Evaluation report : the rural service center project and the feasibility of its linkage with the local resource management project

Special evaluation covers 1978-84; no methodology is given. The project seems to be making headway in redressing poverty. Training and TA have been effective in developing RSCs' development capabilities, as demonstrated in the growth in the number of subprojects (SP's) from the initial 16 to 246, with 212 still in operation (city development staff, however, see a need for continued training in community organization and project preparation, management, and supervision). In addition, SP orientation has shifted from infrastructure to income generation. Individually implemented SP's appear to have greater income and employment impact and chance of success, while group-implemented SP's develop a stronger sense of community; prior community preparation, design factors such as market access and the existence of prior skills, and the effectiveness of monitoring have also been factors critical to SP success. Due to budget difficulties, SP authorization has virtually ceased since 1983. However, a financial management system has been developed, tested, and, now introduced in 10 local governments (LG's), shows potential in some cases for enabling LG's to respond early to financial difficulties. Also, preliminary experience in 4 cities in mobilizing private groups' involvement in SP's has been encouraging. Two of three cycles of training for project devolution (planned to begin in 2/85) have been completed in Ministry of LG offices in pilot regions, and these offices are ready to assume project management. The project is not ready for nationwide replication, however, lacking in particular a monitoring system to examine the impacts of departures from planned procedures; also, an MLG Central Office capability for managing the program will be needed, devolution notwithstanding. The project should be extended for 3 years, to evaluate and revise the project in year 1 and introduce changes, expand the project, and test replicability in years 2 and 3. Linkage with the ongoing Local Resource Management (LRM) project is both desirable and necessary, but until a form of institutional linkage can be agreed upon, piecemeal efforts to limit project expansion in areas not covered by LRM and to coordinate RSC and LRM activites are recommended.