Mid-term evaluation of environmental education and communication project (GreenCom)

The evaluation covers the period 9/93-12/96. Missions and other USAID offices are for the most part enthusiastic about GreenCOM performance. GreenCOM thinks it has plowed new ground in social marketing by applying it to an area vastly more complex and varied than in previous applications by its parent contractor, the Academy for Educational Development (AED). One important difference between GreenCOM and AED's earlier communications efforts is that community participation is significantly more important. The senior staff seem agreed that a clear GreenCOM "mindset" has not yet emerged, but most would agree that "listening to people," participation, and an emphasis on gender are important pillars for whatever may emerge. The information exchange part of GreenCOM appears to be functioning as intended. However, there is widespread frustration among GreenCOM technical staff over lack of time for preparation of synthesis products. The Office of Women Development (WID) contributed to GreenCOM's funding. The objective was to see that WID issues were integrated into GreenCOM activities. GreenCOM has been very conscientious about doing that. Although the contract calls for six evaluations in the first five years, only one (in Jordan) has been done. The problem is persuading USAID Missions to include an evaluation when designing a GreenCOM buy-in. Research is dependent on funds from buy-ins for all its activities. GreenCOM staff give high marks to their USAID project managers for their understanding of development, environment, and social marketing, for their support, and for dealing with them as professional colleagues. At the same time, the staff feel the need for more core technical support in terms of oversight on the direction, strategy, and approaches being implemented. GreenCOM staff have cited the following lessons learned. (1) There is resistance to research among some Missions who see it as overly time-consuming and academic. GreenCOM needs resources for research to test models or strategies across countries to get lessons learned. (2) GreenCOM is moving toward a less quantitative formative research model in response to changing program needs, low funding, and time constraints. However, there isn't always a full understanding in Missions of the importance of formative research to design a program. (3) Sometimes there is funding to conduct formative research, but no follow-up funding is available to implement activities that are identified. This is true in Ecuador (recycling program) and Morocco (improving solid waste collections in poor neighborhoods). To avoid the problem of having raised expectations, some form of follow-up implementation activities should be mobilized. (4) Including persons responsible for field implementation in the design process has proved to be a successful initiative. The sense of ownership among national clients needs to be cultivated. The workshop recently conducted in Morocco is an example of a strategy to get people to "buy in" to the program through a participatory workshop. (5) Taking gender considerations seriously has enhanced results. This was true in Egypt as well as in the Philippines and Jordan. However GreenCOM has not stressed this lesson when following up with Governments. GreenCOM has also learned that integration of gender concerns, rather than separate WID activities with separate WID specialists, works better. (6) Technical staff are recognizing the need to marry environmental considerations with development realities. A strength of the project is its ability to view its mandate as supporting sustainable use. Its goal is to be very practical in its approach. This has two important ramifications. First, GreenCOM staff and consultants need to be very familiar with the breadth of development issues. Unlike health, environmental communication is heavily impacted by other sectors and GreenCOM consultants need to be able to point this out, even to USAID personnel. For example, in Mali and Madagascar Missions have stressed school-based environmental education. But a review of country development indicators suggests that funds would be better put into addressing out-of-school youth since the majority of school-aged youths do not attend school. And those in school are already the recipients of environmental information. Similarly, technical staff have noted that although urbanization, even in Africa, is increasing at an enormous pace, the environmental education models that GreenCOM is asked to implement respond to natural resource issues not urban environments. USAID staff need to be aware that environmental education can support a wider range of activities than it is currently being asked to. (7) Missions have to be explicitly told what they can expect in terms of support to avoid creating false hopes. For example, in El Salvador they had great expectations but felt they got nothing. In fact, the Mission refused offers of research. (8) When the initial visit is made to a Mission and potential staff are identified, it is critical that we determine whether the Mission will deem the salary of local hire individuals acceptable. In a number of situations, appropriate local hire staff have been identified during the initial visit, only to have them rejected by the Mission contracts officer.