Decentralized development management project

Mid-term external evaluation, presented as a PES, covers the period 6/81-6/84 and is based on document review and interviews with USAID/T, TA, and local and national RTG personnel. The project is beset with serious conceptual, organizational, and contractual difficulties which could thwart its purpose. A basic problem concerns differing perceptions of the project"s purpose - i.e, whether to decentralize the decisionmaking process or to improve local-level management. At the organizational level, there is no clarity regarding: the precise roles in the project of either the National Working Group - the effectiveness of which is also limited by time and bureaucratic focus - or the TA Team (TAT); the ability of TAT to facilitate relationships serving the long-term goal of creating self-sustaining local development; the field monitoring role of TAT/Bangkok; or the importance of adherence to the annual workplan by TAT/field and by TAT/Bangkok. The arrangements for the three project contractors are also ambiguous, providing neither concrete performance indicators nor means of contract supervision; nor has the Secretariat of the implementing agency, the Rural Employment Generation Project (REGP), in fact supervised the contracts. In addition: inadequate REGP staffing is creating paperwork bottlenecks; the confining of subprojects to guidelines of the REGP - which is, moreover, a temporary entity - significantly constrains the project"s value; project findings are unlikely to be used if they require substantial interministerial cooperation or additional RTG funding; local maintenance capablilites for subprojects are limited; and USAID/T and REGP funds have not been co-mingled as planned. On the positive side, the TAT performs highly valued staff functions for the REGP, provincial governors, and district offices; tambons" capacity to plan and implement projects is increasing (although this is somewhat offset by increased demands upon the central government for technical and financial support); and the placement of ARD technicians at the district level has been an unqualified success, providing the expertise needed to implement large construction (including cross-tambon) projects (roads, dams, bridges) meeting acceptable technical standards. There is also evidence that the project"s innovative "learning laboratory" system to provide local-level policy-related information to central decisionmakers is beginning to bear fruit. The overall recommendation (many specific ones are included) is to use the evaluation as a basis for arriving at a common understanding of the project by all parties.