr Raj Babu Shrestha, participated in the seventh meeting of the Business Enterprise and Employment Support, held in Dhaka, Bangladesh, on April 24-26, 2014.

Similarly, Mr Durga Gandhari and Mr Sandeep Nath Upreti participated in the training 'Evaluating the Impact of Development Programme: Turning promises into evidence', organized by the World Bank and BRAC, Bangladesh, on March 19-21, 2014. They also participated in the next event 'The SAR Project Economic Analysis for TT Workshop', organized by the World Bank on May 19-21, 2014.

Ms Kanchan Tamang, Mr Om Poudel and Mr Sandeep Nath Upreti participated in a workshop on making monitoring and evaluation more effective, held on February 12 -14, 2014, organized by the World Bank. They also participated in a workshop 'Monitoring and Evaluation and Knowledge Management', organized in Kathmandu by IFAD from May 1 to 13, 2014.

Mr Akhilesh Chandra Das and Mr Moti Prasad Sharma participated in the National Cooperative Congress, which was organized on March 26–27, 2014 in Kathmandu.

Mr Moti Prasad Sharma and Ms Meena Nakarmi, participated a two-day workshop on Indigenous People, in March 2013.


3CHAPTER 3.1 Monitoring and EvaluationMonitoring and evaluation (M&E) is an inextricable part of PAF’s mission, providing an analytical basis for programmatic decisions, allowing PAF to learn from its experience, and share the impact and lessons with different stakeholders.

PAF's M&E Division undertakes or facilitates various research and studies, surveys with other units of PAF, enriching the organization’s overall programmes and strategy.

Its monitoring data is developed on five different databases, which support the process of working with POs and COs and monitoring the sub-project activities (Figure 1). These databases provide a rich source of information on PAF activities and have been increasingly analysed to improve planning and address weaknesses in the project implementation process and to identify areas of strength that can be scaled up.

PAF’s monitoring focuses on the progress, process, compliance and the results of project activities. The

organization has been encouraging all stakeholders to be involved in the monitoring process of the project activities.

As community is at the driving seat of all PAF programmes, monitoring by the community is essential for the compliance and results of the programme. Thus, the monitoring subcommittee of each CO is responsible to monitor the activities carried out by the CO concerned. Besides, the social mobilizers assigned by the POs are responsible for facilitating the monitoring subcommittee for effective monitoring and also monitor the activities of COs themselves.

Besides, the programme coordinators, supervisors and board members of the POs are responsible for monitoring or tracking the progress and the compliance made by the COs.

The Portfolio Managers (PMs) and the consultant assigned by the PMs monitor the activities of the POs as well as COs. Similarly, on periodic basis, the representatives of the local bodies (DDCs, VDCs and other line agencies) carry out monitoring visits in the PAF working areas of the districts concerned.

INFORMATION, MONITORING AND GRIEVANCE HANDLING

Community:Implementation

of activities

Partnerorganization

database

CommunityOrganizations

database-Beneficiaryassessment

Communityagreements

database

Sub-projectProjects

database

Revolving funddatabase

Community:Selection of

priority activities

CommunityOrganizationSelection and

registration

PartnerOrganization

Selection


The PAF central level also carries out monitoring visits in the districts on periodic basis. Likewise, PAF Board Members, representatives from line ministries and representatives from the World Bank carry out monitoring visits on periodic basis.

Furthermore, PAF has been reporting its progress against the set indicators on regular basis. For details refer to Annex 12.

3.2 Results of Monitoring Data Analysis

3.2.1 Social Re-assessment/ Beneficiaries’ Assessment

A social re-assessment of 40,085 households of the sample COs which are in three or more than three years of maturity period was carried out during 2013/14. The comparative analysis of the social re-assessment data with the baseline social assessment shows that household-level assets increased, school enrolment of children increased, food sufficiency duration of individual households improved, and construction and use of toilet increased.

The household-level gross income (from all sources) of the re-assessed 4,085 households increased by 68.5 per cent in real term. Similarly, the household income of about 68 per cent of the total households has shown an increase by 15 per cent or more.

One of the indicators that PAF uses to identify the targeted population is the food sufficiency level. Households are divided into four different groups under this category: hard core poor (those with less than 3 months of food security either via own production or via other dependable sources of income), medium poor (those with 3 to 6 months of food security), poor (those with 6 to 11 months of food security) and non-poor (those with 12 or more months of food security). The other is whether the household is from a Dalit or Janajati community.

The results show that the percentage of households with food insufficiency of 3 months or less dropped from 63.9 per cent to 37.2 per cent, with a reduction of 58.3 percentage point, for the CO member households.

This effect is seen stronger for Janajati households. The percentage of food insecure households among Janajati households decreased from 56.7 per cent to 18.0 per cent, a reduction of 68.2 percentage point. For Dalit households, food insecure households decreased from 85.4 per cent to 35.7 per cent, with a reduction of 58.2 percentage point.

3.2.2 Status of Revolving Fund

A revolving fund assessment was carried out during 2013/14, which shows that the community has been managing their revolving fund satisfactorily. Revolving funds have provided an opportunity to the poor to access funds, otherwise inaccessible, through formal financial institutions, to initiate income generation activities. COs are managing and operating these funds by themselves and are responsible for setting interest rates and loan payment conditions.

The revolving fund data of 10,328 COs shows that the fund provided to the COs by PAF has increased by 19.0 per cent, which includes the interest against the loan taken by its members, community contribution and funds collected from other sources. Similarly, among the total CO members (N= 290,783), 93.0 per cent have accessed the fund at least one time to initiate income-generating activities. Out of the total members accessing the fund from the revolving fund, 60 per cent have used the fund two times or more. The assessment also shows 87.5 per cent of the total fund has been invested as loan to its members, and the rest of the fund is in bank and cash in hand in COs itself.

The assessment also shows that the average rate of interest on the loan is 9.9 per cent. However, the interest rate is slightly higher in newer COs. The average rate of repayment of the loan is 78.4 per cent.

3.3 CO Maturity Assessments A CO Institutional Capacity Assessment was carried out during the reporting period. The assessment assessed the capacity of the COs in terms of various aspects of institutional development and identified the strengths and weaknesses of the COs and developed a strategy for their graduation to enable them to operate in a sustainable way.

The assessment was done among 12,870 COs against 30 indicators2 and graded into four groups by the sum of indicator scores (each on a scale of 1–4, making the maximum total score of 120). Around 12 per cent of the COs were found fully mature and able to function without additional capacity building or supervision support; around 82 per cent of the COs required some additional capacity building support in managing the organization or needed further social mobilization efforts. The remaining COs still needed substantial handholding for some time.

2 Each of the following six assessment categories has five indicators: (i) social situation; (ii) economic situation; (iii) capital and resource mobilization; (iv) coordination, partnership and communication; and (v) good governance and institutional development; and (vi) capacity building and sustainability.


3.4 Communications, Outreach and PublicationsPAF is giving high emphasis to communications as it is critical to create demand from beneficiaries to ensure transparency and foster partnership and learning across stakeholders.

The PAF communication strategy aims to disseminate PAF approach, procedure and rules to the stakeholders, develop the external and internal communication capacity of PAF, and identify and develop communication messages for PAF, as well as disseminate best practices and success stories.

Some of the major activities that were initiated and continued during the reporting year were:

n Publication of Newsletter 'Jeevika' in both English and Nepali

nDynamic web sites constructed and regularly updated

n Publication of annual reports—both national and district-based

n Success stories and case collection

nDifferent interaction meetings and workshops at the local and national levels

n Extensive media coverage at the local and national levels

nOrientations programmes and stakeholders consultations at the local level

n Publications of PAF operating guidelines

n Launching of E-Chautari

n PAF Journalism Award for excellent reporting on poverty issues

Since PAF work has now increased its coverage and depth, there is a growing need to generate greater awareness based on the results. A proactive communication and outreach strategy will be highly important in this regard. PAF will work with all stakeholders to keep them abreast of the important developments and disseminate information at national and international forums.

3.5 Grievance Handling in PAF Since 2013, PAF has been developing a grievance handling system to record and respond to complaints on its practices, policies and procedures at the centre as well as at the grass roots level.

A concept note of PAF grievance handling mechanism was developed and a subcommittee of the board members was also formed to oversee and supervise the grievance handling system. PAF has developed


direct e-mails to the Vice Chairperson, Executive Director and the Programme Chief in its website. It has already installed a suggestion box at its central office. All complaints coming from direct e-mail to the Vice Chairperson, Executive Director, website e-mail, or telephone, or any other means are recorded and registered in a complaints register, with the updated status of the complaint and remedial actions taken.

So far, complaints have been made regarding field-level misuse of PAF fund, activities of PO, exclusion of hard core poor and selection of POs in the districts, among others. PAF Programme Division Chief directly oversees all grievance-related activities.


PAF gives top priority to partnership and collaboration with different agencies (governmental and nongovernmental) at both central and district level. The different partnership and collaboration efforts are discussed below.

4.1 Partnership with MoFALDThe Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD) and PAF, on October 8, 2010, signed an MoU for a strategic alliance to alleviate poverty through synergic efforts between the two institutions.

The MoU has helped to increase coordination and linkages during project planning, implementation, monitoring, reporting and review while implementing targeted poverty alleviation and empowerment initiatives at the local level. As part of the MoU, PAF is closely involved in coordination with the District Social Mobilization Committees (DSMCs) at DDCs for social mobilization and programme monitoring. All sub-projects of targeted communities are presented at VDC Council and later endorsed by the DSMC and District Council. Based on this agreement, all PAF programme districts have been working closely with the DDCs concerned.

During the reporting year, district review meetings were conducted in all PAF programme districts. As part of the MoU with the Ministry, COs are enlisted with the VDCs concerned and CO’s programmes are endorsed by the ward citizen forum concerned and acknowledged by the VDC Council meeting.

4.2 Partnership with MoADThe Ministry of Agriculture Development (MoAD) and PAF signed an MoU on January 30, 2013 for a strategic alliance to alleviate poverty through technical backstopping on agriculture and livestock extension services. As per the MoU, PAF is providing income generation and infrastructure support grants to the COs/groups for continuity of programme, while the Ministry mobilizes its networks to facilitate them. After

the understanding, a series of meetings were held between PAF and District Agriculture Development Offices and District Livestock Development Offices.

4.3 Partnership with WFPPAF and United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) signed an MoU on August 30, 2010 for a strategic alliance to alleviate poverty and food insecurity in the Mid and Far-Western Hilly and Mountain regions.

Following the MoU, some initiatives have been taken to implement community infrastructure sub-projects, in which WFP has provided vital food and nutrition assistance equivalent to community contribution. Some jointly commissioned projects include small-scale irrigation, water harvest tank, cellar store, cash crop farming, micro hydro and rural agriculture road and enhanced farming techniques and poultry farming and other relevant training. A total of 23 small infrastructure schemes were implemented in Achham, Dailekh, Humla, Jumla and Mugu districts. Out of the total, seven are small irrigation, eight micro hydro, four drinking water schemes and one each is energy mill, improved ghatta (mill), water harvest tank and cellar store.

Table 29: List of Projects Implemented in Partnership with WFP

District Type of Scheme No.

Achham Micro hydro 4

Humla

Energy mill 1

Micro hydro 3

Irrigation 2

Jumla Pipe irrigation 3

Mugu

Irrigation 2

Improved Ghatta 1

Water harvest tank 1

Cellar store 1

Micro hydro 1

Dailekh Drinking water scheme 4

CHAPTER 4PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION


4.4 Partnership with Heifer and LFLP Practical Action Nepal, Heifer International Nepal, Forest, Leasehold Forestry and Livestock Programme (LFLP) and PAF signed an MoU on July 29, 2011 to establish synergies in poverty alleviation efforts at the grass roots and ensure increased opportunities for the poor and disadvantaged people.

Based on the MoU, capacity-building efforts were made for poor and disadvantaged people by Heifer International in Rautahat and Sindhuli districts and by the LFLP in Sindhupalchowk district. Heifer International has selected one VDC each in Rautahat and Sindhuli to build the capacity of CO members in its Cornerstones. PAF provided revolving funds to the COs, whereas Heifer provided training and mobilization support. In Sindhuli district, CO members were awarded the best prize for excellent work under the support of Heifer.

4.5 Partnership with HelvetasAn MoU was concluded between PAF and Helvetas-Nepal on February 7, 2011 to work together so as to enhance the livelihood of poor households. Based on the MoU, activities such as riverbed farming in Bardiya, Rautahat and Sarlahi districts and micro irrigation and drinking water scheme in Kalikot and Dailekh districts were carried out during the reporting year.

A total of 500 CO households in Bardiya, Rautahat and Sarlahi districts are involved in riverbed farming. Helvetas Nepal provides technical support to train local resource persons and follow-up technical support in the farming period.

Based on this MoU another understanding was also signed with LILI/Helvetas and WARMP/Helvetas for construction of micro irrigation and drinking water schemes in the common programme districts. LILI/Helvetas and WARMP/Helvetas will provide support in technical as well as in community contribution part and PAF would support the cost of external materials. During the reporting period, four micro irrigation and two drinking water schemes were implemented in Kalikot.

Another area of partnership with Helvetas is related to the employment sector. As per the MoU, PAF CO members can access the training programme from the Helvetas Employment Fund (EF) programme that enhances the technical capacity of CO members. After graduation from training, CO members can start their own enterprises utilizing the revolving fund at the CO level or get employment with other employment providers. Dozens of CO members of Kanchanpur, Bardiya, Kapilbastu, Pyuthan have benefitted under this partnership arrangement.

4.6 Partnership with AEPCUnder an agreement with the Alternative Energy Promotion Centre (AEPC), PAF and AEPC are working together in 137 micro hydro sub-projects in 21 districts. The following table shows the district-wise partnership in micro hydro projects with the AEPC.

Table 30: List of Projects Implemented in Partnership with AEPC

SN Name of district Number of schemes

1 Accham 20

2 Baitadi 11

3 Bajhang 13

4 Bajura 10

5 Baglung 1

6 Darchula 2

7 Doti 5

8 Dailekh 4

9 Dadeldhura 2

10 Dolpa 2

11 Sindhuli 6

12 Jumla 8

13 Humla 5

14 Kalikot 6

15 Mugu 1

6 Pyuthan 1

15 Dhading 2

16 Makawanpur 1

17 Ramechhap 7

18 Rasuwa 3

19 Udayapur 13

20 Khotang 5

21 Taplejung 7

22 Jajarkot 2

Total 137

Box: Community Challenge Fund (CCF) ProjectThe project is a pilot designed to investigate the role of information and incentives in improving the health of expectant and new mothers and children in the age group of 0–2 years (target group for future reference). The focus of the project is the first 1,000 days of a child’s life. The pilot will cover four districts (Sarlahi, Sindhuli, Ramechhap and Rasuwa) that have been selected using the criteria agreed to with the Ministry of Local Development and based on access to services (water and sanitation) and nutritional status. The districts cut across the mountain, Hilly and Tarai areas of the country. Also, the pilot will be run in the first instance for 12-18 months.


This chapter discusses the outcomes of the some of major studies relating to PAF results on the ground.

During the reporting year, a few outcome studies were done, including detailed analysis of the report of the impact evaluation study conducted by the Centre for Economic Development and Administration, Tribhuvan University.

An independent PAF impact evaluation conducted in six sample and three control districts shows that the programme impact on real per capita consumption growth was 31 per cent over a two-year intervention period. This is impressive in the context of the same analysis, which indicates that, in the absence of the PAF programme, the targeted households would have recorded about negative 2 per cent growth.

The estimated net programme impact on per capita consumption (in real terms adjusted for price inflation) growth is 15 per cent for PAF IG participant households, 31 per cent for PAF money recipient households and 42 per cent for those beneficiaries who have received money for at least six months. The net impact on growth in per capita consumption is even higher for Dalit and Janajatis and for the poorer segments of the population, implying programme’s ability to distribute growth towards the targeted groups.

The evaluation data shows a 10 percentage point decrease in the incidence of food insufficiency and 6 percentage point increase in school enrolment rate for children aged 5–15 years. The programme effect is also seen in access to services (agriculture centres, community forest groups, farmers' groups) and women’s empowerment. For child malnutrition (stunting, underweight) a higher positive impact is seen for children in the age group of 1–2 years amongst PAF-supported households.

5.1 Monitoring and Impact Evaluation Results1. In addition to the MIS, an independent impact

evaluation has also been integrated into the

design of the programme. The PAF Impact Evaluation (IE) shows that the programme impact on real per capita consumption growth was 31 per cent over a two-year PAF intervention period. This is impressive in the context of the same analysis, which indicates that, in the absence of the PAF programme, the targeted households would have recorded about negative 2 per cent growth. Significant and positive PAF impacts are also seen in terms of other welfare indicators such as food sufficiency, child schooling, access to services and women’s empowerment.

2. The IE has been a long-term partnership between the PAF Secretariat, Tribhuvan University, which carried out the surveys, and the WB task team, which provided technical assistance during the design phase and carried out the analysis. Data for the PAF IE comes from two rounds of survey of 3,000 households from 200 villages. The baseline was carried out in late 2007 and the follow-up of the same households in early 2010. The survey questionnaire is adapted from the Nepal Living Standards Survey (NLSS) and includes detailed information on consumption and income, socioeconomic and demographic issues, including education, health and nutrition, housing conditions and physical assets, migration and remittances, employment, social environment, community relationship, voice and participation. For comparability with the national household survey-based welfare measures, PAF survey includes a very similar consumption module and follows the same consumption aggregation method. The IE analysis uses panel households (2,774 out of 3,000), half of which are PAF beneficiaries (treatment) and the rest non-beneficiary (control) households. Outcome indicators on PAF beneficiary households and carefully matched non-beneficiary households are compared for the periods before and after the initiation of the PAF programme. This method is known as difference-in-difference combined with propensity score matching. The estimated net programme impact on per capita consumption (in real terms adjusted for price inflation) growth is 15 per cent for PAF IG participant households, 31 per cent for PAF money recipient households

CHAPTER 5OUTCOMES AND RESULTS


and 42 per cent for those beneficiaries who have received money for at least six months. The net impact on the growth in per capita consumption is even higher for Dalits and Janajatis and for the poorer segments of the population, implying the programme’s ability to distribute growth towards targeted groups.

3. Both the GoN and the WB agreed that the findings of the rigorous IE provide important contribution to results-based decision-making and an assurance to all stakeholders that the PAF programme is a very sound investment in poverty alleviation. These findings have been discussed with high-level policy-makers from line ministries, the National Planning Commission (NPC), the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers (OPMCM) and with the Development Partners (DPs). It has been agreed that the independent impact evaluation process would continue on the same sample to observe long-term impact of income-generating programmes as well as community infrastructure initiatives.

Welfare Effects5. IE results show a significant increase in real per

capita consumption of PAF households. Based on a sample of households drawn from six of the 19

PAF districts in Phase II, the results show that the households who received PAF money for at least 6 months saw their real per capita consumption increase by more than 42 per cent. The IE results show an encouraging trend in PAF’s ability to reach its targeted group as well. While the real per capita consumption increase for Dalits and Janajatis was 30 per cent, the increase was about 16 per cent for the three poorest quintiles of households, as measured by the baseline survey of 2007.

5. Impact on other welfare indicators is also positive and significant. The data shows a 10 percentage point decrease in incidence of food insufficiency and 6 percentage point increase in school enrolment rate for children aged 5–15. The programme effect is also seen in access to services (agriculture centres, community forest groups, farmers' groups) and women’s empowerment. For child malnutrition (stunting, underweight) a higher, positive impact is seen for children in the age group of 1–2 years amongst PAF-supported households. There are, as yet, no significant differences evident between treatment and control groups on indicators associated with community/social capital (trust, respect, relationships between different ethnic groups, community disputes, etc.), although the overall trend for both groups is positive.


Targeting6. The impact results are consistent with the PAF’s

objective of targeting the poorest households and support monitoring data results as well. Of the many criteria that PAF uses to classify the poor, one is the level of food sufficiency. Households are separated into four different groups under this category: hard core poor (those with less than 3 months of food security either via own production or other dependable sources of income), medium poor (those with 3 to 6 months of food security), poor (those with 6 to 11 months of food security) and non-poor (those with 12 or more months of food security). The results show that the percentage of households with food insufficiency of 3 months or less dropped from 13.8 per cent in 2007 to about 5.5 per cent in 2010—a reduction of more than 60 per cent—for the PAF beneficiary households (defined as those engaged in PAF-supported income-generating activities). The reduction was only about 6.8 per cent for non-beneficiaries. Similarly, the percentage of households with food insufficiency of 6 months or less decreased from 40 per cent in 2007 to about 33 per cent in 2010—a reduction of about 17.5 per cent—for PAF beneficiary households. There was no reduction for non-beneficiaries during this period, and, in fact, there was an increase in food insufficiency of these households by about 9 per cent.

Access to and Use of Services7. With the second phase of PAF II still ongoing,

poor households with access to improved infrastructure facilities number more than 49,000. The IE results show that the school enrolment rate for children from households engaged in PAF-supported income-generating activities increased by more than 10.5 percentage points. The enrolment rate was even higher for children from Dalit or Janajati households. In contrast, the number was only about 4.4 percentage points for the control households (or those not involved in such activities). While there was no obvious difference between the PAF beneficiaries and the

non-beneficiaries in the use of health services/facilities, the beneficiary households were found to be making more use of agricultural centres, community forest services and farmers' groups. The increased use of such services supports the monitoring data findings that PAF beneficiaries are investing in agriculture-related opportunities and reaching out to service providers to improve and develop these investments.

5.2 Performance Audit Report (2012)

The Office of the Auditor General has conducted a comprehensive Performance Audit in five programme districts (Sindhuli, Rautahat, Dadeldhura, Pyuthan and Siraha) covering 125 COs and 300 CO members in 2012.

The study has shown that the PAF programme has covered mainly poor communities and the programme was selected and implemented in a participatory way. Participatory decision-making process at the community level has increased the feeling of community ownership and transparency of work. Also, the CO members have stated that they have raised their income and savings after the implementation of the PAF programme. The study shows that the community-based revolving fund was used in income generation-related activities and the loan was provided to individual CO members only for their benefit through collective decisions.

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

60.4

17.2

9.1

6.8

g Controlg Treatment

3 months or less 6 months or less

Fig. 27: Reduction in Food Insufficiency


6.1 Financial Planning and ManagementPAF Financial Management System consists of three pillars, namely Financial Planning, Financial Management and Financial Reporting. Financial management is directed by the Applicable Accounting Standards, which is accepted by both the GoN and the World Bank. It also fulfills the requirements of POs. Financial Management System of PAF is governed by its Financial Management Manual.

PAF accounting system is based on cash basis. It maintains all books of accounts relating to receipts and expenditures. PAF maintains its books of account on computerized accounting software, Fin App. III.

For effective implementation of PAF activities and monitoring of documents, regular auditing is done by internal and external auditors. M/S Kuber and Company was assigned as internal auditor for FY2069/70 and FY2070/71. Similarly, external audit is carried out by the Office of the Auditor General.

For effective planning and monitoring of funds, PAF has signed separate MoUs with Rastriya Banijya Bank (RBB) and Nepal Bank Limited (NBL). PAF has opened main accounts and, along with main accounts, separate bank accounts are opened for PAF operating expenses and for programme expenses. Also, RBB and NBL have opened an operating bank account for each CO in the districts concerned.

PAF prepares Implementation Progress Report (IPR) on a trimester basis for review by internal management and reporting to the World Bank. The report comprises different sections, including brief description of project progress. The IPR is the comprehensive report that includes various reporting formats, which cover financial, physical progress, contract expenditure and procurement information. The report 2A discloses the information on sources and uses of funds. Likewise, 2B is for reconciliation statement of designated account and the projection for the forthcoming trimester.

Review of physical progress section provides all information on the achievement against plan with

CHAPTER 6FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

PAF Level

(Centre)

PAF

Main A/C

PAF

Programme A/C

Community

Operating A/C

PAF

Operating A/C

Communitycontribution

CO Level

(District)

Partner Organization (PO) provides technical

assistance to Community Organization (CO)

Fig.: PAF Fund Flow Modality

Figure 4: PAF Funds Flow Modality


regard to major physical indicators set by PAF. Contract expenditure report has two parts: goods and consultants. Furthermore, goods and consultancy are categorized on the basis of prior or post-review threshold. Similarly, procurement section has two parts: goods and consultancy. Furthermore, procurement of consultants has been categorized as individual consultant and firm consultant. Whether procurement is prior or post-review depends upon the threshold for procurement of goods and consultants.

6.2 Budget ExpenditureThe total expenditure in FY060/61 (2003/04), FY2061/62 (2004/05), FY2062/63 (2005/06), FY2063/64 (2006/07), FY2064/65 (2007/08), FY2065/66 (2008/09), FY2066/67 (2009/10), FY2067/68 (2010/11), FY2068/69 (2011/12), FY2069/70 (2012/13) and FY2070/71 were Rs.5.78 million, Rs.247.32 million, Rs.493.50 million, Rs.1,210.30 million, NRs1,875.48 million, 1,647.20 million, 2,481.5 million, 2,601.28 million, 2998.69 million, 2,343.03 million and 2322.02 million respectively.

Total expenditure of PAF till FY2070/71 is Rs.18,225 million.

Out of the total PAF expenditure of Rs.18,225 million till FY2070/71 (2013/14), 93.92 per cent was in Programme

Implementation through COs and POs (COs: 76.62% and POs: 17.29%), 2.19 per cent in Monitoring, Training, Studies and Workshops, 0.45 per cent in capital investment for PAF, 0.01 per cent in identity card distribution cost and 3.43 per cent in PAF operation/recurrent cost.

Out of the total PAF expenditure up to FY2070/71 (2013/14), 90.09 per cent is from International Development Agency (IDA/the World Bank) grant, 1.54 per cent is from the International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD) grant, 4.87 per cent from the Trust Fund and the remaining 3.50 per cent from the GoN sources.

6.3 Financial Progress Status In FY2013/14 (2070/71), total PAF expenditure has remained at Rs.2,322,022,043.45 (75.87% of the allocated budget) as compared to FY2012/13 (2069/70), where total expenditure has remained at Rs.2,343,029,166.11 which was 76.29 per cent of the allocated budget.

Out of the total PAF expenditure of Rs.18,224.90 million till FY2070/71 (2013/14), 93.92 per cent was in Programme Implementation through COs and POs (COs: 76.62% and POs: 17.29%), 2.19 per cent in Monitoring, Training, Studies and Workshops, 0.45 per

Fig. 28: Ratio of Cumulative Expenditure up to FY2070/71

Monitoring, Training/Workshop

& Programme Supervision Cost,

2.19%

Programme Implementation

through CO & PO, 93.92% (CO-76.62%,

PO-17.29%)

Recurrent Cost, 3.43%

ID Cards Related Cost 0.01%

Capital Cost, 0.45%

Fig. 29: Summary of Expenditure of FY2070/71

Monitoring, Training/Workshop

& Programme Supervision Cost,

2.77%

Programme Implementation

through COs & POs, 92.98%

PAF Recurrent Cost, 3.82%

PAF Capital Cost, 0.43%

Table: Expenditure during the Reporting Fiscal Year

Details FY2070/71 Expenditure %

Total community organizations 1,677,254,520.34 72.24

Partner organizations 481,618,586.52 20.74

COs/POs 2,158,873,106.86 92.98

Monitoring, training/workshop and programme supervision cost 64,395,482.93 2.77

Capital cost 9,988,657.85 0.43

Recurrent cost 88,764,795.81 3.82

Total (A+B+C+D+E) 2,322,022,043.45 100.00


cent in capital investment for PAF, 0.01 per cent in identity card distribution cost and 3.43 per cent in PAF operation/recurrent cost.

Out of the PAF total expenditure of Rs.2,322,022,043.45 for the reporting year, 92.97 per cent was for programme implementation through COs and POs, 2.77 per cent was from monitoring, training and workshops, 0.43 per cent in capital investment for PAF and 3.82 per cent in PAF operation/recurrent cost.

In FY2013/14 (070/071), the annual budget was estimated to be Rs.3,060,658,640.00. Out of which, 3.85 per cent was provisioned under recurrent cost and the remaining 96.15 per cent was under the programme and capital cost.

6.4 Disbursement to COsFund disbursement has to be made against contracts (sub-project agreements) with COs in two or more trenches, while controlling mechanism based on agreed upon milestones needs to be maintained.

Based on the community demand, several activities related to income generation and small infrastructure sub-projects are being implemented. In FY2013/14 (2070/71), PAF disbursed NRs1,672 million directly to the community account. The region-wise distribution of disbursement shows that the Hilly Region has the highest share, followed by the Terai and Mountain regions.

6.5 Disbursement to POsDuring the reporting year, altogether 370 POs worked with PAF to facilitate and provide necessary technical support to the COs in the PAF districts, for which PAF disbursed Rs.482 million. On the basis of the expenditure on PO, the Hilly Region has the highest share with 40.15 per cent, followed by the mountain and terai regions with 24.54 per cent and 32.14 per cent respectively. The IWP districts NDM stands with the share of 2.95 per cent and 0.23 per cent respectively of the total expenditure.

Similarly, during FY2069/70, the total fund disbursement to POs has remained at Rs.514 million. Similar to the reporting year, the share of POs from the Hilly Region has the highest with 40.52 per cent. The Terai region has the second highest share of expenditures, with 31.45 per cent, followed by the Mountain Region, with 24.62 per cent. The IWP districts stand with the share of 3.41 of the total disbursement to POs.

6.6 Additional Funding: Current status and future The PAF Project II is initially funded by an IDA Grant of US$100 million and IFAD Grant of US$4 million for four years till January 2012. IDA disbursement to the PAF II project till date is 99.46 per cent (as advance), i.e. equivalent to about US$99.46 million. IFAD disbursement to PAF till date is US$3.81 million. IDA further provided additional financing of US$75 million (out of which US$65 million is from IDA grant and

Table 31: Disbursement Expenditure to COs (in Million)

District CO Registered w/PAF (No.) Agreement Total Amount Released (Rs.)

With CO No. Amount (Rs.)

Hill Total 821 1,106 1,407 716,726,202 758,822,235.54

Mountain Total 321 373 538 366,834,683 386,521,326.37

Terai Total 506 598 745 384,025,963 526,715,543.43

Total 1,648 2,077 2,690 1,467,586,848 1,672,059,105.34

Table 32: Disbursement Expenditure to POs

S.N. Districts Disbursed in

FY2070/71 % Disbursed in FY2069/70 %

A Mountain 118,170,168.07 24.54 126,539,255.77 24.62

B Hill 193,366,393.79 40.15 208,282,493.31 40.52

C Terai 154,803,678.95 32.14 161,628,941.06 31.45

D Innovative 14,185,661.71 2.95 17,521,713.09 3.41

E NDM 1,092,684.00 0.23 - -

Grand Total 481,618,586.52 100.00 513,972,403.23 100


US$10 million grant is from FPCR Trust fund) for PAF II project and the project period has been extended till December 2014. Disbursement of additional financing by IDA to PAF till date is US$63.34 million (as advance). Trust Fund disbursement till date is US$10 million (as advance). Recently, IDA has provided second additional financing of US$80 million and JSDF provided US$2.65 million for PAF II Project and the project period has been extended till December 2017. No advance has

been received from the second additional financing from IDA and JSDF disbursement to PAF till date is US$0.79 million.

IDA grant for PAF Project I of US$40 million (Initial US$15 million and additional US$25 million) has been utilized by January 2009.


7.1 Lessons PAF’s current initiative to build the community’s capacity to manage revolving fund and operate the sub-projects and raise the awareness of the community through functional literacy will be further intensified. Social mobilization will be given high priority for this. Considerable input will be given to establish COs’ linkages with basic health, education and youth training.

Provisions for innovation and special programmes will be renewed and emphasis will be given to replicate and scale up successful innovations. PAF will continue its efforts to explore alternatives to livestock and agriculture-based activities for the landless poor.

As PAF is maturing, technical assistance for activities under high demand needs to be provided regularly and attention should be paid to the quality of service providers. This is an important factor in ensuring that efforts made by communities are sustained and serve to bring them permanently out of poverty. A new system of PO performance evaluation with involvement of COs has been going on for the past two years. This process will be further improved in the days to come.

Efforts will be given to increase collaboration with the private sector, governmental agencies, local governments and donor agencies at all levels to implement the programme and sub-projects in the communities to bring marked impact in considerably less time by complementing and supplementing each other’s effort. MoUs were signed with different organizations to facilitate collaboration. PAF’s efforts will be to materialize them in implementation to benefit the poor while exploring further collaborative efforts in the future.

Increased governmental and civil society ownership in the programme will be achieved by regularizing productive workshops, reviews and coordination meetings with stakeholders at central, regional and district levels. In addition, monitoring and supervision visits by central level and district governmental agencies, DDCs, VDCs, civil societies, political representatives and journalists in the PAF project sites will be organized regularly. Besides, central-

level monitoring from PMO, NPC, Ministry of Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation and other line Ministries will be carried out.

Community institutionalization is taking place with the formation of CO federations, multipurpose or single purpose cooperatives and VDC-wise informal networks of COs as per communities’ felt need. PAF will accord top priority to formalizing (and legalizing) these institutional development processes while ensuring that poor communities gain maximum benefits from these institutions. For sustaining income-generating activities initiated by communities, important initiatives will be taken to establish linkages with financial institutions, market as well availability of insurance safetynet.

Special focus will be put on marginalized castes while implementing interventions in the district. Simultaneously, pocket area interventions will be synchronized in the potential pockets.

PAF is working with its exit strategy focusing on its strategic thrust to enable the community to go on a sustained path to get out of poverty within a stipulated five or six years of time. In this line, PAF will work on the pocket area development approach by building on the potential strengths of the area. At the same time, special support will be provided to poor and marginalized communities to secure their livelihood. Moving ahead, PAF will pay increased attention to research and development, monitoring processes and outcomes, improving financial management and capacity building of COs, POs, local bodies and PAF.

7.2 ChallengesIn view of the wide variety of activities undertaken within the sub-project, the challenges faced in ensuring sustainability of sub-projects include the linkage with market for sustaining income-generating activities as well as the availability of insurance safetynet, particularly for livestock. PAF is also to explore an alternative to livestock-based activities for the landless poor as the huge demands are mainly livestock-related. Another important issue before PAF is to build the community capacity to manage revolving fund and

CHAPTER 7LESSONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS


operate sub-projects and raise the awareness of the community through functional literacy. Also, there is a need to adopt different approaches for poorest districts and districts with greater access and livelihood opportunities and special support to vulnerable poor, backward ethnic groups such as Mushahar, Dom, Chamar, Raute, among others.

7.3 The Future StrategyBased on the lessons learned, PAF is now working on the expansion of its programme to new VDCs and

districts, and important initiatives are being taken for the institutionalization of COs as cooperative or other forms of institution as per their decision and link with financial institutions and markets where the programme is already in implementation. Also, PAF is laying special emphasis on the capacity building of COs, POs and PAF while coordination and collaboration are being accorded high priority. This year onwards PAF is strengthening its grievance handling process with stakeholders’ views on the effective Performance Management System of COs, POs and the PAF Secretariat.


FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


Annex 1: Current Board Members (as of January 2015) Chairperson Rt Hon’ble Prime Minister Sushil Koirala

Vice Chairperson Mr Yuba Raj Pandey

Member Mr Sharada Prasad Trital

Member Mr Rishiraj Lumsali

Member Ms Mahin Limbu

Member Ms Chand Tara Kumari

Member Mr Man Bahadur Nepali

Member Ms Kamala Rai

Member Mr Basanta Bahadur Telar

Member Mr Akhileshwar Lal Das

Member Ms Durga Neupane Bhattarai

Member Dr Kal Bahadur Rokaya

Annex 2: CO Registration, Agreement for Sub-project and Disbursement Status (FY2070/71–2013/14)

District CO Registered w/PAF (No.)

Agreement Total Amount Released (Rs.) With CO No. Amount (Rs.)

Initial 6 Districts

Darchula 9 22 17,144,709 30,904,987.00

Kapilbastu 59 53 60 31,033,746 34,912,732.26

Mugu 14 19 34 22,920,396 19,614,838.80

Pyuthan 13 9 29 30,206,675 30,727,959.00

Ramechhap 21 26 45 33,413,753 37,849,640.20

Siraha 67 70 91 44,741,864 40,283,088.00

Sub Total 174 186 281 179,461,143 194,293,245.26

19 Additional Districts

Achham 22 36 66 37,372,535 54,176,358.79

Baitadi 5 73 88 33,446,339 37,028,092.00

Bajhang 37 35 52 46,742,953 40,966,035.00

Bajura 37 21 25 10,396,620 18,512,145.38

Dadeldhura 55 54 66 29,223,541 23,921,867.00

Dailekh 51 51 73 57,179,789 58,167,744.37

Dolpa 25 32,693,044 31,552,166.31

Doti 72 79 89 43,683,330 37,596,550.00

Humla 31 41,207,921 29,671,327.00

Jajarkot 42 109 129 53,850,519 64,379,051.22

Jumla 14 34,126,316 32,963,812.42

ANNEXES



Agreement Total Amount Released (Rs.) With CO No. Amount (Rs.)

Kalikot 15 27 41 40,668,565 59,558,203.68

Mahottari 21 30 32 19,726,112 14,674,060.45

Rasuwa 1 12 23 20,105,162 15,496,636.00

Rautahat 27 29 17,378,009 119,646,206.92

Rolpa 45 54 67 36,943,570 40,402,685.70

Rukum 47 73 82 39,906,691 46,902,833.14

Sarlahi 67 54 70 50,049,176 54,513,614.90

Sindhuli 81 99 119 59,129,919 55,962,163.59

19 Dist. Tot. 598 834 1,121 703,830,112 836,091,553.87

25 Dist. Total 772 1,020 1,402 883,291,255 1,030,384,799.13

15 B1 District

Bara 56 86 102 39,284,671 43,912,614.09

Bardiya 28 57 86 46,206,330 50,275,945.83

Dhading 64 65 80 33,229,819 32,267,711.80

Dhanusha 78 66 87 46,468,950 56,714,032.91

Khotang 34 42 48 29,507,150 30,845,797.90

Okhaldhunga 55 76 90 42,829,347 41,674,625.45

Panchthar 43 49 63 36,647,185 44,285,989.38

Parsa 51 69 79 34,379,045 40,615,441.87

Salyan 75 92 118 44,188,677 43,734,857.00

Saptari 68 75 90 45,187,589 56,015,511.50

Sindhupalchowk 108 128 149 60,757,528 52,316,751.97

Solukhumb 39 48 48 16,784,476 21,186,842.01

Taplejung 70 74 74 23,286,992 33,777,580.80

Terhathum 64 67 90 33,084,623 31,312,456.00

Udayapur 16 39 47 29,984,653 29,855,982.00

19 Dist. Tot. 849 1,033 1,251 561,827,036 608,792,140.51

40 Dist. Total 1,621 2,053 2,653 1,445,118,291 1,639,176,939.64

Innovative Programme Districts

Arghakhanchi 3,000,004.00

Baglung

Chitawan 11 11 14 4,347,397 4,225,475.00

Dhading

Kanchanpur 5 5,223,073 10,926,819.70

Kavrepalanchowk 591,253.00

Lalitpur

Makwanpur 16 13 18 12,898,087 14,138,614.00

Morang

Nawalparasi

Surkhet

Innovative Tot. 27 24 37 22,468,557 32,882,165.70

Total = 1,648 2,077 2,690 1,467,586,848 1,672,059,105.34 Note: From FY2066/67 funds are transferred directly to Operating Account of the Community


Annex 3: CO Registration, Agreement for Sub-project and Disbursement Status (Cumulative)

District CO Registered w/PAF (No.) Agreement Total Amount Released

(Rs.)


Initial 6 Districts

Darchula 885 878 1319 661,642,852 657,317,631.55

Kapilbastu 1099 1068 1154 670,034,280 644,117,428.28

Mugu 309 278 440 193,997,185 180,922,668.50

Pyuthan 1164 1119 1340 680,730,252 671,704916.81

Ramechhap 1288 1256 1479 638,160,783 625,704,538.69

Siraha 1728 1697 1779 760,021,061 724,712,387.32

Sub Total 6,473 6,296 7,511 3,604,586,413 3,504,479,571.15


Achham 814 767 897 607,204,656 548,644,301.89

Baitadi 957 741 895 447,385,631 425,441,805.62

Bajhang 587 528 688 396,861,645 354,421,967.14

Bajura 509 486 612 367,059,453 361,614,185.64

Dadeldhura 550 546 625 315,462,895 300,915,667.99

Dailekh 526 526 608 381,507,173 364,769,269.18

Dolpa 208 208 249 179,551,560 171,960,190.97

Doti 674 673 745 339,714,456 318,718,940.47

Humla 329 329 492 286,291,664 272,080,670.44

Jajarkot 505 445 510 356,979,482 337,660,853.55

Jumla 485 483 577 498,066,598 475,324,427.81

Kalikot 731 722 847 498,287,456 471,365,104.35

Mahottari 734 721 764 384,362,291 351,890,993.20

Rasuwa 308 302 336 178,058,492 171,931,856.34

Rautahat 1796 1658 1759 1,125,818,564 1,107,160,919.67

Rolpa 336 332 383 171,783,118 165,420,859.11

Rukum 444 395 429 233,216,023 213,852,287.15

Sarlahi 1185 1162 1263 675,648,485 660,977,846.81

Sindhuli 1069 1036 1274 683,131,280 656,870,904.43

19 Dist. Tot. 12,747 12,060 13,953 8,126,390,924 7,731,023,051.76

25 Dist. Total 19,220 18,356 21,464 11,730,977,337 11,235,502,622.91

15 B1 District

Bara 426 410 437 159,598,658 150,053,522.81

Bardiya 439 408 525 180,618,629 168,331,028.03

Dhading 319 316 379 144,900,296 121,052,143.80

Dhanusha 434 419 453 288,861,436 259,839,432.62

Khotang 290 221 237 140,470,749 131,156,786.16

Okhaldhunga 357 338 366 127,867,594 118,793,539.75

Panchthar 316 297 317 113,214,573 103,294,270.58

Parsa 348 343 381 210,003,254 199,096,744.56

Salyan 410 397 477 157,924,590 146,027,731.00

Saptari 381 351 392 224,176,370 186,726,013.50

Sindhupalchowk 464 460 524 229,237,974 207,236,943.40


District CO Registered w/PAF (No.) Agreement Total Amount Released

(Rs.)


Solukhumb 222 214 223 92,084,611 91,979,047.88

Taplejung 459 432 471 265,140,886 250,781,404.40

Terhathum 276 267 345 121,734,945 114,764,365.00

Udayapur 222 165 190 123,791,178 115,884,742.34

15 Dist. Tot. 5,363 5,038 5,717 2,579,625,744 2,365,017,715.83

40 Dist. Total 24,583 23,394 27,181 14,310,603,081 13,600,520,338.74

Innovative Window Programme Districts

Arghakhanchi 1 1 1 4,000,006 4,000,006.00

Baglung 1 1 1 722,165 722,165.00

Chitawan 74 74 109 27,408,071 26,251,827.00

Dhading 81 81 98 40,283,561 48,550,215.00

Kanchanpur 142 138 204 81,797,131 81,023086.70

Kavrepalanchowk 5 2 3 5,900,438 5,900,438.00

Lalitpur 2 2 2 6,784,220 6,934,220.00

Makwanpur 163 145 165 70,955,470 64,601,494.02

Morang 85 84 84 40,886,557 39,269,154.47

Nawalparasi 1 1 1 1,551,248 1,551,248.00

Surkhet 1 1 1 3,015,982 2,020,708.00

Innovative Tot. 556 530 669 283,304,848 280,824,562.19

Total = 25,139 23,924 27,850 14,593,907,929 13,881,344,900.93 Note: (1) Additionally, agreements were signed with 37 NDM sub-projects through POs that amounts NRs49,189,847 (NRs14,758,416.00 NDM2005, Rs.34,431,431 NDM2008). Out of this 47,662,976.95 is disbursed till date.


Annex 4: POs, COs and Coverage (FY2069/70 – 2012/13)

District No. of Working

POs

Total VDCs + Municipality

in District

PO Committed No. of VDCs

CO Working

VDCs

Sub Proj. No. Beneficiary HHs

IG Infra.

CO Member

HHs

Total Beneficiary

HHs

Initial 6 Districts Darchula 9 41 41 41 10 12 322

Kapilbastu 15 78 78 78 28 14 787 685

Mugu 6 24 24 24 3 60

Pyuthan 10 49 49 49 10 7 265 323

Ramechhap 9 55 55 55 35 26 1,171

Siraha 17 108 108 102 118 8 2,703 2,610

6 Dist. Tot 66 355 355 349 204 67 3,755 5,171


Achham 16 75 68 66 74 966 2,404

Baitadi 14 63 63 63 51 11 741 1,653

Bajhang 10 47 47 47 28 19 903 1,103

Bajura 4 27 27 27 17 19 431 680

Dadeldhura 8 21 21 21 50 1,281 882

Dailekh 5 56 33 31 24 14 655 1,040

Dolpa 3 23 23 23 7 199

Doti 5 51 51 36 77 19 2,727 1,835

Humla 5 27 27 27 5 19 427

Jajarkot 7 30 26 26 6 7 255 331

Jumla 7 30 30 30 15 377

Kalikot 6 30 30 30 38 20 1,128

Mahottari 12 77 46 46 44 9 221 1,258

Rasuwa 6 18 18 16 3 1

Rautahat 9 97 97 77 88 1 1,808 2,194

Rolpa 5 51 22 22 46 16 1,179 1,509

Rukum 10 43 34 33 6 1 89 157

Sarlahi 16 100 88 87 33 16 931 1,026

Sindhuli 10 54 54 50 42 21 973 1,150

19 Dist. Tot 158 920 805 758 632 215 13,160 19,353

25 Dist. Tot 224 1,275 1,160 1,107 836 282 16,915 24,524

15 Districts (B1)

Bara 13 99 46 45 77 10 1,646 1,517

Bardiya 5 32 18 18 78 31 992 1,879

Dhading 8 50 20 21 56 11 1,391 913

Dhanusha 14 102 51 51 58 12 1,489 1,403

Khotang 7 76 38 32 29 6 608 640

Okhaldhunga 7 56 28 28 54 14 307 830

Panchthar 7 41 21 21 83 5 1,118 1,238

Parsa 11 83 48 48 41 20 1,413 1,482

Salyan 6 47 27 27 46 23 1,005 1,137

Saptari 15 115 49 47 42 2 471 1,242

Sindhupalchowk 11 79 34 33 67 13 1,557 1,440

Solukhumbu 3 34 14 14 32 879 513


District No. of Working

POs

Total VDCs + Municipality

in District

PO Committed No. of VDCs

CO Working

VDCs


IG Infra.

CO Member

HHs

Total Beneficiary

HHs

Taplejung 9 50 41 40 1

Terhathum 4 32 16 16 28 19 159 700

Udayapur 10 45 23 23 25 4 781 677

15 Dist. Tot 130 941 474 464 716 171 13,816 15,611

40 District Total 354 2,216 1,634 1,571 1,552 453 30,731 40,135


Baglung - 60 - 1

Chitawan 1 38 8 8 8 145 144

Dhading 1 50 6 65

Kanchanpur 1 20 8 8 2 33 651

Kathmandu 1 58 2

Kavrepalanchowk 1 90 2 2

Lalitpur 2 42 4 2

Makwanpur 2 44 18 18 23 6 566 394

Morang 3 65 5 3

Nawalparasi 3 74 5 1

Surkhet - 48 - 1

Innovative Total 15 589 58 44 33 39 711 1,254

Sub Total 369 2,805 1,692 1,615 1,585 492 31,442 41,389


Annex 5: POs, COs and Coverage (cumulative to date)

DistrictNo. of

Working POs

Total VDC + Municipality

in District

PO Committed

No. of VDCs

CO Working

VDCs


IG InfraCO

Member HHs

Total Beneficiary

HHsInitial 6 Districts

Darchula 9 41 41 41 863 442 17,886 29,488

Kapilbastu 15 78 78 78 981 484 27,768 37,968

Mugu 6 24 24 24 292 130 7,546 12,782

Pyuthan 10 49 49 49 1,036 284 31,718 35,306

Ramechhap 9 55 55 55 1,212 256 29,575 33,075

Siraha 17 108 108 102 1,610 296 38,462 39,549

6 Dist. Tot 66 355 355 349 5,994 1,892 152,955 188,168


Achham 16 75 68 66 757 74 24,034 26,313

Baitadi 14 63 63 63 660 147 21,106 24,437

Bajhang 10 47 47 47 415 221 12,745 22,495

Bajura 4 27 27 27 469 118 13,711 17,392

Dadeldhura 8 21 21 21 489 70 14,085 14,028

Dailekh 5 56 33 31 475 60 16,626 17,794

Dolpa 3 23 23 23 208 16 6,178 6,537

Doti 5 51 51 36 594 62 19,523 18,568

Humla 5 27 27 27 347 114 7,860 9,789

Jajarkot 7 30 26 26 327 54 11,997 17,493

Jumla 7 30 30 30 492 134 17,249 18,412

Kalikot 6 30 30 30 711 95 19,548 21,419

Mahottari 12 77 46 46 706 26 17,773 17,775

Rasuwa 6 18 18 16 293 21 8,685 9,420

Rautahat 9 97 97 77 1,627 266 44,520 52,608

Rolpa 5 51 22 22 277 39 7,731 7,100

Rukum 10 43 34 33 302 45 9,780 10,004

Sarlahi 16 100 88 87 1,108 85 31,833 32,912

Sindhuli 10 54 54 50 939 216 28,576 31,927

19 Dist. Tot 158 920 805 758 11,196 1,863 333,560 376,423

25 Dist. Tot 224 1,275 1,160 1,107 17,190 3,755 486,515 564,591

15 Districts (B1)

Bara 13 99 46 45 324 11 9,099 6,260

Bardiya 5 32 18 18 365 74 8,685 6,761

Dhading 8 50 20 21 246 53 6,278 4,093

Dhanusha 14 102 51 51 354 12 9,528 8,537

Khotang 7 76 38 32 157 32 4,996 4,355

Okhaldhunga 7 56 28 28 262 14 6,362 3,449

Panchthar 7 41 21 21 248 6 6,551 3,409

Parsa 11 83 48 48 238 64 8,131 7,664

Salyan 6 47 27 27 293 66 8,271 5,524

Saptari 15 115 49 47 274 28 7,891 7,851

Sindhupalchowk 11 79 34 33 332 43 8,769 6,199

Solukhumbu 3 34 14 14 164 11 4,332 2,853


DistrictNo. of

Working POs

Total VDC + Municipality

in District

PO Committed

No. of VDCs

CO Working

VDCs


IG InfraCO

Member HHs

Total Beneficiary

HHsTaplejung 9 50 41 40 359 38 7,440 6,329

Terhathum 4 32 16 16 194 61 5,276 3,337

Udayapur 10 45 23 23 108 35 3,468 3,120

15 Dist. Tot 130 941 474 464 3,918 548 105,077 79,741

40 District Total 354 2,216 1,634 1,571 21,108 4,303 591,592 644,332


Baglung - 60 - 1 1 13 142

Chitawan 1 38 8 8 68 33 1,582 2,340

Dhading 1 50 6 81 17 2,394 2,987

Kanchanpur 1 20 8 8 140 59 3,255 4,364

Kathmandu 1 58 2

Kavrepalanchowk 1 90 2 2 1 3 49 163

Lalitpur 2 42 4 2 2 416 516

Makwanpur 2 44 18 18 102 45 3,972 3,735

Morang 3 65 5 3 84 45 3,316 3,212

Nawalparasi 3 74 5 1 1 11 705

Surkhet - 48 - 1 1 9 655

Innovative Total 15 589 58 44 476 207 15,017 18,819

Sub Total 369 2,805 1,692 1,615 21,584 4,510 606,609 663,151Note: 22 POs in addition to above were dropped due to poor performance and inability to work.

Additional programme through NDM 2005 and 2008Innovative Window Programme Districts

NDM-2005 12 25 25 10 2 8,999

NDM-2008 25 52 52 17 8 5,228

NDM Total 37 0 77 77 27 10 0 14,227

Total = 406 2,805 1,769 1,692 21,611 4,526 606,609 677,378


Ann

ex 6

: PA

F in

Ter

ai B

orde

r VD

Cs

Dis

tric

t

Tera

i Bor

der V

DC

CO R

egis

t ra

tion

Nos

CO A

gree

m

ent N

osCO

Mem

ber H

HTo

tal P

AF

Agr

eem

ent

Am

ount

(Rs.

)IG

No.

IG A

mou

ntIN

FRA

. No.

INFR

A.

Am

ount

Tota

l VD

CPA

F Co

vera

ge

VD

C

Bara

1615

132

120

3,30

646

,277

,443

112

41,1

20,0

418

5,15

7,40

2

Bard

iya

96

143

125

2,82

639

,223

,537

113

30,9

57,1

3212

8,26

6,40

5

Chi

taw

an4

16

817

52,

498,

897

61,

746,

497

275

2,40

0

Dha

nush

a13

431

3482

423

,794

,210

3121

,152

,495

32,

641,

715

Kanc

hanp

ur8

14

485

1,22

6,30

04

1,22

6,30

0-

Kapi

lbas

tu18

1821

722

75,

571

148,

843,

711

190

83,6

88,0

4810

265

,155

,664

Mah

otta

ri7

593

871,

803

38,4

68,0

8885

35,2

80,8

382

3,18

7,25

0

Pars

a20

1167

681,

885

41,9

89,2

9353

25,6

05,7

0015

16,3

83,5

93

Raut

ahat

66

166

175

4,75

710

7,01

8,66

716

610

0,53

7,33

210

6,48

1,33

5

Sapt

ari

167

3637

937

24,4

13,9

0732

18,3

29,6

555

6,08

4,25

2

Sarla

hi15

1512

413

23,

155

82,8

66,0

1111

661

,079

,997

1621

,786

,014

Sira

ha14

1414

915

03,

360

63,9

14,5

1814

657

,675

,077

56,

239,

441

Tota

l14

610

31,

168

1,16

728

,684

620,

534,

582

1,05

447

8,39

9,11

218

014

2,13

5,47

0

100%

71%

100%

77%

23%


Ann

ex 7

: PA

F in

Kar

nali

Regi

on

Dis

tric

tN

o. o

f PO

Karn

ali V

DC

CO R

egis

trat

ion

Nos

CO A

gree

men

t N

os

Karn

ali H

ouse

hold

s (H

H)

Agr

eem

ent A

mou

nt (R

s.)

Tota

l V

DC

PAF

Cove

rage

V

DC

Tota

l HH

Poor

HH

CO M

embe

r Be

nefic

iary

HH

Dol

pa3

2323

208

208

5,81

62,

309

6,17

8 1

47,8

26,0

09

Hum

la5

2727

329

329

6,95

12,

885

7,86

0 2

45,0

83,7

43

Jum

la7

3030

485

483

15,8

565,

454

17,2

49 4

63,9

40,2

81

Kalik

ot6

3030

716

695

18,4

9010

,503

19,5

48 4

57,6

18,8

91

Mug

u6

2424

295

259

8,25

94,

212

7,54

6 1

71,0

76,7

89

Tota

l27

134

134

2,03

3 1,

974

55,3

72

25,3

63

58,3

81

1,4

85,5

45,7

14

100%

100%

100%

10

5%

Dis

tric

tTo

tal P

AF

Agr

eem

ent A

mou

nt (R

s.)

IG N

o.IG

Agr

eem

ent A

mou

nt (R

s.)

Infr

a. N

o.In

fras

truc

ture

Agr

eem

ent A

mou

nt (R

s.)

Dol

pa 1

47,8

26,0

09

208

114

,401

,794

16

33,

424,

215

Hum

la 2

45,0

83,7

43

347

145

,808

,484

11

4 9

9,27

5,25

9

Jum

la 4

63,9

40,2

81

492

353

,365

,003

13

4 1

10,5

75,2

78

Kalik

ot 4

57,6

18,8

91

711

361

,124

,653

95

96,

494,

238

Mug

u 1

71,0

76,7

89

292

86,

373,

822

130

84,

702,

967

Tota

l 1

,485

,545

,714

2,

050

1,0

61,0

73,7

56

489

424

,471

,958

10

0%

71%

29

%


Annex 8: Community Institutional Development

List of CO Federations in Districts

S.N. District No. of COFederation Specific Objectives/Activities

Accham 18Five federations were formed for Pasu Bima Programme, 2 for ICT (Information and communication technologies) at Bayalpata, 2 for construction of micro hydro sub-projects, 5 for school buildings and 4 for solar school systems at various VDCs.

1 Bajhang 1Seven COs from Hemantawada and Luyata VDC were federated to run a Seti Saipal V-SAT centre at Chainpur to promote capacity building, entrepreneurs’ skill and knowledge at local level.

2 Bajura 13

13 federations were formed for the following activities:

9 federations for School building construction

2 federations for water supply project

2 federations for Micro Hydro project

Dadeldhura 16

16 federations were formed for the following activities:

9 federations for School building construction in 7 VDCs i.e. Jogbudha, Shirsha, Shirsha, Bhadrapur, Alital, Bhageshwor, Koteli and Manileka.

5 Federations for Drinking Water Supply Scheme in 5 VDCs i.e. Ghankhet, Bhadrapur, Mastamandu and Nvadurga.

2 Federations for suspended bridge projects in 2 VDCs i.e. Ajaimeru and Navadurga.

2 Darchula 14 11 CO federations were formed to implement micro hydro sub-project and three CO federations to implement electric line extension schemes at various VDCs.

3 Doti 10

n federations were formed made for the following activities:

n 4 federations for school building construction in four VDCs, named Pokhari, Ganjari, Gairagaun, Basudevi

n 3 federations for drinking water supply scheme in three VDCs, namely Bhumirajmandau, Daud and Toleni

n 2 federations for micro hydro projects in two VDCs, namely Daud and Toleni

n 1 federation for constructing a health post building in Ranagaun VDC

n 29 COs were formed for networking in 29 VDCs for practising higher-level organization

n Established a cooperative in Toleni VDC for running and maintaining a micro- hydro projects involving three COs

4 Kalikot 2 Two CO federations were formed to implement a micro hydro sub-project at Phoi mahadev VDC and a pico hydro sub-project at Chilkhaya VDC for rural electrification.

5 Kapilvastu 1

357 buffalo raising farmers of 5 VDCs namely Ganeshpur, Biddhyanagar, Bhagamanpur, Sirshihawa and Ramnagar were federated and formed Shivam Dugdha Utpadak CO for collecting milk and operating chilling centre and cattle insurance scheme for members.

6 Mugu 3 Two federated COs were formed for constructing and operating micro hydro scheme for rural electrification and one for micro irrigation.

7 Pyuthan 44

41 CO federations has been formed for implementation of different infrastructure sub-projects like link road, drinking water, irrigation, micro hydro, school building in various VDCs.

Two CO federations were formed to operate community livestock Insurance programme in Tusara and Bangesal VDC.

One CO federation has been formed for the establishment of Vegetable Collection Centre at Lung VDC.


S.N. District No. of COFederation Specific Objectives/Activities

8 Rautahat 9 9 CO federations were formed in 9 VDCs for livestock management and insurance policy

9 Sindhuli 12 To implement infrastructure schemes like rural road, irrigation, drinking water, mechanized bridge etc.

10 Siraha 9

One federated CO for operating a chilling centre at Bishnupurkalti VDC and another one to run breeding centre at Dhodhana and Bhadaiya VDC

Five CO federations were formed to construct culverts in various VDCs

Two CO federations were formed in Mukshar VDC to construct to construct Agriculture roads

11 Rukum 5 4 Water Users group and 1 school users group

12 Dailekh 9One federation for Drinking Water Supply Project and 8 federations for School Building Project

13 Ramechhap 9 For Micro-Hydro, Irrigation and Community Building projects

List of Cooperatives formed through COs' Initiatives in Districts

S.N. District No of Cooperatives Specific Objectives/Activities

1 Accham 35 To manage all COs within the VDC.

2 Darchula 44

Six cooperatives were established in 6 VDCs to provide savings and credit services to CO members

Three cooperatives established to provide electricity extension and distribution service by leasing agreement with NEA.

3 Kapilvastu 19

A multipurpose cooperative has been established to run agro vet service and milk collection and marketing centre

Total 19 Cooperatives has been established till date

4 Mugu 1

Rara Bahuudesiya cooperative has been established with the joint efforts of 11 COs of three VDCs namely Pina, Karkiwada and Shreenagar to provide agro-vet services to its members, to establish hatchery and make available chicks in district for its members To run dairy at district headquarter collecting milk from its members.

5 Pyuthan 2Two cooperatives were established at Arkha and Rajbara VDC to manage revolving fund and savings and credit fund, provide micro finance services to its members and for institutional development and sustainability of CO efforts.

6 Rautahat 2

A cooperative has been formed in Bishanpurwar Manpur VDC to establish and operate milk chilling centre for marketing milk products produced by the members.

A cooperative has been established at Santapur Dostiya VDC to provide savings and credit service for agricultural and livestock management

7 Siraha 1 Three COs in Muskar VDC are in process to register cooperative to run savings and credit and provide technical services to its member

8 Chitwan 1

Eight different COs in Khaireni VDC have teamed up to form a multipurpose cooperative. 90 per cent of the cooperatives members are women. They are carrying cooperative farming in lease-land, marketing of vegetable products and savings and credits, among others.

9 Makwanpur 1 One Cooperative (Basamadi Agriculture Chepang Cooperative Org.) has been formed with collaborative efforts of 3 COs at Basamadi VDC.


Annex 9: Status of Ongoing IWP Sub-projects

S.No. Name of PO Sub-project Theme

1 Multi -dimensional Agriculture for Dev. MADE Nepal, Chitwan Vegetable Farming on Lease Land for Landless

2 Nepal National Social Welfare Association (NNSWA), Kanchanpur

Creating and enabling environment to the Dalit Community--”Mukta Kamayia”

3 Manohari Development Institute Nepal (MDI-Nepal), Makawanpur

Area Development in 11 VDCs: Integrating livelihood improvement of tribal communities (Chepang and Tamang) through agro forestry, plastic water harvesting construction and link road construction

4 Women, Children And Environment Dev. Centre, Makawanpur

Bankariya and Praja/Chepang improvement by livestock, agriculture, education and other income-generating programme support by locally available resources

5 Multi Purpose Development Management Services, Nep, Morang

IG activities for poverty reduction--Livestock development, vegetable farming, etc.

6 Women Professional Agriculture Group, Morang IG Programme for poverty reduction--Making women starting business on agriculture trough Organic Farming


Ann

ex 1

0: D

etai

ls o

n Ca

paci

ty D

evel

opm

ent o

f CO

s SN

Act

ivit

ies

No.

of e

vent

sM

ale

Fem

ale

Dal

it

Jana

jati

Oth

erTo

tal

Dis

tric

t

1 C

O g

radu

atio

n or

ient

atio

n1

335

43

3138

Dol

pa

2A

ccou

nt M

gmt

Trai

ning

212

1852

3639

1154

2407

1691

5372

Ach

ham

, Bai

tadi

, Dad

eldh

ura,

Dol

pa, K

alik

ot,

Khot

ang,

Mah

otta

ry, O

khal

dhun

ga, P

arsa

, Sa

rlahi

, Ter

hath

um, U

daya

pur,

Dot

i,Kho

tang

, D

hanu

sa, R

ukum

3A

gric

ultu

re F

arm

ing

214

222

2410

36So

lukh

umbu

4A

nim

al h

usba

ndry

10

548

418

2633

813

8655

222

76Pa

rsa,

Okh

aldh

unga

, Bar

a, S

oluk

hum

bu,

Uda

ypur

, Kap

ilbas

tu,B

ardi

ya

5A

pple

Far

min

g Tr

aini

ng

115

70

319

22Ro

lpa

6Ba

sic

Coop

erat

ive

15

40

81

9So

lukh

umbu

7Ba

sic

furn

iture

2

700

070

070

Solu

khum

bu

8Be

e Tr

aini

ng

114

62

018

20Ba

itadi

9Bi

opes

ticid

e pr

epar

atio

n tr

aini

ng

18

170

025

25Ba

jang

10Bo

ring

Ope

rato

r4

619

85

1225

Pars

a

11Bu

ildin

g El

ectr

icia

n2

4030

062

870

Solu

khum

bu

12Ca

paci

ty b

uild

ing

Trai

ning

14

8513

314

1119

321

8D

arch

ula

13Ca

rpen

try

120

07

013

20Ba

jang

14Ca

sh c

rop

prod

uctio

n1

60

06

06

Khot

ang

15C

limat

e ch

ange

and

ad

aptio

n pl

anni

ng

12

120

68

14Te

rhth

um

16Co

gra

duat

ion

asse

ssm

ent

232

2410

1234

56Sa

ptar

i, Ter

thum

17CO

Man

agem

ent

30

140

122

14U

daya

pur

18Co

mm

unity

Liv

esto

ck1

202

20

2022

Baita

di

19Co

oper

ativ

e M

anag

emen

t 81

1208

1872

674

1639

786

3099

Bara

, Dad

eldh

ura,

Hum

la, S

indh

uli,

Solu

khum

bu,

Ruku

m, S

iraha

, Tap

leju

ng

20D

DC

Coo

rdin

atio

n M

eetin

g 2

300

04

2630

Sarla

hi

21D

haka

Wea

ving

2

014

212

014

Solu

khum

bu


SNA

ctiv

itie

sN

o. o

f eve

nts

Mal

eFe

mal

eD

alit

Ja

naja

tiO

ther

Tota

lD

istr

ict

22D

omes

tic V

iole

nce

20

3725

57

37Ba

ra

23D

rivin

g 1

30

20

13

Dai

lekh

24D

WS

and

Sani

tatio

n2

2010

218

1030

Solu

khum

bu

25Eff

ectiv

e Co

mm

unic

atio

n &

Pres

enta

tion

119

20

417

21Py

utha

n

26EN

A T

rain

ing

684

2220

2462

106

Sarla

hi

27Fa

bric

pai

ntin

g2

044

172

Pars

a

28Fa

mily

1

112

013

Pars

a

29Fi

ne a

rt a

nd P

aint

ing

220

60

260

26So

lukh

umbu

30Fr

uit F

arm

ing

111

240

350

35U

daya

pur

31Fu

rnitu

re m

akin

g 1

130

50

813

Dai

lekh

32G

inge

r Far

min

g 1

1813

029

231

Uda

yapu

r

33G

oat R

aisi

ng T

rain

ing

1313

816

331

027

630

7Ba

jan,

Dad

eldh

ura

34G

othe

mal

sud

har

116

140

1812

30U

daya

pur

35G

reen

Hou

se

Man

agem

ent

18

150

023

23Ba

jang

36G

roup

Man

agem

ent

1337

328

6820

196

365

Bard

iya,

Dai

lekh

37H

ealth

and

San

itatio

n Tr

aini

ng

249

9932

1010

614

8Ba

itadi

, Kho

tang

38H

ouse

wiri

ng tr

aini

ng

11

00

01

1Ba

jang

40In

frast

ruct

ure

mai

nten

ance

trai

ning

1094

239

7017

984

333

Pars

a, K

hota

ng, B

ajan

g

41In

stitu

tiona

l D

evel

opm

ent

2926

627

172

284

181

537

Pars

a, K

hota

ng

42In

tegr

ated

cap

acity

bu

ildin

g 10

8060

422

294

349

665

Dha

nusa

43Le

ader

ship

Tra

inin

g 77

401

1096

409

268

820

1497

Dol

pa, M

ahot

tari,

Rol

pa, R

ukum

, Sar

lahi

, Ka

pilb

astu

, Kho

tang

, Ach

ham

, Dot

i

44Li

vest

ock

Farm

ing

5011

312

7482

615

540

112

04D

aile

kh, D

hanu

sa, U

dyap

ur, B

ardi

ya

45Li

vest

ock

Insu

ranc

e 8

6019

319

172

5925

0D

olpa

, Uda

ypur

,

46Li

vest

ock

& A

gric

ultu

re58

537

859

198

833

365

1396

Khot

ang,

Ter

athu

m

47LR

P6

6654

2042

5812

0Ba

rdiy

a, P

arsa

, Dai

lekh


SNA

ctiv

itie

sN

o. o

f eve

nts

Mal

eFe

mal

eD

alit

Ja

naja

tiO

ther

Tota

lD

istr

ict

48M

asso

n3

6812

738

3580

Baja

ng, S

oluk

hum

bu

49M

icro

ent

erpr

ise

deve

lopm

ent

526

111

2927

7193

Pars

a, K

apilb

astu

50M

obile

repa

iring

2

624

106

1430

Dai

lekh

51M

onito

ring

& Ev

alua

tion

orie

ntat

ion

22

120

68

14Te

rhth

um

52M

uda

mak

ing

Trai

ning

1

413

310

013

Uda

yapu

r

53N

etw

ork

Man

agem

ent

42

9630

3137

98Ka

pilb

astu

54N

utrit

ion

and

Hea

lth88

170

758

113

7873

792

8Ba

ra, R

ukum

55O

rgan

ic fe

rtili

zer

314

293

401

44Kh

otan

g

56O

rient

atio

n fo

r Loc

al

reso

urce

per

son

and

soci

al M

obili

zatio

n 1

527

24

2632

Dar

chul

a

57O

rient

atio

n VD

C L

evel

1897

657

135

2016

2Ra

suw

a

58Pa

supa

lan

Trai

ning

6

7399

4712

110

178

Uda

ypur

, Bar

diya

59Po

cket

are

a de

velo

pmen

t 60

625

602

164

742

261

1167

Sira

ha, K

apilb

astu

, Ach

ham

, Sin

dhul

i

60Po

ultr

y 3

124

415

6685

Pars

a

61Pr

opos

al w

ritin

g10

118

126

5013

658

244

Khot

ang

62Pr

e Co

nstr

uctio

n Tr

aini

ng

344

306

680

74U

daya

pur

63Pr

ee C

untr

utio

n on

Pe

ltric

set

sub

pro

ject

126

2113

350

48U

daya

pur

64Pu

blic

Aud

it Tr

aini

ng

14

94

09

13Ba

itadi

65Re

fresh

men

t Tra

inin

g on

CO

gra

duat

ion

15

272

426

32D

arch

ula

66Re

view

Mee

ting

330

00

426

30Ka

likot

, Sar

lahi

67RF

man

agem

ent

trai

ning

447

3358

6106

1045

5542

2167

9444

Bara

, Ras

uwa,

Sar

lahi

, Sin

dhup

alch

owk,

Udy

apur

, Kh

otan

g, T

aple

jung

, Ach

ham

, Kap

ilbas

tu,

Bard

iya,

Dad

eldh

ura,

Dol

pa, M

ahot

tari,

O

khal

dhun

ga

68Sa

ving

cre

dit

Mob

iliza

tion

1310

162

823

112

135

871

0Kh

otan

g, D

hanu

sa


SNA

ctiv

itie

sN

o. o

f eve

nts

Mal

eFe

mal

eD

alit

Ja

naja

tiO

ther

Tota

lD

istr

ict

69Se

win

g Cu

ttin

g 12

1465

2129

724

Uda

ypur

, Kap

ilbas

tu, K

hota

ng, P

arsa

70Si

take

Mus

hroo

m

Farm

ing

17

30

100

10U

daya

pur

71SI

YB60

518

1069

139

953

494

1586

Bara

, Par

sa, R

olpa

, Ruk

um, T

erht

hum

, Kho

tang

72Sm

okel

ess

impr

oved

ro

cket

sto

ve

cons

truc

tion

trai

ning

1

21

00

33

Baja

ng

73So

cial

Mob

iliza

tion

LRP

1012

8132

2734

93Ba

ra

74SR

I tra

inin

g1

97

08

816

Khot

ang

75Ta

ilorin

g3

279

4113

2781

Baja

ng, D

aile

kh

76Ve

geta

ble

Farm

ing

6810

752

517

677

379

632

Kapi

lbas

tu, B

ara,

Par

sa, K

hota

ng, U

dayp

ur

77Ve

geta

ble

Pock

et A

rea

Dev

elop

men

t pro

cess

or

ient

atio

n 1

513

00

1818

Baja

ng

78W

inte

r sea

son

hot b

ed

nurs

ery

prep

arat

ion

trai

ning

1

511

00

1616

Baja

ng


Ann

ex 1

1: C

apac

ity

Dev

elop

men

t Sta

tus

of P

osS.

N.

PO L

evel

Cap

acit

y Bu

ildin

g A

ctiv

itie

sN

o. o

f Ev

ents

No.

of P

Os

Part

icip

atin

gG

ende

r and

Eth

nici

ty-w

ise

No.

of P

arti

cipa

nts

Rem

arks

Mal

eFe

mal

eD

alit

Jana

jati

Mus

limO

ther

sTo

tal

Inst

itutio

nal D

evel

opm

ent a

nd

Inst

itutio

nal M

odel

Dev

elop

men

t Re

late

d To

Ts, T

rain

ing,

Ref

resh

er

Trai

ning

and

Orie

ntat

ion

5122

886

334

815

739

31

660

1211

1.1.

ToT

and

Orie

ntat

ion

on S

ocia

l M

obili

zatio

n an

d Le

ader

ship

D

evel

opm

ent

1140

156

8830

800

134

244

Sapt

ari,

Dha

nush

a Ta

plej

ung,

Si

ndhu

palc

how

k, B

ardi

ya, S

alya

n,

Jum

la,D

arch

ula,

Dai

lekh

, Jaj

arko

t

1.2.

ToT

on A

ccou

nt a

nd R

evol

ving

Fun

d M

anag

emen

t15

726

012

759

141

018

738

7

Solo

khum

bu, T

aple

jung

, Te

rtha

thum

, Sin

dhup

alch

owk,

Sa

ptar

i, D

hanu

sha,

Kap

ilbas

tu,

Dar

chul

a, M

ugu,

Bai

tadi

, Dot

i, A

ccha

m

1.3.

ToT

on R

evol

ving

Fun

d M

anag

emen

t2

718

11

40

1419

Dar

chul

a, M

ugu

1.4.

Trai

ning

in A

ccou

nt m

anag

emen

t an

d So

cial

Mob

iliza

tion

27

1417

1014

07

31Ba

rdiy

a, D

adel

dhur

a

1.5.

ToT

on C

oope

rativ

e A

ccou

nt

Man

agem

ent

18

273

05

025

30D

arch

ula

1.6.

Refre

sher

Tra

inin

g an

d O

rient

atio

n on

Rev

olvi

ng F

und

Man

agem

ent

421

111

1913

620

5513

0Si

raha

, Mug

u

1.7.

Refre

sher

Tra

inin

g in

Soc

ial

Mob

iliza

tion

and

Revo

lvin

g Fu

nd

Man

agem

ent

29

6116

1310

153

77M

ahot

tari

1.8.

Trai

ning

in S

ocia

l Mob

iliza

tion

and

Pock

et A

rea

Iden

tifica

tion

232

86

10

3340

Dad

eldh

ura

1.9.

Trai

ning

and

Orie

ntat

ion

on

Coop

erat

ive

Form

atio

n an

d M

anag

emen

t10

122

168

6724

790

132

235

Mah

otta

ri, S

arla

hi, K

apilb

astu

, Sa

lyan

, Dar

chul

a, B

aita

di

1.10

.O

rient

atio

n on

Coo

pera

tive

Busi

ness

Pla

n pr

epar

atio

n2

711

30

20

1014

Dar

chul

a,

1.11

.Tr

aini

ng in

Soc

ial A

udit

19

11

10

810

Rolp

a

2.O

rient

atio

n an

d Re

orie

ntat

ion

on P

AF

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pr

oces

s (In

frast

ruct

ure

and

IG) a

nd R

ole

and

Resp

onsi

bilit

ies

of P

AF

Staff

3412

648

927

815

124

823

345

767


S.N

.PO

Lev

el C

apac

ity

Build

ing

Act

ivit

ies

No.

of

Even

tsN

o. o

f PO

s Pa

rtic

ipat

ing

Gen

der a

nd E

thni

city

-wis

e N

o. o

f Par

tici

pant

sRe

mar

ksM

ale

Fem

ale

Dal

itJa

naja

tiM

uslim

Oth

ers

Tota

l2.

1.O

rient

atio

n an

d Re

orie

ntat

ion

on

PAF

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pr

oces

s an

d Ro

les

and

Resp

onsi

bilit

ies

of P

AF

Staff

1863

336

9167

135

2220

342

7Si

raha

, Sin

dhup

alch

owk,

Ka

pilb

astu

, Rol

pa, D

oti

2.2.

Orie

ntat

ion

on P

AF

Infra

stru

ctur

es

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pr

oces

s4

332

159

200

1847

Tera

hthu

m, S

indh

upal

chow

k,

Rolp

a, Ja

jark

ot

2.3

Orie

ntat

ion

o PA

F Re

volv

ing

Fund

Mgm

t. G

uide

lines

and

In

frast

ruct

ures

Im

plem

enta

tion

Gui

delin

es

18

2014

621

07

34Ka

likot

2.4.

Orie

ntat

ion

on P

AF

Spec

ial

Prog

ram

me

for M

argi

naliz

ed

Com

mun

ities

10

62

12

05

8D

arch

ula

2.5.

Trai

ning

, Orie

ntat

ion

and

Wor

ksho

p on

Poc

ket A

rea

Dev

elop

men

t7

4766

115

5963

158

181

Sapt

ari,

Okh

aldh

unga

, Rol

pa,

Bard

iya,

Dar

chul

a

2.6.

Orie

ntat

ion

on N

utrit

iona

l G

uide

lines

Pre

para

tion

for C

Os

and

Impr

oved

Agr

icul

ture

Tec

hnol

ogy

35

2941

97

054

70Bh

ajan

g, B

ajur

a, M

ugu

3.En

trep

rene

ursh

ip S

kill

and

Ente

rpris

e D

evel

opm

ent R

elat

ed

ToT

and

Trai

ning

2237

293

115

120

077

408

3.1.

ToT

and

Orie

ntat

ion

on S

IYB

and

Ente

rpris

e D

evel

opm

ent

1821

227

9231

9Te

rhat

hum

, Dha

nush

a, D

arch

ula,

Ja

jark

ot

3.2.

Trai

ning

in V

alue

Cha

in1

816

11

00

1617

Dad

eldh

ura

3.3.

Trai

ning

in R

esou

rce

iden

tifica

tion

and

Valu

e C

hain

38

5022

110

061

72Ka

likot

4.Ex

posu

re V

isit

1254

9069

1965

273

159

Sapt

ari,

Okh

aldh

unga

, Si

ndhu

palc

how

k, B

ardi

ya,

Dad

eldh

ura,

Dar

chul

a, M

ugu

5Pa

rtic

ipat

ory

Proj

ect P

lann

ing,

M

onito

ring

and

Eval

uatio

n an

d Pa

rtic

ipat

ory

Rura

l App

rais

al7

2614

521

2839

010

916

6

5.1.

Trai

ning

and

Orie

ntat

ion

on

Part

icip

ator

y Ru

ral A

ppra

isal

(PRA

) an

d A

dvoc

acy

26

233

36

017

26D

aile

kh, B

ajur

a


S.N

.PO

Lev

el C

apac

ity

Build

ing

Act

ivit

ies

No.

of

Even

tsN

o. o

f PO

s Pa

rtic

ipat

ing

Gen

der a

nd E

thni

city

-wis

e N

o. o

f Par

tici

pant

sRe

mar

ksM

ale

Fem

ale

Dal

itJa

naja

tiM

uslim

Oth

ers

Tota

l5.

2.Tr

aini

ng in

Par

ticip

ator

y Pl

anni

ng,

Mon

itorin

g an

d Ev

alua

tion

520

121

1811

333

091

139

Tera

hthu

m, O

khal

dhun

ga, S

iraha

, Ba

ra, P

yuth

an

5.3.

Trai

ning

in P

lann

ing

and

Proj

ect

Man

agem

ent

10

00

01

1D

adel

dhur

a

5.

Trai

ning

in P

ropo

sal,

Repo

rt, S

ucce

ss

Stor

ies,

Case

Stu

dies

and

New

s W

ritin

g, G

roup

Fac

ilita

tion

Skill

and

O

rgan

izat

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t

912

317

967

3682

012

824

6

5.1.

Trai

ning

in O

rgan

izat

ion

Dev

elop

men

t1

2013

521

07

33Bh

ajan

g

5.2.

Trai

ning

in P

ropo

sal,

Case

Stu

dy a

nd

Repo

rt W

ritin

g5

114

126

3722

390

102

163

Sind

hupa

lcho

wk,

Sar

lahi

5.3.

Trai

ning

in S

ucce

ss S

torie

s an

d N

ews W

ritin

g1

87

12

68

Ruku

m

5.4.

Trai

ning

in G

roup

faci

litat

ion

Skill

D

evel

opm

ent

21

2616

722

013

42Si

raha

, Mug

u

6.Tr

aini

ng in

IPM

Man

agem

ent

29

6116

1310

153

77Bh

ajan

g

7.Tr

aini

ng S

afe

Mig

ratio

n5

611

938

2229

110

515

7Si

ndhu

palc

how

k, P

yuth

an, R

ukum

, D

arch

ula

Refre

sher

Tra

inin

g fo

r LRP

s3

6060

019

111

2960

Sarla

hi

8.O

rient

atio

n on

LRP

s M

edia

(2 D

ays)

14

718

111

067

79Ka

pilb

astu

9.Co

ordi

natio

n an

d Re

view

Mee

ting

with

DD

Cs

and

Line

Age

ncie

s12

4039

815

156

800

413

549

Tera

hthu

m, O

khal

dhun

ga, S

apta

ri,

Bard

iya,

Dot

i, Bh

ajan

g, K

alik

ot

Dad

eldh

ura

10.

Regi

onal

leve

l pro

gram

me

revi

ew

and

tech

nolo

gy tr

ansf

er tr

aini

ng

(Jee

vatu

)2

19

163

10

2125

Bhaj

ang,

Baj

ura


Annex 12: PAF Results Matrix

NEPAL: POVERTY ALLEVIATION FUNDPAF II PROJECT

RESULTS FRAMEWORK

PDO indicators

Indicator

July 15, 2014

RemarksPAF II Cumulative

Number of households benefitting from increased access to community infrastructure

Value: 178,873 HHs Value: 264,224 HHs

Number of households includes CO and non CO members. The number is beneficiaries of completed

infrastructures only.

Percentage of beneficiary households have increased their incomes by at least 15% against base year (2007), by the EOP

Value: 68.3%

The value is based on the social re-assessment data collected during 2013/14.

Percentage of key positions in Project community organization that come from targeted households

Value: 60%

Value: 65% Target groups: Dalit, Janjati, Madhesi, Muslims, and women.

Number of CO members *(households)

Value: 484,782 Value: 675,762

Number of non CO members *(households)

Value: 28,269 Value: 51,733 Non CO members are the beneficiaries of infrastructure subprojects.

Percentage of CO members that are female

Value:78.4% Value: 75.4%

Intermediate Results IndicatorsIndicator July 15, 2014

RemarksPAF II Cumulative

Comp. A: Small Scale Community infrastructure

Number of infrastructure sub-projects that are completed with target community participation, according to agreed design and quality standards

Value: 2,932 Value: 4,625 This indicator is based on final financial disbursement

Percentage infrastructure subprojects operating with functional O&M system

Value: 50%

The value is based on the technical audit report (of the completed INFRA subprojects) 2011/12. The collection of updated data on O&M status is in progress.

Comp. B: Income Generating Activities (IGA)

Percentage of IGA community organization members who belong to targeted groups.

Value: 57% Value: 60% Target groups: Dalit, Janjati, Madhesi, Muslims, and women.

Percentage of CO members (from a sample survey) with IGA investment Economic Rate of Return (ERR) of at least 10%

Value: N/A The project will require third-party assessment to evaluate economic benefits of beneficiaries in a sample basis.

ToR and cost estimate is completed and hiring of an expert is in process.


Percentage increase in the number of CO members accessing funds from the revolving fund more than one time for IGAs.

Value: 47.2% It is required that CO members can only have one loan at a time.

Based on the analysis of RF status of FY 2012/13.

Percentage of CO members with improved levels of food availability

Value: 62.5%

Based on the Social Re-assessment of sample COs during 2011/12. Collection of new data of social re-assessment of sample COs is in progress.

Comp. C: Product Development, Market Linkages and Pilots

Number of higher level institutions formed

1 Cooperative has been registered in district cooperative office in Dhading.

Percentage of higher level institutions with market linkages, access to services (such as financial services) and/or leveraging local bodies’ funds/services

Activity based pocket area development guideline has been finalized to support higher level institutions for production, market linkages etc.

Number of COs in urban/ peri-urban settings with investment plans developed

Guideline for PAF investment in urban/peri-urban area has been finalized.

Comp. D: Capacity Building and Institutional Development

Percentage of DDCs/VDCs participating in monitoring PAF activities.

Value: 100% Total number of visits done: 250

Measured by: Total # of participating VDCs and VDCs in PAF monitoring / Total # of DDCs/VDCs where PAF is active

Based on the PO evaluation 2012/13. The data is of monitoring visits in PAF activities by DDCs during the fiscal year July 16, 2012- June 16, 2013. ( all 40 DDC representatives done monitoring visits in their respective district)

Percentage of VDCs/ COs Network with at least one Local Resource Person.

Value: 58.2% LRPs are CO members with formal training and certification in one discipline.

The data is based on the LRPs with different discipline atleast one per VDC. CO working VDCs= 1,631 and the Number of LRPs= 950.

Percentage of POs that have been evaluated by COs.

Value: 100%

Total number of POs evaluated is 349.

Com. E: PAF Administration and Project Management

Percentage of CO agreements endorsed/ approved by TAC within a month.

Value: 64%

The data is of the period of Jul 16, 2013-May 30, 2014

Percentage of POs that submit PO Progress and monitoring reports and Audit reports according to Project standards of timeliness to Project management

Value: 67%

PO progress report along with financial audit report.

Percentage of complaints received by PAF recorded, addressed satisfactorily and the actions documented through complaint handling mechanism.

Value: 88.2% PAF has installed a toll free number and PAF is in process to develop the operational guideline for complaints handling mechanism along with the installation of complaints registration linked with it MIS.

Based on the number of complaints received PAF secretariat.


Annex 13: Year-wise Target versus Achievements

Fiscal YearPhysical Progress Financial Progress

Target in Nos.

Achievement in Nos.

% of achievement Budget (NRs) Expenditure (NRs) %

FY 2060/61 - - 225,000,000.00 5,781,378.87 2.57

FY 2061/62 - 541 268,000,000.00 247,322,605.53 92.28

FY 2062/63 1,597 1,166 73% 507,925,000.00 493,505,927.29 97.16

FY 2063/64 2,750 3,483 127% 1,254,070,000.00 1,210,296,384.99 96.51

FY 2064/65 3,776 3,117 83% 1,970,723,000.00 1,875,485,349.14 95.17

FY 2065/66 4,048 3,343 83% 2,978,865,000.00 1,647,207,174.93 55.3

FY 2066/67 3,923 3,882 99% 2,723,717,000.00 2,481,049,874.47 91.09

FY 2067/68 2,193 3,146 143% 3,039,166,000.00 2,601,283,022.30 85.59

FY 2068/69 3,880 4,396 113% 3,585,268,350.00 2,998,692,500.25 83.64

FY 2069/70 2,390 2,097 88% 3,071,121,000.00 2,342,256,542.26 76.27

FY 2070/71 3,327 2,690 81% 3,060,658,640.00 2,322,022,043.45 75.87

Total 27,884 27,861 100% 22,684,513,990.00 18,224,902,803.48

Annex 14: Details of Expenditure up to July 16, 2014 (cumulative PAF-I and PAF-II)Details PAF I (40M) Expenditure PAF II (100M)

ExpenditureTotal Expenditure

Community Organization (IG) 1,381,890,497.49 7,860,891,875.19 9,242,782,372.68

Community Organization (INFRA) 391,685,432.51 3,479,743,772.18 3,871,429,204.69

Community Organization (Innovative) 654,004,180.22 196,458,498.70 850,462,678.92

Total Community Organization (I) 2,427,580,110.22 11,537,094,146.07 13,964,674,256.29

Partner Organization (II) 373,442,911.49 2,778,066,812.20 3,151,509,723.69

Sub Total (A=I+II) 2,801,023,021.71 14,315,160,958.27 17,116,183,979.98

Monitoring, Training/Workshop (B) 108,181,431.90 291,531,654.05 399,713,085.95

PAF Capital Cost (C) 34,438,454.82 48,064,759.96 82,503,214.78

PAF Recurrent Cost (D) 120,946,304.52 503,722,402.17 624,668,706.69

ID Card Cost (E) 1,833,816.08 1,833,816.08

Total (A+B+C+D+E) 3,064,589,212.95 15,160,313,590.53 18,224,902,803.48

Annex 15(1): Programme Funding Status of FY2070/71 (2013/14 only)

Details Budget FY70/71 Expenditure in FY70/71 %

Community Organization (IG) 1,191,215,000.00 899,663,844.55 75.52

Community Organization (INFRA) 886,243,000.00 744,708,510.09 84.03

Community Organization (Innovative) 185,006,000.00 32,882,165.70 17.77

Total Sub-project Block Grants (A) 2,262,464,000.00 1,677,254,520.34 74.13

Partner Organization 534,739,000.00 481,618,586.52 90.07

Monitoring, Training/Workshop 120,615,000.00 64,395,482.93 53.39

PAF Capital Cost 25,123,000.00 9,988,657.85 39.76

PAF Recurrent Cost 117,717,640.00 88,764,795.81 75.40

Distribution of Poverty Identity Cards Programme and Building Rehabilitation Cost - -

Sub Total (B) 798,194,640.00 644,767,523.11 80.78

Grand Total (A+B) 3,060,658,640.00 2,322,022,043.45 75.87


Ann

ex 1

5 (2

): D

istr

ict-

wis

e Ta

rget

ver

sus

Ach

ieve

men

t in

FY20

69/7

0 (2

012/

13 o

nly)

Sn.

Dis

tric

tIG

INFR

A

T. N

oP.

No

Targ

et A

mt.

Prog

ress

Am

t.T.

No.

P. N

o.Ta

rget

Am

t.Pr

ogre

ss A

mt.

15 D

istr

ict B

1

1Ba

ra69

7744

,730

,080

25,9

45,3

248

107,

442,

620

7,47

2,70

0

2Ba

rdiy

a54

7834

,348

,840

20,0

29,2

3416

3117

,953

,217

20,1

48,6

52

3D

hadi

ng54

5625

,567

,953

16,6

31,8

6012

1116

,135

,779

7,40

6,67

8

4D

hanu

sha

8758

101,

658,

101

37,9

64,1

7213

1211

,440

,000

11,1

92,0

01

5Kh

otan

g48

2927

,941

,377

12,6

39,0

2112

618

,291

,304

5,85

4,69

9

6O

khal

dhun

ga58

5428

,488

,822

17,7

46,9

7311

1410

,560

,000

17,6

96,6

54

7Pa

ncht

har

6783

27,3

57,6

6225

,430

,151

95

8,64

0,00

03,

837,

455

8Pa

rsa

4941

31,5

93,5

8821

,281

,240

1520

21,6

33,5

8422

,094

,070

9Sa

lyan

5446

30,0

29,1

3511

,847

,380

1523

19,8

57,1

7812

,156

,132

10Sa

ptar

i51

4234

,057

,190

29,7

28,9

3610

217

,888

,213

1,29

4,37

9

11Si

ndhu

palc

how

k68

6737

,291

,410

28,9

83,3

3710

1316

,473

,614

13,3

42,6

59

12So

lukh

umbu

5832

28,3

83,7

8111

,530

,328

811

,346

,891

13Ta

plej

ung

6050

,997

,156

91

57,6

84,6

271,

500,

000

14Te

rhat

hum

3928

17,3

97,6

605,

854,

320

1519

20,2

10,6

1916

,925

,617

15U

daya

pur

4825

24,2

77,4

9313

,523

,039

164

19,8

51,4

195,

132,

594

15 D

istr

ict B

1 To

t86

471

654

4,12

0,24

927

9,13

5,31

517

917

127

5,40

9,06

414

6,05

4,29

0

19 D

istr

ict

1A

chha

m74

7474

,290

,274

76,1

25,9

9814

34,6

76,8

01

2Ba

itadi

5151

25,3

63,6

2823

,959

,050

1311

21,2

98,9

2110

,051

,771

3Ba

jhan

g29

2817

,141

,569

12,9

04,6

6020

1933

,582

,994

23,4

26,7

83

4Ba

jura

1517

12,4

25,5

834,

308,

940

1719

35,0

86,9

3921

,794

,332

5D

adel

dhur

a47

5015

,142

,949

13,7

64,3

707

16,4

34,5

73

6D

aile

kh38

2418

,548

,493

15,4

76,7

4915

1426

,689

,395

17,5

66,9

88

7D

olpa

043

9,62

016

722

,759

,234

10,6

94,1

65

8D

oti

6577

28,1

61,5

2920

,015

,416

1519

17,4

86,5

4515

,703

,683

9H

umla

65

3,24

3,44

91,

645,

840

1119

19,5

69,6

5814

,241

,519

10Ja

jark

ot27

628

,515

,946

3,25

2,00

010

728

,207

,821

7,35

3,38

5

11Ju

mla

67,

723,

046

1615

29,7

18,8

5516

,132

,765

12Ka

likot

4938

60,5

64,2

7722

,735

,564

1920

31,4

05,4

5927

,961

,224


Sn.

Dis

tric

tIG

INFR

A

T. N

oP.

No

Targ

et A

mt.

Prog

ress

Am

t.T.

No.

P. N

o.Ta

rget

Am

t.Pr

ogre

ss A

mt.

13M

ahot

tari

5544

45,2

25,5

8728

,902

,300

149

17,2

75,1

8513

,687

,722

14Ra

suw

a9

35,

579,

880

2,22

1,00

08

19,

018,

471

1,51

5,23

2

15Ra

utah

at30

8889

,625

,570

67,5

42,3

176

119

,283

,171

2,77

1,87

8

16Ro

lpa

4646

20,9

83,3

1921

,694

,950

1416

19,0

81,7

4112

,262

,681

17Ru

kum

406

29,9

34,4

302,

850,

714

101

26,6

25,3

752,

044,

309

18Sa

rlahi

7733

36,4

08,4

8224

,882

,225

1616

26,8

07,7

9435

,278

,859

19Si

ndhu

li65

4232

,670

,833

21,5

60,5

6018

2135

,977

,767

32,7

09,7

21

19 D

istr

ict T

ot72

963

255

1,98

8,46

236

3,84

2,65

325

921

547

0,98

6,70

126

5,19

7,01

8

6 D

istr

ict

1D

arch

ula

610

6,85

3,88

34,

067,

220

512

21,7

89,9

5022

,399

,669

2Ka

pilb

astu

4828

34,4

61,5

7313

,348

,782

1414

37,7

36,3

6015

,709

,555

3M

ugu

33

5,95

3,01

21,

335,

950

917

,969

,236

4Py

utha

n6

103,

831,

523

1,81

4,46

09

720

,271

,894

13,2

64,9

85

5Ra

mec

hhap

1935

14,6

10,0

3115

,300

,654

1526

19,1

94,4

6824

,587

,428

6Si

raha

119

118

65,5

09,2

6852

,129

,080

108

27,7

87,3

279,

882,

699

6 D

istr

ict T

ot20

120

413

1,21

9,28

987

,996

,146

6267

144,

749,

235

85,8

44,3

36

Inno

vati

ve W

indo

w P

rogr

amm

e

Curr

ent I

nnov

ativ

e

1C

hita

wan

78

2,50

7,92

21,

974,

000

41,

926,

968

2Ka

ncha

npur

152

3,86

5,85

073

2,00

011

338,

726,

520

21,3

06,2

77

3Ka

vrep

alan

chow

k0

-0

833,

080

4M

akw

anpu

r21

234,

777,

500

5,27

5,59

88

64,

285,

263

8,23

9,45

0

5M

oran

g0

2,87

2,56

00

-

Curr

ent I

nnov

ativ

e To

t43

3314

,023

,832

7,98

1,59

823

3915

,771

,831

29,5

45,7

27

New

Inno

vati

ve

1In

nova

tive_

20 p

roje

cts

2020

20,0

00,0

00

2C

halle

nge

Fund

1013

,650

,000

New

Inno

vati

ve T

otal

3020

33,6

50,0

00-

00

--

Inno

vati

ve P

rogr

amm

e To

tal

7353

4767

3832

7,98

1,59

823

3915

,771

,831

29,5

45,7

27

Tota

l1,

867

1,60

51,

275,

001,

832

738,

955,

712

523

492

906,

916,

831

526,

641,

371


Annex 16: Poverty Alleviation Fund Project – II Progress StatusHeading Number Amount (Rs.)

Community Organisations Registered with PAF 17,960

(CO) CO Federation Registration 1,096

Agreement 19,336

PAF Investment in CO

Income Generating (IG) 16,279 7,490,685,006

Community Infrastructure (INFRA) 3,227 3,191,784,320

Total 19,506 10,682,469,326

Partner Organisations (PO) 366

Districts Covered Total 59

Regular PAF Districts 40

Phase I (6 Districts) 6

Phase II (19 Districts) 19

Phase III (15 Districts) 15

IWP + NDM 19 additional districts

VDC Covered POs Working 1,687

COs Programme Activity 1,634

Percentage

CO Member Total 446,669

House Holds Poverty Hardcore Poor (Ka) 446,669 285,863 64.00%

(HH) Ranking Medium Poor (Kha) 117,715 26.35%

Poor (Ga) 42,418 9.50%

Marginal Non-Poor (Gh 673 0.15%

Gender Male 446,669 95,957 21.48%

Female 350,712 78.52%

Ethnicity Dalit 446,669 108,482 24.29%

Janajati 131,822 29.51%

Others 206,365 46.20%

Total Beneficiary Total 476,671

HH including Ethnicity Dalit 117,294

Infrastructure Janajati 129,604

Others 229,773


Annex 17: PAF II CO registration, agreement for sub-project and disbursement status (cumulative PAF-II Only)


Agreement Total Amount Released (Rs.)With CO No. Amount (Rs.)

Initial 6 Districts

Darchula 442 601 822 491,658,320 487,619,254.05

Kapilbastu 621 610 676 416,730,593 390,670,066.27

Mugu 162 181 255 128,062,977 117,611,908.00

Pyuthan 915 917 1070 584,242,011 575,569,522.94

Ramechhap 898 941 1067 501,657,841 490,161,717.15

Siraha 1218 1194 1265 558,787,895 525,426,099.68

6 Dist. Total 4,256 4,444 5,155 2,681,139,637 2,587,058,568.09


Achham 573 573 649 512,683,055 454,124,380.89

Baitadi 789 629 704 361,408,487 340,098,084.34

Bajhang 468 420 540 346,152,316 303,712,638.59

Bajura 394 383 472 297,363,215 289,861,958.98

Dadeldhura 416 432 490 267,054,271 252,708,244.00

Dailekh 389 417 471 325,144,096 308,406,192.18

Dolpa 103 111 144 129,813,046 121,403,977.17

Doti 495 515 564 260,522,609 239,527,093.47

Humla 118 180 264 193,161,094 178,409,150.44

Jajarkot 398 345 399 285,386,200 271,499,221.65

Jumla 298 320 379 364,990,207 346,681,698.81

Kalikot 627 642 743 450,706,917 424,732,325.35

Mahottari 461 465 491 286,374,299 263,986,779.80

Rasuwa 142 145 165 112,691,998 106,145,687.04

Rautahat 1538 1424 1501 992,350,522 973,692,877.92

Rolpa 316 316 363 160,247,868 153,885,609.11

Rukum 364 318 349 202,162,219 184,467,079.15

Sarlahi 999 986 1077 610,408,953 596,635,005.61

Sindhuli 775 804 954 543,260,101 518,895,250.90

19 Dist. Total 9,663 9,425 10,719 6,701,881,474 6,328,873,255.40

25 Dist. Total 13,919 13,869 15,874 9,383,021,111 8,915,931,823.49

15 B1 Districts

Bara 426 410 437 159,598,658 150,053,522.81

Bardiya 439 408 525 180,618,629 168,331,028.03

Dhading 319 316 378 144,100,296 121,052,143.80

Dhanusha 434 419 453 288,861,436 259,839,432.62

Khotang 290 221 237 140,470,749 131,156,786.16

Okhaldhunga 357 338 366 127,867,594 118,793,539.75

Panchthar 316 297 317 113,214,573 103,294,270.58

Parsa 348 343 381 210,003,254 199,096,744.56

Salyan 410 397 477 157,924,590 146,027,731.00

Saptari 381 351 392 224,176,370 186,726,013.50

Sindhupalchowk 464 460 524 229,237,974 207,236,943.40

Solukhumbu 222 214 223 92,084,611 91,979,047.88



Agreement Total Amount Released (Rs.)With CO No. Amount (Rs.)

Taplejung 459 432 471 265,140,886 250,781,404.40

Terhathum 276 267 345 121,734,945 114,764,365.00

Udayapur 222 165 190 123,791,178 115,884,742.34

15 B1 Districts Total 5,363 5,038 5,716 2,578,825,744 2,365,017,715.83

40 Dist. Total 19,282 18,907 21,590 11,961,846,855 11,280,949,539.32


Arghakhanchi 1 1 1 4,000,006 4,000,006.00

Chitawan 57 72 88 21,617,637 20,524,393.00

Dhading 51 64 68 29,911,566 37,378,220.00

Kanchanpur 66 80 128 57,223,439 56,525,094.70

Kavrepalanchowk 4 1 2 4,165,401 4,165,401.00

Lalitpur 2 2 2 6,784,220 6,934,220.00

Makwanpur 122 109 123 56,762,593 51,991,487.00

Morang 24 23 23 8,798,802 18,394,532.60

Innovative Total 327 352 435 189,263,664 199,913,354.30

Total 19,609 19,259 22,025 12,151,110,519 11,480,862,893.62

Annex 18: PAF II Expenditure (in Rs.) Details As of FY2069/70 FY2070/71 Total Expenditure

Community Organization (IG) 6,961,228,030.64 899,663,844.55 7,860,891,875.19

Community Organization (INFRA)2,735,035,262.09 744,708,510.09 3,479,743,772.18

Community Organization (Innovative)

163,576,333.00 32,882,165.70 196,458,498.70

Total Community Organization (I)

9,859,839,625.73 1,677,254,520.34 11,537,094,146.07

Partner Organization (II) 2,296,448,225.68 481,618,586.52 2,778,066,812.20

Sub Total (A=I+II) 12,156,287,851.41 2,158,873,106.86 14,315,160,958.27

Monitoring, Training/Workshop (B)

227,136,171.12 64,395,482.93 291,531,654.05

PAF Capital Cost (C) 38,076,102.11 9,988,657.85 48,064,759.96

PAF Recurrent Cost (D) 414,957,606.36 88,764,795.81 503,722,402.17

Distribution of Poverty Identity Cards Programme and Building Rehabilitation Cost (E)

1,833,816.08 - 1,833,816.08

Total (A+B+C+D+E) 12,838,291,547.08 2,322,022,043.45 15,160,313,590.53Note: Including KA-1-6 (Beruju) Expenses Amount


Annex 19: Summary Results of Follow-on Impact Survey 2010

Poverty Alleviation Fund

Monitoring and Impact Evaluation Results

1. PAF’s monitoring data is developed on 5 different databases which support the process of working with partner and COs and monitoring the sub-project activities (figure 1). These databases provide a rich source of information on PAF activities and have been increasingly analysed to improve planning and address weaknesses in the project implementation process and to identify areas of strength that can be scaled up.

2. In addition to the MIS, an independent impact evaluation has also been integrated into the design of the programme. The IE has been a long-term partnership between the PAF Secretariat, Tribhuvan University (TU) (that carried out the surveys) and the WB task team (that provided Technical Assistance-TA during the design phase and carried out the analysis). Data for the PAF Impact Evaluation (IE) come from two rounds of surveys of 3,000 households from 200 villages. The baseline was carried out in late 2007 and the follow-up of the same households in early 2010. The survey questionnaire is adapted from the Nepal Living Standards Survey (NLSS) and includes detailed information on consumption and income, socio-economic and demographic issues, including education, health and nutrition, housing conditions and physical assets, migration and remittances, employment, social environment, community relationship, voice and participation. For comparability with the national household survey based welfare measures, PAF survey includes a very similar consumption module and follows the same consumption aggregation method. The IE analysis uses panel households (2774 out of 3,000), half of which are PAF beneficiaries (treatment) the rest non-beneficiaries (control) households. Outcome indicators on PAF beneficiary households and carefully matched non-beneficiary households are compared for the periods before and after the initiation of the PAF programme. This method is known as difference-in-difference combined with propensity score matching.

Consumption Effects1. The estimated net programme impact on per capita consumption (in real terms adjusted for price inflation)

growth is 13% for PAF income-generating (IG) participant households, 28% for PAF money recipient households and 49% for those beneficiaries who have received the money for at least six months. It is not a surprise that these impact estimates are larger for money recipients but it is interesting to note that this effect remains strong for those who have had the funds for some time and have invested them in IGAs. The magnitudes of these estimates are impressive across all three categories of treatments both in terms of per cent change and absolute change. For example, money recipients for more than 6 months recorded on net a 49 per cent growth and Rupees 6,900 (approximately US$100) absolute change in real per capita consumption in just over two years of time. These results are all statistically significant and robust across different matching algorithms. The higher levels of welfare impact over time may suggest that IGA revenue is contributing to the welfare of these households, a result that would be desirable from a policy and sustainability point of view.

2. The net impact in the growth in per capita consumption is even higher for Dalit and Janajatis, implying the program’s ability to distribute growth towards targeted groups. The net effect for money recipients among this caste/ethnic group was an increase in real per capita consumption of 34 per cent, compared to 28 per cent for the overall sample of the same treatment category.

Food Security Effects: 1. Chronic food insecurity is a particularly important concern in Nepal and substantial amount is spent per year

on public works programmes aimed at alleviating hardship for food insecure households. Sustained food price inflation remains a concern and an estimated 3.7 million people are currently food insecure. The impact of high prices and food insecurity is most severe on economically, geographically and socially marginalized communities. Since Nepal’s poorest households spend more than 75% of their income on food, high prices will continue to affect poverty alleviation efforts. The analysis estimates that the net PAF impact on incidence of food insecurity (as defined as self-reported food sufficiency for six months or less) is 10 percentage points


decline when the treatment group is PAF money recipients, and 14 percentage points decrease among money recipients at least 6 months prior to second-round survey. These effects are stronger for Dalit and Janajati households. However, there is no impact for PAF IG households (the base treatment category), possibly implying that the self-reported food sufficiency indicator (measure of perceived change in household’s ability to increase their food consumption) is not affected by PAF participation alone when the household is yet to receive funds and start an IG activity. Once again, these results are quite robust across different matching alternatives.

School Enrolment Effects1. Due to PAF, school enrolment rate among 6-15 year old children increased by a net 7 percentage points

for PAF IG households, by a net 9 percentage points for PAF money recipient households, and a net 12 percentage points for PAF money recipients for more than six months. These are all notable and statistically significant impacts. While child education is not a direct outcome associated with PAF intervention, one can think of at least two ways by which a treated household would change its behaviour in relation to this outcome. First, PAF households are part of the larger PAF community organization (CO) are and likely to benefit from social-networking and mobilization. Second, actual and perceived positive change in income (PAF funds) will likely reduce potential constraints to sending a child to school.

Child Underweight Effects1. For child malnutrition, measured in terms of underweight, the impacts of PAF are as not strong as they are

for other outcome indicators. Nevertheless, incidence of underweight among children under 5 years of age is estimated to decrease by 5 to 10 percentage points. The results are however not statistically significant and also do not hold across different matching techniques and across multiple treatment groups. We take this as a sign of overall trend in the right direction and could see significant effects in the next couple of years.

Other Effects1. There are, as yet, no significant PAF impact evident on indicators associated with community/social capital

(trust, respect, relationships between different ethnic groups, community disputes, etc.), although the overall trend for both groups is positive. Similarly, while there is no significant impact of PAF programme on the use of health services/facilities, the effects are qualitatively positive on the use of agricultural centres, community forest services, and farmers' groups.

Targeting1. The targeting results are consistent with PAF’s objective of targeting the poorest households and support

monitoring data results as well. Of the many categories that PAF uses to classify the disadvantaged, one is the level of food sufficiency. The other is whether the household is from Dalit or Janajati caste/ethnicity category. For example, the probability of being selected as PAF money recipient goes up by 25 percentage points if you are from a Dalit/Janajati household. Similarly, one per cent decrease in per capita consumption at the baseline is associated with 15 percentage points increase in the probability of being selected for PAF.

2. The impact results are also consistent with PAF’s targeting the poorest households. Among other categories that PAF uses to classify the poor, one is the level of food sufficiency. Households are separated into four different groups under this category: hard core poor (those with less than 3 months of food security either via own production or other dependable sources of income), medium poor (those with 3 to 6 months of food security), poor (those with 6 to 11 months of food security), and non-poor (those with 12 or more months of food security). The results show that the percentage of households with food insufficiency of 3 months or less dropped from 13.8% in 2007 to about 5.5% in 2010, a reduction of more than 60%, for the PAF beneficiary households (defined as those engaged in PAF-supported income-generating activities). The reduction was only about 6.8% for non-beneficiaries. Similarly, the percentage of households with food insufficiency of 6 months or less decreased from 40% in 2007 to about 33% in 2010, a reduction of about 17.5%, for PAF beneficiary households. There was no reduction for non-beneficiaries during this period and in fact, there was an increase in food insufficiency of these households by about 9%.


Access and Use of Services 1. With the second phase of PAF II still ongoing, the number of poor households with access to improved

infrastructure facilities has reached more than 49,000. The impact evaluation results show that the school enrolment rate for children from households engaged in PAF-supported income-generating activities increased by more than 7 percentage points. The enrolment rate was even higher for children from Dalit or Janajati households. While there was no obvious difference between the PAF beneficiaries and the non-beneficiaries in the use of health services/facilities, the beneficiary households were found to be making more use of agricultural centres, community forest services, and farmers' groups. The increased use of such services supports the monitoring data findings that PAF beneficiaries are investing in agriculture-related opportunities and reaching out to service providers to improve and develop these investments.

Conclusions1. The evaluation results indicate that there is a positive and significant impact on household level welfare due

to the PAF programme relative to any other poverty reducing efforts that may be ongoing at the same time. The results further indicate that the programme is an effective tool for targeting the population considered most vulnerable in terms of caste and ethnicity as well as most food insecure. There are many process-related questions that this impact evaluation does not yet answer. For example, a review of the monitoring data suggests that women groups are far more diversified in livelihood activities that mixed groups. Impacts on women only groups would need to be analysed further as should the previously related positive indication of nutritional impact on children under 5 years of age.

2. The household-level panel data provide an opportunity for further analysis over time which may help us understand changes in poverty dynamics and for further counter factual analysis of the outcomes reported in this paper. As such, a continuation of the survey methodology and of the impact evaluation analysis would be an important tool for policy makers and for the implementation of the poverty alleviation fund at the national level.

(Ref. Impact Evaluation of the Nepal Poverty Alleviation Fund, WB/TU, 2010)


Ann

ex 2

0: P

artn

ersh

ip w

ith

AEP

C fo

r Rur

al E

nerg

y Su

b-pr

ojec

ts

Dis

tric

t N

o. o

f V

DCs

Act

ivit

y Ty

pe

Tot

al N

o of

Sub

-pr

ojec

ts

Tot

al B

en

HH

T

otal

Ben

Po

p

Pro

ject

Cos

t (in

Rs.

)

PA

F C

O C

ash

CO

Kin

d D

DC/

VD

C A

EPC

Cont

ribu

tion

Ach

ham

11

Mic

ro H

ydro

13

4,57

0 27

,118

37

,843

,099

21

,991

,656

26

,751

,680

12

,147

,158

86

,921

,054

Bag

lung

1

Mic

ro H

ydro

1

142

852

722,

165

- 48

6,88

5 -

1,33

8,75

0

Bai

tadi

9

Mic

ro H

ydro

12

3,63

9 22

,259

24

,414

,045

16

,205

,073

19

,896

,419

14

,838

,906

38

,425

,217

Baj

hang

12

Mic

ro H

ydro

12

3,27

0 19

,283

20

,670

,164

1,

945,

759

16,4

73,8

33

8,08

1,40

9 60

,301

,169

Baj

ura

5M

icro

Hyd

ro

61,

608

9,35

8 15

,569

,028

-

18,7

03,2

76

7,31

2,76

1 52

,094

,440

Dad

eldh

ura

2M

icro

Hyd

ro

228

8 1,

719

4,33

5,00

9 16

7,40

0 1,

172,

778

899,

674

4,82

5,00

0

Dai

lekh

2

Mic

ro H

ydro

2

388

2,44

4 5,

582,

750

- 3,

886,

757

2,02

8,81

4 9,

431,

076

Dar

chul

a 3

Mic

ro H

ydro

3

658

3,87

3 6,

431,

200

- 1,

351,

764

587,

616

2,56

5,00

0

Dha

ding

1

Mic

ro H

ydro

1

92

460

700,

000

277,

205

248,

059

300,

000

1,32

5,00

0

Dol

pa

2M

icro

Hyd

ro

246

0 2,

437

6,63

7,64

4 50

0,00

0 3,

997,

627

3,70

0,00

0 12

,405

,429

Dot

i 2

Mic

ro H

ydro

4

1,43

2 8,

091

6,80

4,64

5 35

6,96

5 5,

377,

367

3,36

5,96

513

,439

,000

Hum

la

3M

icro

Hyd

ro

467

9 3,

264

12,4

49,2

31

632,

519

3,82

3,92

3 2,

552,

394

22,6

10,5

71

Jaja

rkot

6

Mic

ro H

ydro

8

2,32

2 12

,310

16

,149

,208

2,83

0,21

9 15

,051

,322

3,

826,

614

37,8

49,9

15

Jum

la

8M

icro

Hyd

ro

81,

226

7,55

0 11

,645

,570

1,

130,

908

12,1

77,5

29

8,86

2,71

6 42

,143

,805

Kal

ikot

4

Mic

ro H

ydro

4

1,64

8 10

,008

12

,333

,789

52

,456

4,

630,

535

12,5

39,3

98

27,3

25,0

00

Kho

tang

1

Mic

ro H

ydro

1

92

580

975,

780

- 1,

148,

954

- 2,

646,

243

Mug

u 1

Mic

ro H

ydro

1

112

596

2,50

0,00

0 35

2,54

5 28

1,45

5 1,

091,

000

2,32

5,00

0

Pyu

than

1

Mic

ro H

ydro

1

107

838

599,

917

- 32

5,19

1 34

8,57

2 85

0,00

0

Ram

echh

ap

6M

icro

Hyd

ro

61,

153

7,05

6 8,

212,

768

5,10

8,18

3 7,

934,

608

4,09

3,10

3 14

,405

,000

Ras

uwa

2M

icro

Hyd

ro

333

9 2,

021

3,31

8,78

1 -

1,64

1,16

3 1,

630,

854

4,28

1,50

0

Ruk

um

1M

icro

Hyd

ro

110

0 65

2 2,

248,

700

- 3,

716,

741

1,59

2,95

3 2,

790,

000

Sal

yan

1M

icro

Hyd

ro

182

56

5 1,

227,

000

- 87

2,05

290

0,00

01,

125,

000

Sin

dhul

i 4

Mic

ro H

ydro

6

1,13

9 7,

595

11,0

25,9

643,

007,

675

7,57

9,69

6 8,

276,

000

11,1

65,0

00

Tap

leju

ng

11M

icro

Hyd

ro

114,

790

24,5

62

30,9

25,5

66

20,4

68,6

9821

,715

,138

23,

101,

276

81,2

41,4

00

Ter

hath

um

1M

icro

Hyd

ro

124

1 1,

371

3,66

9,95

7 -

1,08

4,35

0 1,

735,

470

4,51

8,95

0

Tot

al10

0

114

30,5

77

176,

862

246

,991

,980

7

5,02

7,26

1 1

80,3

29,1

02

123

,812

,653

5

38,3

48,5

19

Language editing, graphic designing/layout and printing PagePerfect Graphic Designing and Printing

Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF)P.O. Box: 9985, Red Cross Marg, Tahachal, Kathmandu, NepalPhone: 01-40307000, Fax: 977-1-4030701Email: [email protected]: www.pafnepal.org.np

paf annual report 2014 - paf nepal annual report_2014... · the world bank and the international...

Documents