VIET NAM  COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION MAIN MISSION  3 – 24 March 2011  Preliminary Review of Findings Office of Evaluatio...
Management and Staffing <ul><li>Luciano Lavizzari:  Director, Office of Evaluation (IOE) </li></ul><ul><li>Anne-Marie Lamb...
Mission Schedule <ul><li>3-4 March 2011: Meetings with national ministries and mass organisations in Hanoi </li></ul><ul><...
Remaining Milestones <ul><li>5 September: Share draft with Government for comments </li></ul><ul><li>3 October: Government...
Scope of the CPE <ul><li>Three COSOPs </li></ul><ul><li>Ten projects (recent approvals not covered)  </li></ul><ul><li>Non...
Evaluation Criteria <ul><li>Relevance </li></ul><ul><li>Effectiveness </li></ul><ul><li>Efficiency </li></ul><ul><li>Rural...
Overall finding of the evaluation <ul><li>The evaluation team has concluded, based on the evidence on the ground, that IFA...
Targeting Poverty <ul><li>IFAD supports provinces, districts and communes with a relatively  high poverty incidence  often...
Integrated Rural Development Model <ul><li>IFAD supports poverty reduction through a range of programmes at the commune le...
1.   Decentralisation, Coordination and Building Management Capacity <ul><li>Projects work directly with provinces with PP...
2. Small-Scale Infrastructure using Participatory Planning and Commune Development Funds  <ul><li>Villages submit project ...
3. Demonstration Models of Farm Production <ul><li>Programmes aim at enhancement of food security and income diversificati...
4.  Micro-finance <ul><li>Savings and credit groups </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide the poor with a practical means of credi...
5.  Market Access and Micro Enterprise <ul><li>A step forward in market access </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved awareness th...
Efficiency and Programme Management <ul><li>Timely project effectiveness and completion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Effectivenes...
Efficiency and Programme Management (cont.) <ul><li>Financial management: The authorized allocation into the designated ac...
Impact of the Viet Nam-IFAD Cooperation <ul><li>IFAD looks at impact in terms of a number of domains: </li></ul><ul><ul><l...
A. Household Income and Assets <ul><li>Accurate data is a challenge given the inflation in Viet Nam which makes historical...
B. Institutions and Policies <ul><li>Important achievements through pioneering: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Participatory planni...
C. Food Security and Agricultural Productivity <ul><li>Overall, the projects have helped to increase cereals and vegetable...
D. Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change  <ul><li>A significant development in preparation of land-use maps an...
E. Human and Social Capital and Empowerment <ul><li>The capacity building activities result in visible improvement at indi...
F. Gender Equality and Ethnic Minority Development <ul><li>Projects have empowered women as well as women’s organisations ...
Sustainability, Innovation and Scaling Up <ul><li>Issues of sustainability and scaling up have not yet received the attent...
IFAD’s non-lending activities <ul><li>In addition to its lending, the evaluation covers activities such as: </li></ul><ul>...
Key Questions to be Addressed in Upcoming COSOP A. Programme Design Questions <ul><li>Should IFAD adopt more explicit targ...
B. Programme Content Questions <ul><li>What is the optimal model for providing credit to the rural poor and what role shou...
C. Programme Management Questions <ul><li>Should IFAD be doing more to build both financial and knowledge partnerships wit...
Acknowledgements <ul><li>Government for its support of the mission </li></ul><ul><li>Viet Nam Country Presence Office  </l...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

IFAD Vietnam Country Programme Evaluation March 2011

847 views

Published on

International Fund For Agricultural Development (IFAD) Vietnam Evaluation, Main Mission, 3 – 24 March 2011 – A Preliminary Review of Findings .

The evaluation team concluded, based on the evidence on the ground, that IFAD’s programme is adding substantial value to the Government of Viet Nam’s efforts to reduce rural poverty.

Published in: Business, Economy & Finance
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
847
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

IFAD Vietnam Country Programme Evaluation March 2011

  1. 1. VIET NAM COUNTRY PROGRAMME EVALUATION MAIN MISSION 3 – 24 March 2011 Preliminary Review of Findings Office of Evaluation, IFAD 21 March 2011
  2. 2. Management and Staffing <ul><li>Luciano Lavizzari: Director, Office of Evaluation (IOE) </li></ul><ul><li>Anne-Marie Lambert: Lead Evaluator (IOE) </li></ul><ul><li>Basil Kavalsky: Consultants’ Team Leader (IOE) </li></ul><ul><li>Ganesh Shivakoti: Consultant (IOE), Agricultural Production, Natural Resource Management and Environment </li></ul><ul><li>Jicheng Zhang: Evaluation Research Analyst (IOE), Market Integration and Enterprise Development </li></ul><ul><li>Oanh Nguyen: Evaluation Research Analyst (IOE), Programme Management </li></ul><ul><li>Uyen Vu Ngoc: Consultant (IOE), Gender, Ethnic Minorities, and Community Development </li></ul>
  3. 3. Mission Schedule <ul><li>3-4 March 2011: Meetings with national ministries and mass organisations in Hanoi </li></ul><ul><li>6-18 March 2011: Field visits to IFAD Programmes in: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Bac Kan </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ben Tre </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ha Giang </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ha Tinh </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Quang Binh </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Tra Vinh </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Tuyen Quang </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>21-24 March 2011: Wrap up meetings and remaining meetings in Hanoi </li></ul>
  4. 4. Remaining Milestones <ul><li>5 September: Share draft with Government for comments </li></ul><ul><li>3 October: Governments comments to IOE on draft report </li></ul><ul><li>End October: Finalise draft evaluation report and share with all partners </li></ul><ul><li>End November: CPE National Roundtable Workshop </li></ul><ul><li>January 2012: Finalise CPE Agreement at Completion Point, publish report  </li></ul>
  5. 5. Scope of the CPE <ul><li>Three COSOPs </li></ul><ul><li>Ten projects (recent approvals not covered) </li></ul><ul><li>Non-lending activities </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A large number of grants – global and regional grants covering Viet Nam and some country specific grants </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Policy dialogue, knowledge management, and partnership building (for the most part not free standing but implicit in the kind of activities it supports) </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Evaluation Criteria <ul><li>Relevance </li></ul><ul><li>Effectiveness </li></ul><ul><li>Efficiency </li></ul><ul><li>Rural poverty impact </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Household income and assets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Human and social capital and empowerment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Food security and agriculture productivity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Natural resources and environment (and climate change) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutions and policies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Innovation, replication and scaling up </li></ul><ul><li>Gender equality and women’s empowerment </li></ul><ul><li>Performance of partners </li></ul>
  7. 7. Overall finding of the evaluation <ul><li>The evaluation team has concluded, based on the evidence on the ground, that IFAD’s programme is adding substantial value to the Government of Viet Nam’s efforts to reduce rural poverty. </li></ul>
  8. 8. Targeting Poverty <ul><li>IFAD supports provinces, districts and communes with a relatively high poverty incidence often associated with a large weight of ethnic minorities in the populations of those localities. </li></ul><ul><li>IFAD targets women in many projects because this has been demonstrated as one of the most effective instrumentalities for addressing rural poverty. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Integrated Rural Development Model <ul><li>IFAD supports poverty reduction through a range of programmes at the commune level that are undertaken together so as to derive synergies. </li></ul><ul><li>These programmes operate on both the supply side - building the capacity and providing financial resources for investment by the rural poor; and the demand side -linking producers to markets. </li></ul><ul><li>It also supports the enabling environment by helping improve the coordinated delivery of government services to the poor. </li></ul>
  10. 10. 1. Decentralisation, Coordination and Building Management Capacity <ul><li>Projects work directly with provinces with PPCUs generally reporting to a steering committee headed by the Chairman of the Provincial People’s Committee </li></ul><ul><li>Line departments associated with the project at all levels </li></ul><ul><li>Project implementation is responsibility of Commune PCU </li></ul><ul><li>Project invests heavily in building capacity of staff at all levels to promote poverty reduction and implement programmes effectively </li></ul><ul><li>PCU coordinates contributions to project implementation of line departments and builds capacity to deliver </li></ul><ul><li>Key Issue: How best to institutionalise this integrated approach of coordinating support provided by the PCU and the line departments to delivering services for poverty reduction, and make it sustainable. </li></ul>
  11. 11. 2. Small-Scale Infrastructure using Participatory Planning and Commune Development Funds <ul><li>Villages submit project proposals and commune project unit prioritises on the basis of established criteria. </li></ul><ul><li>Projects are for the most part integrated into the commune SEDP </li></ul><ul><li>Resources mainly used for access roads and small-scale irrigation </li></ul><ul><li>Programmes use more rigorous procedures than those under Government’s programme 135 </li></ul><ul><li>Key Issue: IFAD and the Government need to work towards a uniform approach to strategic planning and project implementation procedures. </li></ul>
  12. 12. 3. Demonstration Models of Farm Production <ul><li>Programmes aim at enhancement of food security and income diversification through the support of: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Animal breeding and health models including new forages production </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Models of major cereals, cash crops and vegetables </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Forest production models including issuance of forest land use certificates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adaptation trials, farmer field schools facilitated increase in food production and efficient use of farm labor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Key issue: How to develop market-oriented production models including private sector engagement. </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. 4. Micro-finance <ul><li>Savings and credit groups </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide the poor with a practical means of credit </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enable small-scale farm activities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Create linkage with banks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutionalize mutual support mechanisms </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Micro-credit through banks </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Raise attention to the poor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>VBSP engages in low-interest lending to SCGs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>VBARD provides market-interest loans to small business </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Go only part of the way in filling the gap in addressing needs for credit </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Build formal credit record for the previously unbankable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide potential for upgrading the SCGs and CIGs </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Key Issue: VBSP provides only very limited amounts of credit – too small for anything beyond the simplest activity; VBARD requires collateral for all loans . This leaves most poor farmers who want to expand the scale of their commercial activities without sufficient credit. </li></ul>
  14. 14. 5. Market Access and Micro Enterprise <ul><li>A step forward in market access </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved awareness through market based planning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased market-oriented productions(CIGs) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inter-village roads connecting to local markets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gap in supporting physical markets, market information, and enabling environment </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Micro-enterprise development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited capacity at local levels and few successful cases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gap in food and agri-processing in the value chain </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited engagement with the private sector </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Potential of co-investment with village trade leaders to create employment </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Key Issue: How can business capacity for entrepreneurship be developed and programmes build links with small and medium private operators? </li></ul>
  15. 15. Efficiency and Programme Management <ul><li>Timely project effectiveness and completion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Effectiveness lags are well below the regional average </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Projects were either completed by the original closing date or extended but for no more than one year. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Programme management costs are in line with the region. </li></ul><ul><li>Projects are generally multi-components. Decentralization requires lots of coordination among activities and levels. Effective project coordination enhances project efficiency. </li></ul><ul><li>Some projects cover more than one province, and there is no strategic basis for the combination of provinces in each project </li></ul>
  16. 16. Efficiency and Programme Management (cont.) <ul><li>Financial management: The authorized allocation into the designated account is too small and projects tend to run dry during the high implementation phase. Bottlenecks in the flow of funds impede progress. </li></ul><ul><li>Procurement: IFAD thresholds are lower than government standards. Procurement takes time given the weak procurement capacity at the commune level, however these rigorous procedures promote better governance and more efficiency. </li></ul><ul><li>M&E system in general has captured financial and physical progress. Indicators in many cases are still confined to the output level and are quantitative. Efforts are being made to update the results chain, include more qualitative measures and aggregate to outcome and impact levels. Overall assessing impact is still challenging. </li></ul>
  17. 17. Impact of the Viet Nam-IFAD Cooperation <ul><li>IFAD looks at impact in terms of a number of domains: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Household Income and Assets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Agricultural Productivity and Food Security </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutions and Policies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Natural Resource Management and Environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Human and Social Capital and Empowerment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gender Equality </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Often difficult to attribute impacts to the IFAD programme in a context of rapid overall growth and an increasing number of Government programmes to support poverty reduction </li></ul>
  18. 18. A. Household Income and Assets <ul><li>Accurate data is a challenge given the inflation in Viet Nam which makes historical comparisons of poverty difficult </li></ul><ul><li>Impact studies suggest projects are raising incomes of poor households </li></ul><ul><li>Greater attention is needed to the near-poor who are at risk of falling back into poverty </li></ul><ul><li>Impact on household assets has been mainly through livestock and forest land ownership </li></ul>
  19. 19. B. Institutions and Policies <ul><li>Important achievements through pioneering: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Participatory planning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decentralised project management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved coordination for poverty reduction at different levels of government </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Programme 135 effectively builds on IFAD’s approach </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on forest land use as an instrument for poverty reduction has been another important contribution </li></ul>
  20. 20. C. Food Security and Agricultural Productivity <ul><li>Overall, the projects have helped to increase cereals and vegetables production both by increasing productivity and cropping intensity through the provision of both inputs and infrastructure development </li></ul><ul><li>Food security for poor and ethnic minorities have been increased between 1 to 5 months </li></ul><ul><li>In addition, animal and aquaculture development may have contributed to improved nutrition status of the beneficiaries, but this needs to be confirmed. </li></ul><ul><li>However, there is further scope for adaptive production technology development at local level suitable for the poor and marginal farmers </li></ul>
  21. 21. D. Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change <ul><li>A significant development in preparation of land-use maps and distributing land title certificates to the ethnic minorities </li></ul><ul><li>Forest land allocated for conservation and management to the individual households in the community </li></ul><ul><li>Climate change adaptation mechanisms such as salt tolerant varieties development efforts and shift from rice to coconut planting underway among the poor coastal communities </li></ul><ul><li>Adaptation of Good Agriculture Practice through organic farming or IPM for safe use of insecticides and pesticides not to pollute land and water. </li></ul><ul><li>However, there is so far a lack of a strategic approach integrating communal planning and land-use planning. There is scope for a number of environmental interventions, such as exploring the potential for bio-gas as a substitute for fuel-wood, promotion of poor farmers’ exploitation of NTFPs, and awareness & participation of poor in understanding role of forest for conservation in a holistic manner. </li></ul>
  22. 22. E. Human and Social Capital and Empowerment <ul><li>The capacity building activities result in visible improvement at individual level (awareness and skills of staff; technical and managerial capacity of community members; and private business beneficiaries in some projects); </li></ul><ul><li>Community self-management capacity and grassroots democracy are stronger in project areas, though the degree of improvement observed varies across projects (commune development board, CIG, credit-saving groups, women’s livelihood clubs, association of private producers and traders). </li></ul><ul><li>However, the issue is how to improve quality of the organisations supported by the project (management, sustainability, benefits to members). </li></ul>
  23. 23. F. Gender Equality and Ethnic Minority Development <ul><li>Projects have empowered women as well as women’s organisations at grassroots level through improved living conditions and livelihoods, access to credit, employment opportunities and services. </li></ul><ul><li>However, women’s business and access to market is inadequately supported and encouraged overall </li></ul><ul><li>The objective for ethnic minority support is not always explicit in the project guidelines and data are not always separated by ethnic groups; It could be useful to strengthen monitoring of ethnic minority participation and development </li></ul>
  24. 24. Sustainability, Innovation and Scaling Up <ul><li>Issues of sustainability and scaling up have not yet received the attention they merit </li></ul><ul><li>COSOP will need to focus on reaching a consensus on a strategic approach to IFAD’s engagement in Viet Nam over the long term </li></ul><ul><li>IFAD could do more to bring the project and provincial level experience to the national level </li></ul><ul><li>Stronger partnerships with other donors and with the private and cooperative sectors may need to have more prominence in the strategy going forward for scale up and sustainability of market integration programmes </li></ul><ul><li>Selection of provinces for engagement seems arbitrary and there is no exit strategy at the project level </li></ul>
  25. 25. IFAD’s non-lending activities <ul><li>In addition to its lending, the evaluation covers activities such as: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Policy Dialogue - IFAD could do more to assist the Government to strategise its approach to rural poverty through building on its project experience </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Partnerships - IFAD could do more to promote partnerships for scaling up the programmes it supports </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge Management – IFAD has a substantial programme of knowledge management in place, but could promote more systematic sharing of knowledge across projects through strategic selection of the provinces it supports. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>IFAD also provides grants – both regional grants that include Viet Nam and country-specific grants. These are playing a useful role in building knowledge sharing and partnerships, especially in the area of agricultural research, and this role could be further enhanced by strategic development of a grant programme as part of the COSOP. </li></ul>
  26. 26. Key Questions to be Addressed in Upcoming COSOP A. Programme Design Questions <ul><li>Should IFAD adopt more explicit targeting of the poorest of the poor, ethnic minorities, women and youth? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the model of covering one or two unrelated provinces efficient and compatible with scaling up IFAD’s programme? </li></ul><ul><li>Could these programmes be more closely aligned with GOV programmes so as to leverage its support more effectively? </li></ul><ul><li>How can the important coordination role in addressing rural poverty of the PPCU, DPCU and CPCU/CDB be institutionalised? </li></ul>
  27. 27. B. Programme Content Questions <ul><li>What is the optimal model for providing credit to the rural poor and what role should the VBSP, Agribank and the Women’s Union play? </li></ul><ul><li>How can the effectiveness of approaches to market integration and enterprise development be enhanced? </li></ul><ul><li>Is IFAD paying enough attention to issues of environmental management and climate change in its programme? </li></ul>
  28. 28. C. Programme Management Questions <ul><li>Should IFAD be doing more to build both financial and knowledge partnerships with other donors? </li></ul>
  29. 29. Acknowledgements <ul><li>Government for its support of the mission </li></ul><ul><li>Viet Nam Country Presence Office </li></ul><ul><li>Project authorities in the provinces visited who provided extraordinary support to the mission and whose commitment to the task of rural poverty reduction made a deep impression </li></ul>

×