USAID. MISSION TO CAMEROON
Evaluates project to develop a methodology for providing urban-based services in the Mandara Mountains and nearby areas of rural North Cameroon.
Jackson, Leroy; Mathieu, Claude · 1982
Abstract
Final PES covers the period 9/80-4/82 and is based on document review and interviews with Government of Cameroon (GURC), USAID/C, and contractor personnel. Despite serious implementation problems, the project did produce a viable "Urban Functions in Rural Development" (UFIRD) methodology which can be applied elsewhere in Cameroon and a plan for developing the project area through investments in services, facilities, and infrastructure. (The plan is acceptable to GURC, even though some have characterized it as a "shopping list" of projects rather than an integrated whole.) To formulate the plan, the technical assistance (TA) team conducted a socioeconomic survey of 72 important regional centers, inventoried available goods and services, conceptualized a four-level hierarchy of service centers, and then recommended specific service sites and interventions. The team also evaluated migration in the project area and analyzed the agricultural and livestock sectors; road, communication, and power systems; and access to health care, education, and water. Regarding implementation: the TA team was inexperienced and in some cases unqualified; there was a dearth of communication among contractor personnel, USAID/C, and GURC counterparts; technical direction by USAID/C and GURC was often confused or lacking; USAID/C changed project officers frequently, assigned officers who did not understand the project"s objectives, and failed to maintain project schedules; and GURC was slow in supplying local cost contributions and ineffective in monitoring local currency expenditures. The project"s central funding and its failure to involve GURC in the design phases - the project was in a sense imposed on Cameroon because AID/W wanted to test its UFIRD theory - also contributed to implementation problems. The project teaches (in addition to the obvious lessons to be drawn from the above) that host personnel have great difficulty in understanding the A.I.D. system, e.g., the differences between consultants and Regional Office personnel.
Connected topics
Classification