Final evaluation of the CARE population and family planning expansion (PFPE) project

Evaluation covers the period 5/91-6/95 against a PACD of 4/96. CARE has used project resources to develop an impressive Population Program and is the first major development agency to successfully integrate population and FP into its portfolio. Nearly triple the expected funds match has been raised. The participatory process used by CARE should be of particular interest to many agencies. A population policy statement has been approved, and the fledgling Population Unit created prior to the project is now fully functional, staffed by competent and dedicated people with a good balance of technical and geographical expertise. Originally, 16 field projects were planned for sub-Saharan Africa. However, following the USAID Office of Population's shift to a Big Country Strategy, CARE shifted its focus to fewer (10) but larger projects in more demographically significant countries, not just in Africa. Eight projects are now functioning in Bangladesh, Dominican Republic, Nepal, Peru, Philippines, Togo, and Uganda, and another is about to be launched in Kenya; a project in Rwanda (once fully functional) is now suspended. Careful deployment of project-funded technical resources has enabled a number of other CARE Country Offices (Bolivia, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mali, India, Tanzania, West Bank-Gaza, and Zambia) to implement FP activities with non-project funding. Since the field projects are so new, it is difficult to evaluate the quality of the services they are providing. Training appears to be strong, but IEC, logistics, monitoring, evaluation, and cost recovery need to be strengthened. Also, the target for couple years of protection (CYP) has been achieved only in Bangladesh. CARE enjoys strong and positive relations with counterpart institutions, as well as with other population PVOs, and has attracted a range of donors. However, the continued growth of CARE's population program will require additional technical expertise so that it can adequately support field offices. Also, the demands of the field projects must be balanced with the demands of fundraising. The following lessons have been learned. (1) Process is important. The manner in which something is done affects what gets done. (2) The careful application of resources can result in significant increases in impact. (3) Flexibility and responsiveness are especially valuable when implementing new programs. (4) Matching fund requirements can have positive programmatic effects. (5) Assume nothing; build in critical elements and do not count on "things planned" by others if crucial to your project's functioning. (6) Integration is more complex than it sounds.