1. Post-Project
Sustainability Study:
Health, Wat/San and
Agricultural
Interventions in
Bolivia...6 Years
Later
Janine Schooley
CORE Spring Meeting 2013

2. Relevant Background
PCI has prioritized moving beyond
donor-driven M&E
Recognized need to
measure what we say
we are all about….Real and lasting
change!
Identified private funding and
decided to pilot a post
project sustainability study
methodology in Bolivia
Sustainable impact and
measurement of same is now one
of 7 Strategic Directions in PCI’s
2013-2016 Strategic Plan

3. Description of Subject Project
PCI implemented the Bolivia DAP/
MYAP (USAID Title II Development
Assistance Program) from 1997 to
2002. Overall project goal was to
reduce high levels of food insecurity
and poverty in select rural
municipalities of Cochabamba and
northern Potosi.
Maternal and child health (MCH)
Water and sanitation (W&S)
Agriculture
Project budget: $ 25,600,000
240,525 beneficiaries (annual investment
of US$ 21 per beneficiary)

4. Purpose of the Study
The primary purpose of the study was to
assess the sustainability and impact of
behavioral, livelihood, health and
infrastructure interventions among
participating communities. The key study
questions were the following:
What is the real and lasting impact of the
Bolivia DAP?
To what extent did the Bolivia DAP change
behavior?
What are perceptions about the impact of
PCI’s DAP interventions?
What can we learn from this study about
how best to achieve sustainable impact?

5. Methodology
Similar methodologies to those used in the
project’s baseline assessment, mid-term and
final evaluations
Same 15 communities as for final project
evaluation conducted in 2002
Also collected information on non-PCI projects
implemented in the same communities
2 control communities also studied

6. Bolivia Post-Project Evaluation at a Glance
16 PCI staff persons participated in the evaluation
66 mothers interviewed
15 community leaders interviewed
11 water committee leaders interviewed
19 agricultural producers interviewed
10 silo owners interviewed
8 health promoters interviewed
2 government center staff interviewed
10 mothers’ focus groups conducted
5 Irrigation committees’ focus groups conducted
12 water systems inspected
5 irrigation systems inspected
75 home water systems and latrines inspected
10 silos inspected
300+ people contributed to data collection
90 households were selected for participation from
517 total households in the catchment area
90% confidence interval used for sample size
calculation
1,149 miles were covered by evaluation team

7. Key Results
DAP communities were
universally still better off than
the control communities
100% of non-PCI respondents
attributed positive health and
development changes in DAP
communities to PCI’s earlier
presence
Strong evidence of
sustainability of results across
all 3 intervention areas

8. Communities which
participated in interventions in
the three key intervention
areas had stronger indicators
of success than those
communities that participated
in only two intervention areas
Sustainability of community
interventions, such as water
and irrigation systems, was
stronger than household
interventions such as latrines
and individual health
knowledge and practices
Key Results cont’d

9. Maternal and Child Health
Positive Results Areas for
Improvement
86% of PCI ‘infants’
still have health cards
Only 69% of younger
infants had health
cards
82% of families still
receive visits from
community health
promoters trained by
PCI
Fewer community
health promoters
active at the local
level over time
84% of households
still seek care at local
health centers

10. Water and Sanitation
Positive Results Areas for Improvement
98% of community W&S
committees still functioning
72% of homes had latrines
but only 51% used these
latrines
Community water systems
universally still in good
working condition
Household water
infrastructure sustainability
28% lower than community
80% of all households still
using one or more
treatment methods for
domestic water use
Coordination with municipal
water committees weak

11. Agriculture
Positive Results Areas for
Improvement
Irrigation systems still
in good condition
Silos still working well
and excellently
maintained
Lack of transparency
and equitable
distribution of silos
Household incomes
continued to increase
from the end of the
DAP

12. Other Important Results
Impact on PCI staff: Pride and
commitment to our mission; flood of
positive emotions
Current and future project
improvements: Useful lessons
learned for future program design;
what tends to “stick” and what needs
more attention if we want it to “stick”
From M&E to Strategic
Information for Impact: Expanded
organizational commitment to M&E
beyond donor requirements and
proved the feasibility and value of
conducting post-project sustainability
assessments

13. Challenges
Inaccurate/incomplete data (eg, census)
Logistics and coordination
Lack of detailed recollections
Locating government health service
personnel
Attribution
Lack of $
Lack of complete documentation
Insufficient time allocated for planning

14. Lessons Learned
Timing of post-project reviews is crucial and
should be carefully assessed, weighing the
need to allow enough time after the end of a
project to accurately assess sustainability
against the possibility that waiting too long will
limit the ability to collect adequate information
about the project.
The involvement of PCI staff who participate in
project design and implementation is absolutely
essential.

15. While post-project evaluations build the
morale of staff, independent
consultants should be engaged as part
of the evaluation team to minimize risks
of bias and ensure a higher level of
independence and validity.
Adequate time should be budgeted
for study planning and data collection,
taking into consideration logistical and
documentation challenges.
Evaluators need to communicate
purpose clearly to community leaders
and participants in order to keep
expectations in line with reality.
Lessons Learned cont’d

16. If you are interested in more
information…
jschooley@pciglobal.org

17. Thank You!

18. 1) You’re a consulting team visiting a new project
(eg, 3 -6 months from startup or at mid-term).
Propose 5-10 questions for testing of potential for
sustainability during the life of project.
2) List Top 10 challenges or constraints (eg, conflict
between achieving results and sustainability) which
you encounter in your programs related specifically
to assessing progress toward sustainability.
3) Outline various possible strategies for CORE and
Member Organizations for obtaining resources for
post-project sustainability studies