Housing and community upgrading for low-income Egyptians; final evaluation report

Mid-term evaluation covers the period 1978-2/82 and is based mainly on document review and interviews with project personnel. Due to lengthy negotiations with U.S. consulting firms, USAID/E had to extend the project 1 year to mid-1984 and less than 10% of project funds have been expended. In the Helwan New Community (HNC) sites and services/core unit subproject, major design work is complete and construction of a model housing estate of nearly 200 units is underway. The awarding of the first major infrastructure contract, however, still awaits USAID/E's approval. In the subproject to upgrade six communities (an instance of the project's occasionally unrealistic design), upgrading has begun in only three, and work is at best incomplete in developing evaluation and finance plans and replicable community action programs and in other areas. The planned Vocational Training Center has been replaced by community center training programs. Although the Government of Egypt's (GOE) success in lowering the costs of its conventional low-income housing projects seems to make the cost savings projected for the HNC unattainable (a fact which may undermine USAID/E's credibility in future housing policy interventions), the project as designed has several advantages over current GOE housing; for example, the HNC provides ownership and better site planning and both subprojects offer a full range of community services. Two issues demand speedy attention. USAID/E and the GOE's Joint Housing Program/Project Implementation Unit (JHP/PIU) must agree on the plan for the HNC. According to USAID/E, inclusion of a three-story vertical core would turn the HNC into a conventional GOE housing project. USAID/E and the JHP/PIU must also reach accord on the extent of USAID/E's technical oversight; JHP/PIU is pressing for greater responsibility over technical issues. Lessons learned are that: USAID/E should outline its key technical criteria in advance to expedite project implementation and not undermine the JHP/PIU's sense of accomplishment; GOE agencies do not readily participate in a project in which they are not directly involved; and the project will not in itself solve the long-term policy issue of placing the GOE's housing strategy on a more economical footing.