Food for Work evaluation : December 1984-May 1985

Internal evaluation covers the period through 5/85 and is based on site visits, document review, and interviews with implementing personnel and beneficiaries. An impressive amount of infrastructural and agricultural development has been achieved. Over 70% (counting cancelled projects) of the projects assessed met or exceeded their construction goals and 65% of these were completed within the planned time period. The work output included: 78.5 km of roads, 45 km of irrigation canal, 41 km of flood control dikes and canals, 20 ha of reclaimed land, 6 ha of rubber plantations, 2 fish ponds of 4 ha, and 17 ha of prepared ricefields. Most of the projects met the requirement that they be labor-intensive: 65% were highly labor-intensive, i.e., spent at least 80% of their budget on labor; only 3% of the projects were less than 60% labor-intensive. FFW projects were, for the most part, functioning upon completion of construction and judged favorably for their quality. There is some indication, however, that most of the projects would have been built even without the FFW program, although probably to a lower standard. The target group, impoverished heads of households, made up the majority of the 9,510 FFW workers. The average worker was employed 61 days and received 2.5 kg of food per day or 153 kg in all. The food aid was generally used for consumption by most or all of the family members; however, a small but not insignificant percentage of recipients have used it in unintended ways (i.e., to sell or feed to livestock). Most of the recipients have been pleased with the food aid (except for some dissatisfaction with bulgar) and would be interested in participating in further projects. The status of maintenance on 15 projects which have been completed for at least 6 months and the proposals that these projects have stimulated for follow-on development activities indicate that the FFW program will continue to benefit the population on a long-term basis. This is true of both road projects (which have been responsible for increased traffic and market competitiveness) and non-road projects (3 of 4 non-road projects specifically examined with regard to long-term impacts have increased agricultural productivity).