You are on page 1of 16

United Nations Development Program Sustainable Human Development

ANNUAL PROGRAM/PROJECT REPORT Purpose: The annual program/project report (APR) is designed to obtain the independent views of the main stakeholders of a program or project on its relevance, performance and the likelihood of its success. The main stakeholders are the target groups, program or project management, the key government agency responsible for the program or project, and UNDP. The APR aims to: provide a rating and textual assessment of the progress of a program or project in achieving its objectives; present stakeholders' insights into issues affecting the implementation of a program or project and their proposals for addressing those issues; and serve as a source of inputs into the preparation of the country office annual report (COAR), a formal means of communication between the country offices and headquarters through which country experiences are captured for consolidation and dissemination to the development community. The questions on relevance are meant to determine the extent to which the objectives and target groups of the program or project remain valid and pertinent as originally planned or as subsequently modified owing to changing circumstances within the immediate context and the external environment of the program or project. The questions about performance pertain to effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness. The questions on success focus on the potential impact, sustainability of results and contribution to capacity development of the program or project.

ANNUAL PROGRAMME/PROJECT REPORT (APR) Basic programme/project information (To be provided by programme or project management) Programme or project number and title:BGD/97/017: Empowerment of Coastal Fishing Communities for Livelihood Security Designated institution: Project starting date: Originally planned: Actual: Project completion date: Originally planned: New: Total budget ($): Original: Latest signed revision: Period covered by the report: Department of Fisheries July 2000 December 2000 July 2005 December 2006 5886,200 6269,549 December 2003 November 2004

PART I: NUMERICAL RATING Rate the relevance and performance of the programme or project using the following scale: 1 - Highly satisfactory 2 Satisfactory 3 - Unsatisfactory, with some positive elements 4 - Unsatisfactory X - Not applicable

Place your answers in the column that corresponds to your role in the programme or project. Target group(s) Programme or project manager Govt. UNDP

SUBSTANTIVE FOCUS

A. RELEVANCE
1. How relevant is the programme or project to the

development priorities of the country? 2. How relevant is the programme or project to the promotion of sustainable human development? Indicate your rating on the focus area which the programme or project was designed to address. Poverty eradication and sustainable livelihoods (b) Protection and regeneration of the environment (c) Gender in development (d) Promoting an enabling environment for SHD, including governance
(a)

1 1

1 1

1 1

3. To what extent are appropriate beneficiary groups being targeted by the programme or project, based on the following considerations? (a) Gender (b) Socio-economic factors (c) Geographic location 4. Given the objectives of the programme or project, are the appropriate institutions being assisted?

SUBSTANTIVE FOCUS

Target group(s)

Programme or project manager

Govt.

UNDP

B. PERFORMANCE 1. Using the following indicators rate the contribution of the outputs to the achievement of the immediate objectives:a/ (Indicator - 1) Strength of target community organizations (VOs). (Indicator - 2) Socio-economic and welfare activities directed and operated by VOs and its network through accessing GO/NGO led extension / support services / information (Indicator - 3) Concern of the communities to issues confronting the costal fisheries resources and habitats including community initiated measures to address such issues 2. Rate the production of target outputs. 3. Are the management arrangements of the programme or project appropriate? 4. Are programme or project resources (financial, physical and manpower) adequate in terms of: (a) quantity? 1 (b) quality? 5. Are programme or project resources being used efficiently to produce planned results? 6. Is the programme or project cost-effective compared to similar interventions? 7. Based on its work plan, how would you rate the timeliness of the programme or project in terms of: (a) Production of outputs and initial results? (b) Inputs delivery? 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

The program or project manager must list the indicators as reflected in the programme support document or project document or as agreed on by the stakeholders.
a/

Target group(s)

Programme or project manager 1

Govt.

UNDP

OVERALL RATING OF THE PROGRAMME OR PROJECT

Explain the basis of your rating, which need not be limited to, or which may be different from, the relevance and performance criteria rated above. For the last year of the programme or project, the overall rating should include an assessment of the potential success of the programme or project as well as its relevance and performance. Most of the project management and transparency related problems, which were encountered during last year, have been addressed by introducing a highly decentralised project management system. The newly introduced system, which is highly participatory, offers scope for equal participation of GO (Upazilla officers of the Executing government agency as well as other participating GO agencies), NGO and CO (Community organizations represented by members of Upazilla level federations of VOs). During the last week of every month a participatory workshop is organised in each upazilla to participatory review the progress of the month and prepare a detailed plan of work for the next month. Operational or management related issues are also discussed and recommendations are sent for discussion at the project level monthly meeting which is held during first week of every month. Project level progress review meeting (PPRM) is held during first week of every month where issues and recommendations of each upazilla are discussed and decision taken. As with the upazilla, the PPRM I also participated by the CO (Members of the district federations of VOs), NGOs and GOs including the NPD, TL and other project staff. Introduction of this upazilla and district level monthly participatory exercises has accelerated community empowerment process and ensured greater participation of community organizations, as well as GO and NGO agencies in planning, implementation, monitoring and decision making process of the project. Bringing certain revisions in the project management such as : introducing a participatory budget preparation exercise on quarterly basis; assigning implementation of certain village and upazilla based activities to COs (community organizations); following the double signatory system for financial management of the NEX budget line; and establishing a formal PMU (Project Management Unit) has helped in attaining better governance and transparency in project management. Frequent meetings and rounds of participatory exercises have made the community organizations quite familiar with various Government and Non-government agencies, their programmes and personnel. Besides, monthly progress review and planning exercise has also created an upazilla level forum for the various GO agencies to interact and work on a common programme and also work closely with NGOs.

PART II: TEXTUAL ASSESSMENT 1. What are the major achievements of the programme or project vis--vis the expected results during the year under review? To the extent possible, include an assessment of the potential impact, sustainability and contribution to capacity development. 1) Capacity of Organizations of the target community the coastal fishing communities. The target community of the project - coastal fishing community is now well organised into village level organizations (VOs) and their upazilla (sub-district) and district level federations. The capacity of these organizations has developed to the extent that they are now capable of bringing significant positive changes in their living and livelihoods of its members, which are amply demonstrated through several socio-economic and welfare activities that have been planned, directed and implemented by these organisations. During the reporting period a total of 248 village organizations (223 for men 225 for women) were fully operational covering all the 117 project villages. A total of 117 Village Development Committees (VDCs), 8 Upazilla Fishers Federations (UFFs) and one District Fishers Federations (DFF) have been highly active in providing coordination support to VOs at village, upazilla and district levels respectively. Democracy and transparency have further strengthened by holding elections for VOs, UFFs and DFF. To ensure free, fair and participatory elections they have developed and fine tuned an election procedure following a bottom up approach. This election procedure is quite effective in selecting persons who are honest and dedicated to the cause of fishing communities while eliminating position seekers. They also formed village, upazilla and district level election committees for holding elections at these levels. Government, NGOs and project personnel were invited as observers. As a result they have a completely new set of highly committed, visionary and active leadership. All the seven members of the executive committees of village and upazilla, as well as district federations have been given responsibilities of looking after the activities of one thematic area each viz. organization, education, IGAs, primary healthcare and sanitation, legal aid, disaster preparedness and natural resource conservation and management for their command area. Enhanced participation of the communities in project activities like training, workshop, meeting is significantly higher (almost 95% are VO members of which 53% are women). Both vertical and horizontal linkages have been established among the VOs, UFFs, DFF and different government, non-government and private agencies. They have been able to raise their voice and brought up their issues representing the fishing community at different levels (including Gram Sarkar, Disaster Committees, Union Parishad, Upazilla and district) for having better access to services and information. Community rrepresentatives (VO / VDC / UFF / DFF office bearers) have become quite close to various welfare and development agencies of the government as they frequently meet and discuss relevant issues and concerns with the heads of relevant GO agencies including the UNOs and Deputy Commissioner (DC). One of the most significant development indicating increasing recognition of fishing community organizations was their formal representation in the upazilla monthly coordination committee meeting convened by the upazilla administration. VO leaders have started participating in these meetings in Sadar and Kutubdia upazillas. Besides, VOs representatives have also been inducted in Union and Upazilla Disaster Preparedness Committees. This is to be mentioned that fishing communities in general is considered to be one of the most disorganised section of the rural poor. The condition was no different in project villages. Base line information clearly indicated that except certain small alliances / groups in some villages, the communities were not organised at all.

2) VO managed fast growing savings programme


Fast growing VOs fund, which are flowing in through their monthly savings programme and recently introduced emergency / welfare scheme and organization fund, resulted in unexpectedly huge sum of money. As of November04, the total VO fund was Tk 6,802,061 (of which savings Tk 6,280,789, welfare fund Tk 424,506 and organizational management fund Tk 96,766). This has helped immensely in confidence building of VOs. They take pride in often mentioning that they have adequate fund to take care of their members for several weeks in the event of any natural disaster Accountability and transparency in fund management have been improved by operating bank account, keeping records and sharing with each others about all financial decisions and fund management. They are depositing Tk 5/member/month for community welfare / emergency fund and Tk 1/member/month for organization fund (DFF and UFFs). From welfare fund, they have provided emergency assistance to two families of fishers who recently killed by pirate. This has given mental strength and confidence to the entire fishing communities and their families. The DFF and UFFs have their yearly action plan for which they take fund from VOs raised for undertaking planned activities. About 100 VOs are managing MCG funds to construct and operate village resource center (VRC) in their villages very efficiently. They have monitored distributed, utilized, managed and recovered MCG business funds.

3)
habitats

Greater concern to protection and conservation of coastal fisheries resources and

It is increasingly realized that without the active participation of fishing communities and other stakeholders it is impossible to rehabilitate and sustain coastal / marine fisheries. In this respect the project has infused a sense of realization among the fishing communities that there is no alternative than to take immediate and collective actions to stop the depleting trend of marine fish availability before it goes out of hand and reach a stage of irreversibility. Besides, the community have also been able to comprehend that most of the fish acts and regulations, though appear to be anti-fishers in immediate and short-term, are in fact beneficial for them in the long run. They have also realized the potential of their organizational strength which could be utilized for rehabilitation and management of coastal fisheries resources and habitats for ensuring sustained benefits. This has been attained by undertaking a number of village, Upazilla and district level consultations and meetings to participatory review the situation, identify causes and concerns and search realistic solutions. Subsequently they were encouraged to prepare a modest available action plan and initiate implementation of those plan keeping in mind that there are no short cut means and it may not also yield immediate results. The Fisheries Management Advisory Committee (FMAC) and members of all the six gear based Fisheries Management Organizations (FMOs) met several times to review the progress of implementation of their 5 decisions taken earlier and based on the findings made certain revisions in their plan. In addition to the previous 5, they have taken 6 new decisions to conserve and manage the resources. Following their decision they have also taken follow up actions to implement most of their decisions. They have already removed pockets from all beach seine nets being operated along Moheshkhali and Charakaria coastline. By removing these pockets this gear is being considered as less destructive. Further, most of the members have stopped collection of shrimp fry from the nature and played pro-active role in discouraging this activity in their vicinity. They have increased the mesh size of the cod-end of ESBN to inch and that of MSBN to 1 inch. All the newly made ESBN and MSBN in project villages have followed these new regulations set by themselves. The community fishermen/fisherwomen organized rally at upazila and district levels to mark the World Environment Day and also undertook certain useful program like beach cleaning. To ensure increasing participation of the resource users in resource management, several initiatives have been taken. These are village based participatory appraisal of natural resources, participatory action plan development (PAPD), participatory monitoring of resources and participatory 7

rehabilitation of natural habitats. Under this program 50 hectares of mangroves have been rehabilitated and several new patches have been developed. These include 1 site along Shahparirdip Jaliapara of Teknaf, 1 site each along Thakurtala and Charpara coastline of Moheshkhali, 2 sites along Mognama of Pekua, 1 site along Chaupaldandi of Sadar and 1 site along Sonarpara of Ukhiya. Community members are also taking full responsibility of protecting these newly re-planted mangrove sites. Encouraged by the growing participation of fishing communities in habitat restoration activities, the UNDP / GEF Biodiversity project came forward to support a VO based mangrove re-plantation program in Sonadia Island where large scale destruction of mangrove has been reported. Efforts have also been made to introduce and familirise FAO CCRF, among various stakeholders of marine fisheries GO, NGO and COs and their personnel through organizing several stakeholders based workshops. One stakeholders based workshop was also organized for the development of community based manual on FAO CCRF. As an output of that workshop a simple and illustrative community focused manual has been developed, printed and distributed to different all stakeholders including the DOF HQ, District and Upazila level officers. Side by side an English version of the community manual has also been developed and now under process for printing. A step further in this direction was the participation of FMOs and FMAC in fine tuning of the draft Marine Fisheries Strategy of the country, a first ever participation of fishing communities in developing national strategy for the development of natural resources. 4) Partnership among GO, NGOs and private sector The project has developed a highly decentralized and participatory approach for implementation of its activities in which active participation of target communities and personnel of GO agencies and SPs (NGOs) is ensured. A number of activities have been performed through which this partnership have been further developed, widened and strengthened. Some of these are regular activities held on monthly and quarterly periodicity. Besides, a two days participatory planning exercise was also organized for the preparation of a two year project work plan. Upazilla level GOs-NGOs-COs coordination is promoted by monthly Participatory Progress Review and Planning (PPRP) meeting and Upazilla Project Implementation Committee that meets once in two to three months. Both these meetings are chaired by the UNO (Upazilla Administrative Head). Besides, community representatives have also been inducted in the upazilla Coordination committee that meets to review the development activities of the entire upazilla. At the project / district level also Project Progress Review Meeting (PPRM) is held on monthly basis to participatory review the progress of the entire project and to consider recommendations of the PPRPs and take necessary decisions. This activity ensures the active participation of GOs and COs in decision making process. Besides, district level inter-agency meeting was organized on quarterly basis to mobilize inter-departmental cooperation and support. For the monitoring of MCG supported activities, MCG Task Force Committee has been constituted at upazilla level with representatives drawn from UFF, NGOs and GOs and the UNO as the chair. Most of the GO and local NGOs come forward to support using their own resources under their ongoing projects / programmes. However, wherever needed, resources were also provided from the project to complement / supplement such activities. To promote improved welfare service to the communities, several MOUs have been signed between the COs and NGOs and Private Sectors. Through signing a MOU with the Family Development Services & Research (FDSR) primary health and family planning related services to the project fishing villages of 5 Upazillas. To develop and market value added products including improved quality solar dried fish / shrimp products a MOU has been signed between the DFF on behalf of the MCG business groups and a private sector enterprise which are now fully operational. Both GO departments and NGOs have realized that project PPRP and PPRM offer good platform for them to interact among them and avoid possible overlapping and duplication of efforts. This 8

practice has also facilitated enhanced coordination and cooperation among GO/NGO departments and other agencies. 5) Primary health care, drinking water and sanitation

One of the major achievements of the project is brining realization among the fishing communities about their priority attention to village and family sanitation needs and safe drinking water. This was attained by conducting several rounds of village based participatory appraisal of current sanitation situation, identification of critical points and measures / collective efforts for improvements. This exercise was quite effective for initiating community based sanitation drive in all the project villages. To start with the project provided three sanitary latrines in each village on cost sharing basis. Following this a good number of VO members in each village have also came forward in establishing sanitary latrine exclusively through their own cost. Impressed by the ground level preparation and awareness the Public Health and Engineering Department (PHED) also came forward for their assistance and provided 260 latrines to the fishers families of Pekua Upazilla alone. Similar support has also been extended in other Upazillas. Six villages (Thakurtola and Bottola Daxin Para of Moheshkhali, Rastarepara of Sadar, Uttar Miheshkhaliapara and Hadurchara of Teknaf, and one village each in Chakaria and Kutubdia have been declared villages attaining 100% sanitation in terms of sanitary toilet, cleanliness and safe water. To furthering the sanitation and primary health drive during this period one member has been selected in each village as Community Health Activist (CHA). These activists have been trained in primary health care and sanitation and linked to the nearest GO supported health related programmes and clinics including satellite clinics. They also work as village level focal points for GO sponsored family planning and immunization programmes. Besides they are also tagged to the FDSR (NGO) operated satellite clinics and depots. Organising paid visits of Para-medical and Medical doctors to project villages deserves worth mentioning. Depending upon the needs of the village the CHA organize the visit of qualified medical doctors for which the community pays Taka 20 per patient. The CHA enlist the names of the patients, collect fees from enlisted individuals and organize the visit of the doctor as and when required. Due to convenience, cost effectiveness and better attention of the doctors this activity is emerging as a practice in project villages. 5) Enhanced family income Following several rounds of VO based participatory exercises (PRAs), which helped the target communities, especially their women members in over-viewing resources at hand, available opportunities, limitations, and identifying gainful employment opportunities, a large number of need based skill development training were organized in all the villages. This village based participatory training has developed their specific income generating skills. Besides, this programme has also helped in giving them strong orientation for following business management norms in running their smallbusinesses. Community based action plan for initiating selected household and group based business, which were prepared earlier, used as framework for developing village based IGAs. During the reporting period a total of 247 batches of project beneficiaries received training on different AIGAs and in each batch there were about 10-12 trainees. Topics like goat rearing, vegetable gardening, improved drying of fish, beef fattening, food processing, etc., were covered under this skill development training programme. Once such business became operational another spell of relatively short-term refresher training were also organised through 211 batches. IGAs are also supported through village based forerunners of business operators who volunteers to promote such activities in their own village Additional Income Generating Activists (AIGAs). Special training programme was also organised for a total of 92 AIGAs. Department of Livestock Services (DLS) 9

, Department of Agriculture Extension (DAE), BRDB, DOYD, etc have come forward in a big way to support AIGAs related activities in the areas of livestock (poultry, duckery, cow fattening, dairy and goat rearing), horticulture (kitchen gardening, betel leaf farming, social forestry, chilli cultivation, etc.), advancing group based micro-credit for IGAs and training respectively. DLS has also provided soft loans to community members for goat rearing activities. This is worth mentioning that most of these GO agencies are encouraged to provide further support because of their high repayment rating. A total of 67 community based and community operated result demonstrations have been organized successfully through which 150 beneficiaries have earned substantial income while encouraging others to taking up these ventures. Micro Capital Grant (MCG) is given to VOs for supporting group based business enterprise development, development of common facilities / infrastructure and for resource regeneration. A total 544 MCG with a total amount of US$ 6, 68, 212 (Tk 3,87, 56256) were given to Village Organizations (VO). However, to become entitled for receiving this support VOs have also deposited a matching fund of at least 20% of the allocated MCG fund. As a result 248 VOs have contributed an amount of US$ 130,000. Out of 544 MCGs, 434 are for group based business development (US$ 270,777), 102 for community Infrastructure development (US$ 2,71,514), and 8 for resource re-generation (US$ 5,521). So far, a total of 3,783 beneficiaries have been benefited through MCG supported business enterprises. They have already made a profit of Tk 8, 62,873 from 317 MCG supported business enterprises. An amount of Tk. 4,56,650, have already paid back to VOs from business ventures, out of which Tk. 2,11200 have been reinvested to other VO based business enterprise and development programmes. On the other hand social, economic and organizational benefits from Village Resource Center (VRCs) have been enormous. 6) School based Primary education During the period under report a total of forty six primary schools were efficiently managed and further developed by their respective village based School Management Committees. These schools completed their second year of operation with regular classes Class I and Class II. In addition to these two regular shifts, one more additional shift were introduced for additional Class I students with direct financial support of the community themselves. Some schools have already planned for the opening of Class III exclusively through their own resources. Steps have also been taken to transfer and get admission of the passed out students to the nearby Govt. Primary Schools. Formal agreement has been reached between the project and the Department of Primary Education to supply necessary books for all 46 school students. Accordingly necessary order has been issued for the sanction of books for all classes for the coming years. School Management Committee (SMCs) has been formed for all the 46 schools who are fully responsible for the management and further development of schools. Capacity of the SMCs have also been developed through training, several rounds of issue based meetings and continuous monitoring. As a result SMCs are now able to operate, guide, direct and manage the school smoothly. SMCs have also taken several initiatives for the sustainable operation of the schools beyond the project period. These include regular SMC and parents meeting, awareness raising campaign for enrolment of left out children, fund raising, printing of receipt books, etc. A substantial school development fund is already raised and deposited in VDC bank account. As the money for the schools is deposited in the VDC bank account, a separate A/C book for school is being maintained by the SMC. To contributing towards nation building, in addition to regular syllabus, the students are also repeatedly reminded of national, social and family values, patriotism, sanitation, primary health care, etc. Most of the schools already have or going to have their own separate building as they are sifting to Village Resource Centers (VRCs) constructed or in progress under the MCG assistance of the project. Under assistance of the Rotary International periodical health check and de-worming programme were undertaken in selected project schools.

10

7)

Disaster preparedness Disaster preparedness related activities undertaken during the reporting period such as organising Mock Demonstrations, Disaster day Observance, distribution of wind and salinity tolerant saplings (3 to 5 / household), distribution and demonstration of IC materials and tools, distribution and demonstration of sea safety materials, etc., have resulted in creating high level of awareness at district, upazilla, union and village levels and significant preparedness at village and family levels. In each village there is an active Village Disaster Preparedness Committee (VDPC) and community prepared Village Disaster Preparedness Plan (VDPP). Besides each village has trained Changed Agents (CAs) and Volunteers to making the community always keeping on alert. This was confirmed by their response during the two spells of highly cyclonic weather conditions along the Coxs Bazar coast in May this year, with 7 and 8 warning signal levels. All the Volunteers and Change Agents are also well trained in aspects of sea safety and First Aid. Positive response has also been experienced from the Government. Community representatives have now been included in the Union and Upzilla levels Disaster Preparedness Committees set up by the Government. Out of 117 villages 23 villages have acquired mobile phone for access to quick and reliable source of information. As a result of MOU signed between the DOF and BB long awaited Coastal Community Radio Unit (CCRU) has been formally established and Coastal Community Radio Programme (CCRP) are aired on regular basis from November onwards which is guided by the principle of radio programme for the community by the community. To making the programme effective and useful network of radio listeners have been formed in project villages with village level Information Activist (IAs) as facilitator. 2. What major issues and problems are affecting the achievement of programme or project results? Due to non-availability of fund from NEX budget line for nearly nine months, a number of planned field activities of the project could not be accomplished. Almost all the Non-NGO supported field based activities of the project are supported through NEX budget line. However, after the introduction of double signatory system in the project, including financial management, funds could be made available for the last quarter and since then all activities are going in full swing. Essential logistic support like computer, furniture, fan etc., could not be made available on time to the field staff especially to MCG Portfolio Managers and the SMO of newly created Pekua Upazillas due to procedural delay. Interruption due to sudden separation of some of the project professional staff and NGO field personnel caused significant set back to the project. Project staff, like Coastal Aquaculture Specialist (CAE), Livestock and Poultry Extension Expert (LPEE) and three SMOs left the project due to personal reasons. Although immediate steps were taken for recruitment it took considerable time due to procedural formalities. NGOs were, however, quick in finding replacements but the newly recruited staff were not at all familiar with the type of job assigned to them. Remoteness of some of the project villages in St. Martin, Sonadia and Martrabari islands, where the only means of communication is boat, caused frequent interruptions in timely delivery of project services. Due to difficult travel and cost consideration many of the NGO Service Providers were unable to send their staff as scheduled leading to poor service delivery.

11

3. How should these issues or problems be resolved? Please explain in detail the action(s) recommended. Specify who should be responsible for such actions. Also indicate a tentative time frame and the resources required.

Introduction of double signatory system, which has been introduced from 15 September onwards has solved many of such problems as a result funds are now available as per the plan. Special attention is needed for the remotely located villages. It requires specific planning or project activities and highly intensified efforts during the period of accessibility.

4. What new developments (if any) are likely to affect the achievement of programme or project results? What do you recommend to respond to these developments? Due to growing strength of VOs and their fast swelling funds some well off and politically connected people would try to enter the organization to establish their hold. High illiteracy level, poverty and their limited capacity make them vulnerable to such aggressions. Further strengthening of democratic process, developing bottom up electioneering process, effective and speedy communication among members and their federations are the areas where the project need to concentrate for at least two to three years. Management capacity of VOs and their network organizations are not developing as par with their increasing resources and expanding activities. Future course of project support are required to concentrate on developing managerial capacity of VOs and their office bearers. 5. What are the views of the target groups with regard to the programme or project? Please note any significant gender-based differences in those views.

The primary target groups of the project have perceived that the project, though introduced late, has already changed their fate and in near future this is also going to change their quality of life as well. However, they at times also complain that why this project was introduced so late. Women member frequently express that they are now better off in terms of decision making at family and village levels. They also feel more confident and secured.

6. To date, what lessons (both positive and negative) can be drawn from the experience of the programme or project? Organizing the rural poor should be the first step in any rural / community development programme. Once the target groups are organized and their organizations are strengthened, any development initiative could be effectively chanellised through these empowered organizations.

7. If the programme or project has been evaluated, what is the implementation status of the recommendations made by the evaluators? The Mid Term Evaluation of the project was held during November December 2003. The report which has been received is considered to be thorough and overall positive. Besides making valuable recommendations for future course of project implementation the Mission also came up with observations while underlining constraints and shortcomings. Extracts from the report with major findings are given below. In spite of a slow start-up, the project has made significant progress in some areas, especially on the activities for achievement of immediate Objectives 1 and 2(p. 23).

12

There was also a clear change in the quality of relations between these poor fisherfolk and local government authorities, noted both by villagers themselves and by the government staff posted at District and Upazilla levels. This is exactly what is meant by the word empowerment which is so central to the ECFC. There was less tangible signs of changing relationship between the fishermen and the boat and gear owners for whom they work. This is a delicate area due to the strong direct economic power exercised by the boat owners, but the project is making commendable efforts to co-pot this latter group into the empowerment process in order to avoid conflicts. Impact Overall, the MTE Mission can affirm that in the first group of 37 communities the project has definitely had a positive short-term impact on the empowerment of coastal fishing communities in Coxs Bazar. It is hoped that in the second spell of villages an equal degree of positive change will be seen. In terms of objective 2 criteria of the project there is having a reasonably good impact on encouraging economic diversification. Objective 3 impact criteria is much longer term in nature and therefore more difficult for the MTE to have investigated. If positive impact continues to be felt in terms of social and economic empowerment the impact on reducing artisanal fishing pressure might well be seen in the future. Summary findings and recommendations The MTE Mission found various operational and strategic project related issues needed examination and therefore comments. These related to restructuring the PMU, legalizing the VOs, mobilizing savings into capital, the grant component of REDS and the development of an operational management system for increased fund under the micro-capital grant component of ECFC especially if the grant element of REDS were to be transferred to MCG budget. The MTE Mission also has identified a need to develop an exit strategy for the project as of now and recommends that a phasing out approach be adopted for first spell villages as a model for the eventual closure of the ECFC. The Mission has also identified the possibility of extending the project beyond the end of the currently specified completion date to make use of unspent monies in the budget and to allow the exit strategy to be fully tested. This would allow consolidation and final assistance to villagers under the project.

8. Do you propose any substantive revision to the programme or project document? If yes, what are they? State justification.
Some revisions has been suggested by the Evaluation Team. No new revision is required. 9. Provide any other information that may further support or clarify your assessment of the programme or project. You may include annexes, as you deem necessary.

Not applicable.

13

For target groups: Name: Md. Joynal Abedin Title: Secretary, District Fishers Federation (DFF) of VOs), Coxs Bazar

Signature:

Date:

For the programme or project management: Name: Md. Zafar Ahmad Title: National Project Director, ECFC Project, Coxs Bazar

Signature:

Date:

For the programme or project management: Name: Md. Mizanur Rahman Title: Deputy National Project Director, ECFC Project, Coxs Bazar

Signature:

Date:

For the programme or project management: Name: Dilip Kumar Title: Team Leader, ECFC Project, Coxs Bazar

Signature:

Date:

For the government: Name: Sri Sapan Kumar Sarkar Title: Senior Upazilla Fisheries Officer, Sadar Upazilla , Coxs Bazar

Signature:

Date:

For UNDP: Name: Ms. Ayshani Labe, Program Officer, UNDP, Dhaka Title: Programme Officer

Signature:

Date:

14

PART III: Program or Project Summary Table


Program/project title and number: Empowerment of Coastal Management arrangement: Fishing Communities for DoF, UNDP, FAO Livelihood security BGD/97/017 Period covered: Dec. 2000Dec. 2005

Designated institution: FAO

OVERALL ASSESSMENT Brief analysis of progress achieved in the contribution of the program or project to the expected results. Fishermen and women of the target areas have been identified and organized into organizations Steps have been taken for the enhancement of livelihood standards through welfare activities and an addition in Family income General awareness has been created about the importance of sustainable utilization and conservation of resource and steps have been taken to initiate community based resource managements Source of funds Annual budget Estimated annual expenditure Delivery rate ($ 000) ($ 000) (%) TRAC (1 and 2) TRAC 3 Other Cost-sharing: Government Financial institution Third party Trust funds AOS (where applicable) Program support objectives (PSOS) or immediate objectives Obj. 1 Obj. 2 Obj. 3 Indicators Achievements

15

. Annual output targets Obj. 1 Output 01 Output 02 Output 03 Obj. 2 Output 01 Output 02 Output 03 Achievement of outputs Proposed output targets for the next year

16

You might also like