FINAL-SWC-SEED-MTE_Report-24-11-2016

Supporting Enabling Environment for Development
Implemented by Search for Common Ground
Mid-Term Evaluation Report
January 2013 – May 2016
Submitted by
Kishor Pradhan, Team Leader
Shushma Khadka, SWC, Team Member
Shova Pokharel, Team Member, MoWCSW
Sudip Dahal, Financial Expert
Submitted to
Social Welfare Council
Lainchour, Kathmandu, Nepal
September 2016

SEED, Mid-Term Evaluation Report

Page 1 of 58
ACRONYMS
C-PAC Central-Project Advisory Committee
CDO Chief District Officer
D-PAC District-Project Advisory Committee
DAO District Administrative Office
DDC District Development Committee
DEO District Education Office
DPO District Police Office
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GA General Agreement
GESI Gender Equality and Social Inclusion
GoN Government of Nepal
INGO International Non Governmental Organization
LEY Leadership Engaging Youth
MoWCSW Ministry of Women, Children, and Social Welfare
MTE Mid-Term Evaluation
ODF Open Defecation Free
PA Project Agreement
PO Project Objective
PT Project Theme
SEED Supporting Enabling Environment for Development
SFCG Search for Common Ground
SWC Social Welfare Council
TDS Tax Deductible at Source
TEA Total Estimated Amount
TG Third Gender
ToR Terms of Reference
UN United Nations
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VDC Village Development Committee
WDO Women Development Officer
WCDO Women and Children Development Office
YNPD Youth Network for Peace and Development


Page 2 of 58
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
On behalf of the MTE Team we would like to first of all thank SWC for giving us this wonderful opportunity
to carry out this interesting assignment.
The field and central office staff members, particularly the SEED project staff members of SFCG Nepal
are to be thanked for their coherent cooperation and for smoothly organizing the fieldworks.
Similarly the SEED project’s central and local level partners, district level line agencies and participants in
various activities of SEED project are to be thanked for organizing the consultations, interviews, FGDs,
and observations.
Kishor Pradhan, Team Leader/Thematic Expert
Shusma Khadka, SWC, Team Member
Shova Pokharel, MoWCSW, Team Member
Sudip Dahal, Financial Expert
September 2015, Kathmandu, Nepal


Page 3 of 58
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................................... 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................................................... 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 5
SECTION I INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................... 7
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................ 7
1.2 PROJECT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES.................................................................................................................. 7
1.5 DONOR INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................... 9
1.6 PROJECT COMPOSITION................................................................................................................................ 9
1.7 FINANCING ARRANGEMENT.......................................................................................................................... 10
1.8 OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION................................................................................................................ 11
1.9 SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION ........................................................................................................................ 12
1.10 EVALUATION RESEARCH QUESTIONS........................................................................................................... 12
1.11 EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION................................................................................................................ 13
1.12 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY REPORT ....................................................................................................... 13
SECTION II METHODOLOGY OF EVALUATION ................................................................................................... 14
2.1 STUDY APPROACH ...................................................................................................................................... 14
2.3 SELECTION OF THE PARTICIPANTS............................................................................................................... 14
2.4 STUDY INSTRUMENTS/TOOLS FOR DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................. 15
2.5 MECHANISM FOR FIELD WORK..................................................................................................................... 15
2.6 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES....................................................................................... 15
2.7 WORK SCHEDULE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................................ 15
2.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY......................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION III DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... 17
3.1 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 17
3.2 KEY FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................. 17
3.2.1 TARGETED OUTPUTS VERSUS ACHIEVEMENTS............................................................................................. 17
3.2.2 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION DATA............................................................................................................... 19
3.2.3 KEY CONSULTATIONS WITH SFCG/SEED STAFF/PARTNERS AND LINE AGENCIES......................................... 20
3.2.4 CASE STUDIES............................................................................................................................................ 21
3.2.5 GESI IN SEED ACTIVITIES .......................................................................................................................... 22
3.2.6 FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE.............................................................................................................................. 28
3.2.7 PROJECT AGREEMENT COORDINATION COMPLIANCE ................................................................................... 34
SECTION IV SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................... 39
4.1 SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................... 39
4.2 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 40
4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 40
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................................... 43
ANNEX 1: GENERIC CHECKLIST .......................................................................................................................... 44
ANNEX 2: TENTATIVE FIELD VISIT PLAN............................................................................................................. 46
ANNEX 3: FGD PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................................................................. 47
ANNEX 4: COMPLETE LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED....................................................................................... 50
ANNEX 5: SEED PROJECT C-PAC MEETING MINUTES, 2012, 2014, AND 2015 ............................................... 51


Page 4 of 58
List of Tables

Table 1: Theme/Objective Wise Project Outcomes......................................................................................8
Table 2: Theme and Project Objective Wise Activities ...............................................................................10
Table 3: Administrative and Program (Activity) Estimated Budget .............................................................10
Table 4: Year Wise Administrative and Program (Activity) Budget.............................................................11
Table 5: Partner Wise Yearly Allocated Budget..........................................................................................11
Table 6: Theme and Objective Wise Outputs Versus Achievements as of 31/05/2016 .............................17
Table 7: Data on FGDs...............................................................................................................................19
Table 8: Data on Key Consultations ...........................................................................................................20
Table 9: Gender Wise CLS Participant Data ..............................................................................................23
Table 10: Social Inclusion Wise CLS Training Participant Data .................................................................23
Table 11: Seed Grant Activities Gender Disaggregated Data ....................................................................24
Table 12: Leaders Engaging Youth (LEY) Participants ..............................................................................28
Table 13: Youth Participation in Development (The Peace Building Initiative Project 2013)......................28
Table 14: Budget Versus Actual Expenses as of 31/05/2016.....................................................................29
Table 15: Program Versus Admin Cost as of 31/05/2016 ..........................................................................29
Table 16: Fiscal year Wise Comparison.....................................................................................................30
Table 17: Spending by Partner Organizations............................................................................................30
Table 18: Partner Budget and Actual Expenses.........................................................................................31
Table 19: Project Agreements Other Than PA Partners.............................................................................32
Table 20: Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of other than PA Partners Organization ..................33
Table 21: Project Agreement with Partners Beyond the PA with SWC ......................................................34


Page 5 of 58
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• SFCG had entered into a General Agreement with the Social Welfare Council to work in Nepal in
2006, which has been renewed twice in 2009 and 2013. Currently SFCG operates in Nepal under the
General Agreement 2013 and the Project Agreement titled ‘Supporting Enabling Environment for
Development’ effective for 5 years from 4 January 2013.
• The overall goal of the SEED project is to support an enabling environment for development in Nepal.
Four specific objectives are to : i) build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government,
youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for development; ii) provide seed grant
support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development project; iii) provide
technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and
behavior change media programs; and, iv) foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative
problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges.
• The total estimated budget for the SEED project for 5 years is NRs. 199,054,531.00 or USD
1,895,757.00. Financing or funding sources for the project was sought from multiple donors for
various thematic activities. As mentioned in this report under section ‘1.5 Donor Information’ in the PA
with SWC it was mentioned that funding would be sought from 8 donors. Budget estimate for 5 years
(in NRs) administrative and program (activity) wise is as given below.
Budget Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sub-total %
Administrative 8, 183,200 7,912,690 7,28,721 6,788,699 6,280,044 36,449,354 18%
Program/
Activity
35,546,000 35,546,00 33,768,700 30,391,830 27,352,647 162,605,177 82%
Total 43,729,200 43,458,690 41,053,421 37,180,529 33,632,691 199,054,531 100%
• Under the PT: Youth participation in Development and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key
actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an enabling environment for
development; and, To provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for
community development project; the target achievement in average has been 67.8%%.
• Under the PT: Women and Girls Empowerment and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key
community development project; the target achievement in average has been 80%.
• Under the PT: Media in Development and PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local
organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media
programs; the target achievement has been in average 79%.
• Under the PT: Leadership in Development and PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue
and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges; the target
achievement has been 83%.
• The overall target achievement has been 77.45% of the entire project period in terms of budget
spending and delivering outputs and services
• From some of the sample data of the SEED project it was found that gender wise in the Civic
Leadership School (CLS) activities in general aggregate the participation of male was 58%, female
40% and third gender (TG) 2% (see Table 6). Social inclusion wise in the CLS activities it was found
the inclusion of the social groups: Madheshi was 40%; Janajati 16%; Dalit 5%; Brahmin/Chettri 20%;


Page 6 of 58
Muslim 5%, OBC 2%; and, others 6% (see Table 7). Under the Seed Grant Activities it was found that
the participation of male was 72%, female 26%, and TG 2% (see Table 8). Similarly, under the
Leaders Engaging Youth activities the gender participation was male 72%, female 24%, and TG 4%.
• Discrepancies have been observed in the budget management, expenses, and partnerships, which
are not in compliance with the PA with SWC.
• Regarding funding and financial management the SEED project, as per the PA with SWC the project
had budgeted for NRs. 199,054,531 for five years (January 2013 – December 2017). As of carrying
out the MTE (May 2016) the project has overspent by NRs. 80,179,700 or about 40% more. Given
that the overall target achievement of the project has been around 77.45% and budget overspent by
40% this needs to be sorted by SFCG with SWC.
• Excess expenses have been incurred from the first year of the project. In 2013 the project has
incurred Rs. 56, 778, 360 as against budgeted amount of Rs. 43, 729,200; in 2014 it has incurred Rs.
57, 070, 421 as against budget amount of Rs. 43, 458, 690; and Rs. 117, 328, 896 was incurred in
2015 as against budget amount of Rs. 41, 053, 421.
• Some partner organizations have overspent their agreement amount. While, the overall budget of the
PA with partner organizations is Rs.102, 491, 673 and the budget upto May 2016 is Rs. 74, 076,
531.Actual expenses upto May 2016 is Rs. 29, 789, 925 resulting in under spending by Rs. 44, 286,
608 which reflects only 40% budget utilization with the PA partner organizations.
• While reviewing the contract with partner organizations we observed partnership agreement
amounting to Rs. 212, 441,153 were made, which were the partner organizations other than as
mentioned in the signed PA with SWC. The total amount of the PA is Rs. 199, 054, 531 but SFCG
has committed to provide Rs. 212, 441, 153 with other partner organizations.
• Some of the partner organizations were not provided with budget according to the PA, but SFCG has
entered into contract with these organizations and incurred expenses amounting to Rs. 84,619,897
upto May 2016.
• While reviewing the partner organization contracts, we observed instances of agreement done
beyond the PA period with three partner organizations that are not the partner organizations as per
the signed PA.
• As per the GA and PA regulations SFCG is required to inform SWC and make amendments in the PA
in case of any changes in the project budgets or activities, or partnerships.

• It is recommended that the SEED project or SFCG: Amend the changes in the project
budgets/donors, activities, partners; Organize C-PAC field visits for 2016; Improve/Speed up the
implementation of activities that have to date achieved less than 50% target; Organize C-DAC and D-
PAC regularly and undertake proper documentation; and Revise the budget of the project and keep it
updated donor, theme, activity, partner wise.


Page 7 of 58
SECTION I
Introduction
1.1 Project Background
Search for Common Ground (SFCG) is an independent, not-for-profit, none-political, international non-
governmental organization (INGO) working in 30 countries in four continents with headquarters in
Brussels, Belgium and Washington DC, USA. Founded in 1982 SFCG works on conflict transformation by
adopting means that is away from adversarial approaches but towards collaborative problem solving.
SFCG had entered into a General Agreement (GA) with the Social Welfare Council (SWC) to work in
Nepal in 2006, which has been renewed twice in 2009 and 2013. Currently SFCG operates in Nepal
under the General Agreement 2013 and the Project Agreement (PA) titled ‘Supporting Enabling
Environment for Development (SEED)’ effective for 5 years from 4 January 2013.
SFCG Nepal’s activities in Nepal are focused around four thematic program areas of:
• Youth participation in development;
• Women empowerment and development;
• Media in development; and
• Leadership in development.
1.2 Project Goal and Objectives
The overall goal of the SEED project is to support an enabling environment for development in Nepal.
Four specific objectives are to:
1. build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting an
enabling environment for development;
2. provide seed grant support to Community based Organizations (CBOs) for community development
project;
3. provide technical support to local organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising
and behavior change media programs; and
4. foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social
and development challenges.
1.3 Intended Outcomes/Outputs of the Project
According to the PA with SWC theme wise and objective wise intended outputs/outcomes of the project
are as given below in Table 1.


Page 8 of 58
Table 1: Theme/Objective Wise Project Outcomes
Project Themes (PT)/Objectives (PO) Outputs/Outcomes (Target)
PT: Youth participation in Development
PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key
actors (media, local government, youth and
women) in supporting an enabling environment
for development; and, To provide seed grant
support to Community Based Organizations
(CBOs) for community development project.
• 2000 youth trained in collaborative leadership
and development in the selected working districts.
• Seed grants ranging from NRs. 5,000 to 50,000
provided to 100 youth groups in the selected
working districts to implement community
development initiatives.
• 100 youth-led community activities and projects
implemented in the selected working districts.
PT: Women and Girls Empowerment
PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key
actors (media, local government, youth and
women) in supporting an enabling environment
for development; and, To provide seed grant
support to Community based Organizations
(CBOs) for community development project.
• 1000 women and girls trained in collaborative
leadership and development in the selected
working districts.
• Seed grants ranging from NRs. 5,000 to 50,000
provided to 100 women and girls groups in the
selected working districts to implement
community development initiatives.
• 100 women-led community activities and projects
implemented in the selected working districts.
PT: Media in Development
PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local
organizations for production and broadcast of
awareness raising and behavior change media
programs.
• 300 media professionals trained in conflict-
sensitive common ground journalism.
• 15 FM stations supported to produce and
broadcast quality common ground radio
programs.
• Radio drama around the theme of promoting
constructive role of youth and women is produced
and broadcast.
• One 13-episode television series produced and
broadcast.
PT: Leadership in Development
PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership,
dialogue and collaborative problem solving to
address Nepal’s social and development
challenges.
• 200 local leaders (from political parties, civil
society and government) will be trained on
leadership, inclusive development and creating
enabling environment for development.
• 100 multi-stakeholder dialogues will be held in the
selected working districts to facilitate collaborative
problem solving to address social and
development challenges at the local level.
Source: SFCG documents.
1.4 Intended Beneficiaries of the Project
In general, the indirect intended beneficiaries of the project are the people and communities of the
selected project districts to have access to development. Specifically the direct intended beneficiaries of
the projects in the project districts are: i) Youths and youth groups; ii) Women/girls and women/girl groups;
iii) Local media organizations, specifically the FM stations in the districts and the TV at the central
(Kathmandu) level; and, iv) Local leaders (from political parties, civil society and government).


Page 9 of 58
1.5 Donor Information
As per the PA with SWC the SFCG anticipated funding from 8 donors for implementing the SEED project.
The anticipated donors included:
1) Royal Danish Embassy;
2) USAID; current donor
3) US Government;
4) UK Foreign and Common Wealth Office (FCO);
5) UK Aid; current donor
6) UN Agencies; current donor
7) National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – current donor; and,
8) European Commission – current donor.
1.6 Project Composition
As per the PA the SFCG’s SEED project is a five-year project (January 2013 – December 2017) with a
budget estimate of NRs. 199,054, 531 (USD 1,895,757). Regarding the funding sources the SEED project
anticipated funding from multiple donor sources.
The project intends to cover two clusters in eastern and western Nepal including 13 districts. In the
eastern cluster Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusha, Mahotari, and Parsa are included. In the
western cluster, Dang, Banke, Bardiya, Kailali, Doti, and Bajhang are included.
As per the PA with SWC the anticipated project partners or executing agencies for the project included:
1. Samagra Jana Utthan Kendra, Siraha
2. New World (NW), Sunsari
3. Youth Initiative (YI), Dang
4. Alliance for Peace, Kathmandu
5. Youth Network for Peace and Development, Bardiya
6. District Youth Club Network, Banke
7. Youth Network for Peace and Development, Dang
8. Youth network for Peace and Development, Kailali
Media partners include FM radio stations that SFCG has worked in the past. In the PA it is included that
SFCG has worked with 16 FM radio stations.
Besides the specifically mentioned anticipated project partners it is stated in the PA that in addition other
local partners (including FM radio stations) would be actually identified and involved in the actual
implementation process of the project.
In line with the SFCG’s SEED project’s thematic areas of work and objectives, themes and objective wise
specific planned activities as per the PA with SWC are as given below in Table 2.


Page 10 of 58
Table 2: Theme and Project Objective Wise Activities
Themes Project Objectives (PO) Activities
1. Youth participation in
development;
PO 1 and 2 • Capacity building training and workshops
for youths
• See grants to youth groups
• Youth and community dialogue
2. Women and Girls
Empowerment
PO 1 and 2 • Capacity building training and workshops
for women and girls
• See grants to women groups
• Women and community dialogue
3. Media in development PO 1 and 3 • Capacity building training and coaching
of media professionals
• Radio programs
• Radios dramas
• Television programs
4. Leadership in
Development
PO 1 and 4 • Capacity building training to local leaders
• Multi-stakeholder dialogues
Source: SFCG SEED project PA with SWC documents.
1.7 Financing Arrangement
The total estimated budget for the SEED project for 5 years was NRs. 199,054,531.00 or USD
1,895,757.00.
Financing or funding source for the project was sought from multiple donors for separate thematic
activities. As mentioned in this report under section ‘1.5 Donor Information’ in the PA with SWC it was
mentioned that funding would be sought from 8 donors.
Budget estimate for 5 years (in NRs) administrative and program (activity) wise is as given below.
Table 3: Administrative and Program (Activity) Estimated Budget
Budget Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sub-total %
Administrative 8, 183,200 7,912,690 7,28,721 6,788,699 6,280,044 36,449,354 18%
Program/
Activity
35,546,000 35,546,00 33,768,700 30,391,830 27,352,647 162,605,177 82%
Total 43,729,200 43,458,690 41,053,421 37,180,529 33,632,691 199,054,531 100%
Detail year wise administrative and program (activity) wise budget allocation is as given below.


Page 11 of 58
Table 4: Year Wise Administrative and Program (Activity) Budget
Budget Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total
A. Operation 8,183,200 7,912,690 7,284,721 6,788,699 6,280,044 36,449,354
1. HR 5,410,200 5,139,690 4,625,721 4,163,149 3,746,834 23,085,594
2. Administration 2,773,000 2,773,000 2,659,000 2,625,550 2,533,210 13,363,760
B. Program/Activity 35,546,000 35,546,000 33,768,700 30,391,830 27,352,647 162,605,177
1. Youth Participation in
Development Program
8,364,000 8,364,000 7,945,800 7,151,220 6,436,093 38,261,118
2. Women Empowerment
and Development
6,434,000 6,434,000 6,112,300 5,501,070 4,950,963 29,432,333
3. Media in Development 20,454,000 10,454,000 9,931,300 8,938,170 8,044,353 47,821,823
4. Leadership in
Development
9,329,000 9,329,000 8,862,550 7,976,295 7,178,666 42,675,511
5. Monitoring and
Evaluation
965,000 965,000 916,750 825,075 742,568 4,414,393
Grand Total (A+B) 43,729,200 43,458,690 41,053,421 37,180,529 33,632,691 199,054,531
Partner wise budget allocation is as follows.
Table 5: Partner Wise Yearly Allocated Budget
Partner 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sub-total
Samagra Jana Utthan Kendra 4,005,000 4,005,000 3,804,750 3,424,275 3,081,848 18,320,873
New World 6,272,400 6,272,400 5,958,780 5,362,902 4,826,612 28,693,094
Youth Initiative 3,358,440 3,358,440 3,190,518 2,871,466 2,584,320 15,363,184
Alliance for Peace 2,238,960 2,238,960 2,217,012 1,914,311 1,722,880 10,332,123
Youth Network for Peace
Bardia
1,331,820 1,331,820 1,265,229 1,138,706 1,024,835 6,092,410
District Youth Club Network
Banke
1,109,850 1,109,850 1,054,358 948,922 854,030 5,077,010
Youth Network for Peace and
Development Dang
1,021,062 1,021,062 970,009 873,051 785,546 4,670,730
Kailali
976,668 976,668 927,835 835,051 751,546 4,467,768
FM Radio Station Partners 2,090,800 2,090,800 1,986,260 1,787,634 1,608,871 9,564,365
TOTAL 22,405,000 22,405,000 21,374,751 19,156,318 17,240,488 102,581,557
1.8 Objectives of the Evaluation
Objectives of the MTE were in line with the ToR:
1. Explore the level of progress/changes made by the project and analyze the extent to which the
achievements have supported program goal and the objectives;
2. Evaluate the project effectiveness — longitudinal effect and continuities of the project
activities/services as well as the scope and extent of institutionalization of the project;
3. Explore the cost effectiveness of the project activities;
4. Identify the target and level of achievements as specified in the project agreement;
5. Explore the coordination between the project line agencies in the project districts;


Page 12 of 58
6. Find out the income and expenditure in compliance with the project agreement and proportion of
programmatic and administrative cost incurred by the project;
7. Examine the financial regularities/disciplines in accordance with the prevailing rules and regulations
and fixed assets purchased in duty fee privileges and locally; and
8. Assess the good lessons to be replicated in other projects and aspects to be improved in the days
ahead.
1.9 Scope of the Evaluation
The scope of the MTE in line with the objectives of the study mentioned-above explored the achievements
by the project in line with its specific objectives.
The achievements were quantified as far as possible against the target set by the project as under
Section I, Sub-section 1.3 Intended Outcomes of the Project under Table 1 (Page 6). Or the framework for
the MTE was as per Table 1.
The timeframe for the MTE was 45 days from the date of holding the pre-evaluation meeting organized by
SWC. The MTE has specifically focused on the following levels as per the ToR for the MTE.
Strategic level
• Analysis of project's context
• Planning and documentation
• Partnership and networking
Implementation level
• Sufficiency and quality of resources mobilized
• Reporting monitoring and evaluation system
• Compliance with project agreement and organizational policy document
Organizational level
• Effectiveness of organizational management system
• Effectiveness of program/management system
1.10 Evaluation Research Questions
Evaluation research questions (checklists) were formulated in line with the three specific project objectives
(POs) and the expected results (ERs).
Complete set of generic research questions/checklists that were used for conducting the interactions,
interviews, and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) is included as Annex 1.


Page 13 of 58
1.11 Evaluation Team Composition
The MTE Team composed of:
1. Kishor Pradhan, Team Leader/Thematic Expert
2. Shushma Khadka, Director, SWC, Team Member
3. Shova Pokharel, Team Member, MoWCSW
4. Sudip Dahal, CA/Financial Expert
1.12 Organization of the Study Report
The Study Report is organized into six parts as:
1. Prefatory Part
2. Section I, Introduction
3. Section II, Methodology of Evaluation
4. Section III, Data Presentation and Analysis
5. Section IV, Summary, Consultations, and Recommendations
6. Supplementary Part (References, Annexures and Appendices).


Page 14 of 58
SECTION II
Methodology of Evaluation

2.1 Study Approach
Participatory: The study approach was participatory in the sense that the diverse stakeholders from
SFCG, SEED project activity partners NGOs, participants of in the activities, government line agencies
and other service providers took part in the evaluation processes.
Consultative: The study was consultative as the related SFCG personnel, national and local level
partners in the districts and various other stakeholders of the projects were consulted in collecting
information and data.
GESI: The study tried to evaluate GESI diversity of the SEED project’s activities in terms of nature of
participation in its various activities such as trainings, recipient of seed grants, dialogues etc.
Thematic, Objective, Target Achievement, and Result Framework: The study approach was based on
the framework of the project’s thematic areas, objectives and target achievements. The approach has
tried to quantify objectively the achievements of the project against the targets as far as possible in terms
of results.
2.2 Study Design
The study design was in line with the ToR for the MTE and a framework as described above. In line with
the four themes and the underlying activities and sub-activities, four specific objectives, and achievements
of the targets in line with the four themes and objectives as described under 1.6 Table 2, it was designed
to collect information and data on achievements of the set targets by the project to meet the objectives
and achieve the project goal.
The study design thus was more based on achievements against the targets set by the project. It was
thus more exploratory and descriptive in data collection and analysis against the target set by the project.
Key research generic questions more in the form of checklists were formulated respectively for different
informants, FGDs and observations for data collection.
2.3 Selection of the Participants
Since the study approach was participatory, participants in the evaluation process were selected in close
consultation with SFCG Nepal.
Participants included consultations in Kathmandu and the districts with SFCG Nepal (project’s program
and management); in the districts consultations with the youth and women groups; representatives of
partner NGOs and line agencies.


Page 15 of 58
2.4 Study Instruments/Tools for Data Collection
Generic checklists in line with the framework of SEED project’s theme, objectives, and targets were
developed for the consultation and data collection processes. The details checklist is attached as Annex
1. Besides the checklists the study instruments included the following.
Literature reviews: Various related project documents such as project agreements, progress reports,
data bases, income tracking reports, M&E reports, finance statements and reports were reviewed.
KIIs: Key informant interviews were conducted with key informants from SFCG, partner NGOs,
participants of training activities, line agencies, and others.
FGDs: Focus Group Discussions were conducted with various stakeholders of the project such as the
youth groups, women groups, and radio program listeners’ group. Altogether 6 FGDs were conducted and
details of which are presented under Section III Data Presentation and Analysis.
Project/Field Site Visits: Project/Field visits in the eastern cluster’s four districts of Dhanusha, Mahotari,
Saptari, and Siraha were conducted. Besides organizing the key consultations, FGDs, in-situ and
participatory observations of the project activities and beneficiaries were conducted.
2.5 Mechanism for Field Work
The fieldworks in the four districts were conducted from 18 - 21 August 2016. SFCG Nepal prepared
tentative fieldwork itinerary in consultation with SFCG’s field offices, partners, and the MTE Team.
In the fieldwork besides interacting with various stakeholders of the projects including the beneficiaries
and the local partner NGOs, interaction was also carried out with related line agencies in Dhanusha. See
Annex 2 for the tentative itinerary for the fieldwork.
2.6 Data Presentation and Analysis Techniques
Information and data were collected from various secondary sources such as project documents, project
progress reports, baseline survey etc. Primary data were collected from the fieldwork consultations, KII,
observations and FGDs.
Data analysis has been carried out basically comparing the achievements against the targets (with data)
set by the project as described under Table 2.
Secondary data has also been subject to Gender Equity and Social Inclusion (GESI) analysis in terms of
participants in specific project activities such as trainings, seed grants, dialogues etc.
2.7 Work Schedule of the Study
The total study period was of 45 days from the date of pre-evaluation meeting, which took place on 27
June 2016. The pre-evaluation filed work was delayed due to the monsoon flood situation in the Terai and
difficulties for the stakeholders to attend the MTE meetings. As well as it was not possible for the MTE
team to visit the field during the monsoon in Terai.


Page 16 of 58
2.8 Limitations of the Study
Limitations of the study include that not ample time could be spent in the field study. And the field study
was conducted in only four districts of the eastern cluster of the SEED project. No field study was
conducted in the western cluster of the project.
The fieldwork planning had to be postponed due to monsoon and when the actual field study was
conducted between 18 - 21 August 2016, all the planned field works for consultations and FGDs could not
be carried out as planned as the expected participants were pre-occupied with the festival of
Rakshabandhan.
Cross-verification of data and information collected from the field was also carried out with official
documents from SFCG. The findings and information collected from the field was triangulated with KII
and FGDs in four sampled districts chosen purposively.


Page 17 of 58
SECTION III
Data Presentation and Analysis
3.1Data Presentation and Analysis
Data collected for the MTE are presented in line with the specific themes, objectives and respective
targets (as under Table 2) and scope of the study.
Data were collected from secondary sources (literature reviews, databases) and primary sources. Primary
data/information and case studies were collected from the field through consultations, KII, observations
and FGDs.
The data collected have been presented first descriptively, GESI disaggregated, in narratives and tables,
as case studies, followed by key analysis in line with the objectives of the MTE, four specific objectives,
and the targets set the SEED project.
3.2 Key Findings
3.2.1 Targeted Outputs Versus Achievements
The key findings or the achievements against the targeted or planned key outputs for the period 1
January 2013 – 31 May 2016 were as given in the table below.
Table 6: Theme and Objective Wise Outputs Versus Achievements as of 31/05/2016
Project Themes
(PT)/Objectives (PO)
Targeted Outputs Achievements as of 31 May
2016
PT: Youth Participation in
Development
PO 1 & 2: To build the local
capacity of key actors (media,
local government, youth and
women) in supporting an
enabling environment for
development; and, To provide
seed grant support to
Community based Organizations
(CBOs) for community
development project
• 2,000 youth trained in
collaborative leadership and
development in the selected
working districts.
• 1,356 local youth
trained in collaborative
leadership and
development (67.8%)
• Seed grants ranging from NRs.
5,000 to 50,000 provided to 100
youth groups in the selected
working districts to implement
community development
initiatives.
• Seed grants support
ranging from 5,000 to
50,000 provided to 26
youth groups (26%)
• 100 youth-led community
activities and projects
implemented in the selected
working districts.
• 45 youth led community
activities implemented
(45%)
PT: Women and Girls
Empowerment
PO 1 & 2: To build the local
capacity of key actors (media,
local government, youth and
women) in supporting an
development; and, To provide
• 1,000 women and girls trained
in collaborative leadership and
development in the selected
working districts.
• 425 women and girls
were trained on
collaborative leadership
and development (42%)


Page 18 of 58
seed grant support to
Community based Organizations
(CBOs) for community
development project
• Seed grants ranging from NRs.
5,000 to 50,000 provided to 100
women and girls groups in the
selected working districts to
implement community
development initiatives.
• Seed grants support to
150 conflict affected
women (150%)
• 100 women-led community
activities and projects
implemented in the selected
working districts.
• 48 community led
initiatives implemented
in the project districts
(48%)
PT: Media in Development
PO 1 & 3: To provide technical
support to local organizations for
production and broadcast of
awareness raising and behavior
change media programs
• 300 media professionals trained
in conflict-sensitive common
ground journalism.
•
• 132 media professional
trained in conflict-
sensitive common
ground journalism
(44%)
• 15 FM stations supported to
produce and broadcast quality
common ground radio
programs.
• Radio drama around the theme
of promoting constructive role of
youth and women is produced
and broadcast.
• 14 FM stations
supported to produce
and broadcast quality
CG program (93%)
• One 13-episode television
series produced and broadcast.
• One 13-episode TV
series produced and
broadcast. (100%)
PT: Leadership in
Development
PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of
leadership, dialogue and
collaborative problem solving to
address Nepal’s social and
development challenges
• 200 local leaders (from political
parties, civil society and
government) will be trained on
leadership, inclusive
development and creating
development.
• 112 local political
leaders and 142 social
leaders trained (127%)
• 100 multi-stakeholder dialogues
will be held in the selected
working districts to facilitate
collaborative problem solving to
address social and development
challenges at the local level.
• 40 multi-stakeholder
dialogues conducted
(40%)
Source: Various SEED project documents and the data sets as provided by SFCG Nepal.
• Under the PT: Youth participation in Development and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key
community development project; the target achievement in average has been 67.8%.
• Under the PT: Women and Girls Empowerment and PO 1 & 2: To build the local capacity of key
community development project; the target achievement in average has been 80%.


Page 19 of 58
• Under the PT: Media in Development and PO 1 & 3: To provide technical support to local
organizations for production and broadcast of awareness raising and behavior change media
programs; the target achievement has been in average 79%.
• Under the PT: Leadership in Development and PO 1 & 4: To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue
and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social and development challenges; the target
achievement has been 83%.
• The overall target achievement has been 77.45%.
3.2.2 Focus Group Discussion Data
Altogether 6 FGDs were organized. The details of the FGDs are given in the table below.
Table 7: Data on FGDs
FGD
No.
Location/Date District Type of FGD Number of
participants
Project
Theme/Activity
1. Suga
(19/05/2016)
Mahottari Mahila Chamata
Bikash Shanti
Samittee
(Women’s Group)
15 (all female) Training and seed
grant to women
2. Youth Network
for Peace and
Development
(YNPD),
Jaleswore
(19/08/2016)
Mahottari Youth Leadership
Training and
Youth
Group/Network
18 (11 male; 7 female) Youth leadership
training and seed
grant to youth
group
3. Welcome
Hotel,
Janakpur
(19/08/2016)
Dhanusha Youth leadership
trainees
11 (2 female; 9 male) Youth leadership
training
4. Samagra
Janautthan
Kendra, Lahan
(20/08/2016)
Siraha Youth
Engagement
partner
organization and
radio program
listener group
10 (3 female; 7 male) Youth leadership
development and
media development
5. Samagra
Janautthan
Kendra, Lahan
(20/08/2016)
Siraha Radio program
‘Sanghor’ listerner
group
9 (3 female; 6 male) Media development
6. Sabal Nepal,
Rajbiraj
Saptari Your leadership
trainees and youth
group seed grant
18 (4 female; 14 male) Your leadership
development and
seed grant
Source: Field visit, 18-21 August 2016.
See Annex 3 for the complete list of FGD participants and other details.


Page 20 of 58
3.2.3 Key Consultations with SFCG/SEED Staff/Partners and Line Agencies

Key consultations were organized with following SEED project partners and beneficiaries.
Table 8: Data on Key Consultations
SN Location/Date/
Type of Consultation
Partner/Participants Nature of
Partnership/Purpose of
Consultation
1. SFCG Office; 27/07/2016;
Meeting in person
SFCG SEED project and admin
team and MTE SWC Team
• To discuss
requirements for the
MTE
• To discuss and plan the
field visit
2. SFCG Eastern Regional
Cluster Office, Janakpur,
Dhanusha; 19/08/2016
SFCG Eastern Regional
Cluster Office team and MTE
SWC Team
• To discuss the Regional
Cluster Office’s
activities and
coordination with SFCG
Head Office
(Kathmandu)
• To discuss field project
activities, partners and
field plans
3. District Women Office,
Janakpur, Dhanusha;
19/08/2016
Nirmala Mishra, DWO and
SFCG/MTE SWC Team
• To discuss the DWO’s
partnership with SFCG
SEED project
4. Chief District Office, Janakpur,
Dilip Kumar Chapagain, CDO,
Dhanusha, and SFCG/MTE
SWC Team
• To discuss the D-PAC
and SFCG/SEED
partnership and
activities in Dhanusha
district
5. District Police Office, Janakpur,
Nahakul Pokharel, DSP, DPO,
Janakpur, Dhanusha
• To discuss
SFCG/SEED
partnership and
activities with DPO
6. Ward 15, Jaleswore
Municipality, Mahotari;
19/08/2016
Mahila Chamata Biakash
Shanti Samittee, Sunaina
Thakur and other women and
SFCG/MTE SWC Team
• To discuss the
leadership training and
seed grant to women
groups activities
7. YNPD Office, Siraha;
19/08/2016
YNPD staff, CSL trainees, seed
grant recipients, and
SFCG/MTE SWC Team
• To discuss the CSL and
LEY, and seed grants to
youth groups
• SEED’s partnership
with YNPD
8. Hotel Welcome, Janakpur,
Dhanusha
CLS trainees and SFCG/MTE
SWC Team
• To discuss the CLS
training
9. Samagra Janautthan Kendra,
Lahan, Siraha; 20/08/2016
Samagra Janautthan Kendra
staff and board members, and
SFCG/MTE SWC Team
• To discuss
SEED/SFCG
partnership and
activities with Samagra
Janautthan Kendra
10. Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Sanghor listerners’ group and • To discuss the SEED


Page 21 of 58
Lahan, Siraha; 20/08/2016 SFCG/MTE SWC Team media activity radio
program Sanghor
11. Sabal Nepal Office, Rajbiraj,
Saptari; 20/08/2016
Sabal Nepal staff members,
CLS trainees and seed grant
recipient group, and New
Generation Youth group
members, and SFCG/MTE
SWC Team
• To discuss the CSL
training and see grants
to youth groups
12. SFCG Office, Lazimpat,
Kathmandu
SFCG SEED/Management
Team and MTE SWC Team
• To review field visit and
discuss pending issues
Complete list of people consulted is included in Annex 4.
3.2.4 Case Studies

Case Study 1: Mahila Chamta Bikash Shantee Samitee, Women Leadership and Seed Grant, Ward
15, Jaleswore, Mahottari

The Mahila Chamta Bikash Shantee Samitee was started about 8 years ago after Sunaina Thakur
received a woman leadership training from SFCG. Sunaina was just 18-year-old when she was married.
She is 28 now and is an upcoming women development leader in her community.
FGD with Sunaina and Mahila Chamta Bikash Shantee Samitee Member, Jaleswore
Sunaina said she is currently the chairperson of the Samitee and her group has 10 board members. The
women groups have trained about 90 women on women leadership and 65 women on Maithili Art
Painting. There was no women group in Sunaina’s ward before the intervention by SFCG and with the
women in her community now being trained on Maithili Art Painting there has been remarkable
empowerment of women economically. Through the Samitee they registered two years ago a saving and
credit group, and currently it has about 350 members and a capital of about NRs. 300,000. They give
loan to women in the villages to start small businesses and produce Mithila Art works.
The Samitee received a seed grant from the SEED project and with that money they started the Maithili
Art Painting entrepreneurship. Now they produce Mithila Arts and sell it to customers who visit the village
and to vendors in Janakpur and Kathmandu.
Sunaina says the Mithila Art they produce still has market problem and there are challenges like giving
employment to all the women they have trained on Maithili Art.


Page 22 of 58
Case Study 2: Ayush Shrestha, 31, Rajbiraj Municipality, Saptari District
Ayush Shrestha is a 31-year-old youth who was born and brought up in Rajbiraj municipality. He took part
in the 7-day Civil Leadership School training imparted under the SEED project in Rajbiraj some years ago.
He is currently pursuing his post-graduate education in Sociology.
He says that after the CLS training his confidence as a youth leader has improved and he is more
confident in public speaking and organizing youth and social activities now in Rajbiraj. Along with Ayush
the youths who took the CLS training have formed an informal youth group called New Generation Group
in Rajbiraj and through it have organized several social leadership activities for youths such as training on
foreign employment and youth entrepreneurship.
Ayush and his groups received two installment seed grants of NRs. 40,000 and 10,000 under the SEED
project. The first grant they sent it for earthquake relief work in Rajbiraj municipality, and with the NRs.
10,000 they organized an awareness campaign on Open Defecation Free (ODF) zone. They organized
awareness raising video shows on ODF in several locations in Rajbiraj municipality. In addition Ayush’s
youth group collected locally about NRs. 10,000 and provided water and food to families displaced by the
recent earthquake in Nepal in 2015.
Ayush says that the CLS training also helped the youths in Rajbiraj whether from Terai or Mountain
(Pahad) communities to work unitedly and collectively as youth groups without any geographical
differences. He added that the political leadership earlier used to pressure them to include their political
party youth leaders in their activities but their persistence not to politicize their activities have been
respected by the local political parties and leadership these days.
Ayush says SFCG should organize a refresher training on CLS for them to be able to work more in VDCs
(rural areas) and give larger grants to youth groups like his to carry out social and community
development activities more in the rural areas.
3.2.5 GESI in SEED Activities
From some of the sample data of the SEED project it was found that gender wise in the CLS activities in
general aggregate the participation of male was 58%, female 40%, and the third gender (TG) 2% (see
Table 6). Social inclusion wise in the CLS activities it was found the inclusion of the social groups:
Madheshi was 40%; Janajati 16%; Dalit 5%; Brahmin/Chettri 20%; Muslim 5%, OBC 2%; and, others 6%
(see Table 7).
Under the Seed Grant Activities it was found that the participation of male was male 72%, female 26%,
and TG 2% (see Table 8).
Similarly, under the LEY activities the gender participation was male 72%, female 24%, and TG 4% (see
Table 9).


Page 23 of 58
Table 9: Gender Wise CLS Participant Data
Districts Venue Date Participants
Male Female TG Total
Dhanusha Janakpur
7-11 September,
2014 27 (55%) 22 (45%) 0 49
Siraha Chohrwa
13-17 September,
2014 30 (56%) 23 (44%) 0 53
Mahottari Red Cross Building 8-12 November, 2014 29 (58%) 21 (42%) 50
Rautahat Judha Higher
Secondary School
Gaur
15-19 November,
2014 28 (58%) 20 (42%) 0 48
Sarlahi Krishna Jantaa
Secondary School
Sarlahi
24-28 November
2014 28 (56%) 22 (44%) 0 50
Morang Faith In Christ
Church Hall,
Biratnagar, Morang 12-16 February, 2015 30 (56%) 21 (39%) 2 (5%) 53
Sunsari District Teachers'
Training Centre,
Inurwa, Sunsari 05-09 February, 2015 33 (62%) 20 (38%) 0 53
Saptari District Teachers'
Training Centre,
Rajbiraj, Saptari 28 Jan-01 Feb, 2015 33 (66%) 17 (34%) 0 50
Total 239 (58%) 164 (40%) 2 (2%) 406
Source: SFCG; TG = Third Gender
Table 10: Social Inclusion Wise CLS Training Participant Data
Districts Madhesi Janajati Dalit Brahmin/
Chhetri
Muslim
OBC Others
Total
Dhanusha 14 7 5 13 3 0 7 49
Siraha 22 9 5 10 1 3 3 53
Mahottari 17 14 0 10 5 4 50
Rautahat 15 6 2 13 4 4 4 48
Sarlahi 37 7 0 6 0 0 0 50
Morang 17 7 5 13 3 0 8 53
Sunsari 19 9 5 9 2 2 7 53
Saptari 25 10 2 8 5 0 0 50
Total 166 (40%) 69 (16%) 24 (5%) 82 (20%) 23 (5%) 9 (2%) 27 (6%) 406
Source: SFCG; OBC= Other Backward community


Page 24 of 58
Table 11: Seed Grant Activities Gender Disaggregated Data
District Date, Activity, Achievements Collaboration
with
Participants No.
M F TG Total
Saptari February 11, 2016
Interaction about the role of
youth and present condition
Rajbiraj
• Young political leaders from
various different political
parties with different
ideologies expressed
committed to unite for issues
of youth and development of
Saptari.
Youth of
Political parties
33 6 1 40
March 5, 2016
Awareness rally and
interaction against drugs in
Rajbiraj
• The President of Saptari Red
cross, social worker
Jogendra Bhagat provided 6
bigha Land for the drug
rehabilitation center
• District Youth Task Force
expanded its coordination
with different stakeholders.
• Renewed commitment from
police and administration to
prevent the use of drugs.
Nepal Police,
Nepal
Journalist
Federation and
different
schools and
colleges
NA NA NA 500
April 6, 2016
Interaction program on
industrial areas and situation
of industries
• Participants committed to
advocate for proper running
of the industrial areas.
• They would bring the
situation of the industries to
the notice of the government
Federation of
Nepalese
Chambers of
Commerce
and Industries
(FNCCI),
Rajbiraj
40 4 0 44
Siraha February 7, 2016
Orientation against drugs
addiction and trafficking in
Golbazar
• Students were informed
about the disadvantage of
drug addiction.
• Discussed about the affect of
drug addiction in the society.
• Interaction between youth,
students and police.
Area Police
Office (APO),
Golbazar
43 6 0 49
February 21, 2016
Interaction on gender
Women
Human Rights
25 11 0 49


Page 25 of 58
discrimination: violence
against women and means of
solution - Bariyarpatti
• Men and women promised to
raise voice against violence
against women.
• Participants informed about
women rights.
Defenders,
Siraha
APO,
Bariyarpatti
February 23, 2016
Orientation against drugs
Madar
• Committed to raise
awareness against drugs and
alcohol.
• Committed to start campaign
to close illegal alcohol
centers.
• Interaction between police
and youth on drugs and
alcohol.
District Police
Office, Siraha
63 51 0 114
April 27, 2016
Installment of information
hoarding board on hygiene
and cleanliness in Lahan
Lahan
Municipality
NA NA NA NA
Dhanusha February 10, 2016
Orientation on drugs
addiction in border side
areas - Nagarain VDC
Police Post
officers, local
youth clubs,
local schools
47 0 0 47
February 12, 2016
Orientation on drugs
addiction in Highway area in
Godar village
Local youth
clubs
46 0 0 46
April 29, 2016
Hording Board
establishment for sensitization
on drugs addiction and
trafficking at Nagarain VDC
Nagarain VDC
District Police
office,
Dhanusha
NA NA NA NA
April 29, 2016
Installment of information
hoarding board for
sensitization on drugs addiction
and trafficking - Godar village
District Police
Office,
Dhanusha
NA NA NA NA
Mahotari February 28, 2016
Interaction program against
drugs addiction and flex
board distribution to school -
Jaleswer
• The students of several
schools took initiatives to
prevent use of intoxicating
District Police
Office,
Mahotari
97 38 NA 135


Page 26 of 58
objects in schools
April 26, 2016
Unseasonal vegetable
farming training for youth
self-employment in Ekrahiya
village
• The participant will be able to
produce vegetables
professionally.
District
Agriculture
Office, local
youth clubs,
cooperative
office
19 1 NA 20
Sarlahi February 4, 2016
Interaction program against
drugs addiction and Flex
board distribution to schools in
Malangwa
• Young people informed about
the misuse of drugs and
alcohol, and about provisions
in low about the same
District Police
Office, Sarlahi
NA NA NA 444
March 6, 2016
Awareness session in
schools/ colleges to reduce
misuse of drugs in
Malangwa, Gamhariya,
Barhatwa villages
District Police
Office, Sarlahi
24 16 2 42
March 9, 2016
Youth engagement in local
resources and development
at Janki Family Hotel
DDC Sarlahi 23 16 2 41
Rautahat April 20, 2016
Interaction on skill-based
and vocational education
system in Gaur
• Stakeholder realized about
the need of skillful education.
• Helped in creating
environment for collaboration
between youth and education
stakeholder.
• Youth and local champions
called upon the relevant
government bodies to
provide skills to develop
entrepreneurship.
District
Education
Office,
Rautahat
46 5 NA 51
April 21, 2016
Rally and Orientation against
drug addiction in Gaur
• Students were informed
about the disadvantages of
use of drugs.
• Discussed about the affect of
District Police
Office,
Rautahat
56 28 0 84


Page 27 of 58
drug addiction in the society.
• Youth, students and police
interacted together.
April 26, 2016
Youth engagement in local
resources and development
at DDC Seminar Hall in Gaur
• District Development
Committee Rautahat agreed
to coordinate with the Youth
Task Force in their action
plan.
• District Education Office
promised to coordinate for
skill-based education.
DDC office 27 4 0 31
Morang December 21, 2015
Orientation on Drugs
addiction and trafficking at
Federal of Nepalese
Journalists (FNJ) Hall in
Biratnagar
District Police
Office, Morang
24 20 0 44
January 26, 2016
Orientation to young people
on Human Rights and
Gender Violence at Hotel
Mahendra in Biratnagar
National
Human Rights
Commission,
NHRC,
Women and
Children Office
& District
Youth
Network,
Morang
44 31 1 76
February 8, 2016
Orientation on Cyber Crime
for youth
FNJ Hall in Biratnagar
District Police
Office, Morang
35 9 1 45
Sunsari January 12, 2016
Round Table program on
preparation of drugs
addiction reduction action
plan at Hotel Fulbari in
Inaruwa
District Police
Office, Sunsari
District
Development
Committee,
Sunsari
20 0 0 20
March 13, 2016
Orientation against drug
high schools at Haripur &
Kaptangunj villages
District Police
Office, Sunsari
57 53 0 110
TOTAL 802 (72%) 299 (26%) 7 (2%) 1108
*
Source: SFCG; TG = Third Gender; * Includes only activities with complete data


Page 28 of 58
Table 12: Leaders Engaging Youth (LEY) Participants
Source: SFCG; TG = Third Gender
Table 13: Youth Participation in Development (The Peace Building Initiative Project 2013)
SN Activity Male Female Total
Youth Adult Youth Adult Youth Adult
1
Training on Radio for peace building (Radio
Journalist)
31 5 14 2 45 7
2
ToT on Consensus building and dialogue with
decision makers (Local Leaders)
2 8 0 1 2 9
3
Training on engaging youth in decision making and
peace building (Govt. Official)
3 43 1 2 3 45
4
Training on consensus building and leadership skills
(National Leaders)
6 29 1 7 7 36
5 Training on various peacebuilding tools (Youth) 429 0 181 0 610 0
6
ToT to facilitate youth and peace building
workshops (Youth)
16 0 8 0 24 0
Total (Capacity building) 487 85 205 12 691 97
7
Seed grants to youth networks/clubs for peace
building/ dialogues, in cooperation with local
decision makers ( 19 Seed grant events)
1,233 0 233 1,466 0
3.2.6 Financial Compliance
3.2.6.1 Comparison with Actual and Committed Support
The overall budget of the Project is Rs.199, 054, 531 and the budget upto May 2016 is Rs.143,733,198.
The actual expenses up to May 2016 has been Rs. 279, 234, 232, resulting into overspent by
Rs.135, 501, 034 and overspent by Rs. 80,179, 700, as compared to Overall Budget of five years period.
See Table 14 below.
Districts Venue Date Participants
Male Female TG Total
Dhanusha Janakpur Dham 31-32 Aug, 2014 18 6 1 25
Siraha Chohrwa 3-4 Sep, 2014 21 6 1 28
Saptari Rajbiraj 18-19 Sep, 2014 16 6 1 23
Mahottari Jaleswor 22-23 Sep, 2014 20 5 1 26
Rautahat Gaur 3-4 Nov, 2014 23 10 1 34
Sarlahi Malangwa 5-6 Nov, 2014 17 7 1 25
Morang
Hotel Everest,
Biratnagar 5-6 Jan, 2015 18 6 1 25
Sunsari Hotel Phulbari, Inaruwa 7-8 Jan, 2015 19 5 1 25
Total 152 (72%) 51 (24%) 8 (4%) 211


Page 29 of 58
Table 14: Budget Versus Actual Expenses as of 31/05/2016
Recommendations
• It is recommended to oversee the project budget and contract regularly to compare the expenses with
budget balance, and further it should be linked with activities to be performed.
• The project management is recommended not to exceed the budgeted amount, if exceeds then
required to obtain the approval from the appropriate authority without any delay.
3.2.6.2 Comparison of Budgeted and Actual Program and Administrative Cost
Analysis of program cost amounting to Rs. 240,033,588 and admin cost amounting to Rs. 39,200,644
reflects that 86% of total expenses incurred has been spent on program and remaining 14% has been
spent on admin cost up to May 2016. See Table 15 below.
Table 15: Program Versus Admin Cost as of 31/05/2016
Nature of Expense 5 Year Total
Budget
Total Budget
Upto May 2016
Total Expenses
Upto May 2016
Budget Actual
Comparison
Percentage
Program Cost 162,605,177 117,523,963 240,033,588 (122,509,625) 86%
Administrative Cost 36,449,354 26,209,236 39,200,644 (12,991,409) 14%
Grand Total 199,054,531 143,733,198 279,234,232 (135,501,034) 100%

3.2.6.3 Fiscal Year Wise Comparison
Excess expenses have been incurred from the first year of the project. In 2013 the project has incurred
Rs. 56, 778, 360 as against budgeted amount of Rs. 43, 729,200; in 2014 it has incurred Rs. 57, 070, 421
as against budget amount of Rs. 43, 458, 690; and Rs. 117, 328, 896 was incurred in 2015 as against
budget amount of Rs. 41, 053, 421. These reflect over expenses in comparison to year wise budgeted
SN Thematic
Program Pillars
5 Year Total
Budget
Total Budget
Upto May
2016
Total
Expenses
Upto May
2016
Budget Vs.
Actual
Comparison
Budget Vs.
Actual
(Overall)
1.
Youth Participation
and Development
38,261,118 27,653,475 49,560,439 (21,906,964) (11,299,321)
2.
Women
Empowerment and
Development
29,432,333 21,272,413 26,579,566 (5,307,154) 2,852,767
3.
Leadership in
Development
47,821,823 32,369,788 40,158,747 (7,788,959) 7,663,076
4.
Media in
Development
42,675,511 33,037,756 53,396,521 (20,358,764) (10,721,010)
5.
Monitoring and
Evaluation
4,414,393 3,190,531 10,076,895 (6,886,364) (5,662,502)
Total Program 162,605,177 117,523,963 179,772,168 (62,248,205) (17,166,990)
6. Administrative cost 36,449,354 26,209,236 39,200,644 (12,991,409) (2,751,290)
Total
l Expenses
199,054,531 143,733,198 218,972,812 (75,239,614) (19,918,280)
7.
Other Initiatives /
New Projects
- - 60,261,420 (60,261,420) (60,261,420)
Grand Total 199,054,531 143,733,198 279,234,232 (135,501,034) (80,179,700)


Page 30 of 58
amount. See Table 16 below.
Table 16: Fiscal year Wise Comparison

Recommendations
• The project management is required to oversee the budget and expenses regularly in order not to
exceed the actual budget.
• The project has exceeded more than 30% in year wise comparison, so it needs to obtain reasonable
approval from appropriate authority.

3.2.6.4 Expenses Reporting by Partner Organization
During our review we noticed some partner organizations have overspent their agreement amount, which
are listed in Table 17 below.

Table 17: Spending by Partner Organizations
Partner
Organization
Budgeted
Amount
(NRS)
Agreement
Amount
(NRS)
Expenses
Recorded as
Per SFCG
Remarks
Samagra Jana
Utthan Kendra
18,320,873 11,032,335 6,730,892
New World 28,693,094 8,365,150 8,104,179
Youth Initiative 15,363,184 8,688,400 8,846,688 Overspent by Rs. 158,280
Alliance for
Peace
10,232,123 2,067,300 1,915,232
Contract Amount is only 20% of the
committed amount in 3.5 years out
of 5 years Project Period.
Youth Network
for Peace
Bardia
6,092,410 550,000 318,000
District Youth
Club Network
Banke
5,077,010 550,000 250,000
Youth Network 4,670,848 645,000 250,000 Contract Amount is only 14% of the


Page 31 of 58
for Peace and
Development
Dang
Youth Network
for Peace Kailali
4,467,768 629,000 329,000
FM Radio
Station Partners
9,564,365 3,392,300 3,045,934
TOTAL 102,481,675 35,919,485 29,789,925
Recommendations
• The project management should strictly follow the terms and conditions of the signed Project
Agreement with SWC and if there are deviations it should be discussed with SWC and secure
approval.
3.2.6.5 Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Project Agreement Partner Organizations
The overall budget of the PA with partner organizations is Rs.102, 491, 673 and the budget up to May
2016 is Rs. 74, 076, 531. However, the actual expenses up to May 2016 is Rs. 29, 789, 925 resulting in
under spending by Rs. 44, 286, 608 which reflects only 40% budget utilization with the PA partner
organizations. See Table 18 below for details.
Table 18: Partner Budget and Actual Expenses
Partner Organizations 5 Years Total
Budget
Total Budget
up to May 2016
Total Expenses
Upto May 2016
Actual
Comparison
Alliance for Peace 10,242,123 7,402,562 1,915,232 5,487,330
District Youth Club Network
Banke
5,077,009 3,669,442 250,000 3,419,442
FM Partners 9,564,365 6,912,708 3,045,934 3,866,774
New World 28,693,094 20,738,123 8,104,179 12,633,944
Samagra Jana Utthan
Kendra
18,320,873 13,241,531 6,730,892 6,510,639
Youth Initiative 15,363,184 11,103,842 8,846,688 2,257,154
Youth Network for Peace and
Development Dang
4,670,848 3,375,886 250,000 3,125,886
Bardiya
6,092,411 4,403,330 318,000 4,085,330
Kailali
4,467,768 3,229,109 329,000 2,900,109
Total 102,491,673 74,076,531 29,789,925 44,286,608
Recommendations
• PA partner organizations have underspent the allocated budget amount.
• It is recommended to assess the capacity and effectiveness of partner organizations before including
them into project agreement.


Page 32 of 58
• Project partnership agreement further needs to be monitored and reviewed regularly, and if there are
irregularities in capacity of the partner organization to fulfill the project agreement requirements then
in consulting with and with approval from SWC change the partner.
3.2.6.5 Agreement Entered Other than Project Agreement Partner Organization
While reviewing the contract with partner organizations we observed partnership agreement amounting to
Rs. 212, 441,153 were made, which were the partner organizations other than as mentioned in the signed
PA with SWC. The total amount of the PA is Rs. 199, 054, 531 but SFCG has committed to provide
Rs. 212, 441, 153 with other partner organizations. The list of partner organizations, their contract
amount, expenses reported, and expenses as per SFCG record are as given in Table 19 below.
Table 19: Project Agreements Other Than PA Partners
Partner Organization
Contract
Amount
Expenses Reported
Expenses Recorded
as Per SFCG
Antenna Foundation 8,632,510 8,107,511 8,564,332
AYON 4,217,000 4,216,411 3,795,300
Bikas Kalagi Pahilaharu Nepal 503,500 498,018 494,018
Community Development Centre
Doti
503,500 503,642 503,500
Centre for Legal Research &
Resource Development
121,767,269 17,277,980 29,229,176
Centre for Security and Justice
Studies
8,982,885 715,567 1,841,864
Dhanusha District Football
Association
1,526,300 - 591,400
Himalayan Human Rights Monitors 895,388 836,476 836,476
Human Rights Protection and
Legal Service Centre
1,678,525 1,629,255 1,699,255
HUCODAN 58,557,863 4,875,709 11,481,207
Jagriti Child And Youth Concern
Nepal
503,500 509,740 503,500
Jan Jagaran Youth Club 1,016,638 815,975 965,975
Rural Women's Unity and
Development Centre
1,727,775 1,597,503 1,597,503
Youth Netwok for Peace
Development
503,500 508,000 503,500
Association of Community Radio
Broadcaster
385,000 - 385,000
Women's Ability and peace
Development Committee
635,000 357,000 635,000
Nepal Forum for Environmental
Journalists
405,000 - 405,000
TOTAL 212,441,153 42,448,787 64,032,006
Recommendations
• The project management is strongly recommended to strictly follow the ToR according to PA with
SWC and the include only the PA partner organizations.


Page 33 of 58
• If new partners are to be included in the project then prior discussion with and approval from SWC is
required, and if necessary amendments in the PA are to be made.
3.2.6.6 Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Non PA Partner Organizations

Following organizations were not provided with budget according to the PA, but SFCG has entered into
contract with these organizations and incurred expenses amounting to Rs. 84, 619, 897 up to May 2016.
Details are given in Table 20 below.
Table 20: Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of other than PA Partners Organization
Partner Organizations 5 Years
Total
Budget
Total Budget
Upto May
2016
Total Expenses
Upto May 2016
Actual
Comparison
Ad Media Pvt Ltd - - 3,881,919 (3,881,919)
Antenna Foundation Nepal - - 8,564,332 (8,564,332)
Association of Community Radio - - 385,000 (385,000)
Association of Youth
Organizations Nepal (AYON)
- - 3,795,300 (3,795,300)
Bikash Ka Lagi Pahilaharu Nepal - - 494,018 (494,018)
CeLRRd - - 29,229,176 (29,229,176)
Center For Security and Justice
Studies
- - 1,841,846 (1,841,846)
Community Development Center,
Doti
- - 503,500 (503,500)
District Football Association, - - 591,400 (591,400)
Federation Of Nepali Journalists - - 80,000 (80,000)
Himalayan Human Rights Monitor - - 836,476 (836,476)
Human Rights Protection And
Legal Service Center
- - 1,699,255 (1,699,255)
HUCODAN - - 11,481,207 (11,481,207)
Jagriti Child And Youth Concern
Nepal
- - 503,500 (503,500)
Jan Jagaran Youth Club - - 965,975 (965,975)
Janakpur Women's Development
Center
- - 21,500 (21,500)
Kalika Self-reliance Social Center - -
Mila Productions Pvt.Ltd. - - 13,600,538 (13,600,538)
Nepal Television - -
Nepal Forum Of Environmental J - - 405,000 (405,000)
Paritran Risk Management
Consultancy And Training Institute
Pvt.
- - 568,135 (568,135)
Rural Women's Development and - - 1,597,503 (1,597,503)
Shanti Tatha Bikash Ka Lagi
Yuwa Sanjal
- - 503,500 (503,500)
Southasia Institute of Advanced
Studies
- - 2,435,817 (2,435,817)
Women's Ability and Peace
Development
- - 635,000 (635,000)
Total - - 84,619,897 (84,619,897)


Page 34 of 58
Recommendations
• The project management is recommended to disburse the project fund only to the project partners as
per the PA with SWC.
3.2.6.7 Agreement Entered beyond Project Agreement period
While reviewing the partner organization contracts, we observed instances of agreement done beyond the
PA period with three partner organizations that are not the partner organizations as per the signed PA.
Details are given in Table 21 below.
Table 21: Project Agreement with Partners Beyond the PA with SWC
Partner Organizations Contract
Amount
PA Period Expenses
Recorded as Per
SFCG
Centre for Legal Research &
Resource Development
121,767,269 Jan 04, 2013 to Jan
03, 2018
Feb 01, 2015 to Dec
31, 2018
Centre for Security and
Justice Studies
8,982,885 Jan 04, 2013 to Jan
03, 2018
June 15, 2015 to
Dec 31, 2018
HUCODAN 58,557,863 Jan 04, 2013 to Jan
03, 2018
Aug 01, 2015 to July
31, 2018
TOTAL 189,308,017
Recommendations
• The project management is recommended to strictly follow the project’s cycle time line.
3.2.7 Project Agreement Coordination Compliance
As per the PA with SWC for the SEED Project SFCG Nepal is required to fulfill several coordination
compliances at the central and district levels. At the central level it is required to form a Central-Project
Advisory Committee (C-PAC) and at the district level District-Project Advisory Committee (D-PAC). The
D-PAC is required to meet every six-month and the C-PAC once a year.
Further in central level coordination it requires monthly updates and periodic consultative meetings with
the MoWCSW. Similarly, joint review with MoWCSW and donors needs to be organized through six
monthly review and reflection workshops and joint monitoring visits to the project’s working areas.
According to the Annual Progress Report 2013 submitted by SFCG to SWC in 2013 D-PAC meetings
were held in all the project districts. Though the reporting mentions that feedbacks were received in the
D-PAC meetings regarding coordinated implementation of the project with the government, it is silent
about what were the specific feedbacks. The 2013 Annual Report also states SFCG invited under the UN
Women funded project (PT: Women and Girls Empowerment, and PO 1 &2) the Director and Focal
Person of Women and Children Department of MoWCSW for implementing the National Action Plan on
UNCSR 1325 and 1820 as resource persons in the orientation and workshops of the project in Doti,
Bajhang, and Kailali districts. However, there is no reporting to be found regarding C-PAC of the SEED
project in 2013.
Similarly, regarding D-PAC and C-PAC meetings in 2014, the study team could not access any document
that would give evidence to have held such meetings.


Page 35 of 58
According to a copy of a hand written meeting minutes received from SFCG, in 2015, attended by 11
people C-PAC meeting was held on 13 December 2015 on the chairpersonship of SWC the then
incumbent Director Subhadra Dahal, at SFCG Office in Lazimpat, Kathmandu. This C-PAC meeting had
discussed and decided the following points: 1) Meena Sharma, Project Manager from SFCG made the
presentation on the progress of the SEED project. It was followed by discussion and suggestion and
advices given by the participants; 2) It was agreed and decided to add new districts and partnerships in
the project. For this there will be a need for amendment in the PA; 3) It was suggested to present the
budget of the project with a breakdown; 4) It was decided to organize a field observation visit for the
concerned persons from the central level; and, 5) The project’s objective should be able to have a link to
good governance and government’s policies. See Annex 5.
Regarding compliance with government policies and plans regarding youths, girls and women, SEED
projects has organized orientations and workshops in Doti, Bajhang, and Kailali districts National Action
Plan on UNCSR 1325 and 1820.
3.2.8 Partnership and Performance
Partnership under the SEED project has been basically on the basis of project’s four themes and
objectives. The project activities planned and agreed to under the PA with SWC have been executed
through various partners, as activity implementing partners and service providing partners.
SEED project has worked with all the partners planned in the PA in implementing activities such as
leadership training and seed grants through partners such as YNPD, Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Youth
Initiative, and others.
In case of seed grants to women and youth groups the partnership has been through both formal and
informal groups formed after the leadership trainings provided under the SEED project. A case study of a
women’s group Mahila Chamata Bikash Shanti Samitee revealed that it has been able to expand the work
started by the leadership training and seed grant provided by the SEED project. The women’s group has
been doing Maithili Art production by women for income generation and has created a saving and credit
group also. This organization has been recently awarded by SFCG HQ as women innovation
entrepreneurship for promoting local culture for peace and social harmony in a worldwide context.

Under the media in development theme SEED project has worked with service providing partners such as
FM radios in the districts, radio production NGO such as Antenna Foundation, and for the television
program with Mila Production.
Regarding the youth participation in development and leadership in development thematic activities there
has been responses and assertions such as the perception of the youth regarding the state and vice
versa has changed; youths earlier divided along geographical identity lines have united, more organized
to be engaged in development; and political leadership respects the independent role of youths’ in
development. But there is a lack of tangible, quantifiable, empirical evidences, and data to support these.
The informal youth groups formed after the CLS and LEY trainings have received the small grants and
their expectation is that the size of seed grants would be increased by the project so that the youth groups
can implement larger community development activities.
Partnership with line agencies such as the DWO, DPO, and CDO has been also observed to be effective
and appreciated. The line agencies are observed to have been informed and communicated regularly
about the SFCG project activities in the districts and invited to participate. However, the Chief District
Officer who has been appointed in Janakpur, Dhanusha district recently have not observed the field
activities of SFCG SEED projects. Similarly, the District Superintendent of Police in Janakpur suggested


Page 36 of 58
to SFCG to implement more rural activities on fighting social problems like dowry, violence against women
etc.
Regarding partnership and selection of partners there have been additional districts and 17 new partners
in implementing the project activities. These districts and partners are separate from the tentative partners
identified in the PA. Though to add new districts and partners was agreed and decided in the 13
December 2015 C-PAC meeting, the new districts and partners were added prior to securing the approval
from SWC.
3.2.9 Analysis
• To date the target achievements specifically under the PT: Youth participation in Development and
PO 1 & 2 in average has been only 67.8%; under the PT: Women and Girls Empowerment and PO 1
& 2 it has been 80%; under the PT: Media in Development and PO 1 & 3 has been in average 79%;
and, under the PT: Leadership in Development and PO 1 & 4 the target achievement has been 83%.
The overall target achievement has been 77.45% of the total project target
• Though the target achievements in average of 77.45% and cent percent and excess achievements in
some themes (such as under media in development’s TV program; seed grant support to conflict
affected women; leadership in development’s) by 41 months of the 60 months (January 2013 –
December 2017) of the project life is notable and reasonable, in some of the thematic activities such
as in youth participation in development the momentum of activities needs to be increased in order to
achieve the target by the end of the project.
• The target achievement of 77.45% only under the youth participation in development theme has been
relatively weak. Achievements under specific activities under this theme, viz, youth leadership
development training has been only 26%; seed grants to youth groups has been only 45%; and youth
led community activities has been only 19%.
• Similarly, the target achievements under the media in development theme for the two activities or
component of producing radio and TV program have been completed. But the capacity building
activity of providing training to journalists has been only 44%.
• In order to achieve the set targets under the four themes/objectives which have achieved to date less
than 50% of it’s target, with only about 15 months remaining period of the project, implementing the
activities needs to be speeded up, or a realistic or achievable target needs to be reset by amending
the PA with SWC.

• Regarding the youth participation in development and leadership in development thematic activities
there has been responses and assertions such as the perception of the youth regarding the state and
vice versa has changed; youths earlier divided along geographical identity lines have united, more
organized to be engaged in development; and political leadership respects the independent role of
youths’ in development. But there is a lack of tangible, quantifiable, empirical evidences, and data to
support these.
• Most of the CLS and LEY trainees consulted demanded refresher training and one FGD demanded
rather than general leadership training more specific existing problem solving leadership trainings. In
general the trainee respondents said they need leadership trainings to be able to implement
community level development activities in the rural areas. One respondent opined that the SEED
activities to youths have been more confined to urban municipality areas.


Page 37 of 58
• The seed grants of NRs. 5,000 - 50,000 have been given to women and youth groups through official
invoices issued by SFCG, for formalizing such monetary transaction a proper and legal means is
observed to be of imperative.
• The informal youth groups formed after the CLS and LEY trainings have received the small grants
and their expectation is that the size of seed grants would be increased by the project so that the
youth groups can implement larger community development activities.
• Gender wise participation of women in key activities of the project such as CLS has been around
40%. It may be improved by having criteria in organizing such activities that ensures increased
participation of women.
• Since the young women’s social/development and political leadership issues vary from men’s
leaderships issues, and are influenced by various social and cultural factors, in addition to the mixed
gender leadership trainings, separate leadership training activities focused on specific women
leadership issues and challenges can attribute to improving youth women’s leadership. This may
apply for leadership development of youths from marginalized communities such as Dalits and
Janjatis.
• Regarding the Sangoor radio program the listerners’ group said that it was interesting in the beginning
but later it tried to address too many issues and could not give a clear information and message.
Need for radio programs that give information on the issue/problem (like drug use by youths) and a
clear message from every episode.
• Lack of consistency is observed in organizing, documenting, and reporting the D-PAC and C-PAC
meetings.
• Regarding funding and financial management the SEED project, as per the PA with SWC the project
had budgeted for NRs. 199,054,531 for five years (January 2013 – December 2017). As of carrying
out the MTE (May 2016) the project has overspent by NRs. 80,179,700 or about 40% more. Given
that the overall target achievement of the project has been around 77.45% and budget overspent by
40% this needs to be sorted by SFCG with SWC.

• Discrepancies have been observed in the budget management, expenses, and partnerships, which
are not in compliance with the PA with SWC.
• The overall budget of the Project is Rs.199, 054, 531 and the budget upto May 2016 is Rs.143,
733,198. The actual expenses upto May 2016 has been Rs. 279, 234, 232, resulting into overspent
by Rs.135, 501, 034 and overspent by Rs. 80,179, 700, as compared to Overall Budget of five years
period. See Table 14 below.
• Analysis of program cost amounting to Rs. 240, 033, 588 and admin cost amounting to Rs.
39,200,644 reflects that 86% of total expenses incurred has been spent on program and remaining
14% has been spent on admin cost upto May 2016.
• Excess expenses have been incurred from the first year of the project. In 2013 the project has
incurred Rs. 56, 778, 360 as against budgeted amount of Rs. 43, 729,200; in 2014 it has incurred Rs.
57, 070, 421 as against budget amount of Rs. 43, 458, 690; and Rs. 117, 328, 896 was incurred in
2015 as against budget amount of Rs. 41, 053, 421.
• During our review we noticed some partner organizations have overspent their agreement amount,
which are listed in Table 17 below.


Page 38 of 58
• The overall budget of the PA with partner organizations is Rs.102, 491, 673 and the budget upto May
2016 is Rs. 74, 076, 531. However, the actual expenses upto May 2016 is Rs. 29, 789, 925 resulting
in under spending by Rs. 44, 286, 608 which reflects only 40% budget utilization with the PA partner
organizations.
• While reviewing the contract with partner organizations we observed partnership agreement
amounting to Rs. 212, 441,153 were made, which were the partner organizations other than as
mentioned in the signed PA with SWC. The total amount of the PA is Rs. 199, 054, 531 but SFCG
has committed to provide Rs. 212, 441, 153 with other partner organizations.
• Some of the partner organizations were not provided with budget according to the PA, but SFCG has
entered into contract with these organizations and incurred expenses amounting to Rs. 84,619,897
upto May 2016.
• While reviewing the partner organization contracts, we observed instances of agreement done
beyond the PA period with three partner organizations that are not the partner organizations as per
the signed PA.
• As per the GA and PA regulations SFCG is required to inform SWC and make amendments in the PA
in case of any changes in the project budgets or activities, or partnerships.

• As per the policy of the government and SWC for INGOs to work in Nepal, it is required to uphold
development transparency to the stakeholders (in terms of programs and budgets). There has been
inconsistency in adhering to transparency of the project. Activities such as public audit, social audit,
and social hearings have not been organized by the SEED Project to date.

• There has been a delay in undertaking the SEED project MTE. It should have taken place around mid
of 2015. This may have been due to the earthquake in Nepal in April 2015.


Page 39 of 58
SECTION IV
Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations
4.1Summary
Adhering to the PA between SWC and SFCG Nepal regarding the SEED Project, an independent MTE
was required to be carried out. The ToR for the MTE was developed by SWC in consultation with SFCG
Nepal and independent team of consultants was hired to carry out the task.
The overall goal of the MTE was to primarily evaluate in the mid-term that the project has been able to
achieve the targets set and other compliances as per the agreement such as financial managements and
obligations (tax etc.), central level coordination, reporting have were adhered to or not.
Simple participatory approach and methodology was used to conduct the study. Methodology included
desk research (literature reviews), consultations, or interviews with key informants, FGDs with various
stakeholders and beneficiaries, specific generic checklists for secondary and primary data collection and
analysis were used.
Undertaking the SEED project MTE may have been delayed due to the earthquake in Nepal in April 2015.
To date the overall target achievement of the SEED project has been around 77.45%. Some of the
thematic activities that have target achievements of less than 50% need to be speeded up in order to
achieve the set goal in about the remaining 15 months project life. Though the project has achieved
about overall 77.45% set targets, the budget has been overspent by 40% in new initiatives. How this
needs to be adjusted or amended needs to be discussed and decided by SWC and SFCG.
Assessments of the project in terms of best practices or lessons learned are as follow.
• The SEED PA with SWC unlike other projects does not have specific confirmed donors and budget.
The SEED project has secured funds from multiple donors as the project has progressed over the five
year of its life cycle. With such multiple or co-funding mechanism, it is important to keep the financial
arrangement and management accurately for purposes like MTE.
• In such SEED project where the exact donors and funding (financing mechanism) is not
predetermined, regular communications and meetings between such the concerned INGO and SWC
is required in order to maintain timely updating.
• The capacity building activities of the project such as the CLS and LEY have definitely imparted skills
to youths, political, civil society, and government personnel for collaborative leadership. However,
documenting and making the results measurable objectively/tangibly is necessary.
• The mechanism of determining seed grants or the amount should not be predetermined by the
project, and even if done so, it should be done more systematically/scientifically with market surveys
and so on. It is better to determine the size of the seed grant on the basis of the action plan and
activities developed by the CCLS and LEY trainees as a group.
• The women or youth groups formed after the CLS and LEY trainings should be formalized as far as
possible so that the institutional capacity at the community level is built, and it is convenient and
legitimized for projects like SEED to administer seed grants.


Page 40 of 58
4.2 Conclusions
• For a project like SEED with multiple donors it is better to have a predetermined or confirmed donors
and budget. Budget should be planned more accurately and overspending should be avoided as far
as possible.
• The time plans, set targets, and budgets, for projects like SEED should be realistic and achievable as
the SEED project with about 15 months left has an overall achievement of about 77.45%, whereas the
budget expended has crossed more than 40% than the actual.
• The PA for projects with SEED’s nature (in terms of funding/donors and activities) should have
provisions for more meetings with SWC so that consistency is maintained in PA stipulations and
amendments.
• Administration and amount of seed grants by projects like SEED should not be pre-determined but
supported by more legitimate partnership and aligned to actual action plan requirements.
4.3 Recommendations

4.3.1 Program Activities and Compliance
4.3.1.1 Though the target achievements in average of 77.45% and cent percent and excess
achievements in some themes (such as under media in development’s TV program; seed grant
support to conflict affected women; leadership in development’s) by 41 months of the 60 months
(January 2013 – December 2017) of the project life is notable and reasonable, in some of the
thematic activities such as in youth participation in development the momentum of activities
needs to be increased in order to achieve the target by the end of the project.
4.3.1.2 The target achievement of 77.45% only under the youth participation in development theme has
been relatively weak. Achievements under specific activities under this theme, viz, youth
leadership development training has been only 26%; seed grants to youth groups has been only
45%; and youth led community activities has been only 19%.
4.3.1.3 Similarly, the target achievements under the media in development theme for the two activities or
component of producing radio and TV program have been completed. But the capacity building
activity of providing training to journalists has been only 44%. In order to achieve the set targets
under the four themes/objectives which have achieved to date less than 50% of it’s target, with
only about 15 months remaining period of the project, implementing the activities needs to be
speeded up, or a realistic or achievable target needs to be reset by amending the PA with SWC.
4.3.1.4 From some of the sample data of the SEED project it was found that gender wise in the CLS. In
activities in general aggregate the participation of male was 58%, female 40%, and the third
gender (TG) 2%. Social inclusion wise in the CLS activities it was found the inclusion of the social
groups: Madheshi was 40%; Janajati 16%; Dalit 5%; Brahmin/Chettri 20%; Muslim 5%, OBC 2%;
and, others 6%. Gender wise participation of women in key activities of the project such as CLS
has been around 40%. It may be improved by having criteria in organizing such activities that
ensures increased participation of women.
4.3.1.5 Since the young women’s social/development and political leadership issues vary from men’s
leaderships issues, and are influenced by various social and cultural factors, in addition to the
mixed gender leadership trainings, separate leadership training activities focused on specific


Page 41 of 58
women leadership issues and challenges can attribute to improving youth women’s leadership.
This may apply for leadership development of youths from marginalized communities such as
Dalits and Janjatis.
4.3.1.6 Regarding media program activities (radio and TV) it is recommended to have regular audience
survey and incorporate the feedbacks from the targeted audiences/viewers in media program
production.
4.3.1.7 Though the D-PAC and C-PAC meetings have been organized documentation of the meetings
need to be consistent and the decisions made in such meetings need to be translated into
tangible actions. For example in the C-PAC meeting held on 11 December 2015, amongst others,
it was decided and agreed to: add new districts and partnerships in the project and there would
be a need for amendment in the PA; to organize a field observation visit for the concerned
persons from the central level; and, the project’s objective should be able to have a link to good
governance and government’s policies. To date there has been lack of congruency in taking
actions.
4.3.1.8 Complacencies have been observed in complying to the decisions made by the December 2015
C-PAC meeting like without approval from SWC the SEED Project has added districts and
partners to implement the activities.
4.3.1.9 Though it was discussed and decided in the C-PAC December 2015 meeting, the project has
added new districts and 17 new partners without proper approval from SWC. This needs to be
sorted out between SFCG and SWC.
4.3.1.10Regarding alignment of the SEED project with government’s policies and plans regarding youth,
girls, and women, there have been activities which have alignment, such as the project organized
orientation and workshops in Doti, Bajhang, and Kailali districts National Action Plan on UNCSR
1325 and 1820. SEED project has imparted training to youth for development leadership and
political engagements such as the CLS and LEY. However, it is recommended that in project
progress reporting to SWC it should tangibly report which activities of the project have contributed
specifically to the government’s policies and plans regarding youth, girls and women.
4.3.1.11Regarding transparency of the project, as per the policy of the government and SWC for INGOs
to work in Nepal, it is required to uphold development transparency to the stakeholders (in terms
of programs and budgets). There has been inconsistency in adhering to transparency of the
project. Activities such as public audit, social audit, and social hearings have not been organized
by the SEED Project to date. It is recommended that SFCG organize national and district level
SEED project transparency activities as soon as possible.
4.3.2 Financial Management
4.3.2.1 Regarding Comparison of Budget with Actual and Committed Support of the project it is
recommended that the project management to oversee the project budget and contracts regularly
to compare the expenses with budget balance, and further it should be linked with activities to be
performed; and not to exceed the budgeted amount, if exceeded then it is required to obtain the
approval from the appropriate authority without any delay.
4.3.2.2 Regarding Fiscal Year Wise Comparison the project management is required to oversee the
budget and expenses regularly in order not to exceed the actual budget. The project has
exceeded more than 30% in year wise comparison, so it needs to obtain reasonable approval


Page 42 of 58
from SWC.
4.3.2.3 Regarding Expenses Reporting by Partner Organizations the project management should
strictly follow the terms and conditions of the signed PA with SWC and if there are deviations it
should be discussed with SWC and secure approval.
4.3.2.4 Regarding Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Project Agreement Partner
Organizations PA partner organizations have underspent the allocated budget amount. It is
recommended to assess the capacity and effectiveness of partner organizations before including
them into project agreement. Project partnership agreement further needs to be monitored and
reviewed regularly, and if there are irregularities in capacity of the partner organization to fulfill the
project agreement requirements then in consulting with and with approval from SWC change the
partner.
4.3.2.5 Regarding Agreement Entered Other than Project Agreement Partner Organization the
project management is strongly recommended to strictly follow the ToR according to PA with
SWC and include only the PA partner organizations. If new partners are to be included in the
project then prior discussion with and approval from SWC is required, and if necessary
amendments in the PA are to be made.
4.3.2.6 Regarding Budget and Actual Expenses Comparison of Non PA Partner Organizations the
project management is recommended to disburse the project fund only to the project partners as
per the PA with SWC.
4.3.2.7 There have been project agreements signed beyond the project life. The project management is
recommended to strictly follow the project’s time line.
4.3.2.8 Since the project has already overspent and further budget is required for implementing the
remaining activities of project in about 18 months’ project period, it is recommended that SFCG
inform SWC about the additional budget sources and if required inculcate necessary
amendments in the PA.
4.3.2.9 Regarding the overall discrepancies in the financial management, additional partnership
agreements and budgets, it is recommended that SFCG discuss with SWC and make the
necessary arrangements and amendments in the incumbent PA.


Page 43 of 58
REFERENCES
• General Agreement Between SWC and SFCG, Belgium, 6 April 2012
• Project Agreement Between SWC and SFCG, 4 January 2013
• Annual Progress Report 2013, Submitted to SWC by SFCG
• SEED Annual Progress Report 2014
• Minute of C-PAC Meeting, SFCG Office, Lazimpat, Kathmandu, 13 December 2015
• SWC general Scope of Work for Mid-Term Evaluation of Supporting Enabling Environment for
Development, Supported by SFCG, June 2016
• Grant Contract, External Actions of the European People, IFS-RRM/2013/329-365
• The Isabel Allende Foundation, Reference Grant Name: 2014 Esperanza Grant, 18 April 2014
• Project Cooperation Agreement between The United Nations Entity for General Equality and The
Empowerment of Women and Search for Common Ground, 26 July 2013
• USAID Nepal, Cooperative Agreement No. AID-367-A-14-00001, 19 December 2013
• BRS Neupane & Co., Independent Auditors’ Report, 4 November 2015
• Other SEED project secondary data and information documents provided by SFCG


Page 44 of 58
Annex 1: Generic Checklist
Supporting Enabling Environment for Development Project (SEED)
Implemented by Search for Common Ground (SFCG)
Mid-Term Evaluation by Social Welfare Council
Evaluation Period: January 2013 -July 2016
Evaluation Period Budget: NRs. 128, 241, 311
DRAFT Generic Checklist (for field assessment)
___________________________________________________________________________________
1. Project Background
Project Goal
• The overall goal of the project is to support an enabling environment for development in Nepal.
Project Objectives
1. To build the local capacity of key actors (media, local government, youth and women) in supporting
an enabling environment for development;
2. To provide seed grants support to Community Based Organizations (CBOs) for community
development projects;
3. To provide technical support to local organisations for production and broadcast of awareness raising
and behaviour change media programs; and
4. To foster a culture of leadership, dialogue and collaborative problem solving to address Nepal’s social
and development challenges.
Thematic Areas/Activity Focus
i) Youth participation and development
ii) Women empowerment and Development
iii) Leadership in development
iv) Media in Development
___________________________________________________________________________________
2. CHECKLISTS:
• Project Objective (PO) and Thematic Areas/Key Results(TA/KR) Wise
• To be administered commonly and contextually in terms of SEED’s nature of partnership.
________________________________________________________________
2.1 Key Informant Interviews/KII (organizations/individuals)
Date: Name:
Organization: Designation:
District: VDC/Municipality:
KEY QUESTIONS
Organization (executing partners)
1. What is the mission/aim of your organization?
2. What activities your organization has done/doing in the district?


Page 45 of 58
3. What are the requirements, objective/activities of your organization under the SFCG SEED project
partnership?
4. What has worked, what has not worked, what can be done better, and what are the challenges under
the SEED project? (SWOT)
5. How do you communicate (program+finance) with SFCG under the SEED project?
6. How do you think can be/will be the activities started under the SEED project sustained by you or your
organization?
7. Any other comments?
Individual (Beneficiary)
1. What do you know about the SEED project?
2. In which activities of the SEED project have you participated?
3. How have you benefitted from the SEED project?
4. What do you think are the strengths/weaknesses/challenges of the SEED project?
5. Do you have any suggestions to make the SEED project more effective?
___________________________________________________________________________________
2.2 Focus Group Discussion/FGD (districts/VDCs/municipalities)
Date: District/VDC/Municipality:
Participants (Full Name/Gender/Address/Contact):
KEY QUESTIONS
2. How have you participated in/benefitted from the SEED project?
4. How do you think the SEED project’s activities can be sustained?
5. Are there any suggestions you would like to make regarding the more effectiveness of the SEED
project?
___________________________________________________________________________________
2.3 KII/FGD (districts, DDCs, DAOs, DEOs, DCOs, DWOs)
(individual/organization/FGD)
Date: District (VDC/municipality):
Name (individual)/Designation/Organization/List of Participants (if FGD):
2. What is the nature of partnership/relation of your organization with the SEED project?
3. In what/which activities of the SEED project have you participated/benefitted?
5. How do you think the activities started by the SEED project can be sustained?
6. Do you have any suggestions to make the SEED project more effective?


Page 46 of 58
Annex 2: Tentative Field Visit Plan
SWC mid- term evaluation of SEED project
18 – 21 August 2016
Day 1 District Time Responsible/
Venue
August 18 Dhanusha 11:10 Travel to Janakpur
August 19 August 19th 9:00 am Meeting with regional team Alok
Janakapur 10-12 Am Meeting with Line agencies (WDO,
CDO, LDO)
Anjana
Lunch 12-1 Alok
Travel to
Mohattari
1-2
Suga 2 -2:45 PM Meeting with Women's group in Suga Bijay
YNPD office,
Jaleswer
3-30 PM Meeting with Youth Network Bijay
Jaleshwor 3:30-4 PM Meeting with FM station
( Sangor/ GGSD)
Bijay
Rudrakshya Fm
Back from
Mahotari
4-5 PM
Janakpur 5-6 PM Meeting with Sangor Listener
And CLS team
Anjana/Bijay
Welcome Hotel
Janakapur 6-7 PM Ghanshyam Mishra (KhullaDharti)
(Radio Partner)
Anjana
Radio Mithila
August 20 Travel to
Siraha
7 AM
Lahan 9 AM-10 AM Meeting with Local Partner Samagra Sunil/Ram Bharosi
Lahan 10:30 -
11:30AM
Meeting with women groups Sunil/Ram Bharosi
Lunch 12:00-1:00
PM
Golbazar
Siraha 1:30-2:30 Meeting with seed grants support
participants/CLS Team
Sunil/Ram Bharosi
Siraha 2:30-3:30 PM Meeting with government
officials(DDC,LPC,NYC,DPO-DSP)
Sunil/Ram Bharosi
Return Back
from Siraha
3:30 -4:30
PM
Lahan 4:30 PM-5:30
PM
Meeting with Sangor listners Sunil/Ram Bharosi
Lahan Meeting with SD audience Sunil/Ram Bharosi
Reflection with the team
August 21 7:30 AM Travel back to Kathmandu
Travel to
Rajbiraj on
the way of
Biratnagar
8:30 AM –
9:30 AM
Meeting with CLS/TFC member
about organizing District Youth
Assembly collaboration with multi-
stakeholders donor agencies and
Government Offices in Saptari district.
Rajesh & Sunil


Page 47 of 58
Annex 3: FGD Participants
FGD 1: Mahila Chamata Bikash Shanti Samittee (Women’s Group), Jaleswore, Mahottari, youth
leadership training and seed grant; 19/08/2016
SN Name Gender Age
1. Sunaina Thakur F 28
2. Rinku Thakur F 25
3. Kalpana Karn F 21
4. Dulari Devi F 22
5. Gulab Devi F 16
6. Banarasi Devi F 30
7. Jyoti Devi Paswan F 35
8. Malti Devi F 35
9. Sushila Thakur F 35
10. Kishor Pradhan M 40
11. Shobha Pokhrel F NA
12. Sushma Khadka F NA
13. Sudip Dahal M NA
14. Meena Sharma F NA
15. Kalpana Karn F 22
FGD 2: Youth Network for Peace and Development (YNPD), Jaleswore, Mahottari, youth leadership
training and seed grant to youth group; 19/08/2016
SN Name Gender Age Name of Organization
1. Nagendra Kumar Kama M 32 NA
2. Md Mohamad Ansari M 20 NA
3. Puja Kumari F 18 NA
4. July Thakur F 18 NA
5. Kamni Chaudhary F 28 NA
6. Bipin Kumar Sah M 25 NA
7. Satyendar Yadav M 27 YNPD
8. Jyoti Kri M 20 Student
9. Deepika Sah F 23 FNJ
10. Chandra Bhusan Yadav M 19 YIC
11. Suresh Thakur M 34 YNPD
12. Sushil Kumar Raut M 34 YTF
13. Kishor Pradhan M NA SWC
14. Sushma Khadka F NA SWC
15. Shobha Pokhrel F NA SWC
16. Sudip Dahal M NA SWC
17. Bijay Jha M 29 SFCG
18. Meena Sharma F NA SFCG


Page 48 of 58
FGD 3: Welcome Hotel, Janakpur, Dhanusha, CLS Trainees, 19/08/2016
SN Name Gender Age Organization Name
1. Ashok Sah M 23 Youth Initiative
2. Saroj Mishra M 34 Youth Initiative
3. Batuk Nath Jha M 29 Youth Initiative
4. Pravakar Prasad Saha M 28 Teach For Nepal
5. Om Prakash Sah M 34 Youth Initiative
6. Dev Kumar Mahato M 23 HRDYI)
7. Gobind Mahato M 23 Sanchar
8. Rinku Mishra Gayatry F 23 TV today
9. Sudip Dahal M 33 SWC
10. K. Pradhan M 49 SWC
11. Anjana Saha F NA SFCG
FGD 4: Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan, Siraha, youth leadership development and media
development, 20/08/2016
1. Bhairab Prasad Gelal M NA APEC
2. Ram Bhansi Mahato M 37 APEC
3. Sunil Kumar Sah M 38 SFCG
4. Shusma Khadka F 41 SWC
5. Shova Pokhrel F 39 MOWCSW
7. Surendra Shrestha M 50 NA
8. Madan Kumar Mandal M 45 APEI
9. Dev Raj Pokhrel M 41 SAMAGRA
10. Mundrika Mandal F 30 APEC
FGD 5: Samagra Janautthan Kendra, Lahan, Siraha, radio program ‘Sanghor’ listerners’ group
20/08/2016
SN Name Gender Age
1. Tej Narayan Yadav M 17
2. Jibachha Prasad Sah M 18
3. Ritesh Kumar Yadav M 22
4. Prameshar Kumar Thakur M 19
5. Teju Maithali M 22
6. Md Javed Ali M 26
7. Shusma Khadka F 41
8. Shova Pokhrel F 39
9. Mundrita Mandal F 30


Page 49 of 58
FGD 6: Sabal Nepal, Rajbiraj, Saptari, youth leadership trainees and youth group seed grant,
20/08/2016
1. Ayush Shrestha M 32 Sabal Nepal
2. Sanjeev Yadav M 25 Student
3. Birendra Mandal M 32 Student
4. Bol Krishna Mandal M 21 Student
5. Mohan Kumar Yadav M 29 New Generation Group
6. Shrawan Kunar Das M 32 NA
7. Sushma Khadka F 41 SWC
8. Bandana BK F 20 Sabal Nepal
10. Pramemshwore Jha M 33 Sabal Nepal
11. Ashok Kumar Sah M 32 Sabal Nepal
12. Jitendra Mandal M 30 Sabal Nepal
13. Prabhat Singh M 40 Sabal Nepal
14. Rajesh Kumar Lohani M 36 SFCG
15. Bhupesh Kumar Sah M 25 Sabal Nepal
16. Dhanesh M 45 Sabal Nepal
17. Kishor Pradhan M 49 SWC
18. Mahesh M 28 Sabal Nepal


Page 50 of 58
Annex 4: Complete List of People Consulted
SN Name Designation Organization
1. Alok Thakur Regional Manager Eastern Regional Office, SFCG
2. Anjana Saha Associate Field Officer Eastern Regional Office, SFCG
3. Ayush Shrestha CLS Trainee Rajbiraj, Saptari
4. Bhariab Prasad Golal Chairperson Samagra Jana Utthan Center,
Lahan, Siraha
5. Bhola Prasad Dahal Country Director SFCG, Kathmandu
6. Bijay Kumar Jha Associate Field Officer Eastern Regional Office, SFCG
7. Dilip Kumar Chapagain Chief District Officer CDO, Janakpur, Dhanusha
8. Kiran Shrestha Finance and Grants Manager SFCG, Kathmandu
9. Meena Sharma Project Manager SFCG, Kathmandu
10. Nahakul Pokharel District Superintendent of Police DPO, Janakpur, Dhanusha
11. Niresh Chapagain DME & A Manager SFCG, Kathmandu
11. Nirmala Mishra District Women Officer DWO, Janakpur, Dhanusha
12. Ram Bharoshi Mahato Program Manager Samagra Jana Utthan Center,
Lahan, Siraha
13. Satish Jungh Shahi Executive Director Antenna Foundation, Kathmandu
14. Sunaina Thakur Chairperson Mahila Chamta Bikash Shanti
Samitee, Jaleswore, Mahotari
15. Sweta Pradhan HR and Admin Manager SFCG, Kathmandu
16. Yubakar Raj Rajkarnicar Program Director SFCG, Kathmandu


Page 51 of 58
Annex 5: SEED Project C-PAC Meeting Minutes, 2012, 2014, and 2015
C-PAC Meeting Minute: 14 December 2012


Page 52 of 58

cf,- ~ ...... (
"'
~
q1,. )_(SI-§; ~/i/f -~.:::i "t;.,_ "".S'l1ri ;up..o__)
~~( ) ..--.....
'16'(TJ G1 11r::;:11 £ ~~16'/ fft,J,,,1a -
9 '(' -- . Z/Of/) ./
~~
~·"
·~ 1! ~p,f""' z,
< ---=--
...
I


Page 53 of 58
C-PAC Meeting Minute: 27 March 2014

- ...L--~~~~~~~~-=----=-__:__:_:~,L_~~t+--~~~~~=--=-----~~~
-L---~~---::~~~~~~~~~~tr-~~~-T-~~~v--~~
-~
1---~----:;;;;--~---.~=----==3~--=-=~~~~~~~~==--~~~-
=-......__--=;=----'""'
}
(f
~, ~ eif.,_g • 9Jf ~ ·-~~-~~'<-"-±-~· t91 'i'.M "1,41 =-
-


Page 54 of 58

""
..,..., ::i 15:.5~~
!--------U~
I' D
,-.-
") - k:s-'1:5Ji!' ::>) ei f3 c'.· 1(1 _2) %?.:fc ) ;ruI,.4 ;"" -
5 :£: 3"@~~9Jt -:i<~'ijJ).fR? £i)t71i ~:
1-------.:--.--~ "%1 ~)' .,-=-; ~~<,.:;;s ;1:JDJl("IM!t -
ci'l11 "');z ~''?j 'n~ '.'.!)~"!.~ :::'7 gQ YI~
----- t!:)
~··
-
1----~--9--=---S_-Jt_L_~.________It!_i!.=-'L.:....V'-1-__ / _
CZ--11= ~"!):2A ~1


Page 55 of 58
Gi 1hl
t
-----------
~
I_,
r-~~~~~---.~~~~~~~~-:;=~~~~-'--~~~----~~~
'--~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----"'-~~~~~----'"~~~~~~,
t---------J
' 23:_.;:I ("'""'
-q z:i nb
3.'ll-L- r-o..c-2 d ~ ~ ..~ g ~
·-~--·· e-"' ~111 -s1@'l'i)"' ~-v,((i' 1 r n 1 ;{Q 2'1", ::> ~'
'-
qu I 03 °'CA VOl=i)
r--
t---
. c:


Page 56 of 58

L---------~----------1,-.
•


Page 57 of 58
C-PAC Meeting Minute: 13 December 2015

X[
D Q
. (


Page 58 of 58

l
1--~~-~~M~,~~---=·'lf1~~.=--9~~~~~-'M4-A~~~~!f-~.-;;;;i~~1~11~~:--.t~4~~-~~,,~T-----;-k~.~~~l~~<~~,,,;r-~,,..-:--~~~q~1~-.
~l
tht 6'1-j e~') c ~=Pr"' :> l~ 7 , "l Ll.f x, ~) 1'1 ?V>Y) q I "- Y) ..J) if o )~
i--~~~~~,~n~~)n1~~'~@J"?t'~-~~ill-~~·~,aF.~~~~--~dJ..-~~4~u·~~~~~~ci~r=-1r-~~~~~~-
S<d5 z-tYJ'°'11 .) rr 4-' r-m'fi1 rdt~<'IOJ6 9,if <'"') r("bci~ -:.i~
1~
~~ <~ <-t C"l"ILl.dl IT .(···6'(~)11 .>14-)
"h~'4 ?h"Y)"~ ~ ~~if 9 h:; er· 3 ·~~~Jt 1-11 ~
01-)) i-f?1) >7 e1sr ;._=1 }"'.6:U- ~~e1 ' ~ i5" Y':f c-;"'1lz;
=

FINAL-SWC-SEED-MTE_Report-24-11-2016

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

More from Kishor Pradhan, MA, DMC, CKM

FINAL-SWC-SEED-MTE_Report-24-11-2016