USAID DEC
THIS EVALUATION REPORT WAS UNDERTAKEN (1)TO ASSESS THE ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES, AND POSSIBLE REPLICABILITY OF THE "MODIFIED' FORCE ACCOUNT APPROACH USED IN THIS PROJECT; AND (2)TO CONSIDER HOW AID'S EVALUATION PROCEDURES FOR NON-CAPITAL PROJECTS SHOULD BE APPLIED TO CAPITAL PROJECTS.
MANLY, GORDON|WESTLEY, JOHN R. · 1974

Abstract
THE EVALUATION PROCEDURE LED THE EVALUATORS TO MAKE 8 RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING: (1)ROAD PROJECTS RELATED TO REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OR RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS SHOULD USE A COST-EFFECTIVENESS APPROACH TO ASSURE APPROPRIATE DESIGN STANDARDS AND PREVENT THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXCESSIVELY COSTLY FACILITIES; (2)ALL BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES SHOULD ROUTINELY INCLUDE A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS APPLIED TO THE MAJOR VARIABLES; (3)AID SHOULD CONTINUE ITS POLICY OF ENCOURAGING CONTRACTOR CONSTRUCTION OF HIGH-STANDARD ROADS, BUT SHOULD BE PREPARED TO CONSIDER MANAGED FORCE ACCOUNT ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS; (4)AID SHOULD CONTINUE TO SEEK OUT MEANS OF ENCOURAGING THE USE OF LOCAL MATERIALS AND LABOR-INTENSIVE TECHNIQUES; AND (5)AID SHOULD ESTABLISH A COMPREHENSIVE AND INTEGRATED MONITORING, REPORTING AND EVALUATION SYSTEM FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS INCORPORATING THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK, ANNUAL EVALUATION BASED ON THE PAR SYSTEM, AND FINAL PROJECT EVALUATION, PERMITTING SUBSTANTIAL VARIATION WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF A SET OF STANDARD MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.
Connected topics
Classification
USAID DEC