Final evaluation 
CRS MALAWI 
WALA PROGRAM
2009-2014
Volume I – Main Report
Wellness and Agriculture for Life Advancement (WALA) 2009-2014
 A Title II MYAP Funded by USAID Food for Peace
August 2014
This assessment was made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency 
for International Development (USAID), Office of Food for Peace (FFP). The contents of this report are the 
sole responsibility of the WALA program and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United 
States Government
i 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Acknowledgments 
The members of the final evaluation team wish to extend our gratitude to WALA program staff, 
CRS and other PVOs, and Government of Malawi officials for all the support received during the 
final evaluation conducted toward the end of 2013. All shared documentation and insights in an 
effort to ensure that the WALA final evaluation can account for its overall performance toward its 
donor and beneficiaries, as well as provide a valuable learning opportunity for all involved. While it is 
not possible to thank all individuals who have assisted, the Team is particularly grateful to 
Jayachandran Vasudevan (Head of M&E and Knowledge Management), who has been the focal person 
for the final evaluation team in almost all matters, starting from the design of quantitative survey 
instruments for the endline survey, qualitative tools for the final evaluation team’s visit to Malawi, 
sharing of program documentation, and the detailed planning and logistics serving the entire field 
visit. 
The final evaluation team would like to thank USAID/FFP staff in Washington and Pretoria, 
particularly the M&E team, for their technical assistance before, during and after the exercise. 
At the same time, we would also like to acknowledge the excellent support received from all PVOs, 
who worked tirelessly to accommodate the many requests for information and meetings from the 
final evaluation team. We also offer special thanks to the entire quantitative and qualitative teams 
fielded by CRS and TANGO International for their dedication and excellent work in collecting 
information. 
We are also indebted to the individuals and families who gave freely of their time and company to be 
interviewed by our teams. Without their generosity and openness in welcoming us into their homes 
and sharing invaluable information about their lives, this important review would not have been 
possible. 
We sincerely hope that our findings, conclusions, and recommendations enable WALA to fine-tune 
its exit strategy in the coming months and guide future proposals of integrated food security and 
nutrition programs in Malawi, starting with the next round of Title II programs in Malawi (2014-18). 
Finally, the team wants to acknowledge the important work conducted by two TANGO staff 
members: Lloyd Owen Banwart, who provided technical supervision to endline survey data 
collection and conducted processing and analysis and the quantitative bivariate and multivariate 
analysis related to the final evaluation, comparing baseline with endline results; and Monica Mueller, 
who has edited the main report and annexes. 
TANGO International final evaluation team 
Rene Verduijn, Team Leader 
Jeanne Downen 
Tamsin Walters 
John Wyeth 
ii
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table of Contents 
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. vii
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Objectives and Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Objectives of the Final Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 1
3. Overview of the Programmatic Context and Implementation .............................................................. 2
3.1 Vulnerability Context ..................................................................................................................................... 2
3.2 Program Description ...................................................................................................................................... 4
3.3 Targeting ........................................................................................................................................................... 5
3.4 WALA Implementation Experience ........................................................................................................... 8
4. Program Effectiveness .................................................................................................................................... 10
4.1 WALA Progress at Impact Level ............................................................................................................... 10
4.2 SO1 – MCHN ................................................................................................................................................ 16
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 16
Performance ....................................................................................................................................................... 16
Sustainability ....................................................................................................................................................... 19
4.3 SO2 – AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming ....................................................................... 20
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 20
Performance – AgNRM ................................................................................................................................... 20
Sustainability – AgNRM.................................................................................................................................... 24
Performance – Small-scale Irrigation ............................................................................................................ 24
Sustainability – Small-scale Irrigation ............................................................................................................ 26
Performance – Livestock and Fisheries ........................................................................................................ 26
Sustainability – Livestock and Fisheries ........................................................................................................ 27
Performance – Village Savings and Loans Groups ..................................................................................... 27
Sustainability – Village Savings and Loans Groups ..................................................................................... 31
Performance – Agribusiness ........................................................................................................................... 31
Sustainability – Agribusiness ........................................................................................................................... 35
4.4 SO3 – Disaster Risk Reduction ................................................................................................................. 35
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 35
Performance – Community Mechanisms ..................................................................................................... 36
Sustainability – Community Mechanisms ..................................................................................................... 38
Performance – Safety Nets and FFW ........................................................................................................... 39
Sustainability – Safety Nets and FFW ........................................................................................................... 40
4.5 Cross-cutting Issues ..................................................................................................................................... 40
Good Governance ............................................................................................................................................ 40
Gender ................................................................................................................................................................. 41
Mainstreaming HIV/AIDS Considerations ................................................................................................... 42
Environmental Monitoring and Impact Mitigation ..................................................................................... 43
iii
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
5. Program Processes ......................................................................................................................................... 44
5.1 Program Management .................................................................................................................................. 44
5.2 Staffing.............................................................................................................................................................. 45
5.3 Program Coordination ................................................................................................................................ 45
5.4 Knowledge Management ............................................................................................................................. 47
5.5 Monitoring and Evaluation .......................................................................................................................... 48
5.6 Partnerships .................................................................................................................................................... 49
5.7 Financial Management .................................................................................................................................. 49
5.8 Commodity Management ............................................................................................................................ 50
5.9 Monetization .................................................................................................................................................. 51
6. Evaluation Findings .......................................................................................................................................... 51
Findings SO1 – MCHN .................................................................................................................................... 51
Findings SO2 – AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming, VSL and Agribusiness .................. 52
Findings SO3 – Disaster Risk Reduction ..................................................................................................... 55
7. Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 55
Conclusions – SO1 MCHN ............................................................................................................................... 55
Recommendations – SO1 MCHN ................................................................................................................... 56
Conclusions – SO2 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock, Fisheries, VSL, and Agribusiness ......................... 56
Recommendations – SO2 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock, Fisheries, VSL, and Agribusiness .............. 58
Conclusions – SO3 Disaster Risk Reduction ................................................................................................ 59
Recommendations – SO3 Disaster Risk Reduction .................................................................................... 59
iv
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
List of Tables 
Table 1: WALA population-based indicators, baseline to endline comparison ........................................... x
Table 2: WALA beneficiary summary as of November 2013 .......................................................................... 6
Table 3: WALA population-based indicators, baseline to end-line comparison ....................................... 12
Table 4: Strategic outcomes by first year of household engagement with WALA (WALA CBO 
households) ................................................................................................................................................................ 13
Table 5: Strategic outcome indicators by number of household WALA activities................................... 14
Table 6: SO1.1 outcome by WALA CBO groupa
............................................................................................. 15
Table 7: SO1.2 outcome by WALA CBO groupa
............................................................................................. 16
Table 8: SO1 activities in terms of Specific Objectives target numbers reached...................................... 17
Table 9: Overview of achievements in outcome indicators under SO2 (Agriculture): baseline versus 
endline ......................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Table 10: Overview of achievements in outcome indicators under SO2 Irrigation, comparing baseline 
versus endline values ................................................................................................................................................ 25
Table 11: Disaster risk reduction survey data analysis .................................................................................... 35
Table 12: Life of program budget data................................................................................................................. 50
List of Figures 
Figure 1: Current estimated food security outcomes, July 2012, per FEWS NET ..................................... 2
Figure 2: WALA program targeting of communities with multiple interventions ...................................... 5
Figure 3: Map of WALA program areas and implementing PVOs .................................................................. 6
Figure 4: First year of engagement for all WALA beneficiary households, by % of total, by year (2009-
2013) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Figure 5: Household participation in specific WALA activities, as reported by respondents .................. 9
Figure 6: Household membership community-based organizations supported by WALA ..................... 10
Figure 7: Community-based Farmer Extension System ................................................................................... 22
Figure 8: Perception of shock preparedness relative to five years ago .......................................................37
Figure 9: WALA flowchart: WALA conceptual framework of critical linkages between program 
activities and by SO .................................................................................................................................................. 47
v 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
List of Acronyms 
ACA Agribusiness Community Agent
ACPC Area Civil Protection Committee
ADC Area Development Committee
ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency
AgNRM Agriculture and Natural Resource Management
ARR Annual Results Report
ASP Agribusiness Service Provider
CA Conservation Agriculture
CAHW Community Animal Health Worker
CATCH Consortium Administration and Technical Capacity Hub
CBO Community-Based Organization
CCFLS Community Complementary Feeding and Learning Sessions
CDSO Crude Degummed Soy Bean Oil
CGV Care Group Volunteer
C-MIS Consortium Management Information System
CRS Catholic Relief Services
C-SAFE Consortium for Southern Africa Food Security Emergency
CSB Corn soy blend
CSI Civil Society Index 
DAHLD Department of Animal Health and Livestock Development
DCOP Deputy Chief of Party
DCPC District Civil Protection Committee
DRR Disaster Risk Reduction
EASPM Economic Activity Selection, Planning, and Management
EI Emmanuel International
EPA Extension Planning Areas
FANTA Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance
FEF Farmer Extension Facilitator
FFA Food for Assets
FFP Food for Peace
FFW Food for Work
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FISP Farm Input Subsidy Program
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GMP Growth Monitoring and Promotion
GNI Gross National Income
GoM Government of Malawi
GVH Group Village Head
HAS Health Surveillance Assistant
HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score
HHN Health, Hygiene, and Nutrition
HP Health Promoter
HSA Health Surveillance Assistant
IEC Information, Education, and Communication
IEE Initial Environmental Examination
I-LIFE Improving Livelihoods through Increasing Food Security
IMPACT Positive Action for Community Transformation
IPC Integrated Phase Classification
IPTT Indicator Performance Tracking Table
IR Intermediate Results
ITT Indicator Tracking Table
IYCF Infant and Young Child Feeding
KII Key Informant Interview
LOA Life of Activity
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
vi
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
MCHN Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MDHS Malawi Demographic and Health Survey 
MoAFS Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security
MoH Ministry of Health
MoAHFP Months of Adequate Household Food Provisioning
MTE Midterm Evaluation
MYAP Multi-Year Assistance Program
NAC National Aquaculture Centre
NGO Non-governmental Organization
NRM Natural Resource Management
OVC Orphans and Vulnerable Children 
PCI Project Concern International
PG Producer Group
PHHS Post-Harvest Handling and Storage
PSP Private Sector Providers
PVO Private Voluntary Organizations
RFA Request for Application
SUN Scaling Up Nutrition
SFP Supplementary Feeding Program 
SO Strategic Objective
TA Traditional Authority
TLC Total Land Care
TOT Training-of-Trainers
TQC Technical Quality Coordinator
TWG Technical Working Group
U5 Under five (years of age)
VCPC Village Civil Protection Committee
VDC Village Development Committee
VHC Village Health Committee
VSL Village Savings and Loans
WALA Wellness and Agriculture for Life Advancement
WDC Watershed Development Committee
WILA Water for Irrigation and Life Advancement
WMC Water Management Committee
WOTR Watershed Organization Trust
WVI World Vision International
vii 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Executive Summary 
Introduction 
The Republic of Malawi is a landlocked country in southern Africa. The country has large freshwater 
resources and high agricultural potential. Climatic shocks affect the country frequently and constrain 
economic growth. As recently as 2004-2005, severe drought necessitated a costly humanitarian 
response to meet the basic food needs of an estimated 40 percent of the population. 
In recent years, lack of crop diversification, poor yields, and dependence on rain-fed farming have 
been key factors in the deterioration of the food security situation. High population growth (over 
three percent) further contributes to increasing pressure for poor households to cultivate marginal 
and less fertile lands, particularly in densely populated districts in the south where food insecurity is 
the worst. Smallholder, rain-fed maize production is the predominant agricultural activity and the 
livestock sub-sector remains underdeveloped. Furthermore, poverty is widespread in the 
predominantly rural population. 
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) Malawi began implementation of the Wellness and Agriculture for Life 
Advancement (WALA) program in July 2009, with an ending date of June 2014. This five-year 
USAID-funded PL480 Title II program is through Food for Peace (FFP) and implemented in the eight 
most food insecure districts in the south of Malawi. WALA is implemented by a consortium of nine 
Private Voluntary Organizations (PVOs) led by CRS Malawi as the grant holder. The seven 
implementing PVOs are Africare, Chikwawa Diocese, Emmanuel International, Project Concern 
International, Save the Children, Total Land Care, and World Vision International. Another partner, 
ACDI-VOCA, provides technical support on agribusiness. 
TANGO International, Inc., a consulting firm based in Tucson, Arizona, USA, was contracted to 
conduct the final evaluation. The primary purpose of the final evaluation is to assess the program’s 
overall performance under each of its specific Strategic Objectives (SOs). The evaluation took place 
during the fourth quarter of 2013, i.e., the second quarter of Year 5 of the program. 
Objectives of the Final Evaluation 
The objective of the final evaluation is to assess the impact of WALA program strategies and 
interventions implemented since June 2009 in achieving its three SOs and related intermediate 
results (IRs) in eight districts in southern Malawi. The evaluation assessed the program results and 
how program management and implementation affected and/or supported program achievements. 
This evaluation will inform future FFP and USAID development programming in Malawi. 
The specific objectives were to: 
1. Carry out a comparative analysis (bivariate and multivariate) of baseline and endline surveys1 to 
assess the changes in the indicators (program result) as outlined in the indicator performance 
tracking table (IPTT); 
2. Identify program strategies, structures, systems and interventions that contributed to or 
impeded the achievement of intended results of program interventions and links between inputs 
and results with gender focus; 
3. Assess the effectiveness and efficiency of technical, managerial and resource management 
strategies; 
4. Assess progress made in responding to the midterm evaluation recommendations 
5. Assess the synergy between various WALA program components including linkages with 
Government of Malawi (GoM) and other development programs, and how the linkages enhance 
the program performance; 
6. Assess the sustainability of the program outcomes; 
 
1 Baseline and endline survey reports and data sets will be made available, and these surveys were designed and 
implemented according to the FANTA/FFP guidelines. 
viii 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
7. List the major successes and challenges faced by the WALA program and how well these 
challenges were addressed; 
8. Extract and report on lessons learned to inform future FFP program designs; 
9. Make specific recommendations on improving strategies and program interventions for future 
programming and/or scale-up. 
Design and Objectives 
WALA is a five-year Title II Multi-Year Assistance Program (MYAP) funded by USAID to prevent and 
mitigate food insecurity in southern Malawi. WALA targets the most vulnerable communities and 
households, ensuring holistic provision of services to the selected groups. In the original design, 
targeted groups comprise households that have the following attributes: small and marginal farms, 
female-headed, host chronically ill persons (tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS), food insecure, and/or host 
orphans. WALA is implemented in the eight most food insecure districts of southern Malawi: 
Nsanje, Chikwawa, Thyolo, Mulanje, Zomba, Machinga, Chiradzulu and Balaka. CRS Malawi, through 
the Consortium Administration and Technical Capacity Hub (CATCH), has led the management and 
implementation of the program. 
Goal: The goal of WALA is to improve the food security of 214,974 chronically food insecure 
households in 39 Traditional Authorities (TAs) in eight districts in southern Malawi by 2014 through 
strategic objectives in maternal and child health and nutrition (SO1); agriculture, natural resource 
management, irrigation, and economic activity (SO2); and disaster risk reduction (SO3). Each SO and 
its main corresponding activities are listed below. 
SO1: Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition (MCHN) 
Target: 170,724 vulnerable households have improved MCHN status. 
Main activities: 
 Application of the Care Group model, a community-based health service provision strategy 
employed to increase the coverage and quality of health and nutrition services. All health and 
nutrition interventions below are implemented through this model. 
 The Community Complementary Feeding and Learning Sessions approach is used to enhance 
the nutritional skills of mothers of children under five and pregnant and lactating women. 
 Strengthening of the Ministry of Health (MoH) through capacity building, provision of 
resources, and collaboration in key activities. 
 Strengthening the capacity of community-based organizations (CBOs2) to undertake and 
sustain development activities, such as village health committees. 
SO2: Agriculture, Natural Resource Management (AgNRM), Irrigation, and Economic Activity 
Target: 147,500 smallholder farming households have improved livelihood status. 
Main activities: 
 Formation of farmer groups or producer groups. 
 Demonstration sites approach used to enhance agricultural production and promote 
improved farming practices, e.g., crop diversification, and watershed management. 
 Small-scale irrigation, focusing on high-quality, nutritious crops, has been scaled up and 
integrated with other WALA components. Stream diversions for gravity systems and shallow 
wells for treadle pump systems are commonly utilized. 
 Village Savings and Loans (VSLs) have been employed to increase household incomes and 
facilitate linkages with micro-enterprises in order to boost economic development. 
 Farming as a business has been promoted through agribusiness groups by strengthening 
linkages between small-scale farmers and the private sector and helping farmers to take part 
in collective marketing. 
 
2 In this report, the term CBO is used to indicate any operational groups or formations often established and supported by 
the program in WALA Group Village Heads (GVH) and communities. 
ix
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 Formation of livestock groups to boost the number of households with livestock including 
goat, pig, chicken, and fish. 
 Strengthening the capacity of CBOs to undertake and sustain development activities, such as 
formation of water users committees and marketing clubs. 
SO3: Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 
Target: 273 targeted communities have improved capacity to withstand shocks and stresses. 
Main activities: 
 Food safety net: provision of food aid to chronically ill beneficiaries who are targeted for 
other WALA interventions. 
 Empowerment of communities on DRR and mitigation. 
 Good governance elements such as the Participatory Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation 
exercises, and conflict management. 
 Strengthening the capacity of local governance structures such as Village Civil Protection 
Committees (VCPC) and Area Civil Protection Committees. 
The program has a number of crosscutting themes that include: 
 Expanded knowledge management. 
 Mainstreaming of HIV/AIDS into all WALA key activities. 
 Gender mainstreaming in all key WALA activities. 
 Environmental protection. 
Main Evaluation Questions: Findings 
IMPACT 
To what extent did the program achieve the intended goal, objectives and results? 
Title II programs typically combine strategies to improve maternal, child health, and nutrition status; 
improve livelihood status, to build up assets and strengthen resilience; and improve capacities of 
communities to withstand shocks and stresses (e.g., through DRR). Table 1 compares baseline and 
endline survey values for program population-based indicators, indicating percent change and 
whether or not the observed change is statistically significant. 
x
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table 1: WALA population-based indicators, baseline to endline comparison
IPTT REF No Indicators
2009 
Baseline 
Survey
2013 
Target
2013 
End-line 
Survey
End-line Confidence 
Interval
2009 to 
2013
Lower Upper Difference
SO1: 170,724 vulnerable households have improved maternal and child health, and nutrition status
1.1 % stunted (HAZ < -2) children 6-59 months of 
age (Impact) 42.4% 36.0% 37.1% 34.9% 39.3% -5.3***
1.2 % underweight (WAZ < -2) children 0-59 
months of (Impact) 17.6% 16.0% 11.3% 9.9% 12.7% -6.3***
1.3
% of children aged 0-59 months in Growth 
Monitoring and Promotion (GMP) gaining 
weight in past 3 months (Impact)
59.6% 75.0% 72.2% 67.7% 76.7% 12.6***
SO 2: 147,500 smallholder farming households have improved livelihood status
2.1 Average months of adequate household food 
provisioning (Impact) 9.35 11 9.36 9.3 9.5 0.01
2.2 Average household Dietary Diversity Score 
(HDDS) (Impact) 4.29 9 4.5 4.4 4.6 0.21***
SO3: 273 targeted communities have improved capacity to withstand shocks and stresses
3.1
% of household reported losses of livelihood 
assets due to shocks and stresses (Impact) 
(Population) (WALA) (GoM – MoAFS)
7.8% 8.0% 6.8% 5.9% 7.8% -1.0
***p<0.01, **p<0.05, *p<0.10, statistically different than the 2009 baseline point estimate 
xi 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Improved Nutritional Status 
Anthropometric measurements of children under five are considered a proxy for the nutritional 
status of the entire population. The quantitative data clearly show a marked improvement in chronic 
malnutrition and in underweight over the program period, with the target for underweight (11 
percent) surpassed and that for HAZ (37 percent) almost achieved. This compares positively with 
the picture at national level: in the last Malawi Demographic and Health Survey (MDHS) (2010), 
chronic malnutrition (HAZ) was estimated at 47 percent and underweight at 13 percent. 
Household Food Access 
Household food access is defined by USAID as the ability to acquire sufficient quality and quantity of 
food to meet all household members’ nutritional requirements for productive lives. There are proxy 
measures of quantitative and qualitative aspects of food requirements. Both population-based 
indicators – household dietary diversity score (HDDS) and months of adequate household food 
provisioning (MoAHFP) – focus on the desired outcome of improved food access: improved 
household food consumption. Progress on both of these indicators between baseline and endline has 
been limited. The HDDS improvement was statistically significant – although well below target –
while MoAHFP did not improve. It is important to note that the program, and the whole of Malawi 
for that matter, suffered two major shocks and stresses in 2012 (continuing into 2013). These 
incidents may help to explain these results as they had significant implications for people’s ability to 
access food. The shock is related to the economic crisis, which saw price inflation in key producer 
and consumer goods after the 50 percent devaluation of the Malawian Kwacha (MWK) in May 2012. 
The April 2013 Malawi Price Bulletin from FEWS Net shows maize prices at markets throughout the 
country considerably higher for the 2012/2013 season (more than 300% higher in some markets) 
compared to the previous year and the five-year average. The stress is related to lack of and erratic 
rainfalls, which meant that farmers saw production fall for their main crops. In August 2013, FEWS 
Net reported increased food insecurity due to reduced crop yields because of a combination of 
flooding, prolonged dry spells and early cessation of rainfall during the 2012/2013 season and 
decreased production in the coming months. It is unfortunate that no data are available for individual 
years to be able to ascertain whether there is a trend, but it can be safely assumed that purchasing 
power has since significantly deteriorated (see also Section 3.1 comparing Gross National Income 
(GNI) data 2009-2013). It is important to consider that without WALA interventions, the negative 
impacts of these shocks and stresses on household food consumption could have been far worse, as 
suggested by endline data: for example, WALA households have an HDDS of 4.8 while non-WALA 
households have a HDDS of 3.9; similarly, WALA households have 9.5 months of adequate food 
provisioning compared to 9.1 months for non-WALA households. 
How have WALA program activities improved the ability of program beneficiary 
households and communities to be able to mitigate, adapt to and recover from food 
security shocks and stresses? 
Progress on the program’s last population-based indicator (percentage of household reported losses 
of livelihood assets due to shocks and stresses) has been positive despite effects of the economic 
and climatic setbacks in 2012. This SO received approximately one-third of the WALA agriculture 
and health sector funding. WALA households report that they are better prepared for shocks 
because of increased savings (31.2 percent) and increased household assets (30.1 percent) relative to 
when the program began, compared to 20 percent of non-WALA households in both categories. 
WALA uses a livelihoods framework and has incorporated into its design all three resilience 
capacities (i.e., absorptive, adaptive, and transformative). Thus, while the impact of WALA support 
may not yet be fully realized, the large investments made in capacity development of CBOs, 
community volunteers and facilitators and individual recipients of training and technical support are 
likely to lead to future benefits and increased resilience capacities. 
xii 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
BENEFICIARY SATISFACTION 
How satisfied were beneficiaries with the program? 
The interviews conducted with CATCH, PVOs, and beneficiaries in the field showed general 
satisfaction with the program. The immediate benefits to beneficiary households have been palpable 
under all SOs. These include the agricultural inputs, Food for Work (FFW), and safety nets for 
vulnerable groups (25,000 beneficiaries); technical support; and the establishment and strengthening 
of CBOs, which have obtained better prices for most participating farmers through collective 
purchasing of inputs and selling of outputs. There was also almost universal satisfaction with the VSL 
program, and general satisfaction with collective marketing experience. The comprehensive 
approach of Title II programs – focusing on all aspects of health, hygiene, nutrition, food production 
and marketing, and DRR has clearly changed many households’ livelihoods for the better.
The program’s main emphasis on skills transfer rather than handouts received criticism from some. 
It was observed that the safety net program was relatively small and could have been larger, 
particularly given the observed economic shock and drought conditions. Vulnerable households with 
chronically ill and orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) may not have benefitted as much as others 
from skills transfer activities due to multiple demands on their limited time and labor. 
RELEVANCE 
How relevant were program activities and beneficiary targeting, considering the needs 
of the target population? 
The mission found that the Title II program design – a combination of MCHN, livelihood support, 
and DRR appropriate to the needs of the entire population – extended beyond the original target of 
assisting only chronically food insecure and very poor households. Most of the program is in 
technical support – without many free inputs – in Community Complementary Feeding and Learning 
Sessions (CCFLS), Care Groups and agriculture. This fits a self-selection approach that invites all 
who are willing to learn. In the future, it may be necessary to take specific account of the special 
needs of the very poorest and the most remote, tailoring approaches to these groups, and using 
other approaches with those who are not quite so disadvantaged. Special attention may be required 
on monitoring the very poorest groups supported by these program activities in their advances along 
a development pathway, from being dependent on safety nets to being included in CBOs focused on 
productive means (such as producer groups).
The pressure on land and vegetation by a large and growing population is an important factor that 
requires intensifying agricultural production while promoting local action for environmental 
protection. All activities promoted by WALA are thus relevant and appropriate for this context, 
including MCHN, agricultural production (Conservation Agriculture (CA)), post-harvest handling and 
storage, and collective marketing. All programs were developed together with, and were approved 
by the GoM. Implementation was conducted in close coordination with relevant ministries (e.g., 
Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security and Ministry of Health). 
EFFECTIVENESS 
How effective were program activities and implementation? 
Both the quantitative and qualitative data provide evidence of an overall effective program, although 
there was indication of some variation in performance on the ground. The final evaluation team 
attributes this variation to the following factors: 
 Use of a volunteer extension system that generally lacks in-depth support, and where the 
success of on-the-job training depends very much on 1) the motivation and ability of 
individuals and 2) the support given by Farmer Extension Facilitators (FEFs) to lead farmers, 
and by Health Promoters (HPs) to Community Group Volunteers (CGVs); 
 A self-help approach that is not popular with poor and very poor households – for some, 
due to lack of household members who are able to take advantage of program offerings; 
xiii 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 The gradual rollout of the program, which meant that communities were in different stages 
of implementation; 
 Different PVO capacities, with differences in remuneration packages and, most importantly, 
differences in ratios of staff versus volunteers versus beneficiaries. 
Successful implementation of the WALA model was usually observed in those communities that had 
frequent and consistent technical support over a three-year period, with implementation starting in 
the first two years of the program cycle. Based on baseline-endline comparisons and confirmed by 
observations and interviews in the field, non-WALA households generally saw smaller improvements 
in particular areas than WALA households. 
The program design uses a volunteer extension system (through the Care Group and producer 
group models). This is an excellent strategy because it utilizes volunteers who work with their own 
communities and contribute to the sustainability of outcomes by retaining and passing on the 
knowledge and experience they have gained. However, it is clear that training needs to be on-going, 
with messages – especially complex ones – continually refreshed and revisited if the volunteers are 
to remain a useful resource for their community over the long term. The final evaluation team 
considers that insufficient resources have been made available to training and extension material to 
empower the agriculture volunteers. Moreover, volunteers’ contributions – for five years in a row –
should receive even more recognition in future programs through certificates and program 
identification items such as T-shirts, bags, umbrellas, etc. It is planned that WALA will provide 
certificates to HPs before program end, and this may extend to CGVs. 
COORDINATION 
How well did the program coordinate with other food security and humanitarian 
programming, with the host country government and with the donor? 
The final evaluation team finds that WALA has overall provided a good example of program 
implementation through a partnership model. Partners include eight PVOs, CATCH, GoM, and 
USAID. Coordination and communication with other programs (some of which are similar in design) 
has been mostly through government-led sectoral committees, which have enabled the 
harmonization of extension approaches. 
The program (mainly through CATCH but also individual PVOs) has coordinated its work well with 
the GoM, particularly at sub-national level: the location of CATCH outside the capital has reduced 
its potential reach and impact at the national level. However, excellent examples of collaboration 
with GoM include the collaboration on national guidelines for the sector in Conservation Agriculture 
(to be adopted before end of the program) and Community Animal Health Working Training 
Manual. In addition, WALA nutritionists have played an integral role in development of the Scaling 
Up Nutrition (SUN) strategy for Malawi, providing technical support and sensitizing the MoH on the 
Care Group model. 
SUSTAINABILITY 
How sustainable are program outcomes? 
The program has invested significantly in the establishment of, and technical and management 
support to, various CBOs. Some of these have good chances to be sustained over time. Examples 
include the Water User Committees, Watershed Development Committees, VSL groups, and 
VCPCs in areas frequently impacted by natural shocks (e.g., floods). 
Others that are likely to be sustained over time include VSL groups and (possibly to a lesser extent) 
marketing clubs, where immediate benefits are to be expected. The outcomes in MCHN and 
AgNRM depend largely on a system of volunteers, supervised by more highly qualified and trained 
community members who usually receive stipends. Without this supervision, it is uncertain that 
many of these Care Groups or producer groups will continue to operate. On the other hand, some 
xiv 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
level of sustainability was built in from the start, as these volunteers come from – and will stay in –
their own communities. 
The absence of good reference material for AgNRM will reduce the effectiveness of demonstration 
to additional smallholder farmers that would enable wider adoption of new technologies. Much of 
the infrastructure built under irrigation, watershed development and roads activities will be 
sustained for some time, particularly the structures that are linked to the CBOs, which can organize 
the community to maintain and repair them. 
Finally, WALA is part of a broad effort to improve food security among poor and very poor 
households in southern Malawi. Programs with a similar design focusing on livelihoods and/or food 
security and nutrition have been implemented and are likely to be implemented in the future. As 
such, it is likely that a number of the WALA beneficiary households will receive some level of 
support in similar areas (e.g., MCHN, CA and VSL) in the future. 
What exit strategies were incorporated into program design and what strategies were 
implemented? 
Since the Midterm Evaluation (MTE), the program has prioritized and incorporated exit strategies 
into all components. Discussions with various beneficiary communities and partners have been 
conducted to generate exit plans. The GoM is rightly seen as a key partner to engage with for 
improving opportunities for continued support. WALA has engaged with the GoM from the start 
but the capacity of GoM to take over delivery of activities is limited. One example where 
partnership has worked is under SO2: some FEFs have agreed to continue as lead farmers in the 
national agricultural extension system. 
WALA has specifically targeted some of the volunteers and retrained them as private service 
providers (e.g., Community Animal Health Workers). This provides them with income-generating 
opportunities that will give them an incentive to continue their work after the end of the program. 
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES 
How well were gender considerations integrated into program design and 
implementation? 
WALA has had a gender strategy in place since the start of the program and has since produced 
guidance for each sector. However, the gender strategy does not include an in-depth contextual 
analysis of the situation specific to Malawi or the districts in which WALA is working. WALA’s 
operational areas are varied and cover patrilineal, matrilineal, as well as both Muslim and Christian 
societies. A more comprehensive understanding of some of the important cultural differences 
between these groups in terms of gender could usefully inform program design and development. 
However, “WALA was designed to ensure a greater role and involvement of women in economically 
productive activities and male involvement in health” (ARR FY13), and in terms of this limited goal, it 
has been successful. 
How were HIV/AIDS and environmental issues addressed? 
Mainstreaming HIV/AIDS 
Overall, HIV/AIDS programming is mainstreamed well in MCHN activities and taken into 
consideration in SO2 and SO3 activities. WALA staff (SO1) work very closely with Positive Action 
for Community Transformation (IMPACT), with PVO staff usually sharing the same office space and 
coordinating well on promotional activities such as Community Health Days. In the majority of 
districts, health promoters make regular visits to HIV support groups to talk about nutrition and the 
importance of antiretroviral therapy, preventing mother-to-child transmission, growth monitoring 
and promotion for children and positive healthy living. They often work alongside clients and 
encourage members of HIV support groups to join WALA activities such as VSL and home gardens. 
xv 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Referrals are made between HIV support groups and CGs. CGVs provide home follow-up to those 
affected by HIV and AIDS. In particular, the CG support and attention to growth faltering assists in 
early identification of children with HIV who need enhanced nutritional support and health care. 
In terms of SO2, many aspects of conservation agriculture promoted by WALA are sensitive to the 
needs of people living with HIV, such as the minimum tillage and soil cover practices, which save 
hard labor and time in the field. In addition, intercropping and homestead gardens under the 
program support this population by providing foods that are more nutritious. 
Under SO3, training in initial assessment to identify hazards, and interventions for preventing or 
reducing the impact of disasters, incorporates information on the effects of disasters on 
handicapped, ill, elderly, and other vulnerable people and how to mitigate negative impacts for these 
populations. The safety net program is specifically targeted to the chronically ill, elderly or those 
caring for OVCs. However, the evaluation found that the most highly vulnerable households appear 
to be less able to take advantage of group activities that are meant to facilitate transition out of 
safety nets support into more sustainable livelihoods. 
Environmental Monitoring and Impact Mitigation 
Overall, the program has performed very well on monitoring environmental impacts identified 
during the Initial Environmental Examination, as observed by the MTE and the final evaluation team. 
Relevant WALA activities include: (1) promotion of fuel-efficient stoves that emit less smoke; (2) 
watershed development; (3) mitigation measures in irrigation schemes; (4) applying water-catchment 
protection principles; (5) promotion of CA to reduce soil erosion and improve soil organic matter 
content; and (6) promotion of environmental protection measures by VCPCs. 
Lessons Learned 
Design/ implementation: Title II programs are comprehensive MCHN, household food security 
and DRR programs that typically target a large number of beneficiaries. WALA is no exception to 
this. This implies that implementation modalities for reaching beneficiaries should be fairly simple and 
straightforward. WALA has depended largely on community volunteers for delivery of various 
technical services to the final beneficiary. Future programs should be aware that sufficient extension 
materials should be made available at this level to maximize opportunities for success, and that 
sufficient incentives are needed to incentivize volunteers to undertake the work conscientiously for 
a number of years. 
It is clear that extension module development needs to be prioritized early (e.g., five modules plus 
sessions on Supplemental Feeding Program and CCFLS) so that rollout is smooth and on time and 
does not cause lengthy delays in implementation. Moreover, the design and conduct of various 
training programs through a training-of-trainers system takes additional time. 
Hygiene and sanitation interventions should include the entire community, as they are not specific to 
pregnant and lactating women and families with children under five, and given the role of men as 
decision-makers in communities (whether or not they are direct program beneficiaries). Improved 
orientation and engagement of village heads and Village Health Committees in these activities might 
lead to greater adoption of behavior changes across the community. The new MoH/SUN Care 
Groups (CLANS) will aim to engage the entire community in each targeted village, including youth, 
who are the parents of the future. 
As to the AgNRM interventions, WALA should focus on fewer innovations and provide more in￾depth support to their adoption. The design should be kept simple with focus on an extension 
program. Consideration should be given to allowing the communities some power of choice over 
which technologies they favor in order to increase chances for success with the chosen 
technologies. 
Program Management: CATCH is a central support structure overseeing and guiding the 
xvi 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
implementation of a standardized approach; it constitutes a separate administrative and management 
entity responsive to the donor, distinct from the CRS country office. This novel approach for Malawi 
has been considered a success and may be considered for future programs with several PVOs. 
Similarly, it has proven beneficial to the group that the technical leads are together in CATCH (in 
Blantyre), in close proximity to the field, which facilitates frequent face-to-face interaction between 
CATCH, PVOs, and partners such as the GoM.
Staffing: Frequent staff turnover has been a problem for WALA, in part due to the highly 
competitive labor market within Malawi and between development partners. The following lessons 
learned should be considered for future success: (1) a central recruitment function for CATCH staff 
would have aided efficiency in staffing; from the start (2) retention schemes should be implemented 
early in the program; (3) the outsourcing of technical support to service providers (such as with the 
irrigation component) may be more efficient/ effective than recruitment of individual experts. 
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E): WALA did a very good job of designing and implementing an 
M & E system that tracked the quantitative indicators and provided the financial accountability 
requested by the donor. It also developed additional indicators to address qualitative issues, but they 
were not implemented in a way that provided systematic documentation of program quality. Given 
the donor’s emphasis on tracking quantitative outputs and financial accountability, the emphasis on 
quantitative monitoring is understandable. On the other hand, monitoring program quality –
including systematic documentation of what worked and how well, and what did not work – is vital 
because the depth and quality of interventions is crucial in determining sustainability of results. 
Systematic performance monitoring of quality, and building learning platforms for exchange with 
other programs (inside and outside USAID) should be a priority. 
Summary Conclusions and Recommendations 
Conclusions – SO1 MCHN 
 SO1 was effective in offering a preventative approach to under nutrition while including 
responsive components (CCFLS and SFP) for children whose nutritional status is deteriorating. 
 Key to its success has been the extended reach of the community-based Care Group 
implementation model, with knowledge, resources, and services accessible to all pregnant 
women and caregivers of under-5 children in the community. The focus on demonstration in 
CCFLS, on stoves, on hygiene and sanitation infrastructure, and the promotion of community￾based GMP, are strong positive elements. 
 Leadership for implementation has been largely delegated to health promoters and CGVs based 
in their own communities, which has contributed to community ownership and sustainability. 
WALA has greatly assisted the outreach capacity of the MOH. 
 Nevertheless, the quantitative data suggest that the Care Group model may still have some way 
to go before it will achieve “saturation coverage” in WALA program areas. 
 Engagement with the district-level MOH has been strong, but varies at field level. This is largely 
attributed to WALA’s broad geographical reach, combined with a lack of financial resources and 
time to train and incorporate all HSAs in the program areas or extend orientation to VHCs. 
 The MCHN sector has had inadequate responsibility for ensuring strong performance of SFP 
within WALA, and this activity, largely delegated to the commodities team for oversight of food 
distribution, has been poorly structured and implemented. 
Recommendations – SO1 MCHN 
 PVOs should start in all sites in the first two years rather than use phased expansion. This would 
enable consistent rollout of modules, provide sufficient time to adopt behavior changes, and 
facilitate Care Group graduation and MOH-supported handover in Year 5. 
 Greater engagement of the MOH should be sought from the start of the program to ensure 
ownership, inclusion of HSAs/ VHCs in activities and training, and effective and timely handover. 
xvii 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 Availability of water for hygiene, sanitation, and kitchen gardens and safe water for household 
consumption were emphasized as key constraints to program implementation and impact. A 
future program should incorporate interventions to improve access to safe water. 
 WALA should assume greater responsibility for providing technical support to the MOH in SFP, 
as well as ensure effective performance monitoring of sites where it is distributing SFP food. 
Ideally, oil and CSB should be pre-mixed prior to distribution to ensure the child receives the 
correct ration and that oil is not diverted into the household pot. 
 CGVs should be recognized for their work and commitment and rewarded with small incentives 
over the course of the program, including bags, occasional drinks at meetings, and certificates. 
Conclusions – SO2 Agriculture and Natural Resource Management, Irrigation, Livestock and 
Fish Farming 
 The package of WALA interventions, such as promoting improved seed varieties, crop 
cultivation and soil conservation technologies linked to CA, is relevant and appropriate, while 
there is a clear limitation to its expansion based on shortage of feeder and mulching material. 
 The AgNRM component started during the first year but did not progress well due to TQC 
changes. As a consequence, PVOs initially lacked strategic guidance. 
 The sheer breadth of AgNRM activities to implement has stretched WALA’s capacity on the 
ground, which reduced potential impacts on program targets. 
 The volunteer extension system is an excellent strategy but WALA has not invested enough in 
training and IEC material for volunteers, which has led to an inability to maximize opportunities 
for knowledge transfer and adoption of promoted technologies and behaviors. 
 Equity is an issue with different support packages provided to different WALA communities and 
households. 
 Results are mixed. Some progress has been made in areas such as irrigation and the adoption of 
new technologies, but their contribution to overall food security status is limited. The 2012 crop 
failures in southern Malawi and the economic crisis likely had a significant effect on the results. 
 Behavior change has been slow, particularly the adoption of certain promoted CA technologies. 
 Staff changes at CATCH and PVO, including changes to TQCs, have negatively affected the 
rollout and coherent vision for program priorities. 
 Lead farmers, who are volunteers, have received too little support from WALA to become real 
agents of change benefitting other smallholder farmers. 
 Technical manuals have been produced but simple extension tools to help the learning process 
on the ground (posters, leaflets, drawings) are missing. 
 A lack of inputs after the first year may have led to a decrease in the effective use of demo plots. 
The use of demo plots is a practical solution for engaging volunteers, although it leads to 
decreased visibility of promoted technologies. 
Recommendations – SO2 Agriculture and Natural Resource Management, Irrigation, 
Livestock and Fish Farming 
 WALA should focus on fewer innovations and provide more in-depth support to their adoption. 
The design should be kept simple, focused on extension and communities should be allowed 
some choice over technologies. 
 In addition to site-specific irrigation technologies, WALA should consider other technologies 
such as drip irrigation and garden sacks. 
 A workshop is suggested to discuss the impact and sustainability of various WALA models to 
enable future Title II programs that build on experiences and lessons learned from WALA. 
 It should become a priority to develop extension material (e.g., simplified messages from the 
CAHW training manual) for the next phase of Title II programs, or by the GoM. 
 Outsourcing of essential technical backstopping (similar to support provided under Agricane) 
may be considered if dependence on individuals becomes a risk to achieving results. 
xviii 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Conclusions – SO2 VSL and Agribusiness 
VSL 
 VSLs are popular and successful, and most targets have been met or almost met. 
 The target number of men in groups has not been met. However, men are interested in the 
VSLs and their absence from meetings does not detract from its reach or effectiveness. 
 PSPs are providing a needed service. The system should ensure that the PSPs remain motivated 
to continue and expand their work with the groups and be motivated to start new groups. 
 Networks have been established, but will need some kind of technical backstopping in the future. 
 The very poorest households, which are supposed to be a focus of the program, may not be able 
to benefit from this activity even though the value of shares is already very low in some VSLs. 
Agribusiness 
 The agribusiness activities have made an important contribution to the income of participating 
farmers in terms of improved prices from collective marketing and reduced costs through 
collective purchase of inputs. 
 The proportion of group member farmers participating in collective marketing is a little lower 
than targeted but the final evaluation team does not consider this a serious issue. Collective 
marketing is less successful in remote areas. 
 Some of the collective marketing disappointments have helped farmers appreciate the risks 
involved in working with the market and the need for caution when dealing with buyers. 
 In general, caution needs to be exercised when creating expectations amongst farmers. Where 
risks are involved, they need to be made clear. 
 It would have been preferable if WALA had included a greater number of buyers in its activities 
so it could reduce reliance on those few with whom it had built relationships. 
Recommendations – SO2 VSL and Agribusiness 
VSL 
 The program should follow up on leads to establish long-term technical backstopping for the VSL 
PSP networks. 
 It may be appropriate to remind some of the VSL groups as to why some best practices, such as 
maximum individual loan amounts, are recommended, and encourage them to be followed. 
Agribusiness 
 WALA should continue to work to find an entity that can organize the marketing fairs in future. 
 WALA should continue to work hard to train the ASPs and ensure their comfort within their 
scope of work and their income-earning activities before the withdrawal of the program. 
Conclusions – SO3 Disaster Risk Reduction 
 WALA’s focus on DRR is highly appropriate, given frequent disasters that are major 
contributors to chronic food insecurity and persistent poverty in southern Malawi. 
 Overall, WALA has performed well under SO 3. The program has built community capacity in 
disaster preparedness and response, strengthened linkages among GoM DRR mechanisms, 
provided reliable safety nets to the most vulnerable households, and has facilitated the 
construction of infrastructure that has positive economic and environmental impacts. 
 The delayed start to DRR activities means that many VCPC groups have not had adequate time 
to build strong capacity or to change the perspective on DRR in their communities. 
 Sustainability of WALA-supported VCPCs depends in part on continuing support from the GoM. 
The new national DRR policy provides funding for preparedness and response and WALA 
VCPCs should be well positioned to take advantage of the small grants scheme under the new 
policy. 
 The poorest households and most vulnerable households may find it difficult to find the time to 
broaden their participation in other WALA activities as intended without additional support. 
xix 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 The FFW activities are appropriate and play an important complementary role in DRR and in 
improving productivity in communities. 
 The combination of defined criteria for participation and community-based targeting that appears 
to work well in some of the communities, but does not appear to be applied by all communities. 
Recommendations – SO3 Disaster Risk Reduction 
 Prior to exit, ensure that VCPCs have the necessary skills to apply successfully to the small 
grants scheme that will be funded under the new national DRR policy. 
 Refresher training should help VCPCs find ways to identify and incorporate new information 
into their repertoire to maintain community interest in their message. 
 Keep DRR as an integrated activity but provide for a separate budget for training and 
community-based risk reduction activities, as well as training materials. 
 If funds are inadequate to carry out activities, focus on more disaster-prone areas. 
 Prior to program exit, increase the number of DRR training manuals provided to ACPCs. 
Safety Nets 
 The next program should consider significantly increasing the number of safety net beneficiaries, 
especially the chronically ill. 
 The program should consider additional technical and material support to safety net beneficiaries 
to help them take advantage of other program activities that will reduce their vulnerability. 
Food for Work 
 Work with FFW communities on formulating infrastructure maintenance plans that have an 
organized approach to maintenance, articulating roles, responsibilities, and a timetable, especially 
with regard to roads. 
1
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
1. Introduction 
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) began implementing the Wellness and Agriculture for Life 
Advancement (WALA) program in July 2009. This five-year USAID-funded PL480 Title II program 
funded through Food for Peace (FFP) and implemented in the eight most food insecure districts in 
the south of Malawi will end by June 2014. WALA is implemented by a consortium of nine Private 
Voluntary Organizations (PVOs) led by CRS Malawi as the grant holder. The seven implementing 
PVOs are Africare, Chikwawa Diocese, Emmanuel International (EI), Project Concern International 
(PCI), Save the Children, Total Land Care (TLC),3 and World Vision International (WVI). Another 
partner, ACDI-VOCA, provides technical support on agribusiness. 
TANGO International, Inc., a consulting firm based in Tucson, Arizona, USA, has been contracted to 
conduct the final evaluation of the program. The primary purpose of the final evaluation is to assess 
the program’s overall performance under each of its specific Strategic Objectives (SOs). The 
evaluation took place during the fourth quarter of 2013, i.e., the second quarter of the fifth year of 
implementation. 
This report describes the background and context of the program; main objectives of the exercise; 
its methodology, which includes a quantitative endline survey and qualitative data collection; main 
findings regarding program achievements and challenges; and recommendations to be considered for 
future programs of similar scope. A compendium of annexes accompanies this narrative report. 
2. Objectives and Methodology 
2.1 Objectives of the Final Evaluation 
The objective of the final evaluation is to assess the impact of WALA program strategies and 
interventions implemented since June 2009 in achieving its three SOs and related intermediate 
results (IRs) in eight districts in southern Malawi. The evaluation assessed the results of program and 
how the program management and implementation affected and/or supported program 
achievements. This will inform future Food for Peace and USAID development programming in 
Malawi. 
The specific objectives were: 
1. To carry out a comparative analysis (bivariate and multivariate) of baseline and endline 
surveys4 to assess the changes in the indicators (program result) as outlined in the indicator 
performance tracking table (IPTT); 
2. To identify program strategies, structures, systems and interventions that contributed to or 
impeded the achievement of intended results of program interventions and links between 
inputs and results with gender focus; 
3. To assess the effectiveness and efficiency of technical, managerial and resource management 
strategies; 
4. To assess progress made in responding to the midterm evaluation recommendations 
5. To assess the synergy between various WALA program components including linkages with 
Government of Malawi and other development programs (e.g., Positive Action for 
Community Transformation (IMPACT), Water for Irrigation for Life Advancement (WILA), 
MCHN+), and how the linkages enhance the program performance; 
6. To assess the sustainability of the program outcomes; 
7. To list the major successes and challenges faced by the WALA program and how well these 
challenges were addressed; 
 
3 Replacing the Salvation Army from the original proposal.
4 Baseline and endline survey reports and data sets will be made available, and these surveys were designed and 
implemented according to the FANTA/FFP guidelines. 
2
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
8. To extract and report on lessons learned to inform future Food for Peace program designs; 
9. To make specific recommendations on improving strategies and program interventions for 
future programming and/or scale-up. 
Additional evaluation questions were included in the Scope of Work (Annex 2) and have been 
reworked in an evaluation matrix (Annex 3). These key questions were used for developing 
individual tools and protocols. Annex 4 provides a summary of responses to key questions. A matrix 
of key questions asked of key respondents is presented in Annex 5 followed by a schedule of key 
informant interviews and focus group discussions in Annex 6. Details on the evaluation approach, 
methodology, and study limitations are in Annex 7. 
3. Overview of the Programmatic Context and 
Implementation 
3.1 Vulnerability Context 
The Republic of Malawi is a landlocked country in Southern Africa. The country has large freshwater 
resources and high agricultural potential. Climatic shocks affect the country frequently and constrain 
economic growth. As recently as 2004-2005, severe drought resulted in a costly humanitarian 
response to meet the basic food needs of 40 percent of the population. Other challenges include 
high population density and growth, a single annual rainy season, and environmental degradation 
(e.g., soil degradation and deforestation). 
Lack of crop diversification, poor yields, and dependence on rain-fed farming are key factors in 
worsening food security in recent years. High population growth (over three percent, per current 
estimates of the National Statistics Office) further contributes to 
increasing pressure for poor households to cultivate marginal and 
less fertile lands, particularly in densely populated districts in the 
south where food insecurity is the worst. Smallholder rain-fed 
maize production is predominant and the livestock sub-sector 
remains underdeveloped. Poverty is widespread in the 
predominantly rural population. 
Small average landholdings and significant deforestation have also 
dramatically diminished Malawi’s soil productivity due to 
increasingly intensive cultivation and soil erosion. Climate change 
threatens to further exacerbate these factors. Deforestation linked 
to unsustainable use of biomass fuel and traditional agricultural 
land-use practices is eroding the country’s progress. 
Food Availability 
Between 2006 and 2010, the country experienced bumper crops 
for maize due to favorable climatic conditions, an expansion of 
areas under cultivation, and an input subsidy scheme that has 
reached a very large number of smallholder farmers (see text box 
on FISP, below). Malawi’s agriculture Gross Domestic Product 
(GDP) increased by six percent during those years. Key economic 
indicators, including inflation, tax rates, and domestic and external 
debt levels, have remained stable throughout this period (FTF 
2011). The prevalence of undernourished in Malawi (the official Millennium Development Goal 
(MDG) 1 hunger indicator) has also seen a gradual decline over time, from 46 percent in 1992-1994 
to 28 percent in 2003-2005 and 20 percent for 2011-2013. 
The country – and particularly the southern parts of Malawi – has seen worsening conditions since 
2012. The FEWS Net-supported Integrated Phase Classification (IPC) maps provided in Annex 8 
Figure 1: Current 
estimated food security 
outcomes, July 2012, per 
FEWS NET
3
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
provide an overview of the food security conditions for the period when WALA has been 
operational (2009-2013).5 This time series shows levels of moderate food insecurity in some districts 
in the south throughout this period. The worst conditions seem to have started in 2012 (Figure 1), 
which saw large parts of the south with reduced harvests due to late and erratic rains. These 
“stressed”6 conditions are shown to have continued throughout 2013 as well. Conditions are 
expected to improve again with the next main harvest (from April 2014) based on good rains 
forecasted for the current rainy season. The IPC maps further indicate that without humanitarian 
assistance in the past two years the IPC classification would have deteriorated to the level of “crisis” 
(IPC Phase 3) for much of the south and for other parts of the country as well. 
The combination of less favorable weather conditions in 2012 coincided with the devaluation of the 
Kwacha by almost 50 percent and with GoM President Banda’s decision to decouple the currency 
from the US dollar in May 2012 to kick-start the Malawian economy. Subsequently, the costs for all 
essential goods rose dramatically due to increased prices for imports such as fuel. This has been a 
challenge for poor households that have limited scope for diversifying income opportunities. The 
deterioration in living standards is likely to have reduced any of the positive outcome and impact of 
the WALA program such as household food provisioning and people’s ability to purchase inputs such 
as improved seeds, fertilizer bags, and tools. 
Food Access
As most smallholder farmers are dependent on rain-fed production and rainfall is erratic, 60 percent 
of farmers are dependent on food purchases in the market. While most stakeholders have seen FISP 
as generally very successful, the economic crisis has also had detrimental effects on the ability of the 
GoM to purchase inputs and reach out to farmers. The program decreased in size in recent years, 
with farmers having greater difficulties accessing agricultural inputs. This resulted in a below-average 
2012 cereal and cash crop production in southern Malawi. Reduced crop production limits 
household food stocks and informal on- and off-farm labor opportunities (ganyu). Moreover, stricter 
border controls imposed on migration to Mozambique have also likely limited labor income further. 
The devaluation of the Kwacha in 2012 has resulted in high retail prices for maize, driven in part by 
the impact of currency devaluation. The southern region is particularly affected, as it is a deficit area 
that receives most of its food from central and northern Malawi. Therefore, transportation costs 
(which increased by more than 30 percent) play an important role in determining cereal prices 
(FEWSNET Web site 2013). The effects can be observed in Malawi’s Gross National Income (GNI) 
 
5 The IPC is a set of standardized tools that aims at providing a "common currency" for classifying the severity and 
magnitude of food insecurity, and is used in many African and Asian countries. For more information, see www.ipcinfo.org. 
Additional details about food security in Malawi can be found at http://www.fews.net/pages/country.aspx?gb=mw
6 “Stressed” is the descriptor for Phase 2 (of five phases) in the IPC. Higher-number phases indicate higher levels of food 
insecurity. 
Farm Input Subsidy Program (FISP)
Malawi has won international recognition for its implementation of the FISP introduced in 2005. 
The program aimed to ease financial constraints of poor smallholder farmers to enhance their 
productivity and household food security status. Farming households received vouchers for 100 
kg of fertilizer, 2 kg of hybrid maize seed or 4 kg of open pollinated maize seed. Others received
legume seed. The number of households receiving fertilizer coupons has averaged 1.7 million 
since the program’s introduction. The FISP is an expanded version of the Starter Pack 
Programme, implemented between 1998-1999 and 2004-2005 with support from international 
development partners. In 2012, following the devaluation of the Kwacha and the subsequent 
economic downturn, only 1.4 million farmers received vouchers while only 140,000 metric tons 
of fertilizer was purchased for distribution – a reduction of 30,000 tons from the year before.
Source: AfDB report 2011; IFPRI Discussion Paper (2012); IRIN (2011)
4
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
per capita, which steadily increased from USD320 in 2009 to USD340 in 2010 and USD360 in 2011 
but reverted to 2009 levels in 2012 (World Bank 2013). 
Markets 
In general, markets for staple crops function poorly, especially for maize, and lead to high seasonal 
variation in staple food prices and decreased productivity. With only small percentages of maize 
reaching the markets, small changes in the quantity of grain traded have a major impact on prices. 
When yields are high, farm gate prices are often low and may not be sufficient to cover costs of 
production; when yields are low, subsequent high prices can prevent adequate household 
consumption (FTF 2011). 
Food Utilization 
The toll of food insecurity in Malawi manifests most significantly in the poor nutritional status of its 
children. Nearly half of Malawian children under five years of age are stunted, indicating a high level 
of chronic malnutrition. 
The diet of Malawians is mainly composed of cereals, primarily maize, starchy roots (cassava and 
potatoes) and starchy fruit (plantain). Fruits and vegetables complement the diet. Overall, dietary 
energy supply is barely sufficient to meet population energy requirements and more than a third of 
the population is undernourished. Moreover, the diet lacks diversity and is poor in micronutrient￾rich foods (FAO Malawi Country Profile 2013). 
The HIV/AIDS epidemic, infectious diseases, malnutrition, and limited access to basic health care are 
among the major factors contributing to high infant and under-five mortality rates. The maternal 
mortality ratio remains very high: 675 per 100,000 live births (MDHS 2010). In the context of high 
morbidity and the HIV/AIDS epidemic, access to health services is still limited, and the lack of 
material and human resources further constrains the quality of services (AfDB 2011). While the 
country is on track to meet the MDG on child mortality and has managed to reverse the trend on 
HIV/AIDS, Malawi is off track on three MDGs: universal primary education, maternal health, and 
gender equality and women empowerment. 
3.2 Program Description 
Program History 
WALA is the successor of another Title II development assistance program entitled: “Improving 
Livelihoods through Increasing Food Security” (I-LIFE) that was implemented from October 2005 –
June 2009, led by CRS and CARE. A number of successful interventions and approaches that were 
piloted and refined under I-LIFE – including Village Savings and Loans (VSL) (though with the Private 
Sector Providers (PSP) approach; see below), the Care Group approach (see Annex 9), and the 
interventions associated with irrigation – were incorporated into the WALA design. While carrying 
over the successful interventions, WALA shifted the geographic focus to the eight southernmost 
districts not covered by I-LIFE, where food insecurity was estimated as most acute.7 Five of the 
WALA PVOs were already members of the I-LIFE Consortium and thus provided necessary 
institutional memory.8 
While WALA has integrated lessons learned from I-LIFE, its roots can be traced back further to the 
program implemented in Malawi (and neighboring countries) by the Consortium for Southern Africa 
Food Security Emergency (C-SAFE). C-SAFE responded to the immediate food security crisis with 
targeted food assistance to vulnerable groups, including households affected by HIV/AIDS. 
Transitional interventions focused on Food for Assets programming to build productive assets at the 
household and community level. The C-SAFE membership included World Vision International, EI, 
Catholic Relief Services, CARE, and ADRA. C-SAFE was also funded by USAID FFP. 
 
7 One of the eight districts (Thyolo) was covered by I-LIFE WVI. However, the WALA program is located in different areas 
(Traditional Authorities). 
8 CRS, Save the Children, EI, Africare and WVI. 
5
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Program Description 
WALA is a five-year Title II Multi-Year Assistance Program (MYAP) funded by USAID to prevent and 
mitigate food insecurity in southern Malawi. WALA targets the most vulnerable communities and 
households, ensuring holistic provision of services to the selected groups. In the original design, 
targeted groups are comprised of households that have small and marginal farms, are female-headed, 
host chronically ill persons (tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS), are food insecure, and/or host orphans. 
WALA is implemented in the eight most food insecure districts of southern Malawi: Nsanje, 
Chikwawa, Thyolo, Mulanje, Zomba, Machinga, Chiradzulu and Balaka. CRS/Malawi, through the 
Consortium Administration and Technical Capacity Hub (CATCH), has led the management and 
implementation of the program. 
Goal: The goal of WALA is to improve the food security of 214, 974 chronically food insecure 
households in 39 Traditional Authorities in eight districts in southern Malawi by 2014 through 
strategic objectives in maternal and child health and nutrition (MCHN) (SO1); agriculture, natural 
resource management (NRM), Irrigation and Economic Activity (SO2); and Disaster Risk Reduction 
(SO3). 
Figure 2: WALA program targeting of communities with multiple interventions
3.3 Targeting 
The WALA program has targeted 215,000 chronically food insecure households in 39 Traditional 
Authorities within five livelihoods zones and eight districts in southern Malawi (Figure 3).
6
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Figure 3: Map of WALA program areas and implementing PVOs
District Implementing PVOs
Balaka Project Concern 
International
Machinga Project Concern 
International
Emmanuel International
Zomba Save the Children
Emmanuel International
Chiradzulu Save the Children
Mulanje Africare
Thyolo World Vision
Chikwawa Chikwawa Diocese
Nsanje Total Land Care
The program has no uniform targeting strategy, which was also noted in the midterm evaluation. 
Beneficiaries and beneficiary households are targeted differently under each SO. Table 2 summarizes 
beneficiary types by SO and the numbers that the program has been able to reach. 
Table 2: WALA beneficiary summary as of November 2013 
IR or SO 
1.1
Type of 
Beneficiary
Total 
Beneficiaries 
through FY13
Breakdown by Sex LOA 
Target
IR 1.1 
Practices
Households with 
pregnant or 
lactating women 
and children U5
152,550 HH NA 170,724
IR 1.2 
Services
152,550 HH and 
206,700 children U5
NA 170,724
SO 1 
MCHN 
152,550 HH NA 170,724
SO 2 
ANRM
153,622 HHs* 147,500
IR 2.1 Crop 
Production/ 
Irrigation/ 
livestock, etc.
Initially only 
smallholder farm 
households with 
<1 hectare of land, 
later opened up to 
all.
116,400 HHs 67,290 women and 
49,120 men
147,500
IR 2.2 
Financial 
Initially only 
smallholder farm 
92,710 HHs 62,470 women and 
27,240 men
103,400
Mzimba
Kasungu
Lilongwe
Mangochi
Chitipa
Rumphi
Dedza
Dowa
Chikwawa
Ntcheu
Mchinji
Zomba
Machinga
Karonga
Nkhotakota
Nkhata Bay
Salima
Balaka
Ntchisi
Mwanza
Nsanje
Mulanje
Thyolo
Blantyre Phalombe
Chiradzulu
Likoma
MOZAMBIQUE
ZAMBIA
TANZANIA
0 50 100
Kilometers
7
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Services households with 
<1 hectare of land, 
later opened up to 
all.
IR 2.3 
Marketing
Smallholder farm 
households with 
less than one 
hectare of land
27,210 HHs - 20,600
SO3 DRR Communities 251 NA 273
IR 3.1 DRR Individuals trained 7560 3,400 women and 
4,120 men
-
IR 3.2 Food 
Distribution
Individual food 
recipients
FY10: 8,220; FY11: 
17,055; FY12: 
17,145; 
FY13: 8,409
FY13: 4,600 women 
and 3,815 men
8,197 
(annual 
safety net 
target)
Program 
Total
Chronically food 
insecure 
households
226,580 (IPTT 
ARR 2013)
NA 214,970
*This figure includes HHs in PG or VSL or irrigation or marketing or livestock (source: November 2013 
data file).
Note that: 
 SO1 targets all pregnant and lactating women and children under five years of age without 
regard to their socio-economic status, as health, hygiene, and nutrition (HHN). Behavior 
change is envisioned for all households, not just the poorest ones. 
 The Supplementary Feeding Program under WALA was targeted based on referrals from 
clinics, hospitals, or Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) in the community; 
 SO2 (Agriculture and NRM plus VSL) initially targeted smallholder farmers owning less than 
one hectare of land but have opened up participation to all farming households that are 
willing to engage in WALA activities. 
In short, the program has moved away from specific targeting of the chronically food insecure (and 
very poor) to allow enrollment of all people from targeted communities. There is a lot to say in 
favor of this approach, particularly given that a large majority (approximately 90 percent of the 
population) is considered either poor (<USD2.5 per day) or very poor (<USD1.5 per day), so the 
income inequality is low. Moreover, the participation of poor households in WALA does not take 
away significant levels of input support from the very poor as it promotes behavior change through 
transfer of knowledge. Ultimately, the activities undertaken by WALA are also very suited to the 
poor farmers as they learn about technological innovations in crop cultivation and soil conservation, 
and are offered an opportunity for better market linages. The safety net element in WALA is 
relatively small; rather, the emphasis is on building local capacities to be more productive (e.g., by 
using improved seed varieties) and to become more resilient in the face of several risks to which 
Malawi is vulnerable (slow-onset disasters such as droughts and fast-onset disasters such as floods). 
WALA beneficiaries benefiting from VSL have a wide range of income levels, although the poorest 
families, with minimal or no cash income, have little to save and are less likely to be able to take 
part. The program elements that remained true to their original target are the Food for Work/Food 
for Assets (FFW/FFA) schemes and safety net/ emergency food rations. 
WALA vs. Non-WALA 
WALA is a community level project, and the associated quantitative survey was population-based. In 
tables providing analysis at the WALA and non-WALA disaggregation, this specifically refers to 
8
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
households that have a WALA CBO Member (WALA) and households that do not have a WALA 
CBO member (non-WALA).
3.4 WALA Implementation Experience 
This section discusses participation in WALA as reported by participants in terms of the timing of 
first engagement in WALA activities, intensity of participation, and community-based organization 
(CBO) membership. 
Based on household recall data from the endline survey,9 WALA rollout was gradual, with first 
instance of engagement increasing steadily each year until peaking in 2012 (Figure 4). Of all WALA 
households, about half were enrolled by 2011 – midway through the program. In 2012 one-third of 
all WALA households engaged with WALA for the first time, with outliers for Chikwawa Diocese 
(40 percent) and PCI (35 percent). The current year (2013) still saw new engagement (about 10 
percent of all WALA beneficiary households), with TLC (19 percent) and Chikwawa Diocese (12 
percent) being the outliers.10 This gradual-roll out of the program is according to plan; the capacity 
of the respective PVO determines the speed of rollout to a large extent. By end of 2011, for 
instance, both TLC and Chikwawa Diocese had not reached their 50 percent mark yet, while EI and 
WVI scored best on this account, having already introduced the program in 67 percent of WALA 
beneficiary households. 
Figure 4: First year of engagement for all WALA beneficiary households, by % of 
total, by year (2009-2013) 
As for the intensity of the participation in WALA activities, 87 percent of respondents (47 percent 
without prompting and 40 percent after prompting) said that at least one member of their 
household had engaged in a WALA-promoted activity. Moreover, 37 percent reported to have 
engaged in one to three activities, 30 percent in four to six activities, and almost 20 percent in more 
than seven WALA activities. 
Figure 5 shows the percentage of households reporting participation in WALA activities. 
 
9 The endline survey asked households with WALA CBO members to recall what year they first engaged with WALA.
10 Note that TLC joined the program late (2010) while PVOs such as Africare, Chikwawa Diocese, and PCI did not have 
offices in the districts and had to set up offices and mobilize staff and other resources. SCI, WVI, and EI started operating 
from offices that were already in use by their organizations to run other programs. 
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Don't Know
9
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 
Figure 5: Household participation in specific WALA activities, as reported by 
respondents
Participation can also be represented in terms of membership in CBOs that WALA helped to 
establish. Figure 6 shows overwhelming success of VSL groups, followed by Care Groups and 
producer groups (Agricultural and Natural Resource Management [AgNRM] groups). Care Groups 
are intended to function in coordination with Care-Group-led activities, and it is probable that 
household respondents transposed the two. When looking at all households, 31 percent engaged in 
a Care Group, via a CBO or as part of an activity, while 17 percent of households engaged with 
Care Groups through both programs. 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% of all househols 
10 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Figure 6: Household membership community-based organizations supported by 
WALA
The WALA team noted that not all beneficiaries would strongly identify with producer groups as 
they were informal, and beneficiaries were not bound to remain in the producer group after learning 
new technologies. Looking at Figure 5 and the services received, it is plausible that many more have 
participated in Producer Groups (PGs) at one or another stage. 
Finally, one should be aware that WALA has not operated in a vacuum – and the implications of this 
when interpreting the endline results. Malawi has and continues to receive significant external 
support and will likely receive more in the future. Households benefit from interventions by 
government, e.g., via HSAs and Agricultural Extension District Officers, and by non-governmental 
organizations (NGOs). 
The endline survey found that 82 percent of respondents had received support from non-WALA 
entities. The most important non-WALA support received included (as a percentage of the total 
number of respondents) subsidy coupons (FISP) (63 percent); food during lean season (22 percent); 
orientation in MCHN (20 percent); and agriculture (17 percent); 18 percent said they did not 
receive any other assistance. 
4. Program Effectiveness 
4.1 WALA Progress at Impact Level 
Title II food security programs like WALA are directed at reducing hunger, malnutrition, and food 
insecurity in the developing world. Title II programs typically combine strategies aimed at 1) 
improved maternal, child health and nutrition status; 2) improved livelihood status – aiming to build 
up various assets and resilience; and 3) improved capacities of communities to withstand shocks and 
stresses (e.g., through DRR). Table 3 (p. 12) compares baseline and endline survey values for 
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
% of CBO Members
11 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
program population-based indicators, indicating percent change and whether or not the observed 
change is statistically significant. 
Improved Nutritional Status 
Starting with the anthropometric measurements of children U5 that are a proxy for the entire 
population, the quantitative data clearly show a significant improvement in chronic malnutrition 
(HAZ) and in underweight over the program period, with the target for underweight (11 percent) 
surpassed and that for HAZ (37 percent) narrowly missed. This compares positively with the picture 
at national level: chronic malnutrition was estimated at 47 percent in 2010 and underweight at 13 
percent in the last MDHS survey conducted in 2010. 
Household Food Access 
Household food access has been defined by USAID as the ability to acquire sufficient quality and 
quantity of food to meet all household members’ nutritional requirements for productive lives. The 
HDDS and months of adequate household food provisioning (MoAHFP) are proxy measures of 
quantitative and qualitative aspects of food requirements. Both indicators focus on the desired 
outcome of improved food access: improved household food consumption. 
In both cases, the progress made between baseline and endline has been limited. The HDDS 
improved significantly – although well below target – while the months of adequate food provisioning 
indicator improved only marginally. It is important to note that the program, and the whole of 
Malawi for that matter, has suffered from two shocks and stresses in 2012 (into 2013) that must 
have had significant implications on people’s ability to access food. The shock related to the 
economic crisis – inflation of prices of key producer and consumer goods – after the 50 percent 
devaluation of the Kwacha in May 2012, while the stress is related to lack of and erratic rainfalls, 
which saw main crops reduced in size. It is unfortunate that no data are available for individual years 
so that a trend can be ascertained but it can be safely assumed (see also Section 3.1 comparing GNI 
data 2009-2013) that purchasing power has since significantly deteriorated. It is important to 
consider that without WALA interventions, the indicators could have been far worse. This is further 
supported by data from the endline survey. For example, WALA households have an HDDS of 4.8 
while non-WALA households have a HDDS of 3.9; similarly, WALA households have 9.5 months of 
adequate food provisioning compared to 9.1 months for non-WALA households. 
It bears noting that there is a large, and statistically significant, difference in the percentage of 
households to consume fruit between the baseline and end-line; far more households consumed 
fruits at the baseline (over double). This suggests that the timing of the en-line survey had an impact 
on accurate and comparable estimation of the HDDS to the baseline findings, particularly regarding 
fruit. 
Improved Capacity to Withstand Shocks 
The progress on this population-based indicator is significant, although it was funded at 
approximately one-third of the agriculture and health sector interventions. The effects from the 
economic and climatic set back in 2011/2012 will have affected this indicator as well, which 
otherwise could have been significantly higher. 
12 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table 3: WALA population-based indicators, baseline to end-line comparison
IPTT REF No Indicators
2009 
Baseline 
Survey
2013 
Target
2013 
End-line 
Survey
End-line Confidence 
Interval
2009 to 
2013
Lower Upper Difference
SO1: 170,724 vulnerable households have improved maternal and child health, and nutrition status
1.1 % stunted (HAZ < -2) children 6-59 months of 
age (Impact) 42.4% 36.0% 37.1% 34.9% 39.3% -5.3***
1.2 % underweight (WAZ < -2) children 0-59 
months of (Impact) 17.6% 16.0% 11.3% 9.9% 12.7% -6.3***
1.3
% of children aged 0-59 months in Growth 
Monitoring and Promotion (GMP) gaining 
weight in past 3 months (Impact)
59.6% 75.0% 72.2% 67.7% 76.7% 12.6***
SO 2: 147,500 smallholder farming households have improved livelihood status
2.1 Average months of adequate household food 
provisioning (Impact) 9.35 11 9.36 9.3 9.5 00.01
2.2 Average household Dietary Diversity Score 
(HDDS) (Impact) 4.29 9 4.5 4.4 4.6 0.21***
SO3: 273 targeted communities have improved capacity to withstand shocks and stresses
3.1
% of household reported losses of livelihood 
assets due to shocks and stresses (Impact) 
(Population) (WALA) (GoM – MoAFS)
7.8% 8.0% 6.8% 5.9% 7.8% -1.0
***p<0.01, **p<0.05, *p<0.10, statistically different than the 2009 baseline point estimate 
13 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Household engagement with 
WALA
Households that have been engaged 
with WALA for a longer length of 
time, as defined by the year that the 
first family member became a WALA 
CBO member, report lower cases of 
stunting and underweight and more 
higher dietary diversity scores. Table 4
presents each of the programs four 
strategic outcome (SO1.1, SO1.2, 
SO2.1, and SO2.2) indicator results 
disaggregated by the first year the 
household had a family member 
become a WALA CBO member. 
Households that first engaged with 
WALA five years ago (2009) have 
fewer stunted children than those that 
engaged later (2010-2012). 
Households that engaged in 2013 have 
a stunting rate marginally less than 
those that engaged in 2009. Similarly, 
households that engaged with WALA 
in year one (2009) have fewer 
underweight children (7.1 percent) 
compare to households that engaged 
with WALA later in its programming 
cycle. 
No strong pattern of change in HDDS 
emerges relative to how long 
households have been engaged with 
the project, and the changes in HDDS 
are fairly small, with differences 
amounting to no more than about half a food group (SO2.2). In months of adequate food 
provisioning (SO2.1) there is no discernible difference. 
Table 4: Strategic outcomes by first year of 
household engagement with WALA (WALA CBO 
households)
SO Number of Observations 
SO1.1 Percentage of stunted (HAZ ≤ -
2) children 6-59 months of age
2009 28.5 241
2010 44.8 248
2011 44.3 378
2012 35.9 607
2013 28.3 169
Don't Know 37.5 30
SO1.2 Percentage of underweight 
(WAZ ≤ -2) children 0-59 months of 
age
2009 7.1 254
2010 15.5 276
2011 11.9 418
2012 10.6 663
2013 8.1 182
Don't Know 11.3 35
SO2.1. Months of adequate 
household food provisioning 
2009 9.4 274
2010 9.4 325
2011 9.4 495
2012 9.4 694
2013 9.3 205
Don't Know 8.4 56
SO2.2. Average modified Household 
Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) 
2009 5.2 274
2010 5.0 325
2011 4.6 495
2012 4.9 694
2013 5.1 205
Don't Know 5.0 56
14 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Households that participate 
in more WALA activities 
have improved outcomes 
for strategic outcome 
indicators.11 Based on 
baseline-endline 
comparisons and confirmed 
by observations and 
interviews in the field, non￾WALA households 
generally saw smaller 
improvements in particular 
areas than WALA 
households. Households 
that participated in one to 
six WALA activities are less 
likely to have a stunted 
child than households that 
have not participated in any 
WALA activities, however 
the number of activities the 
household engages with 
does not have a discernible 
impact (Table 5). The same 
is true for engagement with 
WALA and underweight children; households who have engaged with WALA one or more times are 
less likely to have an underweight child than households that have not have engaged with WALA 
activities. Strategic outcome 2.1 (months of adequate food provisioning) does not differ with the 
level of engagement in WALA activities. HDDS does not differ until at least seven or more activities, 
when the score indicates one food group more than households with no WALA activities. 
Nevertheless, as to changes of HDDS over time, it is worth noting that Malawi went through a 
difficult socio-economic period in 2012, and certain areas in the south were also affected by drought. 
In this context, WALA has been able to protect people's livelihoods and assets during difficult times, 
without consequences for the HDDS. 
Table 6 and Table 7 present strategic outcomes 1.1 and 1.2 (stunting and underweight), 
disaggregated by six key group memberships.12 In only three instances across the two 
indicators is there a statistical difference between those who have participated in the group and 
those who have not. Two of the cases (Stunting/care group participation and VHC/underweight) find 
that those who have participated in the group have a higher likelihood of having a worse outcome. A 
probable explanation is project targeting, and participant self-selection, with less food-secure 
households participating in the activities. The third instance of a statistical difference between group 
participation and SO1.2 (underweight) is with livestock/fish groups. Households with a livestock/fish 
group member are much less likely to have an underweight child (10.7 percent) compared to 
households without a livestock/fish group member (24.9 percent). 
 
11 Engagement in a WALA activity is defined as a type of engagement, not just CBO membership. The 
engagement can be a one-time interaction, or a multiple, continuous interaction. 
12 The six key groups/activities identified by project staff and included in this analysis are Care Group, 
marketing/agribusiness group, producer, group, VSL group, livestock/fish group, and water users group. 
Table 5: Strategic outcome indicators by number of 
household WALA activities
SO Number of 
observations
SO1.1 Percentage of stunted (HAZ ≤ -2) children 6-59 
months of age
No WALA activities 43.1 207
1-3 WALA activities 35.7 635
4-6 WALA activities 35.3 587
7 or more WALA activities 41.5 450
SO1.2 Percentage of underweight (WAZ ≤ -2) children 0-59 
months of age
No WALA activities 16.8 229
1-3 WALA activities 10.9 704
4-6 WALA activities 11.0 640
7 or more WALA activities 11.2 484
SO2.1. Months of adequate household food provisioning 
No WALA activities 9.3 321
1-3 WALA activities 9.5 882
4-6 WALA activities 9.3 711
7 or more WALA activities 9.3 466
SO2.2. Average modified Household Dietary Diversity Score 
(HDDS) 
No WALA activities 4.5 321
1-3 WALA activities 4.6 882
4-6 WALA activities 4.9 711
7 or more WALA activities 5.5 466
15 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table 6: SO1.1 outcome by WALA CBO groupa
SO1.1 Percentage of stunted (HAZ ≤ -2) children 6-59 months of age
Mean % Number of 
observations
Care Group
Member 39.1** 1433
Non-Member 33.6 449
Marketing/Ag-Bus Group
Member 37.4 1714
Non-Member 40.6 169
Producer Group
Member 37.3 1654
Non-Member 40.7 225
VSL Group
Member 36.0 1654
Non-Member 39.3 225
Livestock/Fish Group
Member 37.3 1806
Non-Member 45.5 77
Water Users Group
Member 37.1 1649
Non-Member 39.8 232
Village Health Committee
Member 37.5 1675
Non-Member 38.9 209
***p<0.01, **p<0.05, *p<0.10, statistically different than the 2009 baseline point estimate 
a
Key community-based organizations as identified by WALA staff
16 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
4.2 SO1 – MCHN 
Introduction 
SO1: 170,724 vulnerable households have improved maternal and child health, and 
nutrition status 
SO1 has three Intermediate Results: 
 IR 1.1: 170,724 households have demonstrated improved MCHN practices to prevent 
malnutrition; 
 IR1.2 170,724 households have increased access to quality health and nutrition outreach 
services; and 
 IR 1.3 2,148 community groups have enhanced capacity to address the health and nutrition 
needs of 170 724 households. 
A full description of SO1 activities is found at Annex 10. 
Performance 
The quantitative data clearly show a significant improvement in both chronic malnutrition and in 
underweight over the period of the WALA program, with the target for underweight surpassed and 
that for HAZ narrowly missed (see Annex 11; Table 2). To compare with the picture at national 
level, the Malawi Nutrition Education and Communication Strategy 2012 notes a trend in 
improvement of nutrition indicators at the national level over the five-year period between the 
MDHS surveys of 2005 and 2010: national prevalence of chronic malnutrition (HAZ) was estimated 
at 47 percent in 2010, and underweight at 13 percent.13
Quantitative survey data revealed that approximately 30 percent of households in WALA areas 
participate in Care Group activities. This rises to 42 percent of WALA participating households with 
 
13 MDHS 2010, using WHO Growth Standards. 2005 MDHS data are not reported as they are published using NCHS 
reference data and not directly comparable.
Table 7: SO1.2 outcome by WALA CBO groupa
SO1.2 Percentage of underweight (WAZ ≤ -2) children 0-59 months of age
Mean % Number of 
observations
Care Group
Member 11.4 1575
Non-Member 11.1 485
Marketing/Ag-Bus Group
Member 11.5 1876
Non-Member 9.9 185
Producer Group
Member 11.6 1815
Non-Member 9.6 242
VSL Group
Member 10.9 1003
Non-Member 11.7 1058
Livestock/Fish Group
Member 10.7*** 1947
Non-Member 24.9 87
Water Users Group
Member 11.2 1813
Non-Member 12.1 246
Village Health Committee
Member 11.7* 1835
Non-Member 8.2 226
***p<0.01, **p<0.05, *p<0.10, statistically different than the 2009 baseline point estimate 
a
Key community-based organizations as identified by WALA staff
17 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
a child under 5 years or a pregnant woman. The endline survey found that 34 percent of children in 
households that participated in Care Group activities were stunted (HAZ<-2) compared to 39 
percent of non-participants (the difference is statistically significant), suggesting a positive effect of 
the program (Table 1). In all sites visited during the qualitative study, mothers and Care Group 
Volunteers (CGVs) were able to relate key messages learned. Table 8 shows the numbers of 
households and individuals reached over the course of the program. 
Table 8: SO1 activities in terms of Specific Objectives target numbers reached 
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
Target Achievement
Households reached 170 724 91648 138 609 166 651 152 550
Children U5 reached No data No data 163 688 206 717
CGs 2148 728 1134 1445 1554
SFP children 0 0 7912 7663
SFP pregnant & 
lactating women
0 0 8118 7301
Source: WALA Annual reports FY2010-2013
IR 1.1: 170,724 vulnerable households have improved maternal and child health, and 
nutrition practices 
Table 8 above shows that 152,550 households (89 percent) of target households were reached by 
SO1 activities in 2013, with a peak of 166,651 (98 percent) in 2012. Significant improvements have 
been seen in all WALA indicators for infant and young child feeding practices, with the exception of 
exclusive breastfeeding rates, which, at 68 percent prevalence in 2013, remained below the national 
level of 71 percent for infants under six months in Malawi (MDHS 2010). An 8.5 percentage point 
increase was seen between baseline and endline studies in the percentage of children aged 6-23 
months who receive a minimum acceptable diet alongside breast milk (12.3 at baseline vs 20.7 at 
endline). In addition, the environmental and personal hygiene practices have improved by 19.9 
percentage points at the household level (6.1 to 26.0), which beneficiaries reported has assisted in 
reducing the frequency and severity of childhood illness. A notable reduction in the incidence of 
disease, particularly cholera and diarrhea, was cited by the majority of respondents during the 
qualitative study. New practices learned through the WALA program and ongoing support through 
the care group structure has contributed to these successes. 
While tip-taps, stoves, latrines and dish racks were in evidence in villages sampled by the qualitative 
study, the endline survey reveals that latrine availability has not improved from the high baseline 
prevalence of 88 percent of households (Annex 11, Figure 4), whereas percentage of households 
with a hand-washing facility has improved from 10 percent to 34 percent and those observed to 
have water in them, from 5 percent to 11 percent. This shows a significant improvement in 
availability of hand-washing facilities. However, while hand-washing practices after visiting the toilet 
have improved, there have been no such improvements around food handling and feeding (Annex 
11, Figure 3). Focus group respondents stated that lack of access to water was a barrier to uptake 
and effective use of hand washing facilities, as well as cultural practices in some locations. The 
quantitative survey found that 71 percent of households now have a clothesline (76 percent WALA; 
63 percent non-WALA), 44 percent have a rubbish pit (49 percent WALA; 35 percent non-WALA) 
and 28 percent have a plate/drying rack (32 percent WALA; 21 percent non-WALA), however there 
is a lack of baseline data against which to measure progress in these indicators. Nevertheless, the 
data indicate that program activities had a positive and statistically significant effect on these 
improvements in WALA households (households with a WALA CBO member) in comparison with 
non-WALA households. 
IR 1.2: 170,724 vulnerable households have increased use of quality maternal and child 
health, and nutrition services 
18 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
In terms of improvements in access to services, it is important to acknowledge the role and efforts 
of the Malawi Ministry of Health (MoH) and to note that there have been substantial improvements 
in the indicators at a national level over the last 5-10 years. Concurring with these positive changes 
at national level, significant advancement was made in WALA areas, where 89 percent of the births 
of children aged 0–11 months were attended by skilled health personnel in 2013, an increase from 
78 percent in 2009. 
WALA set an ambitious target of 80 percent for regular attendance of children aged 0-59 months at 
GMP sessions, and although a significant increase in regular attendance was noted, the unreliability of 
MoH-led sessions is reported to be one important external factor that inhibited higher achievement 
on this indicator (ARR FY13). 
The target of 78 percent for post-natal Vitamin A supplementation for the mother at eight weeks 
was not achieved, but reached just 61 percent. This target was difficult for the WALA program to 
strongly influence. The Annual Report FY13, along with evaluation interviewees, notes that 
unavailability of Vitamin A in health facilities and poor recording of supplementation during clinic 
sessions were external factors that hindered achievement of the target (ARR FY13). 
Community Complementary Feeding and Learning Session (CCFLS) 
The CCFLS demonstration sessions are an important aspect of the program, effectively putting 
teaching into practice and assisting caregivers to see, learn, and practice new skills in food 
preparation. MCHN+ funding was used to boost CCFLS performance through a project with 
Chancellor College to develop and pilot a training course on Food Processing and Preparation and 
facilitate CCFLS training for Government staff,14 resulting in the production of a “Food Processing 
and Meal Management Resource Book” for use in community rollout.
Mothers in all program areas described how they can now prepare nourishing porridge for their 
children with their new knowledge. There were also numerous reports of rehabilitation through 
CCFLS of children whose growth was faltering, however the data to support this are not 
systematically recorded. A one-off data report generated by the WALA Monitoring and Evaluation 
(M&E) unit15 that compared child weight-for-age z-score on Day 1 and Day 12 of CCFLS found a 
significant improvement, with mean WAZ at baseline -1.34, reaching -0.98 on Day 12. The average 
weight gained by 961 participants for whom data were recorded was 496 grams over the 12-day 
period. 
Communities have begun adapting the CCFLS protocol to more closely meet their needs, capacity 
and time constraints, with models ranging from monthly CCFLS for three to six days, to twice yearly 
for 12 days (as program design), as well as communities where 12 days are dedicated to CCFLS if 
there is a child to be rehabilitate, decreasing to six days if not (as recommended in the midterm 
evaluation). The important success factor is that communities are using CCFLS to transfer skills to 
new caregivers and to assist rehabilitation of children before they reach a stage where they might 
have to be referred to a recuperative program such as Supplemental Feeding Program, Outpatient 
Therapeutic Program, or Nutrition Rehabilitation Unit. The main challenge to CCFLS 
implementation has been lack of food availability in the dry season when home gardens have dried up 
and the majority of communities do not have adequate water available to support them. 
Supplementary Feeding Program (SFP) 
There is no performance data available for SFP. The SFP system is not entirely compatible with the 
MoH SFP system and has caused confusion among communities and some frustration among staff. 
Although there are distinct benefits of the outreach approach, taking SFP closer to communities, 
WALA is insufficiently supporting MoH with the technical components, with the result that the 
current process is managed as a food distribution rather than a program for rehabilitation of 
 
14 District Health Office (DHO), Agriculture, Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC), and MoH.
15 Community-led Complementary Feeding and Learning Sessions Data Report. Draft 053113. Internal document.
19 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
malnourished children and pregnant and lactating mothers. In particular, the current process of 
providing bags of corn-soy blend (CSB) and cans of oil to a group of mothers and asking them to 
divide it between them is doing little to assist caregivers with comprehending the message that they 
are being given a therapeutic ration for a malnourished child. In the MoH system, the oil and CSB 
are pre-mixed and each mother is given the correct quantity for her child during a biweekly 
distribution. 
Although WALA has Standard Operating Guidelines to guide the SFP, the exit criteria described 
within it are not being adhered to (in practice almost all pregnant and lactating women stay for one 
year in the program and all children under-5 stay for four months). Its guidance on program 
monitoring is inadequate, with the result that WALA is simply monitoring the number of 
beneficiaries and food provided, and does not consolidate the data on performance of the program 
in terms of cure rate or trends in new admissions. This made it impossible to assess the effectiveness 
of this activity. It also leaves the program ripe for exploitation and diversion of food to ineligible 
beneficiaries.16
Observations of SFP in three sites found HSAs to have poor screening and monitoring skills and 
despite the attendance of various WALA staff, it was observed that inadequate technical support is 
provided to the HSAs. Complaints were raised to the final evaluation team and it was noted that not 
all PVOs have complaints or a feedback channel available to beneficiaries to take their grievances to 
WALA staff. In particular, the WALA practice of screening children in the community weeks in 
advance of a distribution, while not screening for new admissions on the distribution day itself (as is 
done at MoH facilities) creates many problems as children and pregnant women may present with 
improved nutritional status by the time they come to receive SFP. This in turn makes it difficult for 
communities to understand who is selected for SFP and why. 
Sustainability 
Exit strategies, with a key focus on handover to the MoH, have been late to implement in MCHN. 
PVOs only started to implement them from July 2013, some only starting at the time of the 
evaluation. The GoM has signed up to the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) movement and its approach 
incorporates an adaptation of the Care Group model, which is starting to be rolled out at district 
level, with the aim of reaching all community members in targeted villages (not just children under-5 
and pregnant and lactating women). “Malawi is focusing on community-based action, with the 1,000 
Special Days National Nutrition Education and Communication Strategy being prioritized from 2012 
to 2017 to reduce child stunting among children under two years to less than 20 percent through 
behavior change and awareness-raising at the community level. This will include a combination of 
means using mass and community media, family counseling, awareness-raising of local leaders and 
capacity building of multi-sectoral frontline workers.”17 WALA nutritionists have played an integral 
role in development of the SUN strategy for Malawi, providing technical support and sensitizing the 
MoH on the Care Group model. The scale-up is dependent on the support of partners at the district 
level. At present, it is clear that, despite their willingness and effective engagement at district level, 
the MoH will not be able to pick up all current WALA activities in 2014, even in districts where the 
SUN rollout is starting. WALA has not managed to orient all HSAs in their program areas on the 
MCHN activities and their capacity is limited, particularly by competing work demands. 
However, it appears likely that behaviors changed over the course of the program will be sustained 
and may proliferate more widely through diffusion in the community. Key health and nutrition 
messages and knowledge are embedded in WALA communities and resident CGVs are well trained 
and will retain the modules for future reference. Qualitative interviews and discussions revealed a 
strong ongoing commitment by CGVs and health promoters and a willingness to continue 
 
16 The evaluation team received several reports from beneficiaries of irregularities in procedures and of ineligible cases 
receiving rations, while genuine cases were turned away. However, these were not possible to substantiate during the 
evaluation timeframe.
17 www.scalingupnutrition.org/sun-countries/malawi
20 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
supporting communities after the WALA program ends. In villages with good uptake of latrines, 
stoves, cupboards, dish racks, etc., these will continue to be used beyond the WALA phase-out and 
their use in some households may influence others in the community. 
4.3 SO2 – AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming 
Introduction 
SO 2: 147,500 smallholder farming households have improved livelihood status 
WALA’s comprehensive aim is to impart improved technologies and management practices to 
smallholder farming households. Many of these newly promoted crop cultivation technologies are 
associated with conservation agriculture (CA). 
WALA has embraced an approach that transfers practical knowledge of innovations through self￾help schemes, rather than implementing large free-input schemes. The latter practice may be what 
the population has been accustomed to in the past, but building up of human and financial assets is 
not likely to occur in the long term. The endline suggested that WALA beneficiary households 
owned significantly larger agricultural plots of land (2.1 acres) than non-WALA households (only 1.7 
acres).18 This is possibly a result of the self-help approach, which allowed all community members to 
participate in the program and benefit from the assistance aimed to strengthen livelihoods assets and 
resilience capacities. 
Performance – AgNRM 
IR2.1 147,500 smallholder farming households have improved crop production practices 
By 2013, out of a target of 147,500 smallholder-farming households, 116,410 individuals (79 percent) 
had been reached. This comprises USG-supported short-term agriculture sector productivity 
training, with women making up 58 percent of beneficiaries by 2013. While not originally planned, 
additional Group Village Heads (GVHs) were added, as targets were not met. Consequently, WALA 
has kept adding new households (from existing WALA communities) until December 2013. This 
would allow the new beneficiaries to participate in training during one crop cycle. It may be 
therefore possible to engage about 85 percent of its stated target in AgNRM. 
An overview of the achievements in outcome indicators under SO2/Agriculture is shown in Table 9. 
Detailed results from the endline are in Annex 12. 
 
18 Some care needs to be taken when considering these results as not all farmers do know the exact size of their plot(s). 
21 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table 9: Overview of achievements in outcome indicators under SO2 (Agriculture): 
baseline versus endline
Outcome Indicators SO2 Baseline Endline
FY13 
WALA 
Beneficiaries
2.1.1a % households using 3 out of 5 WALA promoted 
sustainable crop cultivation technologies (quality seeds, 
crop rotation, intercropping, minimum tillage or 
mulching 
27 33 38
2.1.1b % households using 2 out of 3 WALA promoted 
soil conservation technologies (1. fertilizer or 
leguminous trees, 2. contour ridges, box ridges and 
bunds, or 3. vetiver grass)
12 16 20
2.1.1c % households using post-harvest handling storage 
technologies 39 41 40
Generally, the results are mixed: they are positive in irrigation, while adoption of crop cultivation 
and soil conservation technologies (particularly indicators 2.1.1a-b) has shown only modest gains. 
The latter was often acknowledged by PVOs in their briefings to the final evaluation team. Additional 
analysis on the adoption of individual technologies shows relatively small advances (in percentages) 
since baseline (see Annex 12 for more details). Some of the positive findings that largely can be 
attributed to WALA (based on observations and interviews) include the following: 
 Crop rotation of maize with other crops increased from 17 (baseline) to 21 percent 
(endline); 
 Construction of soil ridges increased from 86 (baseline) to 88 percent (endline). The 
construction of box ridges increased to 53 percent among WALA beneficiary households 
versus 45 percent among non-WALA households at endline; 
 Under tillage techniques, the most significant change was observed in the variable “remove 
all of the previous crop stubble.” This saw a marked decrease from 34 percent (baseline) to 
only seven percent (endline); 
 Under intercropping techniques, the most significant change was observed in the variable 
“Plant maize and other crop seeds at the same time on the same planting station.” This saw 
an increase from 25 percent (baseline) to 47 percent (endline); 
 Mulching increased from 15 percent (baseline) to 30 percent (endline) for all respondents; 
 Another positive result can be observed in the marked increase of households that planted 
maize in the last irrigation season. The percentage at baseline (27 percent of all households) 
had increased to 51 percent at endline. While non-WALA households also saw a significant 
increase (41 percent), the percentage of WALA beneficiary households had increased to 57 
percent. 
Extension Model 
WALA has worked through the establishment of producer groups that have 15-20 farmers, led by a 
volunteer lead farmer who is in turn supported by a Farmer Extension Facilitator (FEF). Lead 
Farmers are usually selected from the producer groups themselves, and often are among the more 
successful and respected farmers that reside in one of the GVH communities. FEFs are selected by 
the community or GVH. WALA is expected to link the FEFs to sources of innovations and 
information such as the Ministry of Agriculture’s Extension and Research, the private sector, and 
other partners. FEFs generally receive incentives in terms of transport and remuneration. The FEFs 
receive support from WALA extension officers (observed to include several former (retired) 
government extension staff) who receive direction from the PVO technical coordinator. 
Whereas CATCH has a single Technical Quality Coordinator (TQC) for each of the technical areas 
– and MCHN and AgNRM have an additional staff member (Program Officer) in the field, either by 
22 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
design or out of necessity (delays in recruitment, etc.) – these positions are often combined, such as 
AgNRM, livestock, irrigation, agri-business, and VSL. Even at field level, some of the field extension 
facilitators combine the tasks such as AgNRM and agri-business. The basic agriculture extension 
system, based on the Care Group model, is shown in Figure 7. 
This model is a multi-layered approach to extension, where in the end the program interacts with its 
100,000+ beneficiaries mainly through volunteers who are exposed to limited amounts of formal 
training. Much of the knowledge transfer takes place on demonstration plots that are often 
maintained by FEFs and/or a small group of lead farmers. WALA reported that 170 community 
nurseries had been established for improved cassava and orange-fleshed sweet potatoes (ARR FY13). 
The producer groups generally meet during the main cropping season when new techniques and 
practices can be observed. The land for demonstration plots is often assigned to the producer 
groups by the Village Headman or GVH, and is part of the broader commitment of the community 
to participate in WALA. Therefore, while the effectiveness of building the capacity of targeted 
beneficiaries can be questioned, perhaps the strongest capacity has been built among program staff 
and volunteers, particularly the FEFs. 
Figure 7: Community-based Farmer Extension System 
Source: WALA Standard Operating Guidelines Agriculture (2012)
Conservation Agriculture 
Many of the promoted technologies, although not all, can be grouped under the banner of 
conservation agriculture (CA), which receives a lot of emphasis in the program. CA is generally 
accepted as “resource-saving agricultural crop production that strives to achieve acceptable profits 
together with high and sustained production levels while concurrently conserving the 
environment”.
19. CA addresses some of the main weaknesses in the agricultural system of 
smallholder farming as increased pressure from conventional farming practices on soils and crop 
yields has become evident in Malawi. These result in reduced soil fertility, nutrient depletion, 
acidification, erosion, and excessive competition from weeds. It is for this reason that the portfolio 
of technologies and practices promoted by WALA are appropriate to the local agro-ecological 
environments as viewed by interviewed community members and agricultural experts alike. WALA 
also participates in the National Conservation Agricultural Task Force and has contributed to the 
development of a manual on CA that should be adopted by all agencies engaged in the Task Force 
before the program closes down. During the start-up phase, WALA received external technical 
support to formulate a CA strategy from the Conservation Farming Unit in Zambia.
CA was observed to suit resource-constrained poor and very poor households by design, as it 
provides an alternative to purchasing expensive inorganic fertilizers, using plant residues and organic 
 
19 FAO 2007 in Mloza-Banda and Nanthambwe, 2010.
23 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
fertilizers from livestock and small stock instead. WALA beneficiaries at times referred to CA as 
“the fertilizer of the poor.” The Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MoAFS) has formally 
signed off on the program design and has influenced the design to ensure that the promoted 
technologies and practices are in line with government policies.20 
Awareness of the (potential) benefits of the various crop cultivation and soil conservation 
technologies was observed during key informant interviews (KIIs) in the field. Producer group 
members could easily list the benefits of using improved varieties of maize and vegetables, inter￾cropping, and mulching. The use of newly aligned contour ridges (with 75 cm spacing and one maize 
seed per planting station, 30 cm apart,21 called sasakawa) was observed to be the most popular 
technology in the field. 
The set of technologies promoted by the 
program is a mixture of traditional and CA 
technologies and in strict accordance with 
government policies and priorities. Crop 
diversification – planting groundnuts, 
cassava, sorghum, and/or vegetables in 
addition to maize – is also popular. These 
other crops are used for home 
consumption and for sales. Collective 
marketing is conducted through 
participation in the agro-business clubs. 
Crop rotation is not very popular, as 
people’s plots are said to be too small. 
Challenges 
The relative shortage of both vegetative matter and animal manure limits the uptake of these 
technologies. In Jali, Zomba District, it was observed that a 70 kg bag of animal manure was sold for 
500-700 MWK. This clearly reflects strong demand, but also shows the limitations to adopting these 
new technologies. Introducing larger numbers of small stock to provide the manure will only help if 
simultaneous efforts in agro-forestry emerge to provide new sources of fuel wood, livestock feed, 
and ground cover. Mulching is further affected by feeding of free-ranging livestock, malicious fires, 
and termites. Because of this scarcity, the areas that receive mulch cover have been observed to be 
relatively small, but farmers concerned are content about increases in yields and the prospect of 
improved soil fertility over time. 
Watershed Development Activities 
Watershed development activities were introduced with guidance from the Watershed Organization 
Trust (WOTR) of India. Without a clear target to aim for, WALA was able to conduct soil and 
water conservation treatments to more than 2,000 hectares, reaching six percent of endline 
respondents. These activities are seen by the final evaluation team as among the more successful 
activities implemented. By the end of FY13, communities stated to have observed regeneration of 
vegetation and rising water tables. The final evaluation team appreciated the approach taken that 
emphasizes a clear “assessment, analysis, and action” (“Triple A”) sequence of activities. It starts with 
mapping community assets and assessing their exposure to various risks, including droughts and 
floods. The team was also impressed by the enthusiasm, determination, and vision of committee 
 
20 The GoM may be serious about promoting CA, as they realize that the large economic transfers into the FISP of the past 
may not be economically feasible in the future. Cheaper alternatives need to be identified to maintain or increase crop 
productivity while preventing soil erosion and preserving soil fertility. 
21 While interviews in the field all referred to the 30 cm mentioned, the GoM standard is said to be only 25cm. 
Popular crop cultivation and soil 
conservation technologies observed in 
the field that are marketed in the field 
as Conservation Agriculture: 
 Ridge realignment 
 Sasakawa (One-One), a spacing 
technique that increases plant density 
 Inter-cropping/ mixed cropping 
 Pit/basin planting in combination with 
compost manure 
 Mulching in combination with 
minimum tillage
24 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
members to reduce and mitigate these risks. The execution of the identified activities has been 
supported by FFW schemes. This clearly qualifies as an example where well-organized communities 
have been rewarded for their willingness to engage in these activities and initiative. 
Sustainability – AgNRM 
The program needs to be commended for working closely with the GoM, and the MoAFS in 
particular, at national, district, and sub-district levels. All agricultural interventions have been 
screened and approved by the GoM. This has certainly caused delays in rolling out the program and 
in generating much-needed guidance for the PVOs. The GoM agricultural extension system also 
depends on lead farmers, but lacks the intermediary layer of FEFs. 
The program reported that 74 FEFs have been trained as Community Animal Health Workers 
(CAHWs), while the remaining ones are being trained as fruit tree grafters. All training is aimed at 
providing FEF trainees with income opportunities once the program withdraws. Lead farmers in turn 
have been targeted for inclusion in the GoM extension system, so they can continue their role 
within the community following the phase-out of the program. 
It has been noted that there is a lack of extension material at the beneficiary level. While it may be 
too late to develop the extension for FEFs and lead farmers to help sustain promoted technologies 
over time before mid-2014, the material should be developed with assistance from education 
specialists (WALA staff or with assistance from GoM) so that it can be used during the next phase of 
Title II programs, or even better, by the GoM itself. WALA has produced a number of manuals in 
collaboration with the GoM. The CA manual is currently being reviewed by the National Task Force 
while another one on post-harvest handling is being peer reviewed but is also expected to be 
officially endorsed before the program closes. 
What seems certain though, is that CA interventions will continue in one form or another in 
southern Malawi, as they receive broad support from the GoM and NGOs. Messages on the use of 
improved varieties and the importance of soil conservation have been heard and are taken seriously. 
Many beneficiaries said that the improved varieties (particularly of vegetables) are also locally 
available. 
Of the other structures established, the Watershed Development Committee (WDC) seems among 
the more durable and powerful CBOs the program has established. They seem to have greater 
leverage perhaps because they represent the larger community interests, whereas other CBOs 
represent smaller interest groups. Certain WDCs – not all - have made plans to expand the 
infrastructure without inputs from the program. They have also stated that they already have 
sufficient technical expertise and could do so without further guidance. 
Performance – Small-scale Irrigation 
As has been stated in Chapter 4, there is large potential for irrigation in several districts where the 
program is operational. For several years, various NGOs, donors and the GoM have aimed to 
increase farmers’ access to irrigated agricultural land. WALA’s irrigation team was also responsible 
for the implementation of a OFDA-funded WILA program, which ran from 2010 to 2012. 
Since its inception, WALA has been able to construct 71 irrigation sites benefiting 3,840 beneficiary 
households. This represents three percent of the total of WALA beneficiary households that the 
program has managed to reach under the AgNRM program component thus far. The total number 
of hectares of land brought under irrigation through WALA activities has been on target (424 
hectares versus a target of 400) for Year 4, while the Life of the Activity (LOA) target – including 
Year 5 – is 500 hectares. WALA expects to reach at least 470 hectares, verified through digital 
mapping exercise. The newly established irrigation sites are either river diversion, gravity-fed or 
make use of treadle pumps. Farmers use them during the dry season (May-October). Many of the 
farmers, linked through Water User Committees, rent plots of land and as part of the agreement, 
they prepare the land for the landowner to use at the start of the rains. 
25 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table 10: Overview of achievements in outcome indicators under SO2 Irrigation, 
comparing baseline versus endline values
Outcome Indicators SO2 Baseline FY13 
Targets
ARR FY13 
WALA 
Beneficiaries
2.1.3 % of irrigation sites installing two or more WALA 
promoted design considerations (lined canals, drip 
systems, adequate field drainage structures, vegetative 
cover and shutoff valves)
0 80 85
2.1.4 % of water users committees using two or more 
WALA promoted operational practices (user fees, high 
frequency low flow watering schedules, structure 
maintenance clearing of weeds and sediments, periodic 
drainage of waterlogged fields, periodic flushing out of 
canals to remove snails)
0 80 97
2.1.5 Number (cumulative) of hectares of land brought 
under irrigation by WALA activities 0 400 (Yr 4) 424
The two main technologies promoted include river diversion and gravity-fed schemes as well as 
treadle pumps. River diversion and gravity-fed schemes are locally appropriate technological options, 
requiring labor for digging and lining canals and constructing diversion structures, with costs for the 
design, cement and piping if needed. Operation of the schemes does not cost anything as they are 
powered by gravity. Routine maintenance (mostly cleaning debris from canals) must be performed 
but is considered not too costly. 
Treadle pumps typically use water that is less than six meters below the surface (from a canal, 
shallow groundwater). This technology is particularly useful to communities in low-lying areas. 
Treadle pumps need to be replaced every few years and as such, operation and maintenance costs 
are higher. For a further breakdown by scheme, beneficiaries and funding invested see Annex 12, 
Table 7. 
The irrigation team has stuck to its successful formula from I-Life as to its design, implementation, 
and technical backstopping through Agricane. This formula of outsourcing could be considered for 
other components as well. The selection of sites follows clear and detailed operating procedures and 
guidelines including site assessment, environmental screening, and completing USAID micro grant 
application forms that include detailed proposals for feasibility of the irrigation site and cultivation 
plans. 
In addition, prospective beneficiaries benefit from training in various skills such as water distribution, 
record keeping, leadership, group dynamics, conflict resolution, farming as a business, and collective 
marketing. WALA also closely collaborates with irrigation engineers and Extension Planning Areas 
(EPA)-level agricultural extension officers from the MoAFS. Some of the irrigation sites have even 
been constructed jointly with the GoM, next to a GoM irrigation scheme and sharing a water 
resource. 
Challenges 
Due to the considerable investments in hardware and software, the irrigation schemes benefit a 
relatively small proportion of program participants (4,000 households), which points to issues of 
equity in the distribution of program benefits. WALA has prioritized the relatively expensive river￾diversion and gravity-fed schemes and treadle pumps over the promotion of low-investment 
irrigation technologies such as drip irrigation or garden sacks that can reach a larger number of 
households. Consideration might be given in the future to more equitable solutions focusing on the 
use of drip irrigation and garden sacks on small garden or school plots (in support of growing 
26 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
nutritious foods). Irrigation schemes enabling greater land coverage remain relevant where 
opportunities and demand from farmers for such schemes arise. 
Sustainability – Small-scale Irrigation 
It is likely that the functioning irrigation schemes – gravity-fed, river-diversion schemes, and treadle 
pumps – will continue their operations in the future given the high potential for profitability and the 
increased access to fresh maize year-round. It is positive to observe that communities are expected 
to provide materials and labor for irrigation infrastructure, which is the best way to assure some 
level of commitment from the community. Only the construction of night reservoirs is eligible for 
FFW schemes. It was observed that some schemes that used treadle pumps initially have adopted 
engines to power their irrigation schemes instead of using manual labor. 
Full sustainability is not assured though, as many of the Water Management Committees (WMCs) 
are new to their job and a reasonable fee structure has not yet been established. It was observed 
that the WMCs interviewed in the field have set fairly low fees. When maintenance costs increase, 
chances are that farmers may refuse to pay higher upfront fees and drop out. 
The program has established good connections with the GoM, which should be available to advise 
once the program has ended. 
Performance – Livestock and Fisheries 
Successes 
Overall, WALA has shown that small stock and fish farming can be an inherent part of the model of 
improving nutrition and income through livelihood support and promoting CA technologies. 
The MTE noted that there seems to be significant demand for support to small stock, poultry, and 
fish development in southern Malawi. This was also observed by the final evaluation team during field 
visits. These activities fit nicely in CA principles and promoted technologies and include the 
distribution of broilers (improved breeds such as Black Australorp), goats, pigs, fishpond 
construction, and livestock technical support. The program advocated for the purchase of poultry 
using VSL savings and share-outs. More than 3,000 Black Australorps have been purchased this way. 
Responding directly to MTE recommendations, WALA initiated a study to review the 
appropriateness and success of the pass-on scheme of goats and poultry. Moreover, much emphasis 
since the 2012 MTE has been on animal husbandry training among PG and VSL groups, while the 
distribution of free animals continued under the pass-on scheme. 
The importance of training community animal health workers (CAHWs) as a key ingredient of this 
component was already identified in the USAID Malawi strategy for 2009-2014. Since the MTE, 
WALA and the Department of Animal Health and Livestock Development (DAHLD) have 
successfully trained 130 CAHWs (90 men and 40 women). The final evaluation team met with 
motivated FEFs and Agribusiness Community Agents (ACAs) that underwent CAHW training, and 
they see good potential for future employment. The training has imparted skills relating to livestock, 
health, and production extension services, while referring complicated cases to qualified veterinary 
personnel. This training for CAHWs is viewed as filling a critical gap in services to the communities, 
and in improving access to vaccines and vaccination of animals. One of the real achievements under 
this component has been the adoption by the GoM (2013) of the WALA’s Community Animal 
Health Worker Training Manual developed in FY12 by the program in collaboration with local 
government staff. Manuals for training of CAHWs have been distributed to all agriculture offices in 
the south and are used. 
Fish farming has also been viewed as providing a good alternative income opportunity. The program 
has often linked fish farms with WALA irrigation schemes that have constructed night reservoirs for 
water storage with help from FFW schemes. Participants interviewed were very positive about the 
27 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
profitability of the business. WALA has thus made very good use of new opportunities, integrating 
various economic activities that can be attached to new infrastructure and creating multiple benefits 
for concerned households. 
However, this is illustrative of the inequality in the distribution of benefits between WALA 
beneficiaries and communities. The ARR FY13 reports that the program has developed a number of 
Information, Education, and Communication (IEC) materials in consultation with representatives 
from the Department of Agricultural Extension Service, the Department of Fisheries, and DAHLD. 
These have been reviewed and approved by USAID/Malawi. 
Challenges 
As the livestock/ fish farming component started in Year 3 with the recruitment of the TQC in 
CATCH,22 results as far as numbers of beneficiaries (7,320 farmers in 548 groups) and the pass-on 
rates (over 150 goats) could be higher, especially given the potential size of this component (no 
specific targets have been set in the IPTT although this component contributes to IPTT indicator 
2.3.1.).
From KIIs with producer and livestock groups, it was evident that livestock diseases are a 
considerable problem (e.g., Newcastle disease for local indigenous chickens) and lead to high 
animal/chicken mortality rates if no vaccination is given. Given the number of veterinary officers 
available in each district (believed to be only two), with support from one assistant veterinary officer 
for each EPA, access to expertise and vaccines is not universal. Early in the program, animals are 
thought to have perished, as the full training and service package had not yet been established. 
One of the constraints reported by WALA staff was the lack of expertise among WALA staff, 
including experts in AgNRM, agri-business, VSL, and extension staff (agricultural extension officers, 
agricultural community agents, FEFs and lead farmers. WALA’s CAHW strategy has directly 
addressed this gap. 
Sustainability – Livestock and Fisheries 
The promotion of small stock as part of livelihoods strategies for poor and very poor families in 
southern Malawi is likely to prove an effective way for increasing food access and nutrition. Animal 
manure is also an important asset to farmers, for its benefits to soil fertility. The one clear challenge 
to sustainability is the lack of feeder grass, which should be considered another essential part of the 
livestock component, similar to the observed lack of mulching material. The increased pressure on 
natural resources for fuel wood and building material due to high population density and increases 
over time will be the main limiting factor on introducing significant numbers of livestock and small 
stock in these communities. 
The engagement with the DAHLD and National Aquaculture Centre (NAC) has assured a 
continuing interest in these areas in the GVHs where WALA is active. Fish ponds using irrigation 
night reservoirs have shown themselves to be profitable and are expected to expand on their own 
using existing reservoirs, basins or ponds, although the absence of FFW, used for repairing or 
constructing new reservoirs, will be missed. 
Performance – Village Savings and Loans Groups 
IR 2.2: 103,400 smallholder farming households have increased use of financial services
 
22 Recruitment of TQCs was initially in the hands of PVOs. When different modalities were suggested and recruitment for 
these positions was late, CATCH intervened and started to work on a new modality whereby TQCs would be based 
inside CATCH and hired by CRS, if possible. This seems quite efficient and effective for such a large program. 
28 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Some background on how the VSL component works is provided in Annex 13. It is arguably the 
most popular activity for WALA: 87 percent of the respondents to the endline survey who 
participate in WALA groups belonged to a VSL group, two and a half times the number involved in 
the next most widespread activity.23 There are now well over 7,000 VSL groups in the WALA areas, 
and many more have developed as part of the same system but outside of the area. An idea of its 
impact is indicated by the fact that about $1.6 million (more than the target of $1.5 million) has been 
saved by the WALA groups24 in the current savings cycle. 
Achievement of targets: There are three official indicators for the VSL component and the 
program is more or less on target for most of them. (Annex 12, Table 12). 
Savings: The first target, which is for total amount saved, has reached more than the level set for 
this stage in the program. This is achieved by encouraging members to save very small amounts of 
money but on a very regular basis. This process has the capacity to make a substantial difference to 
households by providing access when needed to loan funds and – at the share-out that takes place at 
the end of a cycle – to a relatively large lump sum. 
The value of shares in the groups varies from MWK 50 (about $ 0.12) to MWK 200 (about $ 0.50), 
with the commonest figure being MWK100. Many members buy more than one share during a 
meeting, in order to maximize their income during the share-out, but there are also those who find 
it hard to come up with the necessary minimum amount at each meeting. Even when they find it 
hard, however, those spoken to are generally positive about the pressure to save because of the 
benefits they receive, both from the loans and from the share-out. 
Productive loans: The second target is the percentage of loans taken out for "productive" purposes. 
This proportion has fluctuated over the years from over-achievement in 2011 to broad compliance 
in the years since. These data are provided in Annex 12, Table 12 and the breakdown for the single 
year of 2013 by PVO and by district is presented in Annex 12, Table 13.25
The definition of "productive" in this context is that the loan should be used for something that 
potentially leads to a profit within a short period. Table 14 (Annex 12) summarizes the uses to 
which loans and share-outs26 are used and "productive" covers those items in the top two sections 
of the table. It leaves out the items in the bottom section, which includes such things as school fees 
and livestock. 
Whatever the definition of the word, there are strong arguments for encouraging members to use 
lump sums of money for investment purposes. Nevertheless, the other uses cited in the table are 
also important contributions to livelihood and there is no lack of anecdotal evidence from members 
about how important VSL funds have been even for routine recurrent but crucial expenditure, 
especially food, at difficult times. 
Number of Clients: The third target, which is the number of "clients," is a little under achieved 
overall, although some PVOs have already enrolled their target number and there is still time for the 
others to do so. Until recently, it was thought that this target was fully met but earlier enrolment 
figures had been based on VSL group records and included double counting of households that had 
 
23 Care Groups (30 per cent). It is pointed out by the M&E Manager that the number of households benefitting from Care 
Groups may be underreported. It is also the case that care groups are not eligible for the whole community so the 
potential reach is not as great. However, none of this detracts from the popularity of the VSL Component. 
24 See also Annex 12, Table 12. The total savings recorded in this table is taken from the FY 2012 Annual Results Report 
(ARR). They are a little higher than the figures appearing in the IPTT, which is the official source, but they are used anyway 
to give an idea of the breakdown by PVOs, which is not available from the IPTT. Other figures in the ARR, including the 
PVO disaggregation, show complete consistency with the IPTT. 
25 It should be noted that the records of the groups are not reliable in this matter (see below) so this indicator is 
populated using questions asked from the sample in the annual survey. 
26 The questions do not differentiate between the loans and share-outs - both provide lump sums of money that would not 
otherwise available to members. 
29 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
both husband and wife as VSL members. When membership was cross-checked against household 
ID in the Consortium Management Information System (C-MIS), achievement fell to the levels 
shown. Even after this adjustment, however, it seems likely that targets will be met by the end of the 
program.27
Gender balance of members: There are also targets for the gender balance of individual members 
and it is these that contain the one target that is not likely to be achieved. Men are considerably 
under represented and their reluctance to join means that, whilst the female target is over￾subscribed, it is not now possible to reach the hoped for direct participation of men. 
A separate study is investigating the role of gender in the VSLs and it will deal with this matter in 
more detail. It can be pointed out here, however, that the gender balance in VSL groups may reflect 
division of labor in the family rather than lack of interest by men in the clubs and what they offer. 
Many respondents said that the women were there on behalf of their husbands, who were engaged 
in other income earning activities. In any case, discussion with VSL members, including those men 
that do participate directly and even take leadership roles, suggests that men are often closely 
involved with the movements of funds supported by the clubs even when they are not present. 
Important gender related issues include who makes the decisions about how many shares to buy, 
when loans are taken, how much for, what the loan and the share-out money is used for, what the 
source of the money is for repayments and how much of a role each spouses plays more generally. 
In fact, it is not unusual for both husband and wife to be members of clubs, usually different ones, 
although reportedly cases exist where they are members of the same club.28 
Introduction of Private Service Providers (PSPs): The successful introduction of the PSP system, 
introduced to sustain support to the clubs after the program ends, is a notable achievement of the 
program. This did involve asking beneficiaries to pay for a service they had previously received for 
nothing (see Annex 13), which is never an easy task, and most PSPs reported that the transition 
from CA to PSP was difficult. In many cases, it was necessary for them to call in support from 
program staff to convince clubs that the change would be in their interests. The staff did provide the 
support requested; however most PSPs have managed to develop this income source. Furthermore, 
the endline survey showed that 68 percent of members questioned expressed positive support for 
PSPs, even though they now have to be paid. 
Nine percent expressed open dissatisfaction, however, and complaints were received, both during 
interviews and in the survey, about PSPs who did not visit their groups enough or only attended to 
get paid. This came from only a very small number of people spoken to by the final evaluation team, 
however, and a fairly small number in the survey, although it must also be recorded that 24 percent 
of the respondents to the survey declined to say whether they were satisfied or not. 
There has been some discussion about whether groups, especially the stronger ones, can exist 
without PSPs. However, one of the most important routine services provided by PSPs – calculating 
and overseeing the share-out – could quite easily be carried out by many of the stronger groups. 
However, the presence of an independent person who is outside the group, as is the PSP, to do the 
calculations does provide confidence to other group members, especially those who find the 
management procedures hard to understand and who might otherwise be suspicious that they are 
being disadvantaged by their better-educated colleagues. 
Other services provided by PSPs are no less important. These include training in management 
methods and governance, and linking to other support through the networks. Potential PSPs also 
ensure that standards and procedures within the VSLs are maintained over time. 
 
27 – and when PVOs have entered the details of all VSL group membership in the C-MIS. 
28 The evaluation team did not come across this first hand but it was reported to them and the investigator in the gender 
study also mentioned it. The evaluation team therefore leaves it to that study to investigate the matter in more detail. 
30 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
PSP Networks: The development of a network in each district to support the PSPs, including more 
local sub-networks in some places, is a further achievement of the program. There do remain some 
outstanding questions about the existence of external technical support for the networks when the 
program ends, however. At that time, the networks will liaise with Village Development Committees 
(VDC) and Area Development Committees (ADC). 
The VDCs and ADCs can provide official recognition and status and a depository for data collection 
and performance monitoring and the maintenance of standards. However, the provision of technical 
support and the ability to monitor and disseminate new ideas about how VSLs can develop would 
certainly benefit from further external linkages. Of course the larger NGOs involved in this system 
globally will have some stake in promoting continuing high standards, and program staff are aware of 
the value of ensuring the existence of a continuing support service for the networks. 
VSLs as a Source of Income: In addition to helping families develop an understanding of the 
importance of saving and offering a relatively painless way of doing it, even for those who are 
relatively poor, VSLs provide income through share-out of savings plus interest earned, which is 
distributed at the end of each cycle. 
The data gathered in the Portfolio forms and included in the VSL-MIS give some idea of the level of 
return to members. The average return on savings in the most up to date figures provided to the 
evaluation team is 39 percent over the cycle, which is 44 percent at an annualized rate. Return 
amongst the PVOs varies from 15 percent to 62 percent with the most of the PVOs showing 
returns in the range from 30 to 35 percent. As a return this is impressive by any standard, especially 
given the relatively small risks involved. 
On the other hand, for households to be able to benefit from the groups they do need to be able to 
save. As noted above, even with the value of shares set at MWK 50 some families do not have the 
resources to take part. People cannot save what they do not have, so VSLs are not for the very 
poorest or destitute. Nevertheless, they can make a significant contribution to the income of the 
low-income families targeted and certainly justify their popularity. 
Although it is not in agreement with best practice guidelines and training given to the groups, 
interviews did reveal that sometimes the pressure to make savings earn interest results in members 
taking out loans they do not really want so that everyone contributes to the income. Also very 
occasionally, individuals are allowed to take out larger loans than either the rules or best practice 
suggests is prudent. Sometimes when this happens, additional safeguards are taken along the lines of 
more traditional credit programs, such as using assets as guarantees. 
Default is rare in VSLs but members do quite often experience difficulty in making repayments, and 
the last weeks and months of a cycle are usually dedicated to recovering problem loans. The money 
is nearly always forthcoming in one way or another but the process does cause distress and it is not 
a good idea to allow agreed individual credit limits to be exceeded. 
Economic Activity Selection, Planning, and Management (EASPM): The EASPM training 
(explained in Annex 13) is an important step in the development of VSLs because it relates directly 
to the pressure to take out loans that may not be needed especially in the middle of the cycle when 
the amount of cash available becomes substantial and there is a general desire for it to be earning 
something. 
There has been some discussion about using funds that are not loaned out for group income-earning 
activities. Some groups have experimented with these but it not easy to find such activities that have 
31 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
a payback period within the cycle, especially ones that pay returns as large as the loans do. In any 
case, this activity pushes the VSLs into areas that go beyond their core purpose.29 
EASPM, on the other hand, helps members to consider income-generating possibilities on their own, 
and provides them with very basic tools to implement them successfully. This therefore encourages 
them to find profitable reasons for taking out loans. In a short study like the Evaluation it is hard to 
quantify how successful it is, but questioning of participants who have been trained did show some 
grasp of the concepts being passed on to them and the Annual Survey did show considerable IGA 
use of loans amongst respondents and the evaluation team therefore regards this as an important 
sub component to have introduced. 
Sustainability – Village Savings and Loans Groups 
The PSP system and its associated networks have generated a cadre of people who are skilled, 
respected in the community, and (for the most part) unlikely to move. The system of transforming 
CAs into PSPs was specifically introduced in order to encourage sustainability and the system has 
been in place long enough for it to have been tested. It therefore has a good chance of working over 
the long term, so long as the networks carry out their responsibilities seriously. 
One possible issue brought up has been the availability of some way in which the networks 
themselves can recourse to technical advice, both to solve any problems that come up and to keep 
them in touch with new developments that may occur over time. The program is aware of the need 
for this resource but none has yet been assured. 
In addition, the sustainability of VSLs will obviously be greater for groups that have been established 
for longer and have more experience when the program finishes. This has been dealt with by the 
program through periodic assessments of VSL performance and "graduating" those that need less 
supervision. About 75 percent of members belong to groups that have thus far graduated. 
Performance – Agribusiness 
IR 2.3: 20,600 smallholder farming HHs have engaged in commercial marketing 
Annex 14 offers a brief description of how this component operates. Encouraging farmers to 
broaden their horizon from predominantly subsistence to market focused activity involves 
substantial behavioral change and is not easy. Unlike the VSL activity, which is a more closed system 
where influence can be brought to bear on all the actors, agribusiness activities operate in an open 
environment. Farmers need to learn not just new techniques, but new concepts, and how to deal 
with people who have more sophistication and accumulated knowledge about how the system 
works than they do. Under these circumstances, the progress the program has made in this area is 
notable. 
Annex 12, Table 8 shows broad success in the indicators chosen for the component, particularly in 
the first two. These were the percentage of farmers cultivating at least two of the five priority 
products that were promoted by WALA (96 percent achieved) and the number of individuals 
enrolled in marketing groups (target surpassed by about 28 percent).30 
 
29 The MTE also cautioned against group investments. In that case, it was because the MTE considered that such group 
investments do not have a high success rate and it suggested a study might be carried out on the fate of those group 
investments that have been made in WALA. The final evaluation did not see evidence of any such study having taken place 
but it does agree that VSLs should generally stick to their core objective of encouraging saving. 
30 Some tables show this activity as considerably over-achieved but it was realized that the manual recording process of 
members was leading to inaccuracies. When this correction was made the original target of 20,600 was revised to reflect 
actual achievement levels in year 3 of 26,377. The data now presented therefore suggests that the original target set has 
been exceeded by about a quarter. 
32 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Training for farming as a business and choice of output mix: Five products were chosen as 
priorities for promotion by the program31 and the indicator monitoring the percentage of farmers 
who produce at least two of them reflects the aims of output diversification and choice of product 
mix based on profitability. The prioritized products are not new to all the farmers but techniques to 
choose an appropriate output mix, to optimize yields and how to approach mass markets, are. It can 
be noted also that the percentage of farmers doing this increased from baseline for the program as a 
whole and for all but one of the districts and PVOs that were covered. 
The approach of the agribusiness component was to use value chain analysis to investigate the 
feasibility of crops in each area, taking into account market opportunity and agro-ecological zone, 
and then allow PVOs to make decisions about the most appropriate ones to promote based on the 
results. Differences in conditions and changes in opportunities require flexibility, and the program 
has not confined itself to the five crops mentioned. Annex 12, Table 11 gives an idea of the range of 
cash crops that was encouraged. 
Over time conditions change, of course, and so do the opportunities. The real objective is therefore 
for farmers to be able to make their own decisions successfully in the future, combining knowledge 
of their costs with an understanding of market opportunities and arrive at an appropriate output 
mix. 
WALA promoted this by training and by the hands-on experience provided through clubs and 
clusters.32 Overall technical guidance for all of this has been provided by ACDI / VOCA, which has a 
long experience in this field. 
In order to implement its activities the component has made use of a comprehensive series of 
training materials. The limited educational background of WALA beneficiary farmers limit their 
capacity to absorb advanced concepts for analyzing output choices, but the evaluation team was able 
to observe that the training had successfully provided basic understanding of the concepts such as 
costs and profit and loss. 
This was a more limited goal than initial aspirations, which included passing on value chain and gross 
margin analysis, but even getting across basic business concepts to large numbers of farmers used to 
subsistence output is demanding. However, the formal training was supported by three years of 
practical collective marketing experience. It remains to be seen whether all this will be enough to 
encourage good decision to be made in the future. Continuing support from maintaining clubs and 
clusters will certainly help if it is available. 
Collective marketing: Program targets are provided for two collective marketing variables. The 
first is the number of participants enrolled in marketing clubs, which has been broadly achieved. The 
second is the percentage of the marketing group members who actually participated in collective 
marketing. In this case, the target was 60 percent. Only 53 percent33 was reached on average across 
the PVOs, implying an achievement rate of about 86 percent. 
Participation levels: 60 percent might seem an easily achievable target for clubs that were formed 
for the specific purposes of collective marketing. However, it was realistic given the variability in the 
motivation of farmers for joining, and the number of farmers who find that they are not able or 
willing to fulfill all the conditions that are needed if they are to take part, and be successful, in the 
process of collective marketing. When it comes to the point, even those that want to may find that 
they need to sell their produce more quickly than the process allows and be forced to continue to 
sell on their own. 
 
31 rice, beans, groundnuts, pigeon peas, poultry or fish 
32 The system used is explained in the Annex. 
33 There was quite a lot of variation amongst the PVOs but the information was not very reliable because the size of the 
sample of qualifying respondents was quite small, in fact in the case of four PVOs, too small for the results to be reported. 
33 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
It should be noted also that the program works in some quite remote locations where marketing of 
any sort is difficult and from where transport of large quantities of output is difficult and expensive. 
The success of collective marketing efforts was noticeably less in the more remote areas visited. 
Some of the reasons why the target was not met in 2013 also have to be the difficulties faced by 
farmers when they found themselves unable to sell their chili34 crop as expected (see below). 
The range of experiences with collective marketing: In general, the experience of collective 
marketing has been varied, including both the successes and disappointments that are an inevitable 
part of participating in a market system. 
The evaluation team spoke to many farmers who were very happy with the comparison they could 
make between the experiences they are used to when working on their own with those they have 
achieved when marketing collectively. 
When combined with others they can sell to buyers that they would never be able to approach 
individually. Furthermore, when acting collectively they can even command better prices from the 
same buyers they use individually. Combining in this way also gives leverage that protects them 
against some sharp practices, such as under weighing of their produce. Farmers were able to identify 
all these issues for the evaluation. 
However, the evaluation team was also made aware of disappointments. Some of these included 
simple things, such as making arrangements with buyers to buy, only to find that they do not arrive 
as agreed. 
This problem applied to more than one type of crop, including the much-discussed case of chilies. 
After the program introduced this crop to farmers and successfully connected them with a buyer 
over two years, a series of circumstances combined to reduce the willingness and capacity of the 
buyer to buy at the levels and prices that the farmers thought had been agreed on for the 2013 
season. This left some farmers with lower prices than they had expected35 and others with unsold 
output, in spite of a document that had been signed by the company. The document had been 
referred to as an out-grower agreement but it turned out not to be as firm a commitment by the 
buyer as the farmers thought. The expectations that had been created amongst the farmers were 
therefore not fulfilled to everyone's satisfaction. 
It is not a bad thing that such disappointments occurred during the lifetime of the program because 
the experience did illustrate some of the dangers of interacting with a market while program staff 
are still available to explain and motivate. If this support had not been available, the farmers might 
have found it harder to overcome their disappointment. 
As it was, most of those the evaluation team spoke to accepted that they had had two years of 
success behind them and that problems of this sort were occasionally inevitable. Many continued to 
be willing not just to market collectively, but to carry on working with chilies. It is also noted that, as 
Annex 12, Table 11 indicates, substantial collective marketing did take place this year in a wide 
variety of crops. 
Marketing Fairs: Helping farmers to build skills in contacting buyers has been a major 
preoccupation of WALA. A continuing problem with this issue, however, is the relatively small 
number of buyers that have been found to work with the farmers. 
 
34 These are bird's eye chilies but for brevity are simply referred to as "chilies" in this report. 
35 As program staff have pointed out, a situation was created where other output buyers did enter, contacted by farmers, 
especially through ASPs / ACAs, which was a relief to beneficiaries as well as the program. 
34 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
One important approach that has been used to deal with this has been the marketing fair. This tool 
has evolved over the life of the program, starting out as more general agricultural fairs and gradually 
becoming more focused on marketing. Even now not all of them attract a large number of buyers, 
but they remain popular with the farmers and many of the contacts farmers have come from 
meetings at the fairs. 
Over the life of the program, much has been learned about how to use these fairs and when they 
should be held. It has been a productive learning experience but the main difficulty faced at this stage 
is that, if the fairs are to be continued in the future, an organizing body will be needed after the 
program has departed. Efforts are being made to find one but this issue remained unresolved at the 
time of the evaluation.36
Clubs and clusters: The clubs and clusters approach used by the program (described in Annex 14) 
appear to have been an effective mechanism for reaching large numbers of farmers. The clubs are 
small enough for farmers to be trained effectively and to support each other, while the clusters are 
large enough to make collective marketing feasible. As long as they continue to provide technical 
support of the farmers and continue to be successful in collective marketing, there will be an 
incentive for the farmers to maintain them. 
In order to encourage this, one of the pillars of the agribusiness exit strategy is to help clusters 
acting as marketing groups form into networks that would allow them to interact more efficiently 
with buyers and other bodies.37 
Introduction of the Agribusiness Service Provider (ASP) system: As is the case for other 
components in the program, volunteers have been crucial in achieving breadth of coverage for 
training and for other support. In this component, ACAs have played this role. Chosen from the 
cluster membership they have been trained to help with training, market identification, and general 
support activities for the clubs and clusters. 
In order to encourage these activities to continue after the end of the program, the idea introduced 
under the VSL component has been extended to the Agribusiness component. This has been to 
transform the volunteer ACAs into income-earning “Agribusiness Service Providers” (ASPs), who 
earn fees for the services they provide. 
The ASP system is much newer than the PSP one. In fact, although planning and development of the 
system were initiated in 2012, it was only introduced earlier this year (2013) so is still less than a 
year old.38 WALA will have to work hard at the process of training and certification if it is to be 
completed in time. The ACAs will lose their volunteer stipends at the end of 201339 well before the 
transition process to ASPs has been completed. 
The program has informed the evaluation team that the fees recommended for ASPs have been set 
at a level that will provide an acceptable income. It is possible however that in the long run, the ASPs 
will concentrate on the very specific activities where the income earning opportunities lie, and they 
may find it a challenge to continue more general support for clubs and clusters.40
 
36 In their comments on the draft of this report, WALA has referred to how competition among buyers is motivating them 
to use fairs and other means of attracting farmers in the future. 
37 Originally, the aim was to work toward forming cooperatives. However, a number of problems, including farmers’ 
capacity levels, convinced WALA that it would be more effective to concentrate on building famers’ business capacity that 
would help them move towards a formalization of arrangements in the future. 
38 The program has pointed out that some ACAs who might be able to take advantage of income-earning opportunities 
were already identified in 2012. 
39 In some PVOs, some ACAs told the evaluation team that they were already no longer receiving their stipend. 
40 The program also points out that it has developed arrangements between product providers and ASPs that will provide 
an income source that will help to tie the ASPs to clubs and clusters. 
35 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
The view of the evaluation team is that setting up the ASP system is more difficult than it was for the 
PSPs. The work of the ASPs involves more sophistication than that of the PSPs and they will have to 
work unaided in an open system and interact with sophisticated buyers at all levels. Many of the 
ASPs that the evaluation team spoke to are clearly capable and motivated but it remains an open 
question whether there is time for both the introduction of the system and its consolidation before 
fieldwork has to be terminated, especially in the light of the fact that the support from ACDI / 
VOCA is already ending. A support network similar to that for the PSPs is under preparation. This is 
an important innovation but it is too early to tell whether it will become effective before the 
program ends. In any case, the evaluation team feels that this process would have benefitted from 
more time to establish and consolidate. 
Sustainability – Agribusiness 
The basic premise for the agribusiness component is that farmers will be better off by moving from 
reliance on home consumption of family output, and on to the market system. It also relies on the 
fact that marketing, both selling of crops and buying of inputs, is more efficient and results in better 
prices, when larger quantities are involved. This in turn means combining with other farmers who 
are trying to do the same thing.
These are relatively simple concepts and once grasped by the farmers they are unlikely to lose them, 
so they will be sustained. 
More difficult innovations to sustain are the institutional components of the program that were 
established to help put these concepts into practice. The most visible of these are the clubs and the 
clusters and, whether or not they are transformed into formal cooperatives, they are more likely to 
continue if they deliver on the expectations of sufficient numbers of farmers. 
4.4 SO3 – Disaster Risk Reduction 
Introduction 
SO3: 273 targeted communities have improved capacity to withstand shocks and 
stresses 
SO3 has two Intermediate Results: 
 IR 3.1: 273 targeted communities have strengthened mechanisms for disaster preparedness, 
response, and mitigation 
 IR 3.2: 21,203 food insecure households have enhanced capacity to withstand shocks and 
stress 
Table 11: Disaster risk reduction survey data analysis
IPTT 
REF 
No
Indicators
2009 
Baseline 
Survey
2013 
Target
2013 
Endline 
Survey
2009 to 
2013 
Difference
SO3: 273 targeted communities have improved capacity to withstand shocks and stresses
3.1 % of household reported losses of 
livelihood assets due to shocks and stresses 
(Impact) (Population) (WALA) (GoM –
MoAFS)
7.8% 8.0% 6.8% -1.0
The baseline to endline data for SO3 does not show a statistically significant difference in asset losses 
by households due to shocks and stresses. That there was no change in household asset losses 
during the period is significant for several reasons. First, the baseline value of 7.8 percent is low, 
attributed to three consecutive years of good weather prior to the commencement of WALA. 
WALA kept the same value for the endline survey (after rounding it up) as the program decided that 
a further decrease in asset loss would be difficult to achieve. Second, in 2012-2013, WALA 
36 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
households suffered severe external shocks from the currency devaluation, food price increases, and 
fuel shortages. In addition to these global shocks, during the past two years 27 percent of WALA 
households experienced drought, 26 percent were affected by floods and 14 percent by strong 
winds (Annex 15, Figure 10). It is a significant achievement for the program that households in the 
program area were able to maintain a low incidence of loss in the context of multiple severe shocks. 
WALA’s strategy is to revitalize and strengthen multiple levels of the GoM’s disaster management 
and response system, and to link households to participatory community structures and community 
structures to the government disaster response offices. WALA seeks to improve the resilience of 
the most vulnerable through food rations, and of communities through the construction of 
infrastructure through Food for Work (FFW). 
Performance – Community Mechanisms 
IR 3.1: 273 targeted communities have strengthened mechanisms for disaster preparedness, 
response, and mitigation 
Village Civil Protection Committees: WALA has trained Village Civil Protection Committees (VCPCs) in 
251 communities, 92 percent of its target of 273 communities as of Year 4,41 and revitalized 39 Area 
Civil Protection Committees (ACPC) and eight District Civil Protection Committees (DCPCs). 
Training is based on WALA’s Disaster Risk Reduction Training Manual, an excellent training tool. In 
focus group interviews, WALA-supported VCPCs demonstrated a good understanding of local 
threats, DRR measures, and how to apply their training. VCPCs monitor early warning signs, inform 
the community about threats and actions to take, and encourage risk reduction measures (see 
Annex 16). WALA VCPCs have mapped community vulnerabilities and capacities for DRR and 
shared that analysis with community members. 
The strongest VCPCs describe a wide range of DRR activities that they undertake together with 
other WALA groups. Many activities promoted by VCPCs are implemented by other technical 
sectors, so integration of DRR and technical activities is critical to the VCPC’s ability to strengthen 
community preparedness. VCPCs also work to expand people’s perception of DRR, e.g., by 
encouraging people to see agriculture not only as food production but also as a risk reduction 
activity that can help protect the community in the future. 
Endline data on DRR activities does not allow for baseline comparison or attribution to WALA 
alone. However, it does show a high level of community awareness of the primary activities 
promoted by the VCPCs (in conjunction with other WALA groups), designed to strengthen 
environmental defenses against drought, such as planting drought-resistant crops (93 percent 
WALA; 86 percent non-WALA); and the risk of floods and high winds through afforestation (95 
percent WALA; 90 percent non-WALA). This indicates that VCPCs have successfully linked to SO2 
activities (Annex 15, Table 16). 
Empowerment of communities in DRR: A major change attributed to WALA VCPCs is an organized 
approach to disaster reduction and response to smaller scale disasters in communities that were 
previously left to cope on their own (the GoM prioritizes response to large scale disasters due to 
limited funds). Endline data show that community awareness of VCPCs and their activities has 
increased dramatically; 62 percent and 51 percent of WALA and non-WALA households, 
respectively, recognize that DRR activity has taken place in their community. This was confirmed in 
mixed group discussions. 
 
41 The target of 273 communities in the IPTT was based on the estimated number of communities required to reach the 
overall target. However, most of the WALA targets were reached by covering 251 communities and as such, WALA only 
worked with 251 communities and 251 VCPCs. 
37 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Linkages with formal disaster management mechanisms: WALA has successfully formed strong linkages 
along the formal chain of GoM DRR offices. WALA PVOs attend DCPC meetings and keep district 
officers informed of activities. District-level DRR staff state that they have a good relationship with 
WALA, value its contributions, and consider the ACPCs and VCPCs well trained. ACPC members, 
who are the VCPC’s key link to the district DRR structure, say that WALA has strengthened their 
capacity to train and monitor VCPCs, and to pass on information to the district. When WALA 
noted that extension workers were not participating in the VCPCs due to distance or vacancies, the 
program recruited volunteers and retained extension workers in an advisory capacity, where they 
assist whenever requested. 
WALA participates in the national disaster response structure through the Malawi Vulnerability 
Assessment Committee food security assessments and the Famine Early Warning System Network. 
It also monitors district-level household food stocks and coping mechanisms and uses the 
information to assess whether additional food assistance is needed. 
Gender: The DRR training manual mainstreams discussion of the needs of women and girls, and their 
capacities, though it looks at women’s capabilities in a very limited manner (e.g., a main capacity for 
response is the ability to run). VCPCs have members specially designated to look after the needs of 
women and children in disaster response. Women comprise about one-third of the VCPC 
membership and only about one-fifth of the leadership positions. VCPC members insist that men and 
women perform the same duties. This is credible as the VCPC’s primary activities are 
communication with and motivation of community members. 
Resilience: A significant percentage of households (37 percent WALA; 19 percent non-WALA) 
perceive themselves to be better prepared for shocks than before the program began. However, the 
majority do not believe that they are better prepared (63 percent WALA, 81 percent non-WALA) 
(Figure 8). The main reasons given by WALA households for their increased resilience are an 
increase in savings and assets. Since the VCPC serves all households in the community (whether 
WALA participants or not) and disseminates some of its information through community meetings, 
both WALA participants and non-WALA households receive information on how to prepare for and 
reduce the impact of shocks. 
Figure 8: Perception of shock preparedness relative to five years ago
Challenges 
Insufficient time to build capacity: WALA had no DRR TQC during the first two years of the 
program.42 Consequently many VCPCs were established and trained beginning in 2012, and have not 
had adequate time and mentoring to develop their skills (e.g., carrying out their Action Plans; 
mobilizing funds). Weaker VCPCs have a narrow concept of their potential as a force in DRR, and 
do not appear to be well integrated into technical sector activities. WALA PVOs have a qualitative 
checklist to monitor VCPC development but this information is not aggregated above PVO level. 
 
42 One of the WALA PVO partners was responsible for hiring the DRR TQC, in line with the original program agreement. 
When the partner was unable to fill the position after a long delay, CATCH assumed responsibility for filling the position. 
18.9
34.4
13.8
33.0 37.1
24.7
13.7
24.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
More prepared
than 5 years ago
No Change Less prepared than
5 years ago
% of Households
Cant say
Non-WALA
WALA
38 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
The SOG for DRR was produced only in Year 3 but is of high quality, which helps account for the 
progress made since 2012. 
The lack of time for DRR to become embedded in communities is also reflected in interviews with 
many GVHs, who failed to mention VCPC support as a feature of WALA, even after probing. This 
may also reflect the GVHs’ perception that health, agriculture and VSL interventions are more 
important to local development than disaster risk reduction, and a need for greater sensitization of 
GVHs. 
Funding: Perhaps because DRR is an integrated approach, the SO3 budget is approximately one-third 
of the other SOs. The lack of funds has reportedly constrained implementation. For example, while 
training targets were met, some PVOs reduced the number of training days, which district officials 
felt reduced the quality of the training. Limited funding constrained PVO support of some initiatives, 
such as tree nurseries and desilting. ACPC members stated that due to budget limitations VCPCs do 
not receive individual training materials, which are important to ensuring a common understanding 
of the DRR material. Funding from the GoM is a major challenge to a DRR response from the 
district DRR offices, which have “zero” budget and are reliant on WALA and others to fund disaster 
response and regular meetings. 
Keeping skills current: Keeping skills up to date and refreshing messages to the community will be a 
challenge for VCPCs after the program ends. Over time, it is likely that most community members 
will have heard and applied – or grown tired of – the same advice. VCPCs will need a way to stay 
abreast of new ideas to maintain community interest. 
ACPCs: ACPC members noted several challenges, including staying current with their skills without 
PVO support, the attrition of members trained as trainers of VCPCs (unless the GoM provides 
training), and transportation, though WALA has given bicycles to several ACPCs. 
Sustainability – Community Mechanisms 
Level of community activity: VCPCs in less disaster-prone areas have little to respond to outside of 
individual household disasters, and thus will have little access to outside funds and are less 
sustainable. Sustainability is much stronger in areas that face more frequent threats, though they will 
also need funding to maintain activities. VCPCs are applying their training in fundraising and have 
modest fund balances. Other factors supporting sustainability are good cross-sector representation 
in VCPCs (eight percent of WALA CBO members belong to a VCPC), and that membership carries 
a degree of prestige and community recognition. 
Appreciation of the importance of DRR: The endline survey reflects a perception that individual 
household assets rather than community assets enable households to better prepare for shocks. 
WALA households report that they are better prepared because of increased savings (31.2 percent) 
and increased household assets (30 percent) compared to 20 percent of non-WALA households in 
both categories (Annex 15, Figure 12). Neither the community early warning system nor improved 
infrastructure is seen as increasing resilience, possibly because household assets are considered most 
important in disaster recovery. 
Support from ACPCs: WALA has strengthened the skills of ACPCs to deliver DRR training to VCPCs. 
ACPC members stated they are confident of these skills and are training VCPCs in WALA and non￾WALA areas. Some ACPCs emphasized the need for refresher training of VCPCs (which is part of 
WALA’s exit plan). 
Support from GoM: The GoM has developed a new National Disaster Risk Management Policy that 
marks a shift from disaster response to reducing risk and building resilience. The policy also closes 
several gaps in the national DRR system that WALA has been addressing since 2012. The new act 
will also make funds available to support the initial costs of disaster response and recovery 
39 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
operations.43 This funding is important to VCPC sustainability, and WALA-supported VCPCs, with 
training in proposal writing, are well positioned to take advantage of the small grants scheme 
focusing on community based DRR initiatives.44 
Performance – Safety Nets and FFW 
IR 3.2: 21,203 food insecure households have enhanced capacity to withstand shocks and 
stress 
Safety Nets: The program has successfully delivered rations on a reliable schedule to highly vulnerable 
households (chronically ill, orphans and vulnerable children (OVC), elderly) allowing them to 
recover their health and become more productive. As of September 2013, safety net rations had 
been delivered to over 25,202 people,45 67 percent of whom are women. Recipients repeated 
messages promoted by WALA during each distribution (i.e., view the food as medicine; the food is 
provided by the US government). Food monitors remind recipients that the food is for one year 
only and encourage them to join WALA groups to improve their food security. Endline data show 
that 27 percent of households receiving food rations belong to 1-2 WALA groups, 31 percent 
belong to 3-4 groups, and 41 percent belong to five or more WALA groups. 
Targeting: WALA uses a guided community-based targeting system with clear criteria and multiple 
checks to determine eligibility. The criteria and process appear to be appropriate, as recounted 
during interviews with safety net recipients, village leaders, and WALA commodities staff, although 
opportunities to verify this independently were limited. 
Capacity of vulnerable households strengthened: Focus group respondents reported that the food ration 
restores strength and energy, allowing them to work again. Most respondents said that prior to 
receiving the rations, they would do ganyu until they had enough money to purchase food for that 
day, and often lacked strength to work for long periods of time. The food rations allow them time to 
work on their own fields and many no longer do ganyu. 
Food for Work: Among the achievements of FFW activities is the construction or rehabilitation of 
critical infrastructure in 160 communities as of September 2013,46 which will have positive long-term 
economic and environmental impacts. Beneficiaries see FFW as a benefit both to community 
infrastructure and as much-needed support to their households during the lean season, providing 
food whose value is higher than ganyu wages. 
FFW activities have supported DRR measures in erosion control (contour ridging, tree nurseries), 
infrastructure development (roads, night reservoirs, dams, irrigation schemes, watershed protection) 
and enabled communities to make progress on some community-initiated activities by freeing up 
labor. The limited number of structures viewed appeared to be appropriate and well-constructed. 
Community members appreciate WALA technical support for infrastructure construction, stating 
that they learned proper methods of construction that they can apply in future. WALA issued its 
Guidelines for Food for Work and Food for Assets in July 2010, which clearly explain eligibility, 
work norms, and designs. 
Among the most positive achievements seen during the fieldwork are communities where the 
benefits attained under FFW have motivated people to continue their work without a further food 
incentive. One community visited during fieldwork had manually desilted a stream, and in another, a 
Watershed Committee plans to extend flood control measures (check dams, tree planting, stone 
bunds) done with FFW to reach more areas in the village with its own labor. 
 
43 Government of Malawi. 2013. Disaster Risk Management Act. 
44 Government of Malawi. 2013. Disaster Risk Management Act. 
45 Data from WALA PVO annual and cumulative ITT data. September 2013. Total is approximate as data for this specific 
category not reported separately by one PVO. 
46 WALA PVO annual and cumulative ITT data. September 2013. 
40 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Challenges 
Safety Nets 
Low number of eligible households assisted. The total number of households designated for safety net 
assistance appears to be quite low, especially given an HIV prevalence rate of 15 percent in southern 
Malawi.47 Many local leaders and participants expressed concern that the number of CIs is much 
greater than the rations provided. In the endline survey, 20 percent of households have a chronically 
ill member, which may include many elderly. 
Leveraging WALA activities to decrease vulnerability. A key concept behind the provision of safety net 
rations is that households dependent on ganyu use the year-long ration support and skills learned 
from WALA to improve household food security. Endline data show a high level of participation 
among households receiving rations. According to beneficiaries and local leaders, safety net rations 
have improved food security for the majority of recipients and freed many from ganyu; however, the 
endline survey shows that there was no statistically significant decline in ganyu between baseline (31 
percent) and endline (29 percent). Many households said they do less ganyu, but the most vulnerable 
rely on ganyu or VSL loans to buy food and household items, suggesting that their degree of 
vulnerability remains high. 
Food for Work 
Planned maintenance of infrastructure. The main challenge observed in relation to FFW infrastructure 
is the need to sensitize community leaders to establish a regular maintenance plan for roads. 
Selection of activities. WALA guidelines specify that the community must actively participate in the 
planning and agree to the implementation of the FFW activities. Some of the FFW beneficiaries 
interviewed did not know how or why the FFW activities were selected. This should be explained in 
community meetings, and may reflect either poor communication or an inadequate process in a few 
communities. 
Sustainability – Safety Nets and FFW 
Safety nets. The combination of a food ration and participation in WALA may not be sufficient to 
overcome the time and labor constraints of the most vulnerable households. 
FFW. The infrastructure provides clear benefits to the community and thus is likely to be sustained. 
Where groups such as a Watershed Committee are active, there is also strong motivation to 
maintain benefits. The main threat to community efforts to achieve sustainability would appear to be 
the expectation that another program may come after WALA to provide FFW. 
4.5 Cross-cutting Issues 
Good Governance 
IR 3.3: 8,000 community-led groups have practiced good governance principles 
WALA has trained 10,544 community groups48 and 251 VDCs and VCPCs in good governance as of 
the end of Year 4,49 and trained 71,593 people in in-group dynamics, 61 percent of them women.50 
Most of the groups interviewed confirmed that they received training in governance, group 
formation, and leadership. A variety of groups said that when their groups were formed, they were 
advised by group leaders (FEFs, lead farmers, and VSL leadership) to decide how they would run the 
group. Many provided examples of how the training has strengthened their capacity to function as a 
group. The most frequently cited benefit is knowledge of how to develop a constitution because, 
 
47 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey, 2010. 
48 WALA. 2013. Annual Results Report. 
49 Data from WALA PVO annual and cumulative ITT data. September 2013. 
50 Ibid. 
41 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
according to a VSL in Mulanje, it “makes us do things in an orderly manner.” FEFs said they have 
learned skills critical to creating successful groups, such as how to select good leaders. 
Governance training is mainstreamed so that WALA participants are prepared to work in groups 
before they launch activities. The Governance TQC trains PVO coordinators, and training is 
cascaded down to volunteers and to groups. The approach is good; however, mainstreaming has 
been constrained by several factors. The PVO designated as the technical lead started activities but 
did not recruit a Governance TQC until Year 2. Sector training was already underway, and while 
governance training was incorporated it did not receive equal emphasis. All groups have received 
training in governance, but the delayed start and reduced emphasis has not allowed some groups to 
gain experience. In addition, the Governance TQC is not based in CATCH, which hampers 
coordination and participation in meetings. 
WALA has two very good tools to measure the progress of the internal governance capacity of 
community groups: the Civil Society Index (CSI) and the Food Security Community Capacity Index. 
The tools are to help communities evaluate the performance of service providers in order to create 
greater accountability and transparency, and to influence services that affect their food security. Both 
were developed under I-LIFE but were not extensively used in WALA until midway through the 
program. It was planned to apply the tools in all GVHs; in practice, it has been used with VDCs and 
water user committees. A third tool, Participatory Planning Monitoring and Evaluation (PPM&E), is 
designed to help groups develop a vision and strategic plans, carry out participatory M&E, and 
determine the impact of their actions on the community. Following the MTE recommendation to 
strengthen PPM&E training, WALA hired Praxis from India to train the governance coordinators on 
PPM&E. WALA has now trained 3,950 WALA-formed/assisted groups in PPM&E.51 WALA has 
developed an advocacy manual and trained PVO coordinators; the intent is to strengthen the ability 
of groups to advocate for services after the program ends. 
Overall, governance training has strengthened the ability of groups to function as formal 
organizations, which is critical to their effectiveness and sustainability. Those basic organizational 
skills will remain in the community and will benefit other efforts. Had governance training started at 
the outset of the program, it would have created deeper understanding and capacity in the groups. 
Gender 
WALA has had a gender strategy in place since the start of the program and has since produced 
guidance for each sector. However, the gender strategy does not include an in-depth contextual 
analysis of the situation specific to Malawi or the districts in which WALA is working. WALA’s 
operational areas are varied and cover patrilineal, matrilineal, as well as both Muslim and Christian 
societies. A more comprehensive understanding of some of the important cultural differences 
between these groups in terms of gender could usefully inform program design and development. 
However, “WALA was designed to ensure a greater role and involvement of women in economically 
productive activities and male involvement in health” and in terms of this limited goal, it has been 
successful with women making up 85 percent of participants in VSL groups, 68 percent in 
agribusiness groups, 57 percent in small-scale irrigation groups, and 62 percent in livestock activities 
(ARR FY13; p. 9). 
Two major constraints to improving gender mainstreaming in WALA are that the majority of PVOs 
have no gender focal person and that almost no gender training of PVO or CATCH staff has been 
conducted throughout the program. 
In summary, gender issues have been considered in the WALA program, yet more in-depth analysis 
could be undertaken to better understand the specific issues relevant to gender roles and 
responsibilities in program areas and to tailor interventions to respond appropriately and effectively 
 
51 Ibid. 
42 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
in the districts of operation. A future program would benefit from a more thorough gender analysis 
that investigates the cultural and gender differences between and within districts/program areas. This 
would improve understanding of the roles of men and women within the household and assist 
program staff to tailor interventions more specifically towards supporting both men and women. In 
particular, efforts should be made to ensure women’s burdens are not increased through their 
participation in activities. In addition, training in a gender-sensitive approach and implementation 
should be provided to all program staff to enable its mainstreaming in all activities. Additional 
discussion on gender aspects of WALA is found in Annex 17. 
Mainstreaming HIV/AIDS Considerations 
HIV in Malawi remains a significant challenge to the health and development of the population. The 
MDHS 2010 reports that prevalence in urban areas is twice that of rural areas: 17 percent of women 
and men aged 15-49 in urban areas are infected with HIV compared with nine percent in rural areas. 
The southern region has the highest HIV prevalence with 15 percent (18 percent women, 11 
percent men), which is about twice that of the Central Region (eight percent) and Northern Region 
(seven percent). Women remain disproportionately affected. 
The WALA program aims to mainstream HIV/AIDS considerations into its activities, as well as to 
work closely with the IMPACT program. 
The evaluation found that HIV considerations are effectively mainstreamed in MCHN activities, 
which work very closely with IMPACT, with PVO staff usually sharing the same office space and 
coordinating well on promotional activities such as Community Health Days. In the majority of 
districts, health promoters make regular visits to HIV support groups to talk about nutrition and the 
importance of antiretroviral therapy, preventing mother-to-child transmission, and growth 
monitoring and promotion for children and positive healthy living. They often work alongside expert 
clients and encourage members of HIV support groups to join WALA activities such as VSL and 
home gardens. Referrals are made between HIV support groups and CGs. CGVs provide home 
follow up to those affected by HIV and AIDS. In particular, the CG support and attention to growth 
faltering assists in early identification of children with HIV who need enhanced nutritional support 
and health care. 
HIV messages are integrated in MCHN modules, including messages on the importance of both men 
and women attending early for antenatal care so that couples can be tested for HIV, PMTCT advice, 
and Infant and Young Child Feeding (IYCF) messages and support. 
Child Health Days and community open days have been used as another opportunity for promotion 
of the MCHN activities and messages – including food processing and food preservation displays –
alongside HIV counselling and testing. 
In terms of SO2, many aspects of conservation agriculture are suitable in principle for active people 
living with HIV due to the principles of minimum tillage and soil cover, which provide large gains in 
hard labor and time savings in the field. Intercropping and homestead gardens also aim to provide 
more nutritious foods. The appropriateness of irrigation technologies is considered in relation to 
time constraints (for women and those caring for the chronically ill) and to ease of operation or use. 
In SO3, training in initial assessment to identify hazards that affect communities and interventions for 
either preventing or reducing the impact of disasters incorporates effects on handicapped, ill, elderly, 
and other vulnerable people. The safety net program is specifically targeted to the chronically ill or 
those caring for OVCs. However, the evaluation found that there has been less attention to 
transition out of safety nets and support beyond food handouts for these vulnerable groups. 
WALA has selected only one indicator to monitor HIV mainstreaming: Cross Cutting 4.1. Percentage 
of individuals (men or women) aged 15-49 years who have comprehensive HIV knowledge (identify two 
prevention methods and three misconceptions). This has improved from a baseline of 44 percent in 2009 
43 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
to 50 percent (WALA 52 percent versus non-WALA 45 percent) in 2013. While this is an important 
shift and is commendable, it missed the WALA target of 65 percent. It is obvious that work remains 
to be done to ensure that the majority of the population has access to adequate knowledge. It may 
also not be the most appropriate indicator in terms of program activities because awareness raising 
on prevention has not featured highly as a WALA activity under any of the SOs. 
Overall, HIV/AIDS programming is mainstreamed well in MCHN activities and taken into 
consideration in SO2 and SO3 activities. Since WALA is not specifically engaged in education 
activities on HIV prevention, more appropriate indicators to assess the effectiveness of HIV 
mainstreaming could be considered in future programs or a stronger emphasis be placed on HIV 
prevention and awareness-raising. It is important that future programs continue to consider 
HIV/AIDS implications thoroughly in their design and that HIV concerns do not slip off the radar. 
Considering the ongoing high prevalence rates, combined with low awareness on prevention in the 
population, a future program should consider whether to enhance its awareness-raising activities. 
Environmental Monitoring and Impact Mitigation 
The program has been observant to the need for environmental monitoring and impact mitigation. 
The MTE report referred to a number of activities that were implemented to mitigate and prevent 
environmental degradation. These included watershed development, conservation agriculture, and 
irrigation. 
These had been specified in the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) that is written during the 
proposal submission process. One of the main restrictions is on the use of fertilizer and herbicides 
in crop cultivation techniques and Post-Harvest Handling and Storage (PHHS). The MTE also noted 
that the program had worked toward integrating environmental protection in all SOs as a cross￾cutting theme by inviting external technical assistance from CRS Madagascar in 2011 to enhance 
capacities for environmental monitoring in WALA. 
The program’s ARR FY13 reports on the relevant activities it has embarked on, including: 
 Promotion of fuel-efficient stoves that emit less smoke (which can cause respiratory problems), 
with support from the Mulanje Renewable Energy Conservation Trust (addressing one of the 
recommendations from the MTE); 
 Facilitation of watershed development, seeking to reverse the degradation and loss of soil, arable 
land, and forest. Treatments include contour continuous trenches, stone bunds, infiltration pits 
and trenches, gully plugs, and reforestation. Conservation treatments have been applied to more 
than 2,000 hectares to date; 
 Incorporating mitigation measures into irrigation scheme design and construction that cover 
monitoring of waterlogging from irrigation systems; 
 Applying water-catchment protection principles to the development of each irrigation scheme. 
Site-specific micro-grant proposals must include an environmental impact mitigation plan; and 
 Promotion of CA, which helps to reduce soil erosion and improves soil organic matter content, 
soil water holding capacities, and soil fertility of small farm holdings; 
Other relevant activities, identified by the evaluation team, include: 
 Environmental protection by VCPCs: advocating tree nurseries and planting trees, reduced 
cutting of trees, vetiver grasses, and windbreakers around homesteads. 
A potential clash has emerged between the limitations set by the IEE and the promotion of CA, 
which often sees a reduced use of fertilizers but a greater use of herbicides. As access to ground 
cover (mulching material) is limited, this provides a limitation on the expansion and success of CA. 
More thorough technical support in Integrated Pest Management would also be relevant and 
appropriate, but requires much more in-depth technical support. 
44 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Overall, the program has performed very well on monitoring environmental impact identified during 
the IEE. 
5. Program Processes 
5.1 Program Management 
The final evaluation team found that CATCH is managing this substantive Title II MYAP generally 
well, especially in terms of guiding the seven PVOs towards the standardized implementation of a 
comprehensive food security and nutrition program based on the final MYAP proposal and detailed 
implementation plans. 
There are various aspects to the program that were novel to the WALA grant recipient and PVOs. 
These include the standardized approach and central support structure guiding the implementation, 
and the administration of CATCH as a separate administrative and management entity responsive to 
the donor, distinct from the CRS Country Office. While other Title II programs use a similar 
structure (e.g., Bangladesh) this was new to Malawi. The final evaluation team feels that the size and 
scope of the program and the number of PVOs involved (varying substantially in capacity levels) have 
justified this decision. 
CATCH has delivered on perhaps its greatest responsibility, overseeing the implementation of a 
uniform program approach, at scale, with more than 80 percent of the ambitious targets set out at 
the start likely to be achieved by the end of the program in 2014. This is recognized by all PVOs, 
who have acknowledged that managing seven different partners with distinct identities is no small 
accomplishment. They also acknowledged that most have profited from backstopping services in 
such areas as program administration, M&E, commodity management, and technical support under 
each of the SOs. This holds true for the systems support (e.g., financial and administrative systems, 
commodity management, and M&E) provided to smaller-sized PVOs. CATCH has invested significant 
resources in building up critical capacities, which justifies the inclusion of these PVOs as a means to 
strengthen local capacity in Malawi. These requests for support often occurred on an ad-hoc basis 
when systemic weaknesses surfaced. 
Consequently, CATCH is considered a success (answering one of the questions raised by the MTE). 
The final evaluation team agrees with the MTE findings that the management responsibility for such a 
large and comprehensive program rests with the grant recipient, giving the responsible party control 
over the means of program delivery so that they can be held accountable for their actions. Similarly, 
it has proven beneficial to the group that the technical leads are together in CATCH (Blantyre), in 
close proximity to the field, which facilitates frequent face-to-face interaction between CATCH, 
PVOs, and local partners such as the GoM. Face-to-face communication is still considered a key 
ingredient for in-depth exchange of knowledge, experiences, and opinions. 
After laying out the framework for community engagement and the implementation strategies for 
PVOs to roll out the program, CATCH has focused on the implementation of the program and 
monitoring thereof, aiming to reach the targets set at the beginning of the program. An important 
achievement is the establishment of efficient and effective coordination and communication 
structures that allow for a frequent exchange of information with the PVOs, with a clear focus on 
program management and technical backstopping of the sectors. 
CATCH and the PVOs have also utilized and promoted exchange visits between various 
geographical entities to improve learning. This has been used for the Advisory Board meetings during 
the second part of the program, as well as the TWG meetings. During each of those meetings, PVOs 
host the sessions and receive an opportunity to focus on their realities in the field, strengths, 
weaknesses, and particular challenges. These meetings have been greatly appreciated by all involved 
and are seen as an essential learning tool. While these exchanges also have occurred closer to the 
45 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
field, the final evaluation team believes that this learning tool could be used even more consistently, 
especially to share good practices and success stories. 
5.2 Staffing 
The MTE report noted the significant staffing challenges over the life of the program. CATCH has 
seen transitions in all positions. The competitive labor market in Malawi is most often mentioned 
when explaining the frequent staff turnover. A large number of NGOs are active in the areas of food 
security and MCHN in Malawi, and experts in administration, finance, and M&E are in demand. While 
CATCH management produced a note on staff retention towards the end of 2013, this seems fairly 
late in the program cycle to have any impact on the staffing levels for the remainder of the program. 
It may still have some effect on keeping staff in place until the end of the program, although no plan 
has been adopted yet for adopting financial incentives. 
Perhaps most notable have been the changes that occurred in key positions in CATCH, including all 
of the senior management positions (Chief of Party, Deputy Chief of Party for Program, Deputy 
Chief of Party for Finance and Administration, and M&E Coordinator), and TQCs for agriculture and 
MCHN. Appointments in TQC positions for DRR and livestock and the lead person in knowledge 
management were significantly delayed. These staff changes and delays have had an impact on 
program performance, perhaps most visibly in the late start of the DRR and livestock/fish farming 
components, which have also therefore seen limited impact on the ground. 
One obvious reason for delays has been the decision in the original design to award PVOs with the 
responsibility for hiring certain TQC positions associated with particular expertise. It is suggested 
that in the future CATCH have the power to recruit according to vision and plan, while PVOs be 
included in selection panels for senior positions. It is important that the technical supervisory team is 
constituted in Year 1 to ensure consistency of preparations, rollout, monitoring, and backstopping. 
Similarly, the program has shown that in some instances the dependency on individual staff members 
such as TQCs for backstopping of the program is a risk given their mobility in the Malawian labor 
market. 
WALA has an excellent example in the area of irrigation of how to mitigate the risks arising from 
turnover of technical staff. Already under I-Life, the irrigation component had outsourced most of its 
technical backstopping to an international contractor with local offices, who has a team of experts 
ready to provide services. Given the high stakes involved in implementing such a large program and 
its dependency on a complex and sequenced implementation program cycle, as well as the short 
time period to achieve results (i.e., to reach all households with a gradual rollout), such 
arrangements may be considered for other technical components in the future as well. This also 
addresses an important point of local capacity development that emphasizes strengthening the 
capacities of institutions rather than individuals. CRS/WALA has drawn on various partners for their 
specific technical expertise. Examples include WOTR in NRM; Conservation Farming Unit in CA; a 
number of research stations were pulled in under agriculture; and Chancellor College and Bunda 
College provided support under MCHN. 
5.3 Program Coordination 
The final evaluation team has identified overall program coordination in CATCH and integration 
between the various elements as an area that could be improved upon. The Team’s views are based 
on the following observations: 
(1) Data from the endline survey suggest that participation in WALA activities does lead to 
greater gains; however the data suggest that the returns diminish as the number of activities 
increases. This could indicate an implementation problem whereby the program lacks 
resources to go in-depth, starting up activities that may not always reach fruition. This may 
also point to a lack of oversight on the quality of multiple interventions implemented 
simultaneously. It is disappointing that one of the key assumptions – increased program 
46 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
engagement leads to positive outcomes – could not be validated due to the size of this 
integrated program. 
This is not to say that no associations or synergies have been identified or promoted by the 
program. Far from it: essential linkages between successful program elements have been 
made. Examples include the engagement of successful VSL groups to invest in livestock, small 
stock, and fish farming; and engagement between SO1 and SO2, for example, with lead 
farmers and FEFs advising Care Groups on the establishment of homestead gardens. 
(2) CATCH has purposefully devolved the monitoring of qualitative performance to individual 
PVOs (using QIVC forms that few actually manage to analyze), leaving CATCH with 
relatively few inputs. For its updates, CATCH depends mainly on the TQCs and their 
interactions with the PVOs through their quarterly meetings. The result is that CATCH 
focuses perhaps too much on the monitoring of numerical targets. 
(3) CATCH has not invested enough in understanding and documenting the linkages and 
relationships between the various components of the WALA model at the various units of 
analysis, or in investigating various development pathways. 52 Perhaps it should have allowed 
for some flexibility as to the modes of implementation, learning about what does and does 
not work in a particular context, and documenting an evolutionary WALA model that could 
inform future programs in Malawi. The MTE had shared a similar concern that there had 
been “limited opportunities for discussions on the bigger picture of the WALA strategy” 
(MTE report, p.45). 
It seems a missed opportunity that the WALA flow chart (Figure 9) provided at the start of the 
program has not been reviewed more extensively, especially as WALA represents a second￾generation program design where questions of opportunities for scaling up may be legitimately 
asked. 
It is likely that staff changes in CATCH affecting senior management and technical leads including for 
knowledge management may have affected performance in these areas – particularly as this has not 
been explicitly programmed. While the implementation of a program this size has to be 
management’s first concern, some of the learning opportunities have been missed. Perhaps a late 
effort in incorporating lessons learned into the WALA model may still yield significant results. 
 
52 This is certainly something that FFP has sought to prioritize in its recent Request for Applications (RFA) for the next 
generation of Development Food Assistance Programs starting in Fiscal Year 2014. The RFA specifically talks about the fact 
that “FFP seeks to implement effective models, build capacity, and create an enabling environment adapted to the Malawi 
context. Therefore, applicants must provide an overall development strategy that seeks to create, when possible, self￾financing and self-transferring models that will continue to spread under their own momentum both during and after the 
project.” (p.3) FFP, 2013.
47 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Figure 9: WALA flowchart: WALA conceptual framework of critical linkages between 
program activities and by SO
Source: Final WALA Proposal.
5.4 Knowledge Management 
Practical implementation of knowledge management in WALA has been concerned with 
documenting and disseminating experiences and achievements generated within the program and 
ensuring that approaches, methods, and lessons learned have been recorded in a way that facilitates 
present and future reference. 
In practice, the knowledge management strategy has focused on knowledge communication and 
related activities, including: 
 Writing a biannual newsletter that documents experiences and presents accessible stories 
about the program. This approach has now evolved to the point where the stories are based 
on chosen themes relevant to program approaches, such as the present one on synergy. 
 Participating in special studies that are identified as required including, for example, case 
studies on integration of WALA activities. 
 Producing well-written program success stories. 
 Information leaflets about WALA for publicity and other purposes. 
 WALA reviews quarterly PVO reports for consistency and accuracy and provides feedback 
to the PVOs and to CATCH management before finalization. 
 The production of videos (specifically on chili production and marketing and on the role of 
men in maternal and child health made for a couples' conference held by the program). 
The knowledge management strategy of the program dated December 2011 explicitly recognizes (on 
pages 5-6) that attention to development of a strategy that would cover all aspects of knowledge 
management had not been emphasized from the start of the program. In the meantime, program 
activities had generated a great deal of explicit and tacit knowledge that was not being systematized 
or made available for effective lesson learning. 
48 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Nevertheless, although it does not do so explicitly as part of the knowledge management activity, 
WALA has made good use of externally generated material and technical support, not only from 
past allied programs but directly from organizations at the forefront of the fields in which WALA is 
working. 
5.5 Monitoring and Evaluation 
The evaluation team concurs with the positive view that has been generated about the design of the 
WALA M&E system. The main components of the system and its most important reporting outputs 
are described in Annex 18, Tables 19 and 20. 
The C-MIS is updated rigorously. It includes data quality analysis exercises that are apparently 
carried out with sufficient regularity to ensure satisfactory accuracy of the targets. Errors have been 
caught and corrected including, for example, an anomaly that was discovered in the achievement of 
target numbers of household enrolled in VSL groups. This had been completed based on Portfolio 
Forms, the content of which are recorded in the VSL-MIS. However, it became apparent that, since 
the Portfolio Forms record data, specifically the numbers of members at the level of individual VSLs, 
simply adding together all the members resulted in double counting households that have both 
husband and wife as members of (usually53) different VSL groups. This has now been corrected, and 
it explains the fall in achievement levels in some of the tables that report VSL membership over time. 
The annual survey has also been carried out regularly since the baseline was completed: it was 
carried out in 2011 and 2012, resulting in written reports. The M&E section runs the survey 
according to best statistical practice with the assistance of PVO M&E offices. In order to encourage 
objectivity, the PVO staff do not work on the survey in their own area but in those of other PVOs. 
In 2013, the questions were combined with the final evaluation Endline Survey (although there is no 
plan to produce a separate report this year since it is considered redundant alongside the report of 
the final evaluation). 
These instruments are quite complex and they took time to develop and implement, so they were 
not rolled out immediately. In the case of the C-MIS, this led to a backlog of data that needed to be 
entered into the database, but this problem was overcome. In general, the principal instruments 
necessary to report on the achievement of targets have been well designed and well implemented. 
The other instruments used for reporting on quality of interventions have also been well designed. 
The QIVC and the MCHN data forms all include data that reflects the depth and quality of outcomes 
from program activities, as does the Indicator Tracking Table (ITT) 54. In addition, the VSL-MIS was 
designed based on experience elsewhere in the world and concentrates on the most important 
variables that describe the contribution of VSLs to village livelihoods. 
In the case of the VSL-MIS, regular reporting is required for external use by CRS in addition to the 
TQC in CATCH, who regularly aggregates the data from all the PVOs. These are thus also kept 
broadly up to date, and they contain generally good information.55
It is also generally up to PVOs to collect the data and complete forms covering qualitative and 
performance issues. These are intended to be principally for PVOs to monitor their own activities, 
 
53 The study of gender issues in VSL groups that was being undertaken concurrently with the Final Evaluation has 
apparently seen evidence that some families have both husband and wife as members of the same VSL group in some cases. 
The final evaluation team did not see this, so it is leaving it to the gender study to confirm whether this does in fact occur.
54 The M&E manager succinctly defined the ITT as “an extended version of the IPTT in which all routine monitoring 
indicators are captured and aggregated. (It) is a program monitoring tool developed by CRS and its use has been 
recommended by TOPS for Title II programs.” 
55 An exception to this is the question that refers to how many loans made are for productive investments. The final 
evaluation team observed firsthand that it is often completely arbitrary whether a loan is specified as productive versus for 
"business." This problem is well understood by program staff and the productivity of loans reported by CATCH relies not 
on the Monthly Portfolio Forms but on questions in the annual surveys. 
49 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
however, and while they are generally complimentary about the design of the ITT and QIVC forms, 
external pressure to complete them regularly is less, and implementation suffers when work 
pressure builds up. The inconsistent implementation of these forms means the data they provide 
cannot be used to show progress across all the PVOs and over time. 
Similarly, the transmission of MCHN data has not been as planned. In fact, monitoring of MCHN 
activities has been generally inconsistent and although the form mentioned was well designed for use 
by CGVs with support from health promoters, it is not uniformly completed, entered into C-MIS, or 
regularly analyzed. It may be that data are being collected, but it does not appear that they are 
optimally used to assess progress or inform decision-making. 
The overall view therefore is of a very well designed system that is well implemented for reporting 
of targets, but less so in reporting on quality issues where the pressure to collect data regularly has 
been more relaxed. 
5.6 Partnerships 
Partnerships represent an important part of the means to achieve program results. An inclusive 
approach toward national and international partners often leads to having the best technical skills 
and know-how available. Networking with other partners also provides an excellent opportunity for 
a learning culture and for capacity development. It also facilitates sustainability, as the program does 
not depend purely on a time-bound program entity but has advocates that will remain in place after 
the program has ended. Consequently, the success of the program can also be measured through 
gauging the interaction that has taken place with national and international partners. 
The first level of partnership extends to the eight PVOs and CATCH, which are the principal 
delivery channel for program interventions. CATCH (a CRS entity) provides the oversight function 
while the other seven PVOs are responsible for implementation. As stated earlier, the collaboration 
between PVOs and CATCH has been fairly efficient and effective, using established coordination and 
communication structures. 
The program has been implemented in a standardized manner despite some differences in capacities 
between PVOs. All PVOs say they have benefited from participating in this program, particularly the 
smaller ones. Perhaps surprisingly, the results from the quantitative survey and qualitative data 
collection tools do not show a clear pattern that points to a clear stratification in terms of success 
indicators among the PVOs. 
The second level extends to the GoM, which has both provided technical expertise and been 
targeted for training. Other public and private partnerships in Malawi have been formed to provide 
specific training and technical assistance. Examples include Agricane in the field of irrigation and 
ACDI-VOCA in agribusiness. Their performance has been discussed in Chapter 4. CATCH has 
made an overview of its engagement with partner organizations, included as Annex 19. Overall, 
WALA provides a good example of program implementation through a partnership model. 
5.7 Financial Management 
Financial Management 
WALA’s funding comes from three sources: monetization, 202(e), and ITSH. As of September 2013, 
expenditures against a revised current budget of $56,135,526 were 72 percent of the LOA budget. 
WALA does not foresee a high unused balance at the end of the program, although the continuing 
depreciation of the Kwacha and the timing of the approval of the remaining 20 percent of 202(e) 
funds are two factors that may affect WALA’s projected cash balance at the end of June 2014. 
50 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Table 12: Life of program budget data
Budget/Expenses Monetization Section 
202(e)
ITSH Cost 
Share
Total
Original LOA budget 34,886,839 10,276,263 6,318,531 886,596 52,368,229
Current LOA budget 30,186,673 18,311,600 6,750,657 15,161 56,135,526
Expenses as of end of 
Year 4
23,494,365 11,259,730 5,080,609 795,336 40,630,040
Percent LOA budget 
spent end of Year 4
78% 61% 75% 90% 72%
WALA undergoes multiple annual audits including a CRS internal audit, an external audit for non-US 
sub-recipients, and the USAID annual A-133 report. WALA was also included in a US government 
Office of the Inspector General audit of USAID agricultural programs in Malawi in 2013. In addition, 
two of the PVOs are reviewed by their own organization’s internal auditors. There have been no 
major issues identified in the WALA audits, in spite of a lot of turnover among finance staff including 
the departure of the Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) for Finance, Administration and Human 
Resources and the arrival of a new DCOP in July 2013. An example of program financial controls is 
that an instance of fraud in one of the partners was detected through CATCH’s routine internal 
review of PVO expenditures, at a time when the loss was quite small in terms of financial impact. 
There have been no delays in fund transfers from the donor or major budgeting shortfalls. Some 
PVOs noted that there have been some persistent delays in cash flow throughout the life of the 
program. The delays are less of a problem for larger PVOs but can be a constraint on operations for 
small partners. This is attributed in part to the multiple organizational layers in multiple locations 
that funding requests must pass through in both CRS and partner PVOs for approval, as well as 
errors in reporting that delay approvals. A significant factor has also been how three-month funding 
advances to PVOs and reconciliations with CATCH were structured. CATCH has recently 
restructured this system to eliminate a built-in funding gap, and moved from a quarterly to a monthly 
reimbursement system, which should help ensure few interruptions in the flow of cash to PVOs. 
PVO partners report good communication and support from CATCH. CATCH assists PVOs to 
prepare for external audits and respond to audit findings. CATCH personnel visit PVO offices on a 
quarterly basis and hold an annual meeting with all PVO finance staff. CATCH has conducted three 
trainings for PVOs on US government regulations and a financial training for non-financial managers 
to better ensure WALA’s ability to meet USAID requirements. CATCH’s oversight includes 
conducting a financial risk assessment to identify any areas of weakness in a partner, and following up 
by ensuring that each PVO has an institutional plan to strengthen its financial accountability. 
5.8 Commodity Management 
The commodity management system in WALA is a comprehensive system incorporating a number 
of checks to ensure that Title II commodities are delivered to beneficiaries in a consistent and 
reliable manner with no pipeline breaks, few delays, and losses below one percent. There have been 
a few incidents of fraud, which the program detected before large losses occurred. It has performed 
consistently well over the life of the program, and while the total amount of commodities is 
relatively small for a Title II program, WALA has the additional challenge of importing commodities 
through a port in Mozambique, and the overall system requirements are no less. This was confirmed 
by the US Office of the Inspector General audit in 2013, which found few problems with commodity 
management. One PVO reported that its internal auditors found that routine warehouse issues had 
already been addressed because of the close communication with CATCH. 
WALA has paid close attention to training, establishing tracking systems, and monitoring. 
Commodity staff in CATCH conduct monthly monitoring visits to PVOs, which include verification 
of warehouse conditions, review of accounts, and training. PVO partners report that they receive 
good support through regular visits and TWG meetings, and that CATCH maintains good 
51 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
communication. Commodity staff are well trained in comprehensive commodity management 
systems, skills that will remain in Malawi after WALA ends. 
At the beginning of the program, commodity management training was provided to PVO partners. 
Training covered the entire commodity procurement and delivery system to ensure that staff have a 
comprehensive understanding of the system. Refresher trainings are given annually for each PVO, 
along with individual trainings in specific areas of weakness for individual PVOs. WALA provides 
comprehensive guidance for planning, programming, and managing commodities through CRS’ Food 
Assistance Commodity Management Manual (2011) and Guidelines for Food for Work and Food for 
Assets (2010). The main warehouse and all PVO warehouses were visited and found to be clean and 
well organized. 
High staff turnover among CATCH commodity management staff (including the departure of half of 
the staff in 2012) and the PVOs has required frequent retraining, and meant that new staff lacked 
familiarity with systems. This has resulted in some gaps in consistent application of internal controls 
– as noted by the Office of the Inspector General –, which WALA has sought to address through its 
frequent visits. PVOs pointed out that staff changes have led to different guidance on some tasks that 
have caused some minor frustration among partners. 
The reliable and timely supply of food in WALA has facilitated the implementation of the safety net, 
SFP, and FFW activities, which is important to the objective of restoring the health of food aid 
recipients and to the motivation of FFW beneficiaries and achievement of goals. 
5.9 Monetization 
WALA has handled the monetization of commodities well over the life of the program, Several 
factors affected monetization plans in Years Four and Five that presented unique management 
challenges, consumed large amounts of management time, and delayed sales and finalization of the 
Year 5 budgets for PVOs. The most significant challenge was the 49 percent devaluation of the 
Kwacha in 2012 that made arranging a sale difficult due to daily currency fluctuations. CATCH was 
able to arrange a payment schedule with a buyer that protected the program from currency losses, a 
notable achievement given that few countries have had experience with such a dramatic fall in the 
value of its currency. CRS also received approval from FFP to spend down the monetization money 
(in Kwacha) and replenish it with US dollars from US-government-funded and other programs. This 
also helped reduce WALA’s exposure and risk. A second major challenge in Year 5 was when 
unsatisfactory commodity prices prompted the program to remove Crude Degummed Soy Bean Oil 
(CDSO) from the monetization list (with FFP approval) in favor of Hard Red Winter Wheat, only to 
revise the decision due to a subsequent low market price for HRRW. The CDSO was contracted to 
be sold, but before this occurred CRS was notified that the commodity would not be available for 
monetization due to an increase in ocean freight rates. CATCH then entered into discussions with 
FFP to provide 202e funds instead, which have been approved. The negotiation process over 202e 
funds took time, as did the issuance of the authorization letters for 202e funds, which delayed the 
finalization of Year 5 budgets with PVOs until late September. As of late October 2013, CRS was 
waiting for USAID to obligate the remaining 20 percent of the 202e funds. Overall, CRS has 
managed several significant changes in its operating environment in Years 4 and 5 well, avoiding 
financial loss to the program and undue disruption to its PVO partners. 
6. Evaluation Findings 
Findings SO1 – MCHN 
WALA has responded to the majority of the key MCHN issues facing the community. All those 
interviewed felt that issues of frequent disease, maternal and infant death, and child malnutrition had 
been significantly addressed by the activities. The quantitative data reveal impressive improvements 
in child under nutrition prevalence rates. However, some communities are restricted in adoption of 
behavior changes due to lack of access to water, particularly hygiene and sanitation practices and the 
52 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
cultivation of kitchen gardens for enhancing availability of nutritious foods. Food security and access 
to the six food groups were cited as on-going challenges despite the engagement of the majority of 
caregivers in other WALA activities. 
Hygiene and sanitation promotion and CCFLS for training of caregivers on food processing, as well 
as the promotion of fuel-efficient stoves, were the activities consistently stated as most adopted and 
preferred by communities. The quantitative data confirm this, with results of high uptake of stoves 
and improvement in complementary feeding practices. 
In “model” sites, good coordination has been achieved with HSAs, who feel their work burden has 
been reduced due to improved community practices. They strongly appreciate WALA’s ability to 
reach all pregnant mothers and children under five in their catchment areas at the household level 
with consistent messages, which is beyond the scope of MoH staffing and resources. For example, 
WALA helped bring GMP to the community through CCFLS. 
However, WALA has not managed to orient and fully engage HSAs everywhere, which has proved a 
constraint to programming in some areas. The MTE recommended training HSAs to the same level 
as health promoters. While WALA has tried to orient as many HSAs as possible, a comprehensive 
training for all has not been considered possible due to time and financial constraints. This is one 
consequence of the program being spread over such a wide area: there are too many HSAs to train. 
Village Health Committees (VHCs) have received minimal, if any, orientation and are inadequately 
engaged in WALA. PVOs were not asked to engage VHCs until very late in the program, despite the 
program’s original intention to build their capacity. This has been a missed opportunity and leaves a 
gap at the time of handover, when they could be a highly useful resource for ensuring sustainability 
of the activities and outcomes. 
At district level, good collaboration and engagement in WALA were reported consistently by MoH 
staff, with sharing of plans and information, coordination, and opportunities for joint supervision. 
WALA follows MoH guidelines on IYCF and UNICEF/WHO key practices guidance, and has worked 
closely with MoH in developing training modules to ensure consistency of messaging. 
Despite working through several layers, the training-of-trainers model was considered effective by all 
involved in the program. The evaluation found that accurate messages have reached a wide number 
of people. The modules are an important resource for CGVs and have been well received, with the 
messages considered appropriate and useful by the community. 
The majority of CGVs have volunteered for up to five years with few incentives. The issue of small, 
non-financial incentives for CGVs was raised in the MTE as a recommended action, however very 
little has been done to address this and it has remained a challenge throughout the program. PVOs 
state resource constraints as the major obstacle. 
The slow rollout of modules, largely due to TQC turnover and delays in finalizing and printing 
modules, has been a challenge and has meant that instead of finishing in Year 3 as planned, the last 
module is still being rolled out in the final year. This has negatively affected plans to graduate CGVs 
(which has not happened yet) and to support a gradual handover to the communities and the MoH. 
Findings SO2 – AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming, VSL and Agribusiness 
Design 
 CA is viewed by beneficiaries and agricultural experts interviewed to be appropriate for the 
setting and context of southern Malawi, although a shortage of feed and mulching material is 
clear based on the evaluation team’s observations.
53 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 Initial targeting of very poor households with chronically ill and/or OVCs has moved toward 
more inclusive self-selection of all households in selected districts. The endline data show 
that WALA beneficiaries had higher acreage than non-WALA respondents. 
 By design, some communities receive substantially more assistance than others do. One 
community may receive direct investments in irrigation plus FFW schemes in night 
reservoirs, fishponds (training, fingerlings), and watershed development, while other 
communities only receive training in AgNRM. 
Implementation 
 The use of the volunteer (Care Group) model has mobilized a large number of people in the 
target areas. It has been fairly efficient, although more support for lead farmers could have 
been envisaged. 
 Due to late recruitment of TQCs for livestock and fish farming and three changes in AgNRM 
TQC, there were delays in producing manuals (Standard Operating Guidelines) and clear 
instructions to PVOs. 
 The TWGs for AgNRM, irrigation and livestock/ fish farming are functioning well, with 
frequent communication and exchange of experiences. 
 WALA collaborates well with counterparts in MoAFS (e.g., in extension, irrigation, livestock 
and research stations, and NAC). 
Achievements 
 Close to 80 percent of the targeted households have received training in new agricultural 
technologies. The adoption rate has been below target, although progress was made. 
 Popular technologies adopted by WALA beneficiaries include: ridge realignment and 
Sasakawa (One-One); inter-cropping/ mixed cropping; pit/basin planting in combination with 
compost manure; and mulching in combination with minimum tillage. 
 From WALA beneficiary households, six percent benefited from livestock and fish farming 
activities; three percent from the irrigation component, based on more than 400 hectares of 
newly irrigated land; and six percent from soil and water conservation treatment activities 
(over 2000 hectares total). There is clear overlap between the communities that profit from 
livestock and fish farming, irrigation and watershed development activities, and FFW. 
Behavior Change 
 Behavior change in the promoted agricultural technologies has been observed although 
adoption is slower than anticipated. This conforms to expectations, as it takes time for 
benefits to show a clear payoff. The knowledge transfer is there, but adoption is often only 
partial – adopting one or two technologies that are easy to integrate in traditional practices, 
such as intensification of crop cultivation through 75cm spacing of ridges (instead of 90cm or 
1 meter) and applying “Sasakawa.” 
Capacity Development/ Extension 
 The extension model includes a training-of-trainers (TOT) model that targets FEFs as 
trainers, though they mostly do not interact with beneficiaries directly. FEFs are in return 
requested to provide the real TOT to lead farmers who will interact with the beneficiaries 
with very few resources. This “TOT in the second level” is a watered-down approach and 
seems to have been adopted for the program to reach the high targets. 
 There is a lack of suitable IEC material (including posters, flipcharts, etc.) for FEFs and lead 
farmers. Much of the training material is targeted to better-educated readers and is in 
English. 
 Frequent staff changes have occurred in CATCH and PVOs at expert and management 
levels, which has delayed program implementation. 
 Demonstration plots are used as the main learning tool for FEFs and lead farmers during the 
rainy season, but are said not to be utilized to their full extent due to lack of (free) seeds. 
The 2012 dry spell and economic crisis may have exacerbated this. 
54 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 While training in PHHS has been provided, the evaluation team (similar to the MTE Team) 
observed that most of the proposed interventions were deemed unaffordable to WALA 
beneficiaries. 
IR 2.2 – VSL 
 The VSL system is very popular within the program and among the members taking part. 
 Most of the official indicator targets (total amount saved, use of loans for productive 
purposes and number of clients) are on course to be broadly met. 
 The target number of men included has not been, and will not be, met. A special study on 
gender in the VSLs is being implemented separately from this evaluation. 
 The introduction of PSPs has been generally successful. 
 There is broad satisfaction amongst VSL members with their PSPs. 
 The establishment of PSP networks has taken place. 
 VSLs provide significant income (although small in absolute amounts) and have significant 
livelihoods impacts on households. 
 VSLs may not be appropriate for the poorest of households that do not have sufficient 
resources that will allow them to save, even in small amounts, on a regular basis. 
 There is some variation in the quality of the VSLs, the way they keep their records, and the 
extent to which they comply with recommended best practice. 
 During the evaluation fieldwork, some VSL members indicated that they felt pressured to 
take out loans that they do not really need. 
 EASPM responds to a real need and is well directed. Members seem to have taken on board 
the simple messages that the EASPM training provides, though it was difficult to ascertain the 
extent to which it is put into practice. 
 This activity is sustainable. 
IR 2.3 – Agribusiness 
 The agribusiness indicators referring to cultivation of at least two priority products and 
number of individuals enrolled in marketing groups are either nearly or fully achieved. 
 The indicator for participation in collective marketing will likely be slightly under-achieved. 
 The agribusiness component has focused mainly on training small farmers to carry out 
farming as a business, providing training and demonstration of the advantages of collective 
marketing, and the collective purchase of inputs. 
 The field work suggests that collective marketing has been noticeably less successful in 
remote areas. 
 Although the scope of the training may have been a little less than originally foreseen, in 
practice it was generally appropriate and many farmers stated that they had absorbed the 
messages. 
 There is broad acceptance and satisfaction among farmers with the collective marketing 
message but there were some notable exceptions. These included farmers who were 
disappointed by the chili marketing efforts in 2013 and some in clubs that experienced 
problems marketing other crops as successfully as hoped. 
 Many farmers who were disappointed with collective marketing in 2013 have shown 
resilience, understanding the dangers of participating in markets and continuing to be 
motivated – not only for collective marketing but also specifically for chili production. 
 Marketing fairs provide one of the main formal means of putting farmers and buyers in 
contact. 
 They have evolved appropriately over the life of WALA and proven popular amongst the 
farmers. 
 No way of assuring the future of marketing fairs has yet been identified. 
 The introduction of ASPs is a worthwhile attempt to encourage sustainability of assistance 
to marketing clubs and clusters. 
55 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 WALA will have to work hard to bring all ACAs up to ASP status and even harder to ensure 
that ASPs are consolidated in their work before the program withdraws. It would have been 
better if there had been more time for this system to be introduced, implemented, and 
consolidated. 
 ASPs have a more complicated job than PSPs and probably needed more time than PSPs to 
be introduced. In practice, they have had less. 
 The development of a network for ASPs is also well behind that for the PSPs. 
 Clubs and clusters are more likely to be sustained if they are successful in delivering to their 
members access to cheaper inputs and to collective marketing. The attempt to formalize 
them into cooperatives may help this process, but it is the quality of the work done by the 
members and their leaders that will be the final determinant of success. 
Findings SO3 – Disaster Risk Reduction 
Strengthened Mechanisms for Disaster Response 
 DRR has strengthened the capacity of local government structures and led to an organized 
approach to preparedness and response at the community level. 
 Revitalized ACPCs are confident of their training skills, engaged in training VCPCs, and able 
to respond to VCPC reports of disasters. 
 District-level DRR personnel have higher-quality DRR training materials than they could 
produce on their own because of the program. 
 WALA is an active contributor at the national level to disaster assessments and maintains 
good communication at all levels. 
 All VCPCs engage in a messages and activities recommended in the training. 
 The stronger VCPCs are well linked with other WALA technical groups, which helps them 
integrate DRR-specific messages into agriculture and health activities. 
 Weaker VCPCs tend to work in isolation from other groups. 
 Assistance to help VCPCs broaden their scope of activities will aid sustainability by keeping 
their contributions to the community fresh and up to date. 
 The late start has not allowed VCPCs enough time to develop as organizations. 
 Funding levels for DRR activities were significantly less than other SOs and constrained 
implementation and the provision of training materials to VCPCs and ACPCs. 
Food insecure households have enhanced capacity to withstand shocks and stresses. 
 Safety net rations have enabled some of the most vulnerable to improve their health and 
livelihood status and reduce reliance on ganyu.
 FFW has helped food insecure households and supported infrastructure such as roads and 
irrigation, which provide economic returns and support resilience. 
 Households receiving food rations (and thus more vulnerable) are engaged with other 
WALA groups that can improve their skills, knowledge, and long-term food security. 
Perceived reliance on ganyu has decreased, while endline data do not reflect a significant 
change. This may indicate that poor households are less dependent on ganyu for daily food 
needs but still use it for other purchases. 
 According to village leaders and beneficiaries, there are many more vulnerable households 
eligible for safety net assistance than there are food rations available. 
7. Conclusions and Recommendations 
Conclusions – SO1 MCHN 
Design and Implementation 
 SO1 was effective in offering a preventative approach to under nutrition while including 
responsive components (CCFLS and SFP) for children whose nutritional status is deteriorating. 
56 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 A key to its success has been the extended reach of the community-based Care Group 
implementation model, with knowledge, resources, and services accessible to all pregnant 
women and caregivers of under-5 children in the community. 
 The focus on demonstration in CCFLS, on the construction of stoves and hygiene and sanitation 
infrastructure, and the promotion of community-based GMP, which enabled earlier identification 
of children whose weight is faltering, have been strong positive elements. 
 The quantitative data suggest that the Care Group model may still have some way to go before 
it will achieve “saturation coverage” in WALA program areas. 
 While engagement with the MoH has been strong at the district level throughout the program 
areas, it has been variable at field level, with HSAs well incorporated in some areas and less in 
others, and VHCs minimally engaged. This is largely attributed to the broad geographical reach 
of the program, combined with a lack of financial resources and time to train and incorporate all 
HSAs in the program areas or extend orientation to VHCs. 
 The MCHN sector has had inadequate responsibility for ensuring strong performance of SFP 
within WALA, and this activity, largely delegated to the commodities team for oversight of food 
distribution, has been poorly structured and implemented. 
Capacity Development and Extension 
 Leadership for implementation has been largely delegated to health promoters and CGVs based 
in their own communities, which has further contributed to the sense of community ownership 
and sustainability. 
 It was noted throughout that the MoH does not have the capacity for intensive household reach, 
nor to organize CCFLS. In this way, WALA has greatly assisted the outreach capacity of the 
MoH. 
Recommendations – SO1 MCHN 
Design and Implementation 
 PVOs should aim to start in all sites in the first two years rather than through phased expansion. 
This would enable consistent rollout of modules across the district at the same time, provide 
sufficient time for all to take on messages and adopt behavior changes, and facilitate Care Group 
graduation and MoH-supported handover in Year 5. It might require targeting fewer GVHs/TAs. 
 Availability of water for hygiene, sanitation, and kitchen gardens and safe water for household 
consumption were emphasized as key constraints to effective program implementation and 
greater impact. A future program should incorporate interventions to improve access to safe 
water. 
 Although the technical elements of SFP remain the responsibility of MoH, WALA should assume 
greater responsibility for providing technical support to the MoH in SFP, as well as ensure 
effective performance monitoring of sites where it is distributing SFP food. Ideally, oil should be 
mixed with CSB as a pre-mix prior to distribution to ensure the child receives the correct ration 
and that oil is not diverted into the household pot. 
Capacity Development and Extension 
 A greater engagement of the MoH should be sought from the beginning of the program to 
ensure ownership, inclusion of HSAs and VHCs in activities and training, and effective and timely 
handover. 
 CGVs should be recognized for their work and commitment and rewarded with small incentives 
over the course of the program. Suggestions given to the evaluation team include bags, 
occasional drinks at meetings, and certificates. 
Conclusions – SO2 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock, Fisheries, VSL, and Agribusiness 
Design and Implementation 
57 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: The package of relevant WALA interventions, such 
as promoting improved seed varieties, crop cultivation and soil conservation technologies linked 
to CA, is relevant and appropriate for southern Malawi, while there is a clear limitation to its 
expansion based on shortage of feeder and mulching material. 
 AgNRM: The component started during the first year but did not progress well due to TQC 
changes. As a consequence, PVOs initially lacked strategic guidance. 
 AgNRM: The sheer breadth of activities to implement, at times referred to by WALA staff as 
WALA’s “buckshot” approach, has stretched WALA’s capacity on the ground, which reduced 
potential impacts on program targets. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: WALA uses a volunteer support model but has not 
invested enough in its success through training, repeat-training, and IEC material. This has led to 
an inability to maximize opportunities for transfer of knowledge and the adoption of promoted 
technologies and behaviors. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Equity is an issue with different support packages 
provided to different WALA communities and households. As such, various WALA models and 
pathways to development can be considered to be implemented. The program has monitored 
the success of the various support models 
 VSL: The very poorest households, which are supposed to be a focus of the program, may not be 
able to benefit from this activity even though the value of shares is already very low in some 
VSLs. There is not much that is within the power of this component that can be done about this 
before the end of the program. 
 Agribusiness: In general, caution needs to be exercised when creating expectations amongst 
farmers, as did the chili marketing agreement. Where risks are involved, they need to be made 
clear. 
 Agribusiness: It would have been preferable if WALA had included a greater number of buyers in 
its activities so it could reduce reliance on those few with whom it had built relationships. 
Achievements 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Results are mixed. Some progress has been made in 
areas such as irrigation and the adoption of new technologies, but the contribution from these 
components to overall food security status as measured by the two population-based indicators 
(HDDS and MOAHFP) has been limited. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: The external context has likely had a significant 
effect on the results. Events in 2012 saw crop failures in southern Malawi and an economic crisis 
– mainly resulting from an immediate 50 percent devaluation of the Kwacha versus the USD, as 
decided by the GoM. 
 VSL: In general, this activity has been both popular and successful. 
 VSL: Most of the targets have been met or almost met. 
 VSL: The target number of men in groups has not been met and will not be. Nevertheless, when 
the evaluation team reviewed the possible reasons for this, it concluded that men are in fact 
interested in this activity and their relative absence from meetings does not detract from its 
reach or effectiveness. 
 Agribusiness: The agribusiness activities have made an important contribution to the income of 
participating farmers in terms of improved prices from collective marketing and reduced costs 
through collective purchase of inputs. 
 Agribusiness: The proportion of group member farmers participating in collective marketing is a 
little lower than targeted but there are one or two special circumstances contributing to this 
result and the evaluation team does not consider this a serious issue. 
 Agribusiness: Neither is it surprising that collective marketing is less successful in remote areas. 
 Agribusiness: Some of the collective marketing disappointments this year have helped to deliver 
the message of dangers involved in working with the market and taught farmers the need for 
caution when dealing with buyers. 
58 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Behavior Change 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Behavior change has been generally slow, particularly 
on the adoption of certain promoted CA technologies. 
Capacity Development and Extension 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Staff changes at CATCH and PVO, including changes 
to TQCs, have negatively affected the rollout and coherent vision for program priorities. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Lead farmers, who are volunteers, have received too 
little support from WALA to become real agents of change benefitting other smallholder 
farmers. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: WALA is seriously challenged by a lack of IEC 
material. While several manuals (Standard Operating Guidelines and technical manuals) have 
been produced, often for each technical area, simple extension tools to help the learning process 
on the ground (posters, leaflets, drawings) are missing. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Demonstration plots are a good learning tool for 
hands-on transfer of practical knowledge. Lack of inputs after the first year may have led to a 
decrease in the effective use of demo plots. The use of demo plots by a FEF and several lead 
farmers seems to provide a practical solution for engaging volunteers, although it leads to 
decreased visibility of promoted technologies. 
 VSL: PSPs are providing a needed service. The system should ensure that the PSPs remain 
motivated to continue and expand their work with the groups and be motivated to start new 
groups. 
 VSL: Although networks have been established, it is likely that they will need some kind of 
technical backstopping in the future. This is not yet assured. 
Recommendations – SO2 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock, Fisheries, VSL, and Agribusiness 
Design & Implementation 
 AgNRM: WALA should focus on fewer innovations and provide more in-depth support to their 
adoption. The design should be kept simple, with a focus on an extension program. 
Consideration should be given to allowing the communities some power of choice over which 
technologies they favor, to increase chances for success. 
 Irrigation: In addition to site-specific irrigation technologies such as gravity-fed, river-diverted 
irrigation and treadle pump, WALA should consider other technologies such as drip irrigation 
and garden sacks. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: A workshop is suggested to discuss the impact and 
sustainability of various WALA models (e.g., maximum interaction versus minimum interaction 
models) to inform the content of future Title II programs that build on experiences and lessons 
learned from WALA. 
 VSL: It may be appropriate to remind some of the VSL groups about the reason why some best 
practices, such as maximum individual loan amounts, are recommended, and encourage them to 
be followed. 
Capacity Development and Extension 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: It should become a priority to develop extension 
material (e.g., simplified messages from the CAHW training manual). While this would be too 
late to benefit the current program beneficiaries, it would be ready to use for the next phase of 
Title II programs or by the GoM. 
 AgNRM, Irrigation, Livestock and Fish Farming: Outsourcing of essential technical backstopping 
(similar to support provided under Agricane) may be considered if dependence on individuals 
becomes a risk to achieving results. 
 VSL: The program should follow up on leads to establish long-term technical backstopping for 
the VSL PSP networks. 
59 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
 Agribusiness: WALA should continue to work hard to find an entity that can continue to organize 
the marketing fairs. 
 Agribusiness: WALA should continue to work hard to train the ASPs and ensure their comfort 
within their scope of work and their income-earning activities before the withdrawal of the 
program. 
Conclusions – SO3 Disaster Risk Reduction 
Design and Implementation
 Overall, WALA has performed well under SO 3. It has built community capacity in disaster 
preparedness and response, strengthened linkages among GoM DRR mechanisms, provided 
reliable safety nets to the most vulnerable households and opportunities to reduce their reliance 
on ganyu, and has facilitated the construction of infrastructure that has positive economic and 
environmental impacts on communities. 
 Many vulnerable households with elderly, chronically ill, or caring for OVCs may find it difficult 
to find the time to participate fully in other WALA activities as intended without additional 
support. 
 The FFW activities are appropriate and play an important complementary role in DRR and in 
improving productivity in communities.
 WALA uses a combination of defined criteria for participation and community-based targeting 
that appears to work well in some of the communities observed, but does not appear to be 
applied uniformly by all communities. In some communities, it may be that large-scale programs 
require more people than vulnerable households can supply, and therefore are opened up to 
wider participation.
Capacity Development and Extension 
 The late start in 2012 means that many VCPC groups have not had adequate time to build 
strong capacity (e.g., carrying out portions of their action plans, mobilizing funds) or change the 
perspective on DRR among the majority of households in their communities.
 Their future ability to function as effective CBOs depends in part on continuing support from 
ACPCs and DCPCs. The new national DRR policy provides funding for preparedness and 
response and prioritizes activities that WALA has been addressing since 2012. With appropriate 
refresher training, WALA VCPCs should be well positioned to take advantage of the small grants 
scheme under the new policy.
Recommendations – SO3 Disaster Risk Reduction 
Design and Implementation 
 The poorest households may not have the additional time to devote to participation in WALA 
activities. This suggests that the program may need to tailor additional technical and/or material 
support to the time and labor constraints of the most vulnerable households.
 Keep DRR as an integrated activity but provide for a separate budget for training and 
community-based risk reduction activities, as well as training materials. 
 If funds are inadequate to carry out training and other activities, focus on more disaster-prone 
areas. 
 Safety Nets: The next program should consider significantly increasing the number of safety net 
beneficiaries, especially the chronically ill. 
 Safety Nets: The program should consider providing support that is more intensive to safety net 
beneficiaries to help them engage in other program activities that will reduce their vulnerability. 
 FFW: Work with FFW communities on formulating infrastructure maintenance plans that have an 
organized approach to maintenance, articulating roles, responsibilities, and a timetable, especially 
with regard to roads. 
60 
Final Evaluation CRS Malawi WALA Program 
Capacity Development and Extension 
 During refresher training prior to exit, ensure that VCPCs, including those already trained in 
proposal writing, have the necessary skills to apply successfully to the small grants scheme that 
will be funded under the new national DRR policy. 
 Refresher training should help VCPCs to find ways to identify and incorporate new 
recommendations into their repertoire to maintain community interest in their message. 
 Prior to program exit, increase the number of DRR training manuals provided to ACPCs.