Evaluation of The Asia Foundation's democracy program in Mongolia

The project exhibited many strengths, such as its sound strategy, high-quality programming, consistent selection of a satisfactory level of participants, few and relatively minor problems, inclusion of women, and the provision of probably as much assistance as was feasible in making NGOs more self-sufficient. Overwhelmingly, grantees rated TAF's flexibility and responsiveness highly. On the down side, TAF, for internal management and analytical purposes and to ease its requirement to respond to USAID, might have focused management of the program more on results. Although the initiatives made to strengthen representative government were small in number, they indicate that it is possible to make strategic interventions with modest amounts of money, and that work with Parliament (directly or through NGOs) should be reconsidered. In the area of legal education and reform, the work with the Chief Justice and Supreme Court was probably strategically significant, and the early exposure to change of a large number of judges from across the country useful. Overall, however, the legal reform and education program was small and tried to cover too many themes. In the area of population participation/civil society, considerable headway has been made, particularly among women's organizations. Effects have been immediate and also may be long-term for many people, particularly in rural areas. For example, there has been some institutional strengthening, and some interlinked effects in work on elections, Parliamentary responsiveness, press freedom, and other areas. With the results of the most recent election, a number of initiatives such as the work with the Parliamentary Secretariat, the draft media, and NGO laws have a very high likelihood of making progress. The June 30 election reflects well on the work of TAF: 25 TAF grantees ran for Parliament, 9 of whom were women; 10 of the male candidates and 7 of the women were elected to office. The ratio of administrative to program cost of the USAID grant appears high and the program moved slowly. However, this gradualist approach to the management of a program in such a new environment and with such fragile institutions seems warranted. Based on the state of the local institutions on which the program had to be built, results achieved, particularly in the area of civil society, and the value added by TAF, USAID has received a good return on its money. The program is a credit to both USAID and TAF. Recommendations suggest means for substantively increasing program impacts through cost-effective or cost-saving techniques such as electronic media or training as a means to more training rather than an end; stress the need for strategic planning, problem analysis, and results monitoring; and offer ideas for enhancing program quality.