Title II Projects Final 
Evaluation 
F~nal Report 
(Volume I) 
<Prepared 6y 
(])evefopment Studies }lssociates 
.,. 
December 2001 
Addis Ababa 
·-
·.! 
·· ~ 
·-> 
CONTENT 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................•....•.•.....•.......•.....•.................................. I 
I. INTRODUCTION .....................•..•....•.......••..•....•....•..•.......•..•...••...•....• -.....•.... 1 
l . l BACKGROUND TO TITLE II PROGRAM .•••.•••.••••...••••••.•.•••.••.•.•.••.••.••••.•......••••.....•••• 1 
l .2 PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION ·················· ··-···············-·····································2 
l.3 FOOD SECURITY ATTHECOUNTRYLEVEL ........................................................... 2 
1.4 FOOD SECURITY IN TITLE II PROGRAM AREAS .•.•.••••••••. ; .•••.••.••••..•.•..•.•.•.••.......... 6 
l .5 TITLE II PROGRAM IN THE CONTEXT OF NATIONAL FOOD SECURITY STRATEGY . 8 
METHODOLOGY ...........•..•...........•......•......•••....•..••.......•......•.•.........•......... 10 
2.1 HOUSEHOLD QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY •....•.•.•••.••••••.•••••••••••••••.•....•..•••...••.••••..•••. 10 
2. J. J Sampling Frame ......................................................................................... J 0 
2.J.2 Sample Design ........................................................................................... JO 
2.J.3 Determination of Sample Size ................................................ : ........... , ....... JO 
2.J.4 Selection of Primary Sampling Units ......................................................... J J 
2.J.5 Fresh Listing of Households and Selection of Households for Interview .. J2 
2.J.J Sampling Frame ................... _ ..................................................................... J 2 
2.J.2 Sample Design ............................................................................................ J2 
2.J.3 Determination of Sample Size ..................................................................... J 2 
2. J .4 Sample Selection of Primary Sampling Units ............................................. J 3 
2. J.5 Fresh Listing of Households and Selection of Households for Inierview J 3 
2.2 PARTICIPATORY SEMI-STRUCTURED SURVEYS .................................................. 13 
2.3 SECONDARY SOURCES ....................................................................................... 14 
2.4 DATA ANALYSIS .....•...•..•••.......••.••..............•..••••.••••••.•..•••.....•.....••••..••.•.•..•..•...••• 14 
2.4.J Anthropometric Measurements ................................................................... J4 
2. 4.2 Comparative Analysis ................................................................................ J 5 
III. TITLE II PROGRAM RESULTS .................................................................... 19 
3.2 PROJECT0UTPUTS: A REVIEWOFACTIJALPERFORMANCE COMPAREDTO 
TARGETS ........................................................................................................... 22 
3.2.J Crop, Livestock and Natural Resources Outputs ................................. 22 
3.2.2 Health and Water Outputs .............................................. : .......................... 7 J 
3.2.3 Physical Irifrastructure Outputs .......................•..•...................................... 76 
3.3 EFFECTS ........................................................ - ................................................... 79 
3.3.I Intermediate Results: Aggregate Picture .....•.............•............................... 80 
3.3.2 Intermediate Results - Africare ...........•...................................................... 88 
3.3.3 Intermediate Results - CARE ..................................................................... 89 
3.3.4 Intermediate Results- Catholic Relief Service (CRS) ..... ._ ........................ 93 
3.3.5 Intermediate Results - EOCIDICAC ....................................................... I OJ 
3.3.6 Intermediate Results - Food for the Hungry International (FHI) ............ J 05 
3.3. 7 Intermediate Results - Relief Society of Ti gray (REST) ........................... J 09 
3.3.8 Intermediate Results - Save The Children (SCF) ..................................... J J 3 
3.3.9 Intermediate Results - WVUE ................................................................... J J8 
3.4 TITLE II PROGRAM IMPACTS .•..••••.•••..•••.•...••.•••••••••••••...•••••••••.••••••••..•.•..•....•.•. 123 
3.4.J lntroduction .............................................................................................. J24 
3.4.2 Overall Picture .......................................................................................... J 25 
3.4.3 SORESULTS- AFRICARE ...•.••••.•..•..•.•.•••..••...••••.•••.••.•..••••..•.••..•.....•....••....•.. 128 
.• : 
'• 
~: 
-· i . :.:~ 
' . c:;J 
r .. ! 
!' . ... , t:.:._i 
.. ..:~ 
.. :~ h~) 
1~4~ ::·., r=:: 
3.4.4 SO Results-CARE .................................................................................. 129 . 
3.4.5 SO Results- CRS ....•. - .............................................•.................................. 132 
3.4.6 SO Results-EOC ..................................................................................... 135 
3. 4. 7 SO Results - FHI ·--·············· -················--····--······· ···································1 38 
3.4.8 SO Results- REST ................................................................................... 141 
3.4.9 SO Results- SCFIUSA ............................................................................ 145 
3.4.10 SOResults-WVUE .............................................................................. 147 
3.5 OTHER TITLE II RESULTS ••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••• 150 
3.5.1 Community Participation .......................................................................... 150 
3.5.2 Gender Aspects ......................................................................................... 152 
3 .6 OPERA TING ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................ 152 
3.6.1 Extemal ..................................................................................... ; ............... 152 
3.6.2Jnternal ...................................•............................. -·················-················· 154 
IV. LESSONS LEARNT: SOME DISCUSSION ............................................ 155 
4.1 RELEVANCE AND APPROPRIATENESS •••..••.•••..••.•.••.••••••••••••••••••.•••.••••••••••••••••••• 155 
4.1.1 Crop and Livestock Production ................................................................ 156 
4.1.2 Health .......•................................................................................................ 159 
4.1.3 Natural Resources .................................................................................... 160 
4 .2 SUSTAINABILITY OF TITLE II ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS •••••••••.•.•..••..•••••••.•.•••.. 161 
4.3 SELF-RELIANCE AT THE HOUSEHOLD LEVEL ••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••..••••••••••••••••• 162 
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................ 163 
5.1 ASSUMPTIONS VIOLA TED .................................................................................. 163 
5.2 MAIN FINDINGS ••••• -........................................................................................... 163 
5.3 LESSONS LEARNT •••.•••.••.••..••.....•.....•....••...•••.•••••••••••••••.•••.•.•.••....•....••....•••••••.•.. 165 
5 .4 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 169 
I 
~ 
. 
/':! 
~~~ -.:51 
·~%1 \ ' ... ;'R:; 
:-:~~! 
··-.·: 
~/~.i 
:·~~A 
.~~ :f;;. 
~~ .:.;.::;t 
~~::. 
~ 
::::·· 
•. : 
.. 
;:-:~ 
.... :;..,: 
'·! 
·- ; 
,, ' 
.. 
·-
7 
f 1 
§3'\ 
;:;~; 
. ~. : 
:. .. "' 
~~ 
§] 
< 
....... ···:.1 
~ 
;~ ~ 
; 
•' 
! .. . , 
i .. ~ 
; ·} .. 
~--
List of Tables 
Table 3. I: Actual Performance of Crop Production Related Activities 
Compared to Plan - Africare 
Table 3.2: Crop Production Related Activities of CARE 
Table 3.3: Outputs of CARE Soil and Water Conservation Activities in 
I 997/98 - 2000/01 Period 
Table 3.4: Selected Conservation Related Survey Results in CARE Projects 
Table 3.5: Crop Production Related Activities of CRS (Oi-omia, Tigray & 
Harari) 
Table 3.6: Outputs of CRS Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the 
Period I 997 /98 - 2000/0 I 
Table 3.7: Selected Conservation Related Survey Results in CRS Projects 
Table 3.8: Actual Performance of Crop Production Related Activities of 
EOC 
Table 3.9: Outputs of EOC Livestock Activities in the 1997 /98 - 2000/0 I 
Table 3. I 0: Outputs of EOC Soil and Water Conservation Activities: I 997 /98 
-2000/01 
Table 3. I I: Selected Conservation Related Survey Results in the EOC 
Projects 
Table 3.12: Crop Production Related Activities ofFHI 
Table 3.13: Output of Livestock Activities ofFHI Projects in the 1997/98-
2000/01 Period 
Table 3.14: Outputs of FHI Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the 
Period 1997 /98 - 2000/01 · 
Table 3.15: Selected Conservation Related Survey Results in the FHI Projects 
Table 3.16: Crop Production Related Activities of REST 
Table 3.17: Outputs of REST Livestock Activities in the 1997 /98 - 2000/01 
Table 3. I 8: Outputs of REST Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the 
Period I 997 /98 - 2000/01 
Page 
22 
24 ~ 
27 
29 
30 
32 
35 
37 
40 
42 
45 
48 
50 
52 
53 
54 
56 
·58 
, ~ ' ~-!~~: 
... - Page .-::;. Table 3.19: Soil and Water Conservation in Central Tigray Zone 59 t~~:~~ "- .::: 
Table3.20: Selected Conservation Related Survey Results in the REST 60 . ·' Projects 
.- .; Table 3.21: Output Compared to Plan for Livestock Activities in the Period 62 
I 997/98- 200-01 - SCF/USA Projects ,. .·' 
,;;:i Table 3.22: Crop Production Related Activities of WVI 64 
m~ ,JD.;.. 
Table 3.23: Outputs of WVl/E Livestock Activities in the Period 1997 /98 - ·"":·~·1. 66 -~~ 
::i.~ 
2000/01 ·.·:~~~ ·-·~ 
-?J Outputs of WVl/E Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the :;:j~ Table3.24: 68 . ~:; Period 1997/98 - 2000/01 ::.:~ 
i~ :rq Table 3.25: Selected Conservation Related Survey Results of WVl/E Projects 70 ;,!'-::..: .:~.~-:- . . ·'.".: 
~~ ~3 
-~.:-/! 
:--:~::-:-:: 
..... 'S Table 3.26: OAP/Title II Health Interventions 72 
·1 :-:-t~ 
\;--~. ~ 
. ~· 
Table 3.27: Major Health Outputs the Cooperating Sponsors 74 
. ; Table 3.28: Major Water Outputs the Cooperating Sponsors 75 . :-
Table 3.29: CS Performance in Physical and Social Infrastructures Plan vs 77 
Actual for the Period 1998/99 - 2000/0 I 
... Table 3.30: Results on IRl indicators 82 .. { : . •,·~ . .. Table J.3 I: Values on Three of the Five Indicator oflntermediate Result Two 84 
Table 3.32: Results on IR3 indicators 86 
Table 3.33: IR 1 Results of CARE Title II Projects 90 ... ·.·: 
~-~~~ ..: .. _ 
-:~-, Table 3.34: Changes between 1997 and 200 I in Respect to Ownership of 91 -...... Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for ;~.~~; 
; 
CARE Project 
...... . . ' Table 3.35: IR3 Results of the CARE Title II Projects 92 ., 
-~ .. Table 3.36: IR I Results of CRS Title II Projects 95 
-·~"-~ ::::. 
:~ ,~,~ 97 .. ·:-! Table 3.37: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of ' .. -: Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for CRS . . Project 
Table 3.38: IR3 Results of the CRS Title II Projects 99 
-~;.~ ~?5 
·J ~ ;~ \·-:-
J;\·_-.... 
E~: 
' 
I ~ 
·•. :~:-.· : 
~-~:?. Page 
,. = . . : Table 3.39: IRI Results ofEOC/DICAC 102 
Table 3.40: Changes between 1997 and 200 I in Respect to Ownership of 103 
Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for EOC 
Project 
;. 
Table 3.41: IR3 Results of the EOC Title II Projects 104 
··z:C"" Table 3.42: IRI Results ofFHI Title II Projects 106 ~;~j :=::. -:.: 
. . Table 3.43: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of 107 .. . Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for FHI 
-:-! . ' Project 
-~¥~ Table 3.44: ~~~:· 
IR3 Results of the FHI Title II Projects 108 
:-~~ ~~,· Table 3.45: IRl Results of REST Title II Projects 110 
---· . . . .. . Table 3.46: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of 111 
Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for 
REST Project 
Table 3.47: IR3 Results of the REST Title II Projects 112 
Table 3.48: IRI Results of SCF/USA Title II Projects 114 
Table 3.49: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of 115 
Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for 
SCF /USA Project 
Table 3.50: Average Milk Production in Liben and Filtu 115 
~~ Table 4.51: Lactating Cows, Camels and Goats in Liben and Filtu Wereda 116 
·-:-~ 
Table 3.52: IR3 Results of the SCF/USA Title II Projects 117 
Wi 
.:·_·; 
.. Table 3.53: IR I Results of WVl/E Title II Projects 120 ' 
Table 3.54 : Changes between 1997 and 200 I in Respect to Ownership of 121 :·· : . ..... Livestock, Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for WVI 
. ::; Project 
.;:.-~ .. .., Table3.55: IR3 Results of the WVE/E Title II Projects 122 ·~· :. 
~~.:.:..-? 
· .... ~ 
- Table 3.56: Project Funds and Resources Actually Availed Compared to Plan 129 
Table 3.57: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 131 
Strategies in 2000 in CARE Title II Projects 
'1 (?JI ~: 
'%'\ ,-- -i 
. I 
·. ! Page 
::·it! 
Table 3.58: Child S_tunting in 2001 Compared to 1997 for CRS Title II Projects 132 
Table 3.59: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 134 
Strategies in 2000 in CRS Title II Projects 
Table 3.60: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in EOC Title II Projects 135 ;. 
.;-;.f Table 3.61: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 137 
~ ~ 
Strategies in 2000 in EOC Title II Projects 
... 
Table 3.62: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in FHI Title II Projects 138 
. . Table 3.63: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe 140 .: :: t•: 
Coping Strategies in 2000 in FHI Title II Projects 
)~ ~ Table 3.64: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in REST Title II Projects 141 
~~ !!,fj-.. 
.~ .. Table3.65: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use .. of Severe Coping 144 . Strategies in 2000 in REST Title II Projects 
Table 3.66: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in SCF/USA Title II Projects 145 
Table 3.67: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 147 
Strategies in 2000 in SCF/USA Title II Projects 
Table 3.68: Stunting Prevalence in 1997 and 2001 in WVl/E Title II Projects 147 .. 
Table 3.69: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 149 
Strategies in 2000 in WVI/E Title II Projects 
Table 3.70: Project Funds and Resources Actually Availed Compared to Plan 153 
Table 5.1: A summary of SO and IR results of Title II projects by CS 166 
§ ~~ - . .. List of Figures ... 
.. Figure 1 : Stunting Prevalence in 200 I Compared to 1997 127 
Figure 2: Food Shortage in 2001 Compared to 1997 127 
... Figure 3: The Use of Severe Coping Strategies in 1997 and 2001 127 
. .. 
Figure 4: Factors Influencing Nutritional Status of a Typical 157 .. Ethiopian Rural HH and Their Inter-relationships 
Figure 5: OAP Activities under Implementation to Improve 158 
Nutritional Status of a Project Household 
·~-::· ~: ·: 
·:· 
t~~ 
fl},·· 
; ! 'l 
1 
i 
~ 
.. ... ~ 
........ ~ 
··.·;·, 
ACSI: 
AIDs: 
ANC: 
CBOs: 
CHA: 
CRS: 
CS: 
CSA: 
DAP: 
DHS: 
DPPM: 
DSA: 
EARO: 
EGS: 
ENI: 
EOC: 
EPI: 
FFW: 
FAO: 
FGD: 
FHI: 
FP: 
FSS: 
GDP: 
Ha./ha.: 
HH: 
IDD: 
IR: 
Kg./kg.: 
Km./k:m.: 
MCH: 
Acronyms 
Amhara Credit anq Saving Institution 
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome 
Antenatal Care 
Community Based Organizations ;. 
Community Health Agency 
Catholic Relief Service 
Cooperating Sponsors 
Central Statistic Authority 
Development Activity Proposal 
Demography and Health Survey 
Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Management 
Development Studies Associates 
Ethiopian Agriculture Research Organization 
Employment Generation Scheme 
Ethiopian Nutritional Institute 
Ethiopian Orthodox Church 
Expanded Program of Immunization 
Food for Work 
Food and Agricultural Organization 
Focus Group Discussion 
Food for Hungry International 
Family Planning ,I"·· 
Food Security Strategies 
Gross Development Product 
Hectare 
Household 
Iodine Defiency Disorders 
Intermediate Result 
Kilogram 
Kilometer 
Mother and Child Health 
NA: 
NGO: 
PA: 
PRA: 
PSU: 
PVO: 
REST: 
SCF/USA: 
SNNP: 
SPO: 
STDS: 
TBA: 
TTBA: 
TLU: : ... 
USAID: 
r:::1 VAD: 
WHO: 
t ·• 
ft~ . l 
WVI/E: 
,. 
I -i 
L 
Nutritional Anemia 
Non-Government Organization 
Peasant Association 
Participatory Rural Appraisal 
Primary Sampling Units 
Private Voluntary Organization 
Relief Society of Tigray 
Save the Children Federation USA 
Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples 
Strategic Project Objective 
Sexually Transmitted Diseases 
Traditional Birth Attendants 
Training Traditional; Birth Attendants 
Tropical Livestock Unit 
United States Agency for International Development 
Vitamin a Deficiency 
World Health Organization 
World Vision International Ethiopia 
;. 
I 
:: ··-~ 
. _-j 
: .. : 
··--1 
: ! !·. l 
Executive Summary 
Introduction 
This is the final report on the final evaluation ?f the first cycle Title II Program in Ethiopia. 
Title II Program is a multi-sectoral, food security-focused development initiative. It has 
urban and rural chapters. The latter, the subject of this report, operates in agriculture, natural 
resources, rural physical infrastructures, health and water. Geographically, it covers all the 
regions of the country but the Afar and Beneshangul-Gumuz Regional States. It operates a 
total of 39 rural projects located in 17 zones and 39 woredas. These projects reach about 
78, I 00 rural households or about 430,000 people. 
Eight international and local NGOs implement the Title II Program. They are Africare, 
·· .. ~. CARE-Ethiopia, Catholic Relief Services, Ethiopian Orthodox Church, Food for the Hungry 
International, Relief Society ofTigray, Save the Children (US), and World Vision-Ethiopia. 
Seven of these NGOs are among the biggest in the NGO community in Ethiopia in terms of 
countrywide program scope and capacity. 
USAID-Ethiopia provided the'tlnancial and food aid resources needed to run the projects. 
Title II Program in Ethiopia seeks Increased Household Food Security for its beneficiaries as 
the strategic objective (SO). Food security is central to the Government Five-Year 
Development Program. Poverty Reduction Strategy is the anchor of Government 
Development Strategies. Thus, Title II program strategic objective and the anticipated results 
dovetail well with the country's development goals. Title II has also set out to attain five 
intermediate results': Increased agricultural production; increased household income; 
improved health status; natural resources-base maintained; and enhanced emergency response 
capacity. Quantitative indicators have been specified and agreed upon to monitor results. 
The implementing NGOs and the donor carried out a baseline survey in 1997 to establish 
benchmark values on the selected indicators. 
The Title II major activity areas include rehabilitation of natural resources through physical 
and biological conservation measures, rural roads, irrigation, health, domestic water, 
agriculture (crop and livestock), income generation, and capacity building (mainly farmers' 
training). The importance of the activity areas in terms of budget allocation seems to follow 
that order. 
The program is about to wind up it first cycle of operation and thus the need to carry out this 
end of project evaluation. The indicators selected to quantitatively determine the extent of 
achievement of the strategic objective and the intermediate results and the 1997 baseline 
values on these indicators are the bases of this evaluation exercise . 
·' 
... .. 
I 
t 
J 
i:~~q: · 
I 
. ;:· 
.~ ; 
.... -.... :i 
;:~~1-
--. ~ 
-~ 
.. · ;. 
Methodology 
The main findings of this evaluation are based on a dataset obtained from a household 
structured survey. A total of7040 rural households were involved in the survey. A stratified 
two-stage cluster sample design was used.The project woredas were treated as a stratum and 
PAs formed the primary sampling units. The PA number was taken from the 1994 
Population and Housing Census as adjusted by CSA for 2000 to accommodate changes 
regional governments make to the size of PAs. The sample size was based on: 
• Proportion of stunted children aged 6-59 months obtained from the 1997 Title II 
baseline survey; 
• Proportion of children aged 6-59 months per household, sourced from the 1994 
Population and Housing Census; 
• Confidence interval of90% 
Three PAs were selected for the survey in each project woreda. Two PAs covered in the 1997 
baseline survey were automatically chosen and the third was chosen by probability 
proportional to size. In projects not covered in 1997 survey, three PAs were randomly 
selected. From a freshly prepared list of households in each sample PA, 60 households were 
systematically selected with a random start. 
Opinions were gathered from the major stakeholders (communities key informants, 
government offices) using pre-prepared guide questions. 
Regarding data analysis, three indices of nutritional status: height-for-age, weight- for-age 
and weight-for-height Z-scores of the children were computed to estimate the overall 
prevalence of stunting, underweight and wasting, respectively, using the WHO/CDC/NCHS 
reference values. A cut-off point of less than - 2 SD was considered low nutritional status and 
values greater than or equal to -2 SD normal. The Z- scores were calculated with the help of 
appropriate software packages 
Cross-tabulation analysis is done to observe any association between SO indicators and 
selected livelihood variables. 
Limitations 
Several problems were encountered during the data coJlection stage, which could have a 
bearing on the quality of data. The first is that households show a lot of impatience as well as 
reluctance to have their children measured. Mothers tend to involuntarily interfere with the 
measuring instruments while attempting to quieten the crying baby. This increases the chance 
to misread measurements. In future DAP evaluations, it seems prudent to separate the 
nutrition survey from other tasks of the evaluation and also accord more time to complete the 
survey. 
The question of manageability of the evaluation was in itself an important limitation. There 
are several points that make Title II Program in Ethiopia unique, so to speak. It operates more 
or less similar interventions using more or less same strategies or approaches in humerous 
places having different socio-economic backgrounds. It involves eight non-governmental 
ii 
;-~ .. --s ...... · """"" ·r .... 
j 
'fl L: 
~ . . ! 
t'"-~ 
!- j 
·. 
.. , 
;..-~ 
! ! 
l _; 
~ C:.l 
r"':'l 
j ,. 
, 
:_;; 
Cl:':l 
~ 
Fl 
r-:' 
l .. 
r-·-· ,. 
f ·~ .... 
1..: 1-.:J 
~ 
l (i 
l: .. • 
ffi 
-
~ "l 
~ > 
·: $.~ A' '°" 
~ 
~j~:i ~g · ··-1 
organizations not exactly embracing same approaches to development, and also not having 
identical policies, strategies, operating procedures, etc. It has rural and urban programs. The 
fact that the evaluation has not reflected this uniqueness was a limitation. This report, in the 
opinion of the evaluation team, would have benefited immensely from breaking the sum total 
of the evaluation work into some more manageable parts (examples: urban, rural; nutrition, 
other interventions; pastoralist, mixed farming; cereal staple, tuber staple; and/or other 
combinations) and contracting out the job to two or more independent evaluating teams. Such 
an approach could be less cost-effective. But the trade-off between cost saving and q'uality 
compromise could have been rewarding. 
Title II Results 
Three types of inter-related results are distinguished. The first is the extent to which the 
projects have accomplished the activities they planned. The second is the extent to which the 
projects have managed to realize the five intermediate results (IR) contained in the 
Development Activity Proposals (DAP). The third is the degree to which the projects have 
attained the strategic objective 
Outputs 
The main findings in this regard are: 
1. There were activities planned but not implemented at all mainly because of external 
factors, government policy in particular. The more important of these in terms of 
achieving intermediate results and the strategic objective included input credit in EOC 
and REST projects, saving and credit programs targeting women (EOC projects for 
example). 
2. Although there are significant, intra- and inter-sectoral and intra- and inter - CS 
variations, yet in most cases accomplishments exceeded targets. 
3. Considering a performance level of below 80% of the plan not satisfactory, the major 
activities that fell into this category were: 
Activity area Where it happened 
• . Irrigation (design, construction CARE (Hararghe) 
and other pre-operation activities) 
CRS canal construction in Kombolcha and 
Gulomekeda 
EOC canal improvement and pond 
construction (Wadla and Endamehoni) 
• Livestock (feed development and FHI, EOC 
provision of livestock) 
• Biological conservation in CARE, EOC, FHI WVIIE 
communal areas 
• Physical conservation of measures CRS, EOC, FHI, REST 
Ill 
.• 
.1:;.: . , ••• _.I 
:'. ~~ 1 .<·! 
··::. .J 
,.,. . . 
·1 .. · .. 
-- 1 ··. I 
'.;:~ 1 :l ~".1 
-~£.-.~; 
·:'·i 
.. '·:1 
'":'"~ .. 
.......... 
Activity area 
• Vegetable 
production/demonstration 
Micro nutrient supply, latrine 
construction, and health post 
construction 
• EPl/mothers 
• Water development for domestic 
use 
Roads 
Where it happened 
CARE, EOC, WVl/E 
FHI 
SCF 
CARE, SCF and WVI/E 
Africare, CARE, CRS (maintenance only) 
4. The major problem for under-performance in the above mentioned areas as well in 
·others was inadequate and delayed delivery of finance and commodities needed to 
carry out the activities. · :--.·~ ' · 
5. The provision of other inputs such as personnel (type and number), transport at the 
sites in particular, logistics and backstopping services was satisfactory. 
6. Through Title II support a considerable number of community assets were created 
including: . 
• Over 450 ha of land was brought under irrigation 
• About I 052 km of rural road was oonstructed 
• About 663 km of rural road was maintained 
• About 442 different types of water systems were constructed and made 
operational for domestic purpose 
• About 2 I ,446 ha of land was enclosed for rehabilitation 
• Some 24,500 km of various types physical soil and water conservation 
structures were constructed. 
Based on sample inspection, this evaluation found the standards (quality) of the above 
infrastructures satisfactory. 
Intermediate results 
The summary table below provides a comparison, where data available, between the baseline 
(I 997) and 2000 of the intermediate results by indicators selected for the purpose and by CS. 
The table indicates: 
J _ Productivity of the five major cereals grown in the project areas has shown a 
considerable increase in 2000 compared to the base year in all CS and almost in all 
projects. It is believed that the conservation and irrigation initiatives of the projects 
made a contribution to the productivity improvement. Rainfall in 2000 was much 
IV 
q ' 
m. 
u 
B 
l3 
.. 
[.: 
~ 
0 
a 
R 
0 
0 
0 
e 
I 
m 
D 
m ' 
r. 
0 ·t 
> 
i1 
m( 
( 
1 
$ 
~ 
I 
. 
. 
; 
• 't 
·:···-1 
. f 
--i 
:J 
:- i 
I
:._.; -
- . 
~ 
• ;r., 
•. ;-:;· 
!K~i ·( t:i 
; 
i 
_·:j 
·: I 
I 
: i 
j . 
·-I 
·i 
.
~::;. I' .-. 
... ~ 
... ·;..«\ 
.. , ;.·,: 
.-:-·. 
.~: . -~ 
. ·• 
:: 1 
·· 
... .... 
more favorable than in 1997 and this obviously positively impacted crop yield. It is 
difficult to ascertain that the productively level attained in 2000 can be sustained . 
2. Percentage of households that used chemical fertilizers in 2000 increased in CARE 
and EOC project PA's, while it decreased in CRS, FHI and WVI/E project PA's in 
comparison to the base year. There are no baseline data to do a similar comparison for 
the rest of CS projects. The increase as well as the decline are attributed to events that · 
took place within the fertilizer sector itself, and it is believed the projects had little, if 
any, role in the observed change. It should be noted that more Title II beneficiaries 
used fertilizer in 2000 (26.6%) o.ver 1997 (21 %). 
3. Percentage of households that used improved seed in 2000 increased over 1997 in 
CRS and EOC projects, while decreased in CARE, FHI, and WVl/E projects. No 
baseline data are available for the rest of CS to monitor change. Some of the projects 
provided improved seeds to beneficiaries, and where there is decline, it is reasoned 
that it is because of non-project factors such as high price, inefficient delivery, lack of 
credit, etc. Here also, at the Title II level there was an increase in 2000 ( 12.5%) over 
1997 (5.9%). 
4. Percentage of farmers who adopted improved farming practices rose in FHI and 
WVJ/E projects, while it declined in EOC projects in 2000 compared to the base year. 
There are no baseline data for other CS. At the Title II level, there was an increase in 
2000 (48%) over 1997 (35%). 
5. Livestock ownership declined in all CS but SCF in 2000 over 1997. In most cases the 
change was significant The reason for decline is difficult to point at. Lack of feed and 
poor livestock health services could account for the change. On the other hand, the 
increase in SCF projects could be attribut~d to the improved water supply from the 
projects and also because of customary stock building tradition of the pastoralists 
following a major destocking due to natural causes like the 1998/99 drought1. 
Livestock is an important well-being indicator both for mixed farmers and pastoralists 
and the decline might be an indication of the lack of overall improvement in the 
welfare of the project communities. 
6. There has not also been any significant change in terms of physical asset ownership or 
in the percentage of households that never consumed luxury food items (meat., fruits 
and the like) between the base year and 2000. 
7. The values of indicators chosen to monitor progress in the health area show that 
overall there has been positive development since the base year. Prevalence of 
diarrhea decreased, children under-weight improved and water coverage increased . 
There was decline in the amount of water consumed per household. Although strong 
evidences are lacking, there are observations indicating that the reduction in the 
amount of water used from protected sources could be due to low awareness and 
unaffordable water charges. 
8. Assuming that areas enclosed for treatment mean communal land reclaimed through 
physical and biological means, there have been impressive results at REST, EOC and 
1 SCF/US doubts the credibility of the figure. It thinks it is too high. Effort was made to further clean the data, 
but the result was the same. 
v 
·; 
. ' 
·! ! .. . ! 
. l . ! 
. i . ! 
... _ ... 
...... !..,; .. 
to a lesser extent at CARE and FHI. These figures cannot be compared with the base 
year for lack of data. 
9. It is observed that in almost all Title II project woredas there some capacity to 
regularly monitor the imminence of any possible disaster. Crop surveys are regularly 
conducted. Food and livestock prices are monitored. Title II projects have been 
assisting in the surveys as well as in price monitoring. 
Impacts 
The summary table below also provides figures on the three indicators selected to measure 
the achievement of the Title II strategic objective. The table reveals 
• The nutritional status of children looked better in 2000 compared to 1997 in many of 
the Title II projects. There is reason to believe that project activities such as 
promotion of vegetable production, feed and other livestock programs, improved 
; .·access to water, health services, and improved access to markets contributed to the 
_._._improvement in the reduction of stunting prevalence. However, there are no strong 
evidences sup.porting whether the results could be sustained . 
• In the overwhelming majority of the projects, the length of the period households 
experienced food shortage had decreased significantly in 2000 compared to 1997. The 
basis for the decrease might not be structural changes in the production systems or 
sustainable income rise from dependable-sources. Rather, it could be because 2000/0 l 
was relatively a better agricultural year. In other words, better food availability, 
access and the attendant reduction in food shortage in 2000 is difficult to wholly 
attribute to the projects, and it is not certain whether it can be sustained . 
• There has not been any significant change over the life of the projects in terms of the 
use of severe coping strategies. In fact, the overall picture (all projects considered) the 
situation in 2000 worsened compared to 1997 in this regard. 
Other Title II Results 
l. Title II projects had a number of interventions intended to build capacity, notably at 
the household level. There were multi-sectoral training programs in which thousands 
-~ of farmers participated. Arguably the beneficiaries are today better informed and more 
.-·knowledgeable about production techniques, conservation, sanitation, water 
management, irrigation management, etc., than they were before Title II projects. 
2. In nutrition, food shortage, use of severe coping strategies female-headed households 
benefited less than male-headed households 
3. Women participation in FFW programs was high, especially among projects in 
Tigray. · 
4. Women hold high appreciation for the project-supported water programs in all project 
areas. 
VI 
n 
" t 
h1 · l 
' -:·.i 
~ _; : . -~· . 
~! rn -_~: 
5. In decision making, the role women play is encouraging on such issues as what and 
when to sell, how ·to use the income from sale. Joint decision on cash crop sale is over 
60% for all CS. The joint decision is equally strong (55%) on the application of 
revenue from cash sales. 
6. Women participation in existing CBOs leaves much to be desired. 
7. There is a tremendous appreciation for health care and mobile EPI programs the 
projects assisted. This would benefit women by bringing the facility to their locality, 
avoiding long distance travel. 
Major Operating Constraints 
1. The teamwork between government offices and Title II project in most projects leaves 
a lot to be desired. To a large extent this stems from the lack of legislation that clearly 
stipulates the roles ofNGOs in development as well relief operations. 
2. The Proclamation to Regulate Micro Finance issued in 1996 was not anticipated at the 
time of designing OAP, and that must have had implications on the first and second 
Intermediate Results. The attainment of these results was contingent on the provision 
of credit for agricultural inputs and for income generation activities focusing on 
women. These were not implemented because of the micro finance regulation. 
3. Most of the finance of the project operation came from monetized food aid 
commodities. All CS's reported availing the fund has been irregular and inadequate. 
4. Drought, ·shortage and irregularity of rainfall seriously constrained performance with 
ramifications for impacts almost in all project areas, but more visibly on REST, FHI, 
SCF/USA, East Shoa CARE/CRS/WVI/E projects. 
5. With regard to community participation, there is still much to be desired. Participation 
did not exceed labor and material contribution, collaboration in the provision of 
infonnation to monitoring and evaluating groups, and membership in various 
functional committees (water, health, irrigation, etc.). 
Lessons Learnt 
I. CS stakeholders, communities and relevant government offices alike, strongly 
believe that project interventions address the priority development needs and have 
a strong relevance to improving household food security. 
2. While this evaluation is in agreement with the stakeholders' views, it is in 
contention that there were activities not included (flour mills, family planning 
services), which could have made important contributions to food utilization 
aspects of household food security. 
3. Food availability, the crucial constituent of food security in rural Ethiopia where 
mixed farming system prevails, could have been more enhanced if livestock feed 
development, perennial crops such as fruits, private woodlots intended for the 
VII 
I -
n 
. 
. 
. 
··:?.':! 
. ~ i 
' 
:-:~· .. 
-...... 
·~. :~~ ... 
market, irrigation, and horticultural crops were more emphasized in terms of 
program scope and resource allocation. 
4. The main strategies the projects pursued are focus on food security, emphasis to 
conservation-based development and targeting the poor. While accepting the 
appropriateness of the strategies, it is argued that the inadequate attention given to 
capacity building at the local and community levels is not consistent with the 
strategies. 
5. There are observations attesting that farmers are accepting that it is they 
themselves who should assume the lead role in conservation development to day 
more than before, and this is attributable to the role the projects have been playing 
to raise awareness. 
viii 
u 1 
-.! 
·': 
·o￾m 
a -
-
u fl 
g 
D 
l 
I -1 
'i 
; 
·1 
D 
·~ . 
B 
0 
m 
I 
a 
f 1 
bl 
m .; 
n 
Ll 
<' 
~ -~ ~ ':w 
ru ~ 
. ~;{. 
·...::;1;:.:·!!1it-
.... ·.· 
I'•'••"' •• " • • ·•• •'>"J, 1'.'o'• 
\,/ I 
:, .: ... ,:; •. ,jlJillj;j!J;:i:,, __ " __ ' ----- .".:. .. :.'! 
A summary of SO and IR results of Title II projects by CS 
"' 'j ,-!'.,"';,: . 1r- "., • " It'' ;,[- '·""1-! '',"'.' "'," '," 1 ':· ':"'11' '.'(" """. "" '."'i"J'I'" .,,. •'.'N'i•' " ;j' ;·11; ,,., n) "•': .. , ·; ·i' I'',•:;':'":/;-.•'' .,,,.' 1 · '··i··.' 1. I 11 ,.:·1'•,,f· 
1 • • .':. :\ ·J '• ' 'U'"' "f l , ,'A•J-:: ... .. ... ) ' ' ,1 -::ft"A"'•,,i\';, (.;: Q.'""', ... .. ,,.·(,"' 'fl f'r'o...4 _i;, '1' 
·,,'..',"' ,:: ,.· . ·-:' .,.J. .. -. . .. ::.: . .. .. ,,;:d 
, ...... , ,,, """'"· .. '"\' ' ' ,r.. . . jr, "., "1;i.J,1·1I 'lr,,,y i t'i':c I f>:1.1;v;\\l !•·:r .. '[ ' ·u:,;;; ' . . . ' '''""' r'-f, : .... . ;)t'., "·''. · • . · · '· .. 
Oo1e 
% I NA \ 18.6 I 52.2 I 43.7 I 56.8 I 34.3 I 66.6 I 54.5 I 85.9 I 56.5 I 11.9 I 46.1 I 45.4 I 40.5 I 65.9 I 39.6 I 61.1 I 39.5 
WAI 
Use of severe coping 1997-
strateQies 2000 - . - 124.6 - 118.5 . 78.1 - 80.0 - 96.9 - 58.3 - 90.4 99.4 
length of peri.od 
households had food Mont 
shortaoe h NA 6.7 5.6 5.1 5.2 4.6 5.5 5.7 8.8 5.3 4.1 3.6 2.2 1.4 5.5 4.3 5.6 4.7 
12. IR1-Jncreased Agricultural 
Production 
Barely yield Ko/ha NA NA 532 690.9 942.7 390.25 923 386 885 532 668.8 NA 872.7 201 .3 747.1 366.74 796 
Wheat ' . NA NA 8.67 630 825.7 437.7 884 416 923.9 532 8.47.3 NA 584 222.4 542 447.62 782 
Te ff .. .. 766.6 5.53 612.7 636 651.6 322.5 674.2 263.7 793.4 532 797 NA 693 165 591.5 320.8 698 
Maize " . 581 .5 6.10 601.9 332.7 988.6 274.25 758.7 206 946.3 532 998.6 NA 322.3 238 647.8 365.5 836.5 
Sorahum " ' 512.2 8.55 639.6 354.5 1051 248.7 628.7 - 833.7 532 788.8 NA 148.4 72 743.4 412.4 763.7 
Overall cereal NA 
production Ka/hh NA 581 NA 522 NA 446 NA 516 NA 361 NA 345 329 I NA I 427 I NA I 435 
Household used -
fertilizers % NA 1.3 16.5 31 .6 29.8 25.5 13.25 22 22.6 6.7 - 42.5 16.1 \ 40.7 i 40.1 I 21 I 26.6 
Household used 
improved seed % NA 0.6 38.5 22.9 3 7.9 2.9 7.3 17.8 0.82 . 12.2 - 1.65 j 1.2 I 21.5 I 5.9 \ 12.5 
Used improved farming 
iractices % NA I 21.1 I . I 44.2 I NA I 44.1 I 53.4 I 47.8 I 29 \ 63.3 I NA I 44.4 I NA I 16.7 I 21 .3 I 83.1 I 35 I 48.o 
lrriQated area Ha. NA . - 145.48 - 3.3 55.3 229 5.1 9.7 NA 1.75 I NA I 0.75 I - I 8.4 I 60.4 J 398.4 
3. IR2 - Increased 
livestock ownershiQ I TLU I - I . I 2.63 I 1.60 I 2.13 J 1.49 I 2.82 11.94 11.s1 11.40 I 3.98 I 2.14 I 2.61 I 6.o9 I 2.83 11.80 I 2.66 1 2.11 
Physical asset 
ownershi of HH 
Radio No. - 0.05 0.08 0.19 0.2 0.18 0.04 0.16 0.01 0.02 0.11 0.26 0.33 0.40 0.05 0.20 0.12 0.18 
• Stunting figures are as it June 200 I 
,. 
f ' 
@l 
I " 
.i: J / ,.;. " •I 
....... • 
_ , .. . .... . , ..... 1-
,,.·. S t' .: .· I I 
ix 
•••• • : :
1
•• :.:. 
·:·rt!··:t:· ... . ! .. •• :. .. : .. . ,. 
" l " lf •" .. , r ,.,, • ' • 
. . i ... 1 • " ·r. 
. . . ... .. '.: ; .. ... ... ;, :1 .... . . 
.. " .. 
Table 
Wooden 
framed bed 
Cart 
Plouoh 
Watches 
Blankets 
HH that didn't add any 
luxurv food items 
4. IR3 -lmoroved Health Status 
Prevalence of diarrhea 
occurrence among 
children 0-59 months 
old 
Children under weioht 
Households using 
rotected water source 
Deliveries attended by 
TIBAs 
HH that visited health 
posts twice in last six 
months 
% 
% 
Lit/da 
/ 
0.08 I 0.03 I 0.08 0.12 I 0.10 I o o.08 I 0.01 I O.Q7 I 0.02 0.14 0.50 I 1.01 I 0.03 I 0.27 0.08 0.16 
0.01 I 0.01 I 0.06 0.07 I o.07 I 0.19 0.17 I 0.01 I 0.26 I o 0.04 0.35 I 0.10 I 0.25 I o.55 0.11 0.24 
0.01 I o.oo 0.01 I 0.07 I o o I 0.01 I o I o 0.28 0.01 I o.04 I 0.01 I 0.01 0.01 0.05 
0.62 I 1.42 I 0.83 1.06 I 0.42 I 0.83 0.79 I 0.69 I 0.52 1.17 0. 12 I o.97 I o.79 11.14 0.99 0.80 
o.05 I 0.11 I o.25 0.25 I o.15 I o.05 0.08 I 0.02 I o.o3 I 0.14 0.21 0.35 I 1.79 I 0.13 I 0.49 0.18 0.38 
0.17 I 0.84 I 0.48 I 0.39 I o.51 I 0.33 I o.34 I 0.11 I 0.08 I 0.46 I o.71 I 0.63 I 0.80 I 0.79 I o.67 I 0.54 I 0.48 
NA I 8.0 I 64.4 I 62 I 62.5 I 62.0 I 82.2 I 80.5 I 98.2 I 91 .8 I 65.6 I 61.7 I 47.3 I 43.7 I 72.8 I 72.5 I 69.6 I 67.7 
NA NA I 13 I 7.7 14 I 4.8 I 8.8 I 6.2 I 17.7 I 4.2 I 1.2 6.6 24.1 I 6.7 I 9 111.9 12.7 5.3 
NA NA I 42.7 I 44.9 41.7 I 24.2 I 47.7 I 50.8 I 63.9 I 38.4 I 57.9 51 33.2 I 44.9 I 48. 1 I 37.9 45.4 41.1 
NA NA 177.441 30.8 142.32 1 42.5 50.7 81.9 I 24. 94 I 26.1 I 29. 79 58.3 35.671 36.1 133.18 1 60.6 36.3 44.2 
NA NA 36.7 61.8 31.6 I - I 50 39.5 69.45 I - I 32.1 NA 40 
NA I NA 27.2 21.9 18.2 17.8 25 26.35 27.6 I NA I 20.5 
Amountofwaterused l vi hhl NA I NA 144.42145.8 l41.51 l 34.8l36.29 [ 31.2 l32.19 [ 27.2 l39.62 1 39 155.42 138.5 137.54 134 I 40.63 135.7 
5. IR4 -Natural Resource 
Based maintained 
1. Communal land 
reclaimed through 
physical and 
biolooical means I Ha. 
2. Soil deposited 
behind check dam 
NA I 150 I NA I 160 I NA I 32 I NA I 21,446 
L 3. Soil deposited ·-- behind hillside - - - - - - -
m;'J l'kim mm m::rJ 
.... .z,t. .:. .le: ;..,
_
, : " ' ••• .. 
t:::l !!\"'P ... Y"" lioilo;..;"" 
l ·::. 
• > M t .. . . ..... . . 
x 
.... 
... 
'" °i!) 
. :: 
f:::r:J I 
.i. • • • )i.~f~J:: .. /l. ..: .. :.:H ___ .. _:Jillf~:{ . ·:. : ~::.;~ t\)~jg~~· . -:. _.:. :~: ~ ..... ·-·~.:; ~ ... :.~ ~: .. ~.J1iliJH~;!;~ ill~~~~~1::'.:_: ~~ .. d~illili ... ·-· ..... t!n~ -E · 'i.·< .. : : :t:;:~~m: terrace 
6. JR5 - Emergency Response Caoac ~ Enhanced 
1. Appreciate updated 
disaster plan in 
lace NA Yes NA Yes NA Yes NA 
2. Access to early 
warn in NA Yes NA Yes NA Yes NA 
Source: Baseline survey 1997 and Evaluation Survey 
"· 
'
,
· ·· 
. ... '. 
Yes NA Yes 
: 
Yes NA Yes 
, 
.·' . 
. 
NA 
NA p;" ~h'i .;.q;f".,'1: Yes Yes • • .: • ..1 .... 
... :· ,;: 11 NA Yes NA Yes NA 
NA Yes NA Yes NA 
\" 
Yes 
I Yes 
... .. ... \ 
..... '. ... ::.::j~ .. ... . 
' l.1 
. " :....:~; xi 
..;·:1il1::0.1 ~?.;~~ 12 
. j 
':•.-. 
I ... j - I 
.~.1 
J 
! 
- :· 
... 
Recommendations 
1. Land degradation is perhaps the single most important development problems 
in Ethiopia. There are reliable sources that claim that economic livelihood 
based on agricultural production may cease to exist over the next 50 years in 
most project areas unless the process of degradation is reduced and eventually 
halted. There is strong rationale to continue placing the focus of attention both 
in terms of scope and resource allocation on rehabilitation of natural resources. 
2. Conservation-based development in Ethiopia requires a structural change. 
Land use and farming practices that aggravate land degradation need to be 
controlled through appropriate measures, mostly action programs and policy, 
especially in the highlands of the Amhara and Tigray Regional States. This 
would require a huge investment in road infrastructure, incentives to move 
from annual to perennial crop economy, long term investment credit targeting 
livestock feed and breed development, a shift to hoe culture with the attendant 
change in crop program once again away from field crops to root crops, etc. 
The OAP programs in North Wello, South Gonder, Tigray and similar other 
places should be designed in this spirit. 
3. An element of vital importance for sustainable irrigation is the training of 
fanners in various techniques of irrigation water management including proper 
timing and methods of application, amount required, supply schedule, water 
budgeting, and choice of crops and agronomic techniques. Although the 
degree varies, sloppiness was observed in projects where there are operating 
irrigation schemes. Capacity building of CBOs is critically important in such 
schemes, and this needs· to be focused in future programs. 
4. There are signals indicating that communities are not making good use of 
protected water sources. One such signal is the lack of association between 
stunting prevalence and use of protected water sources. The same is true with 
households reporting vegetable production. This calls for intensified health 
education that any future programs need to duly note. 
5. Project sustainability is a function of (1) active and authentic community 
participation and (2) the existence of close relationship and coordination 
with other agencies, including government, implementing programs 
similar to that of the projects. Both areas require increased attention. In the 
case of the first, the measures involve training, frequent follow-on training 
programs, leadership training, experience sharing visits, technical 
assistance, putting in place systems and procedures, etc. In the second it is 
largely having the will, determination and commitment to develop good 
working relation. There should be willingness on the part of the project 
staff to assume the lead role. Having regularly held forurris to discuss 
common problems, seek joint solutions and draw follow-on action plans 
could help. 
xiii 
·n n · 
0 
!~ i: 
u 
f1 . j .. J 
, . ..., j ! 
i i 
;._) 
n 
Ll 
,: i 
! 
\ 
\ 
\ 
\ 
1 
\· 
' I 
\ 
6. Construction of soil bund on grazing land that has little or no erosion 
problem was observed in some projects. Since it practically serves no 
purpose, such practice should be discouraged. 
7. Indicators specified to measure project results pertaining to the IR4 are not 
practical and therefore not applicable .. It is suggested that the following 
indicators should be opted for in the future OAP. 
• Percentage of trees planted that established well in the communal 
woodlots; 
• Vegetation cover attained; 
• Native species of trees regenerated in ·the enclosed areas; and 
• Depth of soil trapped inside checkdams 
XIV 
l 
i 
~ .--. J . ; 
··:.· 
-, 
·- ·'!.· 
I. 
·. 
Introduction 
1.1 Background to Title II Prograi:n 
This is a report on the final evaluation of USA ID-assisted Development Activity 
Proposals (DAP) in Ethiopia::. The assistance known as Title II Program focuses 
on food security with special attention to nutrition. The bulk of Title II assistance 
comes through local monetization of food aid resources obtained from the 
Agricultural Development and Trade Act of the US Government. 
Title JI Program started operation in Ethiopia in 1997 /98. Eight international and 
local NGOs (cooperating sponsors) currently run 52 urban and rural Title II 
projects in 22 zones, seven regional states, and two city administrations (Addis 
Ababa and Dire Dawa)
3
. Except Afar and Beneshangul Gumuz the rest of the 
regions are Title II Program beneficiaries. It reaches a total of some 78, I 00 rural 
households or an estimated number of 430,000 persons. The projects seek the 
objective of enhanced household food security~ 
· The rural ~ctivities aim at: 
• Raising agricultural production and productivity (crops and livestock); 
• Increasing household income through income generation initiatives; 
Improving health services in which water and nutrition feature 
prominently; 
• Conserving soils and water through physical and biological measures; and 
• Improving community and local capacity to more effectively respond to 
emergency. 
The urban projects place the focus on: 
• The provision of food to targeted households; 
• Physical infrastructures specially roads; 
• Creation of opportunities for income generation; 
• Skills upgrading and acquisition of new skills; 
• Improvement of environmental hygiene; and 
• Provision of sanitation facilities. 
Both rural and urban projects target vulnerable households. This report is on the 
rural part of the program. 
2 The evaluation was carried out by a team of experts involving a nutritionist, an agronomist, a 
livestock expert, a conservationist, a health specialist, a gender expert, an economist, and a 
statistician. 
3 The project holding NGOs are Africare, CARE-Ethiopia, Catholic Relief Services (CRS), 
Ethiopian Orthodox Church (EOC), Focld for the Hungry International (FHI), Relief Society of 
Tigray (REST), Save the Children /USA (SC/USA), and World Vision Ethiopia (WYE). 
fl 
u 
a 
~ 
n 
LJ 
n Lt 
.. ~ S. ; . i L 
fl Li 
f! 
• ! 
Li . 
m 
a 
~-;i 
Li 
a 
.... 
l ·:_ 
r. 
!:- 0 
t:;_;. 
n 
~ 
:• 
; 
.{! 
~= 
1j 
< 
-~- ,_ 
1· ' 
, 
~~ 
; 
1 
?' .. e .. ~ :.1.!J.;: 
.:":::·, .. ·; 
-· ; 
; 
~~:.~~ .... :w 
... -· ':~ 
- ... ! 
. ; 
1.2 Purpose of the Evaluation 
The first cycle of project funding is nearing completion. Accordingly, the 
Cooperating Sponsors (CS) or the project holders agreed to carry out a final 
evaluation, which constitutes the basis of this report. 
As stipulated in the TOR, the final evaluation has two main objectives. The first is 
to determine the extent to which the projects have achieved the strategic objective 
(SO), "Enhanced Household Food Security". The second is to recommend 
practical and specific measures to better design and implement future DAPs based 
on the lessons learnt to date. The report is expected to contribute to the next cycle 
of Title II Program funding. 
1.3 Food Security at the Country Level 
It seems in order to provide a backdrop of food security situation in Ethiopia in 
order to understand the contextual perspective of Title II Program interventions. 
The problem of food security, its magnitude, seriousness and severity is relatively 
well documented in Ethiopia. So are its causes and effects. Many reasons are 
given for the pervasive and worrisome nature of food insecurity for the large 
majority of urban and rural communities. Results of literature review the 
evaluation team has made and based on empirical experiences of members of the 
evaluation team, among an array of causes six seem to dwarf others. The first four 
are accountable for the chronic food insecurity that exists .in most, if not ali, parts 
of the country, obviously the extent of it varying from one place to another. The 
last two are the principal causes of transitory food insecurity that particularly 
affects relatively more marginalized areas. About 50 percent of the population is 
believed to be living in these areas (Food Security Strategy, 1996). The first of 
these causes is urban and rural unemployment. Data on unemployment are 
scanty in Ethiopia. But it is common knowledge that it is huge. A study carried 
out in 1999 in two woredas in Addis Ababa (Propride, an indigenous NGO) 
reveals that unemployment at the time was over 30 percent. Rural unemployment 
could be lower, but it is reasoned that it is a major cause of household food 
insecurity. The Propride survey further indicates that the communities believe that 
unemployment is the single most important cause of urban poverty and thus food 
insecurity. 
Secondly, abu.sive use of natural resources, especially land, has been undermining 
agricultural productivity. Erosion and degradation-mduced loss of soil fertility is 
one of the main reasons for exceedingly low crops and livestock productivity. 
EARO sources indicate that some 40 percent of productive soil is already lost due 
to degradation and unless it is considerably reduced, production could not be 
possible at all in the next 40 to 50 years in about 50 percent of the drought-prone 
and degraded areas of the country. The third factor is the long history of the 
country that has been characterized by the absence of good governance. The lack 
2 
... 
··' 
: I 
of democratic tradition did not allow authentic participation of urban and rural 
communities in development matters
4
• 
Fourth, there has been lack of people-centered development policies and the 
attendant failure to emancipate the overwhelming majority of rural households 
from the shackle of using primitive means and methods of production. Over 70 
percent of farms are more than a half day walk from all weather road limiting 
access to markets immensely. Road density in 1996 was estimated to be 0.40 km 
per 1000 population and the situation has not changed much since then. 
Education, health and water coverages in rural Ethiopia remain disappointingly 
low. Although the use of chemical fertilizer has become a necessity due to loss of 
soil fertility almost everywhere in the country, yet a large portion of farmers 
located in less accessible areas do not use fertilizers for lack of defensible price 
support. 
r·Another major concern of food security is the ever increasing variability and ·unpredictability of weather, particularly rainfall. It is common knowledge that 
there is considerable variability and diversity in the amount of rainfall within the 
- country. The analysis of rainfall record in the period 1961-87 shows that 
variability was highest in Tigray where the coefficient of variation was 29 while 
the lowest was JO in Gojam (Food Security Strategy, 1996). The variability is 
worsening, area experiencing rainfall shortage is ever widening, and distribution 
of rains is changing almost yearly. In the traditionally drought
-prone areas of the 
country, rainfall annually received and its distribution is not adequate to sustain 
the most drought-tolerant crops currently available. Rainfall shortage is 
establishing permanency in the usually drought-prone areas of the country. 
Finally, lack of security in the country has been an important food security factor. 
Wars, especially civil war, have been a major development problem in Ethiopia. 
The long
-drawn civil war during the Derg regime and the more recent Ethio￾Eriteran conflict disrupted development and caused a huge loss of productive 
resources with immense implications for food security. 
These and other related factors led to the prevalence of severe and pervasive food 
insecurity in the country. Available data indicate that stunting and other 
:.deficiencies are rampant and serious in the country. The 1992 national rural 
. nutrition survey indicates that country
-wise some 64 percent of the children under 
_,,five years of age were stunted at the time, with considerable regional variability. 
More than 30 percent of children experienced significant illness by their first 
anniversary. There were, on average, 4-5 episodes of diarrhea annually among 
children. Only 25 percent of the relevant population had been immunized against 
measles. Rural water coverage was under 10 percent, and access to health and 
sanitation facilities was significantly lower than water ~overage. 
4 It should be noted that there have been some positive changes since government change in 1991. 
Among those of significance to household food security include: (1) relatively more regional 
autonomy; 
(
2) Deregulation of grain and input markets; (3) enhanced commitment to population policy 
and family planning; (4) the existence of market-responsive foreign-exchange 
management; and (5) 
lr~ngthening of hum
an resources 
al the regio
nal l
e
v
el 
and below. 
3 
n u 
G 
~ i ... 
n • t t;;: 
i-_·j 
n 
Ll 
·--~ 
u 
n 
E : 
Ll 
[] 
, ~JJ 
~.,__~~ 
~·~:· ~ 
.. -1 
. • 
I 
. --~ . i ·•. ~ 
·:1 ·' i 
® 
-:·· 
- .: 
.. .. 
~f~\~~~~1 ..... __ - ·: ..... 
-~ }}~~;::~-
~~§~~\% : ·_-.. ---. ·:· . .- ~; 
... 
···..=.. 
-. 
A rural nutrition survey Addis Ababa University had carried out in collaboration 
with Oxford University in 1996 indicates that one-third of the children in the 
surveyed areas were severely stunted. The prevalence of wasting was reported in 
10-14% of the children. The 1996 CSA study reveals that 65% (urban 68%, rural 
50%) of children were stunted. Boys were more affected than girls_ The most 
recent Demography and Health Survey (OHS, 2000) of CSA indicates that chronic 
malnutrition among children is very high; about one in two children stunted and 
one in four severely. The same survey reveals that wasting among children aged 
5-59 months was 11 % (1 % severely) and underweight was 47% (16% severely). 
Among nutritional problems, <he most important ones in Ethiopia are protein￾energy malnutrition, micronutrient deficiency disorders, namely, Vitamin A 
deficiency (V AD), nutritional anemia (NA), and iodine deficiency disorders 
(JOO). Because of this and the prevalence ofother deficiencies, the majority of 
children show various degrees of growth retardation. A nutrition surveillance 
covering rural and urban areas, carried out in 1995 by the Ethiopian Nutrition 
Institute (ENI) indicates that 39% of the rural and 25.5% of urban children 
suffered from various forms of protein-energy malnutrition. 
Evidently, nutritional problems are critical and pose an important development 
challenge for Ethiopia. What has been going on up to now to contain food security 
problems and nutritional deficiencies? What have been the results? Looking at the 
programs designed to address food security issues, it becomes evident that starting 
from the mid-1990's the major development program to reduce rural food 
insecurity at the macro and micro levels has been the agricultural extension 
initiative embracing almost all parts of the agricultural sector. According to the 
Extension Department of the Ministry of Agriculture, currently there are eight 
main and over 70 sub-packages promoting appropriate technologies to small 
farmers. They cover all farming systems in almost all parts of rural Ethiopia. All 
aim at increasing productivity. The ultimate goal is to significantly raise 
household income, the principal determinant of household food security in 
different farming systems. 
There are two principal farming systems in Ethiopia - mixed farming and 
pastoral. The former dominates in terms of population and contribution to the 
national income. Population-wise it had over 92 percent share in 2000. While 
agriculture contributes over 50 percent to the GDP, the contribution oflivestock to 
agricultural GDP might not exceed 20-25 percent. Of this, the share of livestock in 
the pastoral system is not known but it may not be bigger than that of the mixed 
farming system. It must be because of this that the extension initiative has been 
focusing on crop production, notably raising cereal yield per unit of area . 
According to information obtained from the Extension Department of the Ministry 
of Agriculture, the result to date has been mixed. In the early stage of the 
extension initiative remarkable cereal yield increases were reported, in some cases 
yield figures mentioned were staggering (maize.up to 120 qt/ha, wheat 47 qt/ha). 
Reviews carried out more recently indicate that productivity has started declining 
because (I) the extension personnel, development agents in particular, have been 
engaged (60 percent of their time) in the marketing functions of fertilizer (outside 
their main responsibility) and (2) the package prescription has not been strictly 
observed. Highest maize yield dropped to 47 qt/ha and wheat to 29 qt/ha. This 
4 
.· .. 
-· . 
:. :.-
.. ., ..... 
. 
. 
implies that not only the system is failing to sustain the gain; it also appears that 
the development momentum i~ being arrested. This is bad news for food s~curity. 
On the other side, the aggregate per capita food production has not been 
encouraging. CSA sources re,·eal that per capita grain production (cereals. pulses 
and oil seeds) in 1996/97, a Yery good production year, was only I 70 kg (some 
6.0 percent lower than food poverty line requirement of 180 kg/person/year). In 
2000/0 I, another very good production year, the per capita grain availability from 
domestic production was only I 74 kg, still below the food poverty line. Neither 
has there been any dramatic change in cereal productivity at the national level 
between 1996/97 and 2000/01. Since own food production is the underpinning of 
household food security, in the mixed farming zones it is argued that food 
insecurity in terms of magnitude and seriousness is at present at the same level as 
it was when the extension program was launched in I 996. 
In spite of this, nutritional surveillance reports (Save the Children/UK, I 999-
2000) and CSA Demography and Health Survey Results of2000 indicate that 
there have been some positive developments since 1992 as shown below: 
National Level Values 
Indicators Unit 1992 2000 
1. Stunting in children under % 64 51.4 
5 years of age 
2. Children suffering from No.of 4.5 4.0 
diarrhea episodes 
3. Immunization against % 20.6 90.0 
measles 
4. Rural water coverage % 10.0 14.3 
5. Potential health coverage % 48 52.4 
6. Sanitation coverage % 7.0 9.0 
(access to waste disposal 
facilities) 
7. Introduction to solid food Months 8.0 Not available but 
after weaning assumed to be about 
the same 
The changes could be attributed to improved access to credit mainly through 
regional micro-finance institutions, enhanced role of women in household 
decision making as judged from empirical observations, and improved access to 
clean water supply and health facilities. 
5 
n. u 
M 
u 
t1 l .. 
. , 
~ 
. 
• 
f1 
w 
n 
•. :i 
n 
u 
n 
Li 
n u 
I 
. --~ 
,i 
i· .. 
~~~· ·~i:~?~~~~~:!-- .. ::· .: . ...: ... ; 
• 
• 
• 
1.4 Food Security in Title II Program Areas 
The rural Title II Program operates in 17 zones of the Tigray, Amhara, Oromiya, 
Somalie, SNNP and Gambella Regional States. This is shown in a tabular form · 
below. 
:}:7~~ ;~~;.. ,.. . iil" ;'1!{···,, . . ·.- ; 
(ji--()~ini};a -
S~ jJ~} ·:::~ ~ 1111 iifi~t:'·"' · 
r~.'.: ~~!fo· .;"._; A hara,. ·: ~ 
~~~-I>\. ~~ ::~F \~}_. ... : ~· · •. 4:-~.\ ?.-~· :. •. , . . ff:~!~~-~~ ~ Eastern • South • Borena • Guraghe • Gog • Liben 
Gonder Woreda 
• (Zone 1 ?) 
Central • No rt Ir • East • Hadiya 
We/lo Hararglte 
• South • West . We/lo Hararglte 
South • EastShoa • Tye la 
i • West 
Sito a ,, , -
Population of the l ! 
. 
three zones 
2.8 million 3.6 million 7.6 million 6.3 million 0.15 million 
(CSA, 2000) (CSA, 2000) (CSA, 2000) (CSA, 2000) (Region, 200 I) 
There are • There are • There are . There are • There is one 
eight Title II six Title II twenty three Title II 
Projects in Projects in Title II Title II Project in the 
the zones the zones Projects in Projects woreda 
the zones in the 
areas 
In addition to these, there are Title II activities in the rural part of Dire Dawa and 
Harari. Title II urban programs are mainly in Addis Ababa. 
0.018 million 
(Region, 200 I) 
• There is 
one Title II 
Projects in 
the zone 
There are empirical experiences suggesting that food security problems in the Title II 
areas are more serious in the country since most of the zones are located in drier parts 
of the country. However, according to the assessment the evaluation team has made 
the major causes of food insecurity and the attendant results are similar to the national 
sitliation discussed above. In spite of the fact that the drier·parts like Title II project 
areas are relatively less endowed, government development programs designed to 
address food security problems have been favoring rainfall reliable areas. Despite the 
bias, an attempt the evaluation team made to analyze grain production, productivity 
and per capita grain production in the Title II zones in the period 1999/00 - 0 I reveals 
that food availability from own production is not significantly lower than the national 
average in most cases. The results are presented below. 
6 
5! .. ' .. ~ .. 
. 
. r..-;: 
. :. 
. i ···i 
. 
j · 
.. ~!:l. 
........ 
-.. 
Per capita grain production (Kg) 
(National average: 1999100-144 
2000101 -174) 
Ti gray Am hara Oromia 
• Eastern: 117 (65%) • South Gonder: 137 (76%) • Borena : 45 (25%) 
119 (66%) 153 (85%) 66 (37%) 
• Central: 188 (104%) • North Wello: 140 (78%) • East Hararghe: l 09 ( 61 % ) 
157 (87%) 153 (85%) 136(76%) 
• Southern: 144 80%) • West " : 180 (103%) . 
149 (83%) 210 (117%) 
• East Shoa: 223 (124%) 
273 (152%) 
• West Shoa~ 203 (113%) 
249 (138%) 
- SNNP Gambela Soma lie ,. 
• Guraghe: 93 (52%) • Gog Woreda: 236 (131%) Liben: 6 (3%) 
127 (70%) 12 (7%) 
• Hadiya: 81 (45%) 
148 (82%) 
• Wolayeta: 63 (35%) 
105 (58%) 
N.B 
I. The first figure across each zone is per capita grain production for I 999/00 and the second for 
2000/01 
2. Figures in brackets are per capita grain production expressed as percent of the threshold 
(survival need) of 180 kg/person/year. 
3. Except in the case of Gog (Gambella) and Liben (Somalie), the sources are CSA 1999/00 and 
2000/01 Agricultural Surveys and Population Projections contained in the 1994 Population 
Census. The Gog and Liben figures are extrapolated from data the Woreda Agricultural Office 
provided to the evaluation team. 
4. The figures in SNNP zones are low because grain crops are not as dom
inant as in others zones 
where mixed fanning system is practiced. 
Literature review results also indicate that labor and land productivity in the Title II 
zones is not significantly inferior either to the regional or to the national figures. The 
2000/01 CSA cereal productivity figures reveal that maize and sorghum yields (two 
crops more widely grown in most project areas) are close to or at par with the regional 
aiid national values. For example, based on the CSA survey: 
• Yields of teff and sorghum accounting for 44% of crop area in the Central 
Zone of Tigray were at about the same level as the national average. 
Barley and wheat (62% of crop area) yields were in fact slightly better. 
• In South Gonder and North Wello cereal yields (except sorghum) were 
lower by 26-32 percent than the regional average in 2000/01. Sorghum 
yield (an important crop in North Wello) was higher by over I 0 percent 
compared to the regional and national averages. 
7 
u 
A if} 
q , i· 
~ 
~J 
;·~ 
ii 
~ ;;: '.J; 
a ~ 
B 
B 
[j 
0 
n u 
a 
p 
'i u 
a _, 
' 
a 
., 
a :~ 
1; 
-~i 
Li 
11 .. 
l . 
~ 
Li . 
. 
j 
w 
'! 
l ( 
~ 
"" •'!' 
~ . 
a ' 
-
-~! !l 
;_ ~ 
ti 
\ 
Y.-o~~~- . ,, 
~i~ 11 .: :f;.t:;; 
... ·. 
:~ ... 
·············• ::. :: :,;. :::~. -:·.:;, 
II 
·.:::_·-::-_:_:.._:.-·_: ·--_: 
-";.:_ ... 
t 
l 
I 
' 
~ 
·. 
• In the Oromiya zones, cereals yields were higher or al par with the 
regional figures. Even in Borena, barley (a major crop) was not any worse 
than the national average. 
• In the Guraghe and Hadiya Zones ofSNNP, cereal yields were 
considerably higher than either the regional or national yield figures. The 
opposite was true in the case of Welayita. 
Yield figures in 1996/97 and 1999/0 I showed the same trend. It is likely that 
higher family size and lower land holding account for relatively lower per capita 
grain production in the Title II zones, and not the significantly inferior 
productivity. 
Zonal level data on food indicators are not available. If the evidences pertaining to 
production and productivity discussed above are anything to go by, it is possible 
that the magnitude of food problem in the Title II Program zones is not 
considerably inferior compared to the national situation. Still, the lower per capita 
food production coupled with persisting rainfall shortage their selection for Title 
11 interventions seems justified. 
The rational for selection of Title II woredas could even be stronger. It is true that 
the food security situation at the zonal level might not represent the realities in the 
Title ll woredas. Food security and nutrition data at the woreda level are even 
scantier, if there are any at all. But empirical observations abound that the 
overwhelming majority of the Title II woredas are hugely marginalized where 
rainfall shortage is relatively more serious and frequent, land degradation is 
relatively more severe, non-farm income generating opportunities are punier, 
soCial infrastructures like health facilities and schools are less provided with, road 
density is lower, etc. Because of this, the anticipation is that food insecurity in the 
woredas is relatively wider and more severe compared to the zones. There are 
empirical results confirming the anticipation. Data assembled from some woreda 
agricultural offices during the evaluation indicate that per capita grain production 
in the woredas is lower by 17 -35 percent compared to the respective zonal level 
figures. 
Because of the precarious food situation that characterizes the Title II woredas, 
they might benefit more from safety net programs and NGO development efforts 
as well as relief operations. It cannot, however, be ascertained whether such 
incremental benefit offsets the production loss due to disadvantages households 
face in these woredas. Whichever way the argument goes, there is reason to 
believe that the objective conditions prevailing in the Title II woredas deserve 
household food security enhancing development projects like those of Title II. 
1.5 Title II Program in the Context of National Food 
Security Strategy 
Ethiopia has region-specific and national food security strategies (FSS). The 
strategies seek the attainment of sustained household food security through 
increased productivity and producti~m and improved opportunities to raise income. 
3 
.. 
.· . 
. ~ . .;~ : ... ~ 
::: ... ~~-
~~-
1~~ .~--~ . 
::-~J. 
...... : 
.. --
::-
·. 
The strategies place the focus on resource-poor, drought-prone and marginalized 
areas in each region. Moreover, the strategics advocate sustainable, consl'.rvation-
. based and environmentally friendly development approach in all development 
efforts directed at achieving the food security objective. The preparation of 
Participatory Poverty Reduction Strategy is underway at the national level. Since 
solutions to poverty and food insecurity arc coterminous, the Poverty Reduction 
Strategy is bound to re-enforce the food security strategy. 
These strategies invite public and private sectors, PVOs and NGOs to actively 
participate in the designing and implementation of development programs 
consistent with the FSS. 
Title II projects, strongly subscribe to the goals and objectives of the strategies. 
They underpin disadvantaged areas. They underline conservation-based, 
sustainable development. They seek authentic community participation as an 
objective in all aspects of their operation. 
9 
u 
fl j,·l .. 
n 
--~ 
' , :-:; 
~j 
;n 
l. 
l 1 l'-1 
B 
9 v. 
9 
~ . fl 
L~l 
. 
n 1 u 
t·~ 
H 'l...·:l 
n LI 
f 1 Ll 
g 
n l:i 
m . , . . 
~-l· 
B 
,. 
. 
.. fl 
p 
Ll 
,. 
n 
b ' itif ~l '· 
IP' 
t~ 1 , . ..... : 
't". 
I 
.... , .. 
-~ 
. ' 
i . 
i ! -=- i 
. 
;..;:-; 
!.-'J~: 
II. Methodology 
Data needed for the evaluation were obtained through (1) household questionnaire 
survey; (2) participatory semi-structured surveys; (3) secondary sources including 
project documents; and (4) personal observations of members of the evaluation 
teams. Each is briefly outlined below. 
2.1 Household Questionnaire Survey 
(a) Rural 
2.1.1 Sampling Frame 
The list of peasant associations (PA) in each woreda was obtained from the 1994 
Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia. It is used for ·the selection of Primary 
Sampling Units (PSU)5
• To select the ultimate sampling units (households), a 
fresh list of households was prepared by the enumerators in the sampled PAs 
using a prescribed listing instruction. 
2.1.2 Sample Design 
To meet the objectives and requirements of the survey, a stratified two-stage 
cluster sample design was used for the selection of ultimate sampling units. The 
project woredas were treated as a stratum and peasant associations formed the 
primary sampling units. The secondary (ultimate) sampling units were households 
for which the survey questionnaire was administered. 
2.1.3 Determination of Sample Size 
To determine the sample size required for each stratum (woreda) the following 
·cases were taken into consideration: 
The proportion of stunted children aged 6-59 months was obtafoed 
from the 1997 Title II Special Objective-Food Security and Nutrition 
Baseline Survey. 
The proportion of children aged 6-59 months and average household 
size were obtained from the 1994 Population and Housing Census. 
The Confidence interval of90% is con·sidered adequate. 
The design effect, intra-cluster correlation coefficient, response rate 
and coverage rate were computed from different surveys carried out 
by CSA, namely the 1996 and 1998 Welfare Monitoring Surveys, the 
1998 Health and Nutrition Survey and the 1999 Labour Force 
Survey. 
5 CSA updates annually changes in the constitution of PAs and woredas that has been laking place 
from time to time, and the 2000 adjusted frame was used in the selection . 
JO 
.·.:; 
.:.-1 
., . ~ 
! 
From these cases the following results were taken as input for the calculation of 
the sample size: 
L The estimate of the proportion of stunted children aged 6-59 months= 
0.61 
2. Average household size+ 4.8 
3. The desired precision or acceptable error= 0.1 (assumed) 
4. The two-tailed value of the standardized normal deviation associated with 
the 90% confidence level = 1.645 (a = 0.10) 
The required sample size (children) for the estimation of proportion of stunted 
children is: 
n= (0.61) (0.39) 0.645)1 = 64 
(0.1/ 
=..- From the 1994 Population and Housing Census, the proportion of children aged 6-
59 months out of the rural population was 0.17387. Hence, the expected number 
of children in the age group 6-59 months per household was equal to 0.8346 
(0.17387 x 4.8). Accordingly, the required sample size was 17 households. 
As indicated above, the design was not a stratified random sample but rather a 
stratified cluster sample, thus the sample size required for cluster design would be 
smaller or larger depending on whether the cluster design was more or less 
efficient than the random sample design. 
Asswning the design effect being equal to 2, the adjusted sample size became 17 x 
2 = 154 households. From the national sample surveys CSA conducted between 
years 1996-1999, the overall response rate was 90 - 99% and the coverage rate 
95%. From these results, it is known that the response rate was 90% and coverage 
rate 95%. By adjusting the required sample size for both non-response and non￾coverage rates, the final sample size was fixed at 180 households (154/0.9 x 0.95). 
Therefore, a sample size of 180 households was required for each woreda to 
obtain a reliable estimate for the given precision level. 
. . For the 1997 Title II Special Objective-Food Security and Nutrition Baseline 
Survey, pair selection of PAs was made for each woreda to make the design cost￾effective. From similar surveys CSA conducted, the intra-cluster coefficient was 
0.35. This indicates that households within any PSU has similar characteristics or 
there was much more variability between the PSUs than from within. Therefore, it 
was decided to select three peasant associations in each woreda to make the 
design more efficient than the pair selection option. Thus, the coverage was 60 
households per PA. 
2.1.4 Selection of Primary Sampling Units 
Two PA' s covered in the 1997 Base Line Survey were automatically chosen for 
the survey, while the third PA was selected by probability proportional to size, 
11 
u 
0 
n 
A 
. ~ ... 
u 
n 
u 
t"·1 
. ' i; 
I.:. ~ 
fl 
u 
.... , .. . .\ 
p 
t;,I 
p 
t : 
L 
~ I 
:;f:~ . i 
; 
:;.:· •. :! 
.~~~ ~ 
: .. ,
·;~: ' : 
-~-1 
i 
=~ "~ .. !'!- · ~'~! ;~1 :~ .: 
·- ·! .· ":'; 
; -~ ·- · ' \;:.; .. :'.1 ., , .... .. -::: _, 
:~ "-' •[J 
:?;f~; :-::...~ 
Xt~ ;~~ , c:;:-;J 
~"':.:'=, 
:;:~ ~ 
·I 
, -. .. - ·: .. ' .,. 
·~ 
·:· 'i ··• -.. i' 
,: . 
.. ; 
·.: 
~<l':~ ~ 
f;~/~ · ::::;:·.-·. 
\ ;-::":.:.:·:·:.: ·.1 
;_:_>_;
~;1'\~ _; ::-. .:L 
..... , ... .. 
size being total number of households obtained from the 1994 Population and 
Housing Census. 
In the case of projects not covered in the 1997 survey, three PA 's were randomly 
selected. 
2.1.5 Fresh Listing of Households and Selection of Households 
for Interview 
In each sampled peasant association, a fresh listing of households was carried out 
by going from house to house numbering them serially. From the list 60 
households were selected systematically with a random start_ The sampling 
interval for each PA was determined by dividing the total number of households 
by 60. The systematic random sampling technique was employed here because its 
application is simple and flexible, and it can easily yield a proportionate sample. 
{b) Urban 
The 200 I Title II Project Final Evaluation Survey was designed to provide data on 
relevant characteristics for Addis Ababa. 
2.1.1 Sampling Frame 
The list of kebeles, which was provided by CARE-Ethiopia, was used for the 
·• selection of Primary Sampling Units (PSU). For the selection of ultimate sampling 
units (households), a fresh list of households was prepared by the enumerators in 
the sample kebeles using a prescribed listing instructions. 
2.1.2 Sample Design 
To meet the objectives and requirements of the survey, unstratified two-stage 
cluster sample design was used for the selection of ultimate sampling units. The 
primary sampling units and the secondary (ultimate) sampling units were kebeles 
and households, respectively. 
2.1.3 Determination of Sample Size 
To determine the sample size required for Addis Ababa the following steps were 
used. 
I. Since similar surveys were not done before and the proportion or standard 
deviation of the attribute of interest was not known, the sample households 
required was calculated as follows: 
n= (404783)(1.96)2*0.25 = 384 
households 
(0.05/ (404782)(1.96/* 0.25 
12 
!il 
:~i - ' 
.- ' 
·. 
where. 
404783 is the total household size as obtained from the 1994 population 
census. 
l .96 is the number of standard deviation units of the sampling distribution 
corresponding lo the 95% confidence level. 
0.05 is the design precision level 
0.25 is a constant (p=q=0.5). 
2. The assumed design effect (as estimated from the 1998 Welfare Monitoring 
Survey, CSA) is 3, and the adjusted sample is 384 x 3 = 1152 households. 
3. Adjusting the sample size for the 20% non-response rate and I 0% non￾coverage rate the sample households required for the survey is 1600. By 
considering the intra-cluster correlation coefficient obtained from the 
household surveys conducted by the CSA, the number of households 
interviewed per kebele for the survey was 80. Hence, 20 kebeles were cov~red 
and the selection of kebeles from a list provided by CARE was done using 
probability proportional to size, size being th~ tgtal number of households 
obtained from the 1994 population census. 
2.1.4 Sample Selection of Primary Sampling Units 
The selection of kebeles was done by probability proportional to size, size being 
total number of households obtained from the 1994 population and housing 
census. The proportional allocation method was used to allocate sample kebeles to 
. . each wereda. The weredas are those in which the CSs have been operating). 
2.1.5 Fresh Listing of Households and Selection of Households 
for Interview 
In each sampled kebeles, a fresh listing of households was carried out by visiting 
each housing unit. Following the preparation of a complete list of households the 
households were serially numbered. From the list 80 households were selected 
systematically with a random start. The sampling interval for each kebele was 
determined by dividing the total number of households by 80. 
The systematic random sampling technique was employed here because of its 
simplicity in application and flexibility, since it can easily yield a proportionate 
sample. 
2.2 Participatory Semi-Structured ~urveys 
The first of such surveys was focus group discussions with three groups of 
beneficiaries: (1) mixed persons with age, sex, and wealth/social status 
considerations; (2) resource poor; and (3) women only. The plan was to have 12, 
(at least 5 women) 9 and 6 persons in the first, second and third groups, 
respectively. The application was to hold one discussion of each type per project. 
Numerically 40 discussions were to be held of each type in all the rural projects. 
That is, a total of 1080 persons (480 mixed, 360 resource poor, and 240 women 
13 
~ n\ ... · 
f"" .. (I 
t- •••. 
:; .. -; 
~ f l ' 
·:···! 
t 1 
u 
f1 \-.::.' 
Pl d 
~ -
A 
l l Li 
n 
u 
n 
u 
u j 
r;·~ 
i·: 
L.J 
Fl 
F::'"'i 
0 \ 
:! 
~ 
, 
a 
u .5 
J ~ 
~ 
--
-~ 
~~1 l·) --~ 
i:...: .! 
£"• -~ Ll ~· 
~ 1..4 :1 ""'1 .. 
-
_, 
•] 
.,, .. 
.-
. ' : 'l 
·:.: 
only) were scheduled to participate in the discussions. The dis.cussion points were 
pre-prepared. They centered around relevance and appropriateness of project · 
interventions, community participation, institution capacity building, gender, and 
sustainability. The tum out was as planned in all cases but one. In the mixed group 
discussions, the percentage of women who participated was 25%, much less than 
the anticipated (42%). 
The second semi-structured survey was interviews with key informants. The 
survey involved all sampled PA's. The plan was to interview four reputed, elderly 
persons (two from each sex) in each sample PA. The persons did not need to be 
direct beneficiaries. The criteria for the selection were knowledge of socio￾economic realities in the particular community and a certain level of familiarity 
with the projects' interventions. The guide questions for the interview were again 
pre-prepared. The particular interest in the survey was to capture trends or 
changes in food availability, access, income, the state of natural resources over 
time. The plan was to hold 160 interviews in all the projects. The turnout was 
100%. 
Tb.e third semi-structured survey involved agriculture and health offices and 
councils in the project woredas. The purpose was to monitor coordination between 
the project and relevant line offices, infonnation flow and feedback procedures, 
opinions about project perfonnance and results, sustainability, etc. Once again, the 
points to be raised with the woreda offices were prepared in advance. Except in a 
few projects, the planned interviews were held mostly with health and water 
officers. 
2.3 Secondary Sources 
The 1997 Baseline Survey, together with DAP documents the CS furnished, was 
the principal reference to the: 
• Preparation of the survey instruments, notably the questionnaire; 
• Chapter that presents the project results . 
2.4 Data Analysis 
2.4.1 Anthropometric Measurements 
All the children between 6-59 months in the sample households were included in 
the anthropometric measurement. Weight was measured by using hand-operated 
weighing scale of 130 kg capacity to the nearest 0.1 kg, and height was measured 
using a Harpender Stadiometer to the nearest 0.1 cm. Length board was used for 
infants and children who were not able to stand. The three indices of nutritional 
status: height- for-age, weight- for-age and weight-for-height Z-scores of the 
children were computed to estimate the overall prevalence of stunting, 
underweight and wasting, respectively, using the WHO/CDC/NCHS reference 
values. A cut-off point of less than - 2 SD was considered low nutritional status 
and values greater than or equal to -2 SD normal. 
14 
' 
. i 
I 
' 
~. 
·: 
' ! . · .. i . : ' j 
.-·::-{ 
-:! 
. ! 
·- ; 
: .:·: 
j -... .i .: 
··: 
The Z- scores were calculated with the help of appropriate software packages 
(dBase, EPl-INFO and SPSS Programs) developed by WHO and the National 
Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) (5-8). Waterlow's classification (9) are 
applied in the analysis. 
a. Normal (ZWH> 
- 2.00 and ZHA >-2 .00) for nonnal; 
b. Stunted, ZWH >-2.00 and ZHA < -2.00 for stunting; c. Wasted, ZWH< -2.00 and ZHA>-2.00 for wasting; and 
d. Wasted and stunted, ZWH<-2.00 and ZHA<-2.00 which is for underweight 
children. 
Height and weight of biological parents were not measured, since the requirement 
for the analysis was focused on children of s; 5 years. P- value of less than five 
percent (<5%) was considered statistically significant. 
2.4.2 Comparative Analysis 
In 1997 the CS's carried out a baseline survey covering most Title II assisted 
projects. The main purpose of the survey was to provide a database needed to 
monitor the progress of project activities and measure their impacts. Accordingly, 
the survey established base-year or benchmark values for indicators the CS
's and 
the donor agreed upon to measure perfonnance and impacts. The indicators are 
shown below by the Special Objective and Intermediate Results. 
Special Objective: Enhanced Household Food Security in Target Areas 
Indicators: 
(a) Improved nutritional status of children 
(b) Decreased time household does not have sufficient food to eat 
( c) Decreased use of adverse coping strategies 
Intermediate Result No. 1: Increased Agricultural Production 
Indicators: 
(a) Yield increase (barley, wheat, teff, maize and sorghum) 
(b) Overall production increase (barley, wheat, teff, maize and sorghum) 
(c) Percentage of households that used chemical fertilizers (barley, wheat, 
teff, maize and sorghum) 
(d) Percentage of households that used improved seeds (barley, wheat, 
teff, maize and sorghum) 
15 
l"J 
a : 
r .1 
~ 
n 
n 
"C.
"i 
~A 
n l1 
A 
H> 
rn . 
~ 
tfil 
Fl L· • ;.· 1 
{. l , :,J 
fl u 
.. 
u 
D r--1 
I .; L..=I 
~ 
£g 
~ 
p 
Ll 
0 : 
. 
f > 
I 
·. 
L-" 
{ 
·: bJ 4 
D . ~ 
~%1 t~ . :-:. :-: ~ 
..... 
.. ·· 
• ... t 
. . . · .. 
....... '-
Intermediate Result No. 2: Increased Household Income 
Indicators: 
(a) Percentage change in the number of livestock ownership in TLU 
(b) Improvement in physical asset ownership of household 
(c) Change in income from cash crop 
(d) Percentage of household that added luxury food items in their diet 
Intermediate Result No. 3: Improved Health Status 
Indicators: 
(a) Reduced prevalence of diarrhea diseases 
(b) Percentage of children underweight 
(c) Increase in access to potable water or protected water sources 
( d) Percentage of deliveries attended by trained TBAs 
(e) Percentage of households that visited health posts twice in the last six 
months 
(f) Percentage of households having a vegetable garden for own consumption 
(g) Change in the amount of the household used per day 
Intermediate Result No. 4: Natural Resource Base Maintained 
Indicators: 
(a) Change in the size of communal land reclaimed with physical and 
biological means 
(b) Change in the amount soil deposited behind check dams 
(c) Change in the amount of soil deposited behind terraces 
( d) Percentage of project interventions maintained 
Intermediate Result No. S: Emergence Response Capacity Enhanced 
Indicators: 
(a) Whether there is an approved disaster management plan in place 
(b) Access to local early warning information for the target areas 
The special objective, intermediate results and indicators mentioned above are 
primarily for the rural-based projects. The quantitative analysis plan of this 
evaluation is almost entirely based on the above framework. That is, the variables 
in the framework for which the 1997 baseline survey provides benchmark figures 
constitute the components of the quantitative analysis of this report. 
Quantitative results of the evaluation survey are compared with the 1997 baseline 
values for all indicators, where data are available, to record changes attributable to 
Title II interventions. Moreover, attempt is made to cross-tabulate the indicators 
16 
·:....-.. 
with selected livelihood and other related variables. That is, simple regression 
analysi~ is made between SO indicators and selected variables 6
• 
The variables used for the cross-tabulation include: 
• Sex of the head of household • Livestock ownership 
• Family size • Ox ownership 
• Episode of illness • Income from all sources 
• Water source • Physical assets 
• Vaccination status • Food availability from all sources 
• Age supplementary feed started • Consumption of livestock product 
(the proxy was meat consumption) 
• Age breastfeeding stopped • Amount of water consumed 
• Maternal education • Use of pit latrine 
• Practicing horticulture production • Morbidity 
• Land holding 
These livelihood variables were selected because it is hypothesized that the provision 
or access to social infrastructures like health services, education, family planning, etc., 
and ownership of productive assets like land, livestock oxen, etc, are important 
determinants of well-being. Accordingly the knowledge or nature of the association 
between these variables and SO indicators, it is hoped, could provide useful tools to 
the designing of subsequent Development Activities Proposals. 
This means that nutrition and other SO indicators have been expressed as a function 
of: 
(1) Household head characteristics (selected) 
(2) Asset ownership (mainly physical) 
(3) Food availability 
(4) Income 
(5) Access to clean water 
(6) Morbidity 
Percentage reduction in the use of severe coping strategies is one of the three 
indicators chosen to measure the achievement of SO. This report, consistent with the 
1997 baseline survey, assumed that the following variables constitute severe coping 
strategies: 
1. Reducing amount of meals 
2. Eating wild food 
3. Selling ox or cow 
4. Selling camel 
5. Selling non-livestock productive assets 
6. Withdrawing children from school 
7. Distress migration 
6 Jn the meeting held between CS and the evaluation team on September 17, 200 I, it was agreed to run 
a multiple regression analysis to see relations between the SO results and selected livelihood variables. 
The client in the meantime has assigned this task to another group and this report still contains only 
cross-tabulation results. 
17 
,., 
. . 
l j 
.
r~ . , i .;. 
i:.; 
n I :· 
t
'. -~ ·..:,,. 
r 
L 
,., k..?.;: 
%"f~ . 
. . ;
....:~~· .. 
.··.· · .. · 
., 
~ 
M:l 
r-, : ' 
:-.::: 
, . 
.. 
·-:.· .. 
2.5 Limitations 
Several problems were encountered during the data collection stage, which could 
have a bearing on the quality of data. The first is that households show a lot of 
impatience as well as reluctance to have their children measured. Mothers tend to 
involuntarily interfere with the measuring instruments while attempting to quieten 
the crying baby. This increases the chance to misread measurements. In future 
OAP evaluations, it seems prudent to separate the nutrition survey from other 
tasks of the evaluation and also accord more time to complete the survey. 
Another issue is that households have demonstrated a lot of caution to provide 
information pertaining to agricultural production. Although it was not often 
openly expressed, yet there 'was concern that providing data on production could 
result in the reduction of food aid, including FFW. To supplement the information 
that households provide with visual observations, it could be tactical to coincide 
data collection time with harvest, meher harvest in particular, in the future similar 
evaluation. 
Another important limitation was that figures the project staffs provided on plan 
and actual results or outputs did not always tally-with those given at the head 
office level. Where efforts made to reconcile the difference failed, the data 
furnished at the project sites have been taken. 
The question of manageability of the evaluation was in itself an important 
limitation. There are several points that make Title II Program in Ethiopia unique, 
so to speak. It operates more or less similar interventions using more or less same 
strategies or approaches in numerous places having different socio-economic 
backgrounds. It involves eight non-governmental organizations not exactly 
embracing same approaches to development, and also not having identical 
policies, strategies, operating procedures, etc. It has rural and urban programs. The 
fact that the evaluation has not reflected this uniqueness was a limitation. This 
report, in the opinion of the evaluation team, would have benefited immensely 
from breaking the sum total of the evaluation work into some more manageable 
parts (examples: urban, rural; nutrition, other interventions; pastoralist, mixed 
farming; cereal staple, tuber staple; and/or other combinations) and contracting 
out the job to two or more independent evaluating teams. Such an approach could 
be less cost-effective. But the trade-off between cost saving and quality 
compromise could have been rewarding. 
18 
. - -.ui.:u- ': ... -· ..... 
.. ·_. i 
--.. . 
·. 
•· 
. ' 
' 
:3,,. . 
t.,: ·~ 
Ill. Title II Program Results 
3.1 Introduction 
This chapter deals with the major Title II results and issues that have been influencing 
the performance of the projects. The results come in three forms or categories: 
Outputs, Effects and Impacts. Outputs refer to the physical accomplishments 
from the various Title II activities over the project period. The outputs are compared 
to targets and wherever information is available differences between targets and 
achievements are explained. Effects in this case refer to the five intermediate results 
agreed upon by and between the project holders and the donor. Progress or the lack 
of it is discussed using indicators specified for the purpose. Indicator values come 
mainly from the 1997 baseline and 200 I household surveys. The intermediate results 
and their respective indicators are reiterated below for convenience. 
{.I) Intermediate Result One-Increased Agricultural Production 
The six indicators under JR I are: 
• Increase in yield for five major cereals {kg/ha) 
• Increase in household grain production (kg/ha) 
• Households that adopted the use of chemical fertilizers (percent) 
• Households that use improved seeds (percent) 
• Increase of area under irrigation (percent) 
• Households that practice improved cultural practices (percent) 
(2) Intermediate Result Two - Increased household Income 
The four indicators under IR2 are: 
• Change in livestock ownership (TLU) 
• Improvement in physical asset ownership of households (percent) 
• Change in income from cash crops (percent) 
• Eating luxury food (percent) 
(3) Intermediate Result Three - Improved Health Status 
The seven indicators under IR3 are: 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Reduced prevalence of diarrhea diseases 
Percentage of children underweight 
Increase in access to potable water or protected water sources 
Percentage of deliveries attended by trained TBAs 
• Percentage of households that visited health posts twice in the last six 
months 
• Percentage of households having a vegetable garden for own 
consumption 
19 
'M 
::.·..,. ~ ... 1 ·· • > 
n 
i ·1 
iA 
f1 
. ·"\ 
Ll 
.. 
' 
. ' 
... :i 
: ! 
~~~ ..... .. 
··l ! __ .. :. ' 
~/ -
.. ~-... ; 
• Change in the amount of the household used per day 
(4) Intermediate Result Four - Natural Resource Maintained 
The four indicators under IR4 are: 
• Change in the size of communal land reclaimed with physical and 
biological means 
• Change in the amount of soil deposited behind check dams 
• Change in the amount of soil deposited behind terraces 
• Percentage of project interventions maintained 
·(5) Intermediate Result Fi\'e - Emergency Response Capacity Enhanced 
The two indicators under IRS are: 
• Whether there is an approved disaster management plan in place 
• Access to local early warning information for the target areas 
Finally, Impacts, the third category of results, refer to Title II achievements in 
respect to the Strategic Objective (SO). The agreed SO is Enhanced 
Household Food Security, and the three indicators selected to measure the 
extent of SO achievements are: 
• Reduction of child stunting 
• Reduction of food shortage 
• Reduction in the use of severe coping strategies 
To the extent possible effect and impact results are presented by project, CS 
and Title II (national). It is a comparative analysis between base year (1997) 
and end of the first OAP cycle (2001 ). 
20 
~ ~ 
. 
!'~ ",.! 
:}_;_;_._~~-' ~ - . ·::.. 
.. ::..:·. 
~~c.s :( ... ';. 7.'~i:-~ ~~;~ 
:~§~~j -~ 
··' 
....... ; 
: 
: : :--~j iiJ 
:1~ : ·;· 
·-: 
~:r1 ~::.~: 
. . i ~ ~ : 
. ! : ; ; i L; 
: 
.... 
-.. CJfJl¥{<~/1(3 
S<E.CTIOW 1 
PJf<YSICJlL OVCJ'PVCJ'S 
21 
I~ -·1 : J 
<·-::.! =·1- . •. ' : . . I :. 
I 
-
-
- ~ 
~ '.'f 
--1 -- : 
.. ' --
·i , - :; I 
-- -: j ---
g=J 
=--:-i 
~-j
- ._ 
... ' 
-- i 
.. i 
I 
{ -, 
I ··: 
I 
I 
.l 
I 
·i 
.I 
t l ,_ I ' 
! -1 
1 
I 
. 
i ' i 
: .! 
: i 
~ 
:t ;.<:~ 
~ 
~ ~~j 
~~ 
:~· : .: '} 
·:-.I . .... , : ·; 
.-.J 
. .. '
-
] 
I 
.. _; ,-;:.:J E4 : • "!· : 
~~ .. ~ -- :1 
' ' !-1 
.. 
3.2 Project Outputs: A Review of Actual Performance 
Compared to Targets 
Title II activities subsumed under crop production, livestock, natural resources, rural 
infrastructures, health, water, and nutrition. There are outputs in the first six. Nutrition 
results come under the impact section. Before presenting the outputs, a few 
observations relating to irrigation development and FFW that are common to all CS 
are made. 
3.2.1 Crop, Livestock and Natural Resources Outputs 
Africare 
Crop Production 
Effort to enhance increased crop production through the supply of improved 
and local seeds has been accomplished as planned for the two major crops -
maize and sorghum (Table 3.1). The project has also been promoting the 
production and consumption of vegetable seeds, including seeds production . 
OAP provides for demonstrations to minimize post-harvest losses through 
improved harvesting, threshing and construction of family grain stores. The 
project has started addressing the post-harvest component in FY 2000 with 
the construction of 38 granaries all provided with rat protection guards. 
Preparation is underway to build 750 demonstration granaries in FY 200 I. 
• Quantity of maize seed K. 6000 6000 100 
• No. of farmers who received 
maize seed 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
2)Trainin 
• Woreda staff 
• Farmers 
Source: Project.field office 
HH 
K . 
Ill-I 
K . 
No. 
M 
Sets 
No. 
No. 
No. 
404 
4000 
534 
12 
24 
400 
25 
3265 
26 
47 
313 77.5 
4070 101.8 
414 77.5 
9.9 82.5 
24 100 
38 9.5 
25 100 
1856 56.8 
26 100 
47 100 
22 
-
.... . 
:;;:··.; 
:i·:--" 
·.·.·. 
CARE 
-:· 
Crop Production 
The general trend in food production is that crop yield is declining mainly due 
to rainfall irregularity, increasing land degradation due to soil erosion, fertility 
depletion and expansion of chat. Land area for crop production is declining 
consistently as more of the cultivated land is planted to chat. Land is also lost 
because of worsening degradation. 
Chat expansion is due to its high economic return. It is a low cost crop since it 
does not require inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides. It is relatively more 
tolerant to poor climatic conditions. Chat is the most commonly and 
frequently used stimulant, and on average a family spends about I 0 Birr per 
day for home consumption. Because of this, and due to reliable demand and 
organized chat delivery system chat has no market problem. 
The project has been attempting to bring about attitudinal change, and it has 
been encouraging farmers to plant vegetables and fruit trees in areas where 
irrigation development is taking place, but to no avail to date. It is not 
surprising that this was so. Chat is a dependable and competitive cash crop. It 
is likely that farmers will carry on allocating more land to chat as long as its 
competitiveness lasts, and any external initiative to contain chat area 
expansion in favor of food crops will not 
succeed unless, return to chat 
declines for some reasons. 
CARE
- West Hararghe had virtually no crop production 
- related activity 
save training of farmers on improved farm management practices (Table 3.2). 
Farmers' training that the projects have carried out was immensely larger (ten￾fold) than planned. The situation in East Hararghe was different. Training 
scope was wider. It included extension training (in line with 
government 
extension package). Performance in this regard was more than two-fold bigger 
than plan. There was also an irrigation initiative where progress was slow, 
although the beginning looks encouraging. 
At Kuni, CARE supported the construction of two diver
sion 
w
eirs (one 
completed and the other about to be 
completed) for irrigation. The weir at 
Midagu is 95% completed and it is anticipated that about 175 households will 
eventually benefit. At present, of the total command area of I 03 ha., only 53 
ha is under irrigation. 
At 
K
e
n
teri, Mei
so, the con
struction of anoth
er weir is underway (70% 
completed). It has potenti
al to irri
gate an area of 80 ha. 
According to the 
project staff, community participation in the form of 
l
abor 
and fin
ance has 
be
en remarkable. Arrangements
.have not yet been made to 
o
rgani
ze irrigation 
water users associations needed to ensure proper and sustainable 
management 
of the systems. There is 
a
l
so no fee collection system 
y
et in place 
r
equir
ed to 
cover t
he cost of operat
ion 
and maint
enanc
e. 
23 
u 
' 9 
~ 
u 
D 
n 
~~ ··.; 
~ .... 
n [ .\ 
-. ~ 
A 
i:.~ 
'~ ~'2 
n 
rn u 
fl t-.. 
r, 
. 
:
·:; 
g 
11 
u 
a 
n t_ '.'! 
t! 
fl 
~ 
a 
[J 
n 
u 
n 
f · ... t...: f .1 Lj 
a 
1: 
!i 
,, 
;• f! ,, 
=:• ·i 
.; 
.i 
~i <i . 
I 
~ ~ 
; ;j 
I 
\ 
~ :1 
" ; j 
~-; 
. 
'• ·:ii! ·l i i· 
I 
·1 ·n 
s-
~ -~ ...... ··?. ·"r!; . 
1 
.. 
~: .-: 
" 
1:1§ 
: 
'i:l 
! ·~ 
P,i:J 
i ...... ~. .. :.f : ' l _; 
Table 3.2: Crop Production-Related Activities of CARE 
No. 812 8234 8242 6460 78.4 
No 4 
Extension trainin No. 7980 16197 203 
(2) lrri ation develo ment Ha. 500 34 6.8 
Lined canal construction Km. 15.3 1.6 10.5 
Diversion weir construction No. 4 2 50.0 
Ni ht stora e ond construction No. JO 2 20.0 
Table 3.2 cont'd ...... 
l~~~ll!f.~~~~ Pump irrigation Ha. 
"~~WBi~1;~,~~:~j 20 10 50.9 -· - Canal construction Km. 0.5 0.6 120.0 6.8 7.4 
Weir construction No. - - - I I 
Seedling production No. (000) - - - 1750 1450 
Agricultural package No. 135 338 250.4 121 210 
Canal maintenance Km - - - 14 20.5 
Training 
• 
. 
. 
Farmers No. 315 594 188.6 658 1109 
Project staffl No. 40 40 IOO 
Woreda staff No. 12 10 83.3 JO 12 
Source: Project.field offices 
At Grawa irrigation, promotion of organic farming, provision of farm tools 
and improved seeds are the major areas of intervention to increase agricultural 
production. 
The construction of a diversion weir and canals (lined and earth) is underway 
and near completion in Chilul, which is located in the lowland Grawa, a 
locality that frequently faces serious rainfall shortage. The irrigation, if 
supported by proper methods of water application, efficient management, and 
adequate technical support could contribute considerably, to the increase of 
crop production and productivity. 
At Grawa attempt is being made to increase agricultural production through 
the introduction of organic farming. Composting exercise through pit method 
is being practiced at the backyards of selected beneficiary households in the 
project area. 
-, Project woredas include Chiro, Kuni, Guba Koricho (disaggregated data by woreda are not 
available) 
8 Project woredas include Grawa, Bedeno and Kurfachele ((disaggregated data by woreda are not 
available) 
9 Training of staff included both Adam a & Boset 
24 
108.8 
100 
82.9 
173.6 
146.4 
168.5 
120.0 
;. 
1 
-·--1 
··; 
~ ..... . .. 
In East Shoa, project activities were limited to irrigation and farmers' training. 
Both in Adama and Bosset outputs have been considerably bigger than plan. 
The irrigation system is well maintained and farmers' knowledge about the 
basics of irrigated crop production is remarkable. 
A diversion weir the project constructed on Awash River at Doni and 7.5 km 
main canal constructed to channel the water to the command area was 
completed five years ago, and still it is in good condition. The beneficiaries 
are responsible for the maintenance of the canal with technical assistance and 
close monitoring from the project. However, the canal depth is increasing 
owing to· the piling of sediment being removed from the canal every time 
maintenance is carried out. This has posed a problem in the maintenance of the 
canal and in channeling water to the command area and needs attention. 
About 300 ha is irrigated from the diversion at Doni. The project is successful 
and has effected a significant change in the livelihood of the beneficiaries. 
Crop production has significantly increased from 800 kg/ha to 2400 kg/ha. A 
farmer beneficiary earned about 8,000 Birr from onion he planted on a 0.25 ha 
irrigated land. 
Few farmers, however, are not beneficiaries of the irrigated fields because 
they lease the land to other non-farming groups. Effort to obtain information 
on the lease arrangement was not successful. Both the lessor and the lessee 
have not been willing to provide figures on the rental. The information the 
team had is that the rental is to the advantage of the lessee because of his 
superior knowledge of the market and market information. Moreover, he has 
capability to transport the farm produce to nearby townships, which the lessor 
cannot do easily. It is true that the lessee earns revenue risk-free, but the 
concern is that the revenue foregone is bigger than the risk averted. That is, the 
project beneficiaries are the losers. But the loss can be avoided through 
organizing farmers into a marking cooperative or setting up producers' groups 
that could link up with wholesalers and retailers in the townships. The 
important message here is in an irrigation scheme where production involves 
perishable products like vegetables, marketing is crucial that needs particular 
attention. The leasing of land in the scheme is linked to marketing difficulties 
the producer face, meaning that the marketing aspect has not been given the 
attention it deserved. 
The effort made to know the number of beneficiaries who already are leasing 
their plots to traders was not successful. It is learnt that it is not big. But it 
_could grow big in no time unless the marketing problem is addressed. 
On a more positive note, many interviewed beneficiaries expressed high 
satisfaction in the scheme, and they reported that it has immensely improved 
their well-being (see the box story below) 
25 
n 
u 
n. f.- t 
LI 
n 
. . ' ; 
u 
a c 
1 
n lJ 
~ 
. 
. 
. 
' 
l 
FJ 
l;°!J 
·- . 
··~ 
No More a Stranger to Fifty and One Hundred Birr Notes 
Afrasa is a young girl of 25 years of age. She is a beneficiary at the Doni 
irrigation scheme. She lives with here two sisters in the village close to the 
irrigation site. She produces vegetables, mostly onions .. When asked to tell 
what she appreciates most of the irrigation scheme, she smiled with radiance 
and said, "I am much richer now than before. I never had paper money 
bigger than one or five Birr notes. Now this is history. I am no more a 
stranger to the 50 and 100 Birr notes, thanks to the project". She was also 
asked whether she faced any marketing problem to which she responded in 
the affirmative. But she added that she and her two sisters have so far 
managed alright to look for buyers at reasonable prices. 
Natural Resources Conservation10 
Table 3.3 below presents the main project activities and outputs. The table clearly 
demonstrates that except for seedling production on micro nurseries, outputs were 
well below targets. Survey results reveal that farmers awareness is low about 
usefulness of conservation practices and the seriousness ofland degradation. Yet, 
only 13.5% of farmers training programs in this regard was actually implemented. 
Lack of budget was cited as the main problem for the under-performance. 
10 Title II Projects have numerous conservation interventions (physical and biological measures) in 
every woreda. Yet, under the IR4- Natural Resource-Based Maintained- there are three indicators 
specified to measure results of which two are not practical to apply. There is thus only one indicator 
left- "communal land reclaimed through physical and biological means" - to quantitatively monitor 
performance. To supplement this with some qualitative observations a few questions were included in 
the household survey. The frequency distribution of the questions are presented for each CS. The 
beneficiaries are the owners of the Title II Programs. How much are they familiar with the main 
problem the conservation programs address - land degradation? Do they feel they are participating 
effectively in the effort being made through the projects to reduce degradation? Are they aware of the 
realized and potential benefits from the physical and biological measures, which take land away from 
traditional uses? The purpose was thus to solicit responses to these and other related questions. The 
objective was to have information that could be of use in the designing of future DAP. The results 
(percentage of responses) are summarized in tables 3.4, 3.7, 3.1 1, 3.15, 3.20 and 3.25 for those CS that 
had conservation program. 
26 
;/ 
. : : : . :;:: i j:· f 
// 
Table 3.3: Outputs of CARE Soil and Water Conservation Activities ill 1997/98 - 2000/01 Period 
1. Soil conservation trainin 
2. Tree seedling production No. 981,000 301,000 30.7 800,00 I 7 l 0.200 I 88.8 
(demonstration nurseries) 0 
3. Seedling production (micro No. 111,000 450,000 405 - I - - I 11 1,000 I 450,000 I 405 
nurseries) 
4 Promotion of fuel saving stoves I No. I 430 I 450 104.7 146 I 68 I 46.6 I 576 I 518 I 90 
Source: Project field offices 
27 
>· c= r,;::=J n:rn c:::J t;':3 c:;::::: c:::i ::::::.: r::..-::J r.::-...J a:r:rm z::::J ::ma m. 
a· . ... . . . •:r *' :,,\ i :v · .., ,,. ·:. . ... •4·;: ... ,_ ... .... :·. " . ... 
!I 
-!~~ i 
···.;..ti 
. 
~~ :~ .. .... ..,., 
:.--..;:_ ., .. 
-~. i ' ·; : 
; ,·1 
:::J 
·:if '···J ::~!,. 
-~~~ 
..;<:. 
fi~ ,_. _! ~ 
.. 
~ ..• • 
~:;l :-:--::: 
·-. 
·' ,......:.: 
~;.•.: 
·: .. i· 
~-
~i: 
~-·' ~-. 
'"·· .• 
Other main observations relating to natural resources activities of the Title II 
Projects include: 
a) Maize and sorghum are major cereals cropped followed by barley and wheat at 
high altitudes. The mid altitudes are mostly cropped with chat, a perennial · 
stimulant crop. Cereal-cultivated land experiences severe erosion problem 
owing to the absence of ground cover, steep slopes, absence of conservation 
measures and seasonal intense showers. Chat-cropped lands have slight 
erosion because of the traditional soil and water management practices which 
control surface runoff and erosion. Chat planted in well cultivates and cleanly 
tilled ridges and basins collects runoff water and controls erosion . 
b) Another observation that this evaluation notes is the planting of potatoes along 
the contour in rows between ridges and terraces. It is a good example of 
conservation-based farming practice seen in the highland parts. It needs to be 
improved and expanded. The technique presumably was introduced during 
the Italian occupation according to information from the wereda agricultural 
office. It is a technique worth considering in any plan to improve agricultural 
production . 
c) Chat is not only a good source of income to farmers but it also is helpful for 
conservation. Chat performs well under better soil moisture conditions and, 
therefore, requires better soil and water management. The traditional 
Hararghie land management involves ridge and basin cultivation. The ridges 
and basins formed in chat farming help in harvesting moisture and erosion 
control, and therefore, it is a conservation-based intervention. However, since 
chat field is kept clean from vegetation underneath it favours splash and sheet 
erosion. Farmers, however, practice strip cropping to reduce runoff and soil 
erosion. Sweet potato, sorghum and maize are grown in strips in the mid and 
lowlands whereas potato is planted in the highlands. 
d) One other activity with the potential to contribute towards balancing the 
natural resource base is the supply of coffee and fruit tree seedlings to farmers. 
Farmers are given training in planting techniques and plantation management. 
e) Introduction of energy saving stoves is another area of intervention that can 
help reduce overexploitation of vegetation cover. 
f) CARE Adama operates in 27 kebeles. The project area is characterized by 
severely degraded upland slopes and lowlands with moisture stress. 
Development of water harvesting structures (birka/cistem), construction of 
diversion weirs for irrigation development, training in improved agricultural 
practices, provision of seeds and tools and moisture conservation measures 
(ridge and sunken bed) are a good example of conservation-based 
development. 
g) Based on results from the household survey, it seems evident that farmers' 
knowledge about erosion, degradation, participation in project supported 
conservation work, etc. was not adequate (Table 3.4). 
28 
I . 
. 
. 
. ' 
·. -! 
·. 
.· 
~ ·=Y~~~/-:" ~~! =~· .. 
~: ~:,-:h'~~terisd ;L:',_J: Beneficiaries who recognize 
soil erosion caused degradation 
is a roblem 
Beneficiaries who say they 
have had active individual and 
community participation in the 
project-promoted conservation 
programs 
Beneficiaries who say they 
planted trees with support 
provided by the project 
(technical assistance, 
seedlings, etc. 
Beneficiaries who report the 
presence of an area enclosure 
for the purpose of land 
rehabilitation 
Beneficiaries who say they are 
getting grass for their livestock 
from enclosed areas through 
the cut and carry system 
Beneficiaries who say they 
collect fuel wood (dried leaves 
and wood in the enclosures 
Source: Project field offices 
77 
49 
7 
3 
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) 
Crop Production 
69 74 69 37 
30 11 26 38 
47 
9 · 20 41 
5 10 3 
13 76 
25 62 17 
CRS operates 11 Title II projects in as many woredas. Of these only four￾Fedis, Jarso, Kombolcha and Gulomekeda- have had some crop production￾related programs (Table 3.5). The activities involved training of farmers and 
staffs of line ministries, in soil and water conservation, irrigation canal 
construction. Results were mixed. While training programs were carried out 
almost as planned (except farmers' training in Jarso), conservation outputs 
were dismally lower than plan in both woredas, although the quality and 
appropriateness of the conservation measures leave no question to ask 
. . 
Several small irrigation schemes envisaged in the DAP have not been 
implemented reportedly pending the completion of a Programmatic 
Environmental Assessment of the small-scale irrigation schemes in the 
country. 
29 
u 
rn· t:"j l :" 
, t· 
p 
£1 
74 
;.,, ... 
~ i 
i. ~ 
a 
29 
[] 
26 u . 
3 n u 
n lJ 
Fl 
u 
0 
p 
·I u 
m - < 
B ~ 
' 
a ~ ! ·i 
8 ·2 
~ 
i 
i 
f1 Ll 
B .4J.-
.. * .. . .. ... . . . ; · ..... : .... O p,;,. ____ •••H < o , ·.:. 
iijif" H•:. · .. r.t ;., :' ·::::\iitili .... .. .... : .. i llliL1!:IB ··.'·:. , .. 
: .. •' 
't 
Table 3.5: Crop Production-Related Activities of CRS (Oromia, Tigray & Harari11) 
(I) Training: 
• Project staff No . 9 9 100 5 6 I 120.o I 5 I 5 I 100 I 5 I 
• Woreda staff " 1 l 100 - 2 
Fanners " 105 105 100 87 45 I 51.7 I 85 I 83 I 97.6 I 100 I 
Fann land Km. - - - 149 45 I 30.2 I 85 I 137.6 I 161.9 
soil bunding 
Fann land " - - - 264.l I 38 I 14.4 I 690.6 I 92.5 I 13.4 
stone 
bundin 
Composting Mj - I - I - I 263 I 114 I 43.2 I 209.6 I 30 I 14.3 
(2) Irrigation: 
Canal Km - - - 12.7 12.0 94.5 90.0 - - 6 
construction 
Source: Project field offices 
11 CRS operates in woredas not shown in the table,. The omission is due to absence of crop production- related activities. 
5 
98 
1.7 
'! :' 
I 100 
I 98.o 
28.3 
'"•: 
,.,; 
.. :: ,;:fdihi 
.PE 
30 
.. ; ;.. 
~ ~1 :-: .. 
~: ; 
. ·i 
.· :. 
; 
.. -~ 
··.· ..... 
. Natural Resources Conservation 
The projects have been engaged in a wide range of conservation activities as seen 
in Table 3.6 below. Although the rate of performance varied from project to 
project, in most cases what has been accomplished was well under target, 
especially so with physical soil conservation measures. Low performance is 
attributed to irregularity in the flow of project resources. In a few case.s, it is 
though that some targets (construction of Fanya Juu, for example) were 
considered ambitious. 
31 
u 
n 
.. i ~ 1..} 
... ., 
i' : ! \ 
F: H 
.. & 
n1· 
u 
~ > Ll 
n t .: 
,, .· ... 
. :::·;~ nnstruction 
5. Stone-checkdam 
6. Ye etative barrier 
7. Seedling 
roduction 
8. Transplanting 
9. Micro-basin 
establishment 
ITTeed collection 
I I. Grass seed 
roduction 
12. Gr:iss stin 
13. Com st makin 
I 4. Cutoff drain 
15. Grass strip 
,roduction 
16 Spate canal 
construction 
17. Road 
construction 
I 8. Pond construction 
I 9. Roof catchment 
. -~~1~ ~1:. ::·:, ·:~·:!.< ... .:H!llifr~ . Wi~ ·· · :)JH U:.-.:..:·~~:~;~:~~~.-:i~~,:~.; .. ... 
. ' 
" 
:J.:;;t =: •. 
·l: <{; :~~~f1F.. ] Table 3.6: Outputs of CRS Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the Period 1997/98 -2000/01 
18 5 27.8 264 114 43.2 210 92.5 44 260 149.4 57.5 752 
344 66.3 19.3 . . 12 . . . . 356 
245 166.5 68 601 472.5 78.6 639 310.5 48.6 336 311 92.6 1821 
-- 14 -
32 6.5 20.3 5.5 5.1 92.7 16 2.9 18.5 16 22 137.5 69.5 
.. 76 68.4 90 . 7 2.9 40.7 II 10.6 96.2 94 
No. 1,360,0 1,130,0 83 1,037,000 996,000 96.4 1,100,000 1,0 16,500 92.4 3,497,000 
00 00 
.. 1,360,0 1,122,0 82.5 959,000 454,000 47.3 I, I 00,000 1,0 16,500 92.4 573,600 439,550 76.6 3,992,600 
00 00 
No. . . . 232,400 76,700 33 289 137.8 47.7 207,000 108,600 52.5 439,689 
K . . . . 103 61.2 59.4 108 99.5 92.2 54 64 I 18.5 265 
Ha. . . . 1.75 0.9 51.4 . . . 1.75 
Km. . . . 340 975 28.7 76 42 55.3 126 127.4 101.2 542 
M . . . 12.6 12 95.2 90 30 33.3 102.6 
Km. . . . . . . 4 12 300 8 12 
Kg. . . . . . . 135 107.5 79.6 135 
Km. I . I . I . I . I . . I 18 1.5 I 41.7 I I I I 18 
Km. . . . . . . 8 6 75 12 10 83.4 20 
No. . . . . . . . . . 6 4 67 6 
No. . . . . . . . . . I I JOO I 
Source: Projectjleld offices 
" 
. ~>::; ~·: .. . .. _ .. %!1~Hli .. . .. ··) .. .. • ..... ,1 mi 
360.9 48 
63 17.7 
1260.5 69.2 
36.5 52.5 
81.9 87.1 
3, 142,500 89.8 
3,032,050 75.9 
I 85,437.8 I 42.2 
224.7 84.8 
0.9 51.4 
266.7 49.2 
42 40.9 
12 100 
107.5 79.6 
I 1.5 I 41.7 
I 16 I 80 
r 4 l 66.6 
I I I 100 
32 
l ... ;: ....... .1 
.. ;f f'.i; .... I / I 
I; '• 
.... i. 1 
I, Soil bund Km 352 150.3 42.7 I 
construction 
2. Stone bund " 192 48 25 I 
construction 
3. Micro-basin No. 202,000 187,500 I 92.8 I 
construction 
4. Hill side terrace Km. 307 238.9 77.8 
5. Check dam Km. 12 12 100 
construction 
6. Vegetative barrier " 6 6 · 100 
7. Grass strip " 125 98 78.4 
8. Cutoff drain " 4 4 100 
9. Tree seed collection Kg. 30 30 100 
10. Seedling production No. 540,000 540,000 100 
11. Transplanting No. 540,000 530,000 98.2 
12. Fanyajuu Km. - - -
13. Area enclosure Ha. - - -
Source: Project field offices 
.. l.o •• 
,... •.. , .•. " 
i.· •W "'''' .... r::..:J Ww.113 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I 870 I 
I I 
I 294,ooo I 
1615? 
46.8 
29.8 
58 
5 
-
281.8 
-
r.,· .. ... M ... :.<.• 
- I 
I 
I 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
fT,•-:• 
450 
30 
600,00 
0 
. ,·1:; .... . i . : .. :Jlt!tM. 
... 
. 
/ 
. ; Table 3.6 Cont'd ...... 
I 405.4 I 90.l I 802 I 555.7 I 69.2 
I I I 192 I 48 I 25 
I I I 202,000 I 481,500 I 238 
307 404.4 130 
34 I 113.4 I 42 I 92.8 I 220 
6 35.8 596 
125 156 125 
4 9 225 
30 30 100 
540,000 540,000 100 
592,16 98.7 540,000 1,130,0 209 
0 00 
- 281.8 
150 - - 150 
•. ,, "'I .,, r1• '•" '• 
...... '... .• 3 
.. 
.... . 
33 
c:::::J 
· .... 
, . :'.' :·H{M; 
c;Jra Ill 
,, 
. ; ! 
. . ! 
:i: 
Other main conservation-related findings include: 
a) Not only conservation activities come in many forms, but they also address the 
priority conservation needs of the areas. The qualitative aspects of the various 
types of cropland conservation structures, stabilization of these structures with 
vegetation mainly grasses, agroforestry, pond construction, area enclosure and 
enrichment plantations are of high standards. The assistance the projects were 
providing to the establishment of small-scale private nursery is worth noting. 
b) Awareness of the beneficiaries about soil erosion issues is considerable as 
shown below (Table 3.7). 
c) At Golorabo, the project has developed a spring and delivered water through a 
pipe to a village about 400 m away. There is a water committee to manage the 
system. Water from the spring is also used to irrigate crops such as potatoes. 
A village organization manages the irrigation. Any conflict arising from water 
use is resolved by the village organization (Afosha), which is accountable to 
the Kebele Administration. Communities highly appreciate the Afosha 
system. They think it is very effective to resolve conflicts. The system could 
be used to promote community-driven conservation programs. 
d) Cropland conservation outputs in East Hararghe projects are relatively 
impressive qualitatively. Rectangular ridges and basins are formed to plant 
sweet potato on the ridge and chat in the basin. Biological conservation 
practices are introduced in the area. 
e) Bund stabilization with elephant/ napier. grass is undertaken widely and this 
has enhanced the formation of bench or nearly bench terraces, with a terrace 
wall of 1.5 - 2m. 
f) Soil bund is the most commonly practiced conservation activity followed by 
stone bund and stone-faced terrace in all weredas, and this is supportive. 
g) In a nursery established at Egu, various tree and grass species are raised. 
Eucalyptus spp, cupresus, acacia spp cordia spp are among the tree species 
being raised. The nursery further serves as a grass and fodder species 
multiplication site where grass species such as vetiver, elephant grass and 
Phalaris spp are multiplied. Flooding is a problem obstructing nursery 
activities. Constructing a dyke around the nursery could probably solve the 
problem. Another option could be to move the nursery to another site during 
the next DAP (if any). 
h) Table 3.7 reveals that the majority of the beneficiaries are aware that erosion￾caused degradation is an important problem. 
34 
....... 
-·: 
-;.'"~ .... ~:· 
~~ 
~-: -;:.::..:: .. 
it~§~ · .. ·: 
. • . .. -· 
::.=-·-~ .: ... 
·.;.; 
·--·· ·-1 
Table 3.7: Selected Conservation-Related Survey Results in CRS Projects 
... ~;_ . ... -_.·:: ._; . ._: .. 
Beneficiaries who 
recognize that soil 
erosion-caused 93 79 79 85 68 51 
degradation is a 
roblem 
Beneficiaries who say 
they have had active 
individual and 
community 
participation in the 66 42 76 51 93 88 
project-promoted 
conservation programs 
Beneficiaries who say 
they planted trees with 
support provided by 
the project (technical 29 20 44 27 40 71 
assistance, seedlings, 
etc.) 
Beneficiaries who 
report the presence of 
an area enclosure for 63 66 78 59 74 72 
the purpose of land 
rehabilitation 
Beneficiaries who say 
they are getting grass 
for their livestock from 
enclosed areas through 
the cut and carry 35 11 55 15 87 92 
system 
Beneficiaries who say 
they c91lect fuel wood 
(dried. leaves and 5 7 50 12 64 80 
wood)in the 
enclosures 
Beneficiaries who 
report active women 
participation in the 
conservation ro rams 89 12 53 20 86 83 
Source: Project field offices 
Some comments on figures in Table 3.7: 
• The awareness of the beneficiaries on soil erosion as the cause for land 
degradation and decline in agricultural productivity is high (93%) in 
Gulomekeda (Tigray) followed by Fedis (85%). Although communities in the 
35 
•"' . ::>: .•. 
67 
94 
21 
97 
97 
80 
57 
f1 
bl 
f1 u 
rn w 
-.-: !" 
- --~ 
...... _ .. 
~·: 
·.;: .. : 
~;~~ ~: ·-·..:-· .-.-.. · . ._ 
,;.·_ 
project woredas are no strangers to conservation, there are observations 
attesting that there has been an important qualitative change. Communities 
accept that it is they themselves who should assume the lead role in 
conservation development more now than before, and the observations 
accredit this to the projects. 
• Community participation in project activities is also high in Meta (93%) 
followed by Gorogutu (88%). It is relatively lower in Jarso (42%). The 
important contribution of the projects according to observations made is that 
the participation is more authentic now (more decision making role) than 
before. 
• Percent of beneficiaries who are aware that area enclosure is meant to 
rehabilitate degraded lands is highest in Dire Dawa (97%). This is attributable 
to the projects' efforts . 
Ethiopian Orthodox Church - Development Inter-Church 
Commission (EOC-DICAC) 
Crop Production 
The main intervention to increase production, namely, the provision of input 
credit was not implemented due to the government micro-finance policy. 
Because of this, the projects did not have any alternative interventions aimed 
at improving the supply side of household food security. However, there have 
been numerous activities of demonstrative nature such as training, on-farm 
conservation in Wadla and emergency capacity enhancing in Mekdela and 
Endamahoni (Table 3.8). Performance in respect to these activities has been 
satisfactory. 
The plan to develop small-scale irrigation schemes in Sodo, Mekedela and 
Wad la did not materialize. Two irrigation schemes were planned for 
Endamehoni project; one has been developed but did not go operational at the 
time of this evaluation, and the second is still in the planning stage. 
Three reasons are given for under-performance in the development of small￾scale irrigation schemes. The first is that OAP did not have essential 
information on water bodies to be developed for irrigation or for domestic use, 
and in some cases the water sources did not even exist. The second is that the 
time envisaged in the project proposals for the completion of the schemes has 
not been realistic. The third was that project funds came later than planned and 
in less amount than expected. 
36 
;:: ; /:, , .. ;,ii>:!;ll•· 
,, 'g:c .. 1 >. • r .; • · »<1;; • • .. , , .w; . ' I"·'> 'ffl'J'[ij•'·<· 'l''H!!I • 1 11· 1 .,.1·· , ,,.,.,:, :A>::ii·i i:i1 A1;1: i1•ri" ,:"· :. ','.' :, ,1 •• d .. :L. . :.i._: • :·, .... 1 ftEl '" .. ...... : : .. \ : ... ..... " ' ____ ., .... " .. ::i'i\i· >}:; ': ,J:f:1:1mm:1 .: .: U? .. ... l!.:i.:.J . .t.:'; t. • .-;.. .•• .. .. 
/ 
/ 
Table 3.8: Outputs of Crop Production-Related Activities of EOC 
lot 
2 1 Crop assessment 
3 I Crop market survev 
4 I Agroforestry 
5 I Irrigation development 
6 I Farmers training 
On improved 
agricultural Eractices 
On vegetable 
roduction 
On water 
mana ement 
On women skill 
develoEment 
On TAP/primary 
health worker 
7 I CroE land bunding 
Soil bund 
Stone bund 
Stone bund 
maintenance 
m:;;:,J [ ,,r ........ 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
000' 
Ha. 
Ha. 
Km. 
No. 
I No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
No. 
Km. 
Km. 
Km. 
... 
12 4 
20 13 
10 
ISO 99 
I 
51 82 
100 
C::'::J 
3 
540 
33.33 12 
65.00 20 
2 
24 
79 
2 
66.00 560 
I 118 
160.78 62 
50 
20 
732.4 
2186 
( 
....... _ 
. ' I-lo .. .rlol 
2 
125 
12 
2 
I 532 
147 
45 
17 
7.5 
830.1 
C".JJl 
66.67 3 
23.15 500 
12 
60.00 20 
2.5 
5.5 
100.00 T 3 1 
2 
I 95.00 I 450 I 
I 124.58 I 11 o I 
72.58 31 
50 
85 I 17 
1.02 513 
37.97 743 
r.-rv•-, a:..,..;;u-d C;zJ 
2 66.67 3 2 66.67 9 6 66.7 
276 55.20 150 160 106.67 1190 561 47 
6 50.00 10 8 80.00 46 18 39 
17 85.00 20 19 95.00 80 61 76 
119.1 4764.0 4.5 2.6 57.78 9 121.7 1352.2 
0 2 
6.133 111.51 21.2 60.7 6.133 10 
3.2 82.2 
.51 T 11.00 T 2 T 00 T 00 1 7 1 0.51 1 7.3 
00 00 2 00 00 
598 I 132.89 I 550 I 562 I 102.13 I 1110 I 1791 I 104.7 
125 I 113.64 I 115 I 128 I 11 uo I 343 I 400 I 116.6 
40 129.03 57 62 108.77 201 I 229 113.9 
50 250 
2 I 11.76 I 20 I 20 I 100 I 57 I 39 I 68.42 
0.578 0.113 425.6 18.003 I 4.23 I 1671 I 26.081 I 1.6 
951.25 128.03 854.8 457.9 / 53.s1 / 3784 / 2239.957 / 59 
7 
369.41 1507.6 I I I 1877.019 
9 
.. .... 
37 
m 
..... 
i .... 
;: l: :·:;, ..:. ji!~n::> ... ·:~ff~i j:: ~:ff;{'.k ,, .. ). h • -.: •• . 
er .. > .. ,., ;:~~~. I!:-~ • 
.,., .. 
• : . . ,i :1 
Mo• • J ,..J :f~)":i!E~ ::( .· .. ·' 
Chcckdom Km. I I I I 11.5 I 11.4 
construction 
Trench construction Km. 
Cut of drain Km. 6.6 4.722 
8 1 Compost preparation T M 100 32 
9 I Caoacitv building 
Metratogical stations No. 2 I 50.00 2 I 
Source: Project field offices 
. .. 
I 99. 13 I I 
71.55 
32.00 100 
50.00 2 
· v~1~lliWJ /?~~~~~ · · · :·~ .. : . :i! illiit~ : <.:: ·:~~ $ 
... \,.'\i~: I 2.26R I 226.R I 
100 100 
I 50.00 1 
., 
' J.:~·rt $ s.::© R.25 I 5.71 I 100.54 2 T I 1 
.. ;;;;?,; ;. . ?:%f~~ .. ,.~f::~ . ···:.:i 
. .. 
' ,ti m 
I 20.75 
100.54 
6.6 4.722 I 71.55 
200 132 I 66.0 
1 8 I 4 I 50 
38 
... 
~ ' 
. 
·-
~.· .: 
. . · 
,, 
.· ': 
-. 
Livestock12 
Like other CS, EOC did not have much presence in livestock development. The 
activities it has been promoting focused on Sodo. Table 3.9 shows that performance in 
respect to feed development in Sodo (the most important intervention) has been well 
below plan (vetiver slips production I 7%, multiplication of other grass slips 2.4%). 
12 EOC, FHI, REST, SCF/USA and WVl/E have had some direct livestock interventions. The 
scope varied from project to project. So did the tyPes of activities, although feed, health and 
capacity building (training) of fanners were common features of livestock programs. In many 
respects livestock programs aimed at enhancing the access aspect (improving household 
income) of household food security. For this reason and convenience apiculture (support for 
honey production) is included in this section. 
39 
..... 
i ,j_ 
u 
ffl 
u 
n 
[j 
fl 
il 
:. .. 
r ·.-·--·· 
... 
. , · .:, .. ....... · i .. 
., .•• t 1 ..... .... ...... .... 1 .... •• .: •• • ........ } .... .. ......... ... :. · .... ... ; .. ..:_ .. ... ; ... 1 .. .. ·. · · .. ... ·. ..... 
.,., ...... 
: 'd .. :i.'. .. r: > . •;' •l• :: ... · ·::·::-:::1n : •. , .••• :.:i :·:-··-, ..... -
. 
V cl-oosl conslruclion 
Grass seed multiolication center 
Grass seed oroduction 
Multiplication of other grass 
slios 
Improved grass sown on grazing 
lands 
No. 
" 
t. 
Million 
Ha. 
Vetiver slio oroduction I Million 
Source: Project field offices 
., 
Table 3.9: Outputs of EOC Livestock Activities in the 1997/98- 2000/01 
Wadfa;: ·. ·. --:;;;::: .. k .> , 
'A'.cthaJ ;.t ; %' 1.: 'Pllin . r :wctfra), q·:>"' 0k -· 1 . Jlfan I .. A:ci:uiil' ·I .; 
I I I I 00 I I I I I I 00 I I I I I 00 
100 100 100 
0,15 15 
1.48 0.035 2.4 
198 
0.42 0.072 17 
'" 
·--
... -·· --.... '. 
·::.,:23 fill 
40 
II 
_.-~~ ... ' 
. .. 
·,. 
Natural Resources Conservation 
Physical conservation structures (stone bund, soil bund, hillside terracing) and 
seedling production and planting on communal locations dominated conservation 
activities of the projects. In respect to these activities outputs were well below 
targets. In the case of physical structures, outputs ranged between 32% and 56% of 
the plan. It was a bit higher with communal tree planting (afforestation). Some 63% 
of the planned tree planting was achieved in Endemahoni and Mekedela projects, the 
only two sites where there were communal tree planting operations. In all other 
conservation interventions, outputs were either close to target or surpassed them 
(Table 3.10). More importantly, outputs in many respects were increasing . 
consistently over the project period. Moreover, the standards or qualities of the 
conservations works done have been impressive . 
. The dominant conservation programs like construction of physical soil conservation 
structures, seedling production and community tree plantations wholly relied on food￾for-work. The flow ofFFW resources has been irregular and inadequate, and the 
·under performance in this respect has been because of it . 
41 
.' 
/.I'.... • . . ' •. . . • •i1· , ... ' ••' ' 1'1 • • •• •:.1; .... 
.. ': ·· .. ·"·\ .. ·:·. > ... ... : ... . 
.. ,• I, ' ' t !!:ff. i' ' ........ ., ...... . . ml 
-·· •!.• :.: . . :.:· :. .... ; .. .: . 
··' 
Table 3.10: Outputs of EOC Soil and Water Conservation Activities: 1997/98 - 2000/01 
Nursery No. I I I 2 I 200 I 5 I 5 I 100 I 1 I I I I I 2 
establishment 
Seed collection Kg. 115 187.65 163.17 148 193 130.4 1 55 324.42 589.85 190 178.45 9.18 508 883.55 I 173.9 
Seedling 000' 1950 1422.4 72.94 920 189.6 20.61 1900 722.17 38 2800 2730.3 97.51 7570 5064.5 I 66.9 
roduction 6 3 
Seedling 000' 1909 1576.4 82.58 896 177.6 19.82 1820 707.66 38.88 2569 3116.0 121.30 7194 5578.2 I 77.5 
distribution/ 1 8 4 
I anting 
2 I Communal land plantin 
Nursery No. 1 I 1 100 I I 100 I 1 I 100 I 4 I 3 I 75 establishment 
Existing nursery .75 .75 100 I I I I I I I I I I .75 I .75 I 100 
expansion 
Seed collection Kg. 130 11 6 89.23 130 15 1 116.15 23.28 130. I 06.37 I 81.82 I 390 396.65 101.7 
Seedling 000' 1300 1199.5 92.27 510 846.9 166.06 1400 190 13.57 1600 1000 I . 62.5 I 4810 I 3236.4 I 67.3 
iroduction 
Seedlimz olantinE! 000' 1292 757.3 58.61 505 852.1 168.73 998 109.9 11.0 I 1592 25 1.2 I 15.78 I 4387 1970.5 44.9 
Pitting 000' 500 681.6 136.32 505 852. 1 168.73 1012.14 181.7 17.95 997 251.2 I 0.25 I 3014.1 1966.6 65.2 
4 
Area closure Ha. 50 50 100 120 340 T 283.33 T T T T 1210 T 1210 T 100 1 1380 1600 115.9 
Hillside terrace Km. 278 578.96 208.26 37.2 29.62 I 79.61 I 315.2 608.58 193.1 
Trench Km. 200.5 154.2 I 76.9 I I I I I I I 200.5 154.2 76.9 
construction 
Micro-basin 000' 426.7 505.32 118.43 40 177.07 T 442.68 T I I I 476.5 I 191.5 I 40.19 I 943.2 I 873.89 I 92.6 
construction 
Cut of drain Km. 1 4.423 442.30 3 3.3 3.3 7.423 224.9 
Checkdam Km 5 5.14 102.8 5 5.14 102.80 
construction 
3 I Demo, on soil & water 
conservation 
Micro basin 000' 1 1 100 1 1 100 
Hillside terrace Km 3 7.966 265.53 3 7.966 265.53 
42 
,. 
4 
5 
·6 
i" '. ' 
,. ........... 
I ' "---···· r. •t·"-.· .......... 
construction 
Soil bund 
construction 
Stone bund 
construction 
Bench terrace 
I Communal nursery 
Nursery 
establishment 
Seedling 
production 
I Grass seed production 
Center 
establishment 
Grass seed 
roduction 
Vetiver slip 
roduction 
Improve grass 
sown on azin 
Grass slip 
roduction 
Forage production 
on farm olant 
I Gully reclamation 
Checkdam 
construction 
Ve etative barrier 
I 
c:.o 
Km 0.02 
Km 10 
km 10 
Km. I 
No. 2 
000' 20 
No. I I I 
Qt. J 
Millio I 
n 
Ha. 48 
Millio 0.5 
n 
Ha. J 
Km. 2 
Km. 
Source: Project field offices 
,.,..,.. ....... ...,." 
......... ; 
3 30.00 
4.5 45.00 
2.776 I 277.60 I 
2 
... 
I I 20 
I JOO I I 
0.5 
0.3 
48 
0.074 14.80 0.3 
I 100 I 
2. J4 107 15 .8 
15 
/; 
i 
·· ·· .......... ::.-.· · 
.... ..... ... ..:. 
r···· .. : 
......... .., .... .,1 
I l 
I 2 I 100 
I 20 I JOO 
J I JOO 
1.87i 11.88 
1.933 12.89 
c.:=i ..... ''""I \, ... _ ... +<.:: 
T l I I I 
I 3 I 3 I 100 I 2 I I 
I 150 I 15 I 10 I 200 I 
I J I I I JOO I J I 
J J I. I 
0.4 0.013 3.25 0.3 0.028 
48 48 
1.46 0.012 0.82 0.5 0.003 
4 
J 3 9.063 69.72 5.8 3.79 
7.84 1.3 
... 
.... .. _;=;: 
... ........ 
.,. '"""1 
..... 
1'")''.'I 
.... d 
Table 3.10 cont'd .. ... 
0.02 
JO I 3 I 30.00 
JO I 4.5 I 45.oo 
I I J I 2.776 I 277.60 
I 50 I 9 I 6 I 66.67 
I I 390 I 35 I 8.97 
JOO I 4 I 4 JOO 
J JO 3.5 I. I 3 1.43 
9.33 2 0,041 2.05 
192 
0.60 2.76 0,089 3.22 
6 I 16,67 
65.34 36.6 16.87 .. 46.09 
J 6.3 9.773 59.96 
43 
" . f(" .. i 
1. 
l3ll ' 
Pl ~ ... ~:f 
~ ..J .. . 
'·:':-~~! Other observation points of significance to conservation include: ·.·• ... '. ;~~ 
a) The Sodo project is constructing 16 km of road 
- Kela to Adelle. The project 
has also maintained a total of 18 km of road from Jolie Mazoria to Genet and 
another 5 km on another route. The construction of one bridge is completed 
and there is another under construction. The road and bridge construction and 
road maintenance tally with the plan. In all cases labor-intensive technologies 
are used, and quality of work is rated good. All the construction and i• 
~:1i; 
::.:~c~ ·= 
maintenance programs have been conservation friendly. 
~ = b) Grass seed multiplication sites are established by the project with the purpose .~~ ~~ 
:~:! ~ :.:!. of multiplying various grass and legume species. The seeds and splits 
~:::,;'i produced are used in the stabilization of conservation structures on cultivated ;,,, "i r~,:; lands. There was oversawing on enclosed areas and on grazing lands to -~~~ 1 . : ~ !::::;; improve grazing quality and increase biomass production. The action was ,.'~ - . ·=-i commendable. Different species of grasses such as vetch, rhodes, phalaris, ·r~ 
~ ~~ vetiver, elephant grass and fodder beet are raised. The organization of 
~~.1 ;;; .:;::: activities, the quality of grasses and legumes, and the level of production, ~ ~ 
z~~ distribution methods used, etc., at the multiplication sites are impressive, - ~ . : !..!": especially in Sodo, and sensitive to conservation needs. -~-:-: f:f 
c) In Sodo a spring is developed near the nursery to supply water to a nearby ,~·;·; 
~i village. Cattle troughs are constructed near the nursery. The catchment . i 
upslope is properly conserved with natural vegetation. The project is further ;".i 1t~ :'! strengthening conservation activities through enrichment plantations and area • .. ·! enclosures. ·"! 
.. j . : .. : 
d) Again in Sodo about 75 ha of communal land plantations have been developed .. , with additional 25 ha planned to be planted in the Fiscal Year 2000/01. The ~:j \ ·:-~ 
. 
- i !~: : community is given awareness on the protection and management of the ~. •f ·-· · plantation undertaken in communal lands. The project has supported the 
_, community to establish by-laws to enforce the protection of enclosure areas .. i and communal plantations . -~ :"I ·=--~ 
.:.;_:.:.! ... 
:.:;;;! e) In Sodo vetiver is used to develop grass strips in the conservation of cultivated $~ ti'::. lands. It is also used in the stabilization of cropland bunds. Vetch is used to ~ ~ 
< improving fallowlands and Rhodes grass is oversown on grasslands to ¥.:~ ':.=-!'!: 
:= 
~ improve the grazing quality while phalaries is used in oversowing and bund "'"'! 
~d ~ 
.. stabilization. The project has planted elephant grass for stabilizing gullies. 
~~ The choice of the grass types for the intended purposes is supportive. :•-- ~ 
~~~~ ·.-::..:i '• t) Cordia, Eucalyptus camaldulensis and globules, Acacia spp are among the :~·1 
:~~ ;· ... ; seedlings being promoted. Among the seedlings raised Eucalyptus, Rhamnus 
~ X..5 
and Cupresus are given to farmers for homestead and woodlot plantations 
:::"-~ while the other seedlings are planted on communal lands. Communal woodlots r.~-:; ..,--.. :· -~: 
. ..;...~ need to be encouraged in Sodo. Unlike in other parts of the country there is no ·::f .. , problem with communal plantations in the project area because of the by-laws 
-.~1 .. . established by idirs, which are respected and strictly observed. In the case of 
individual plantation, extension agents check whether adequate preparation is 
· •. ::.., made for planting before seedling distribution. Farmers are required to ., 
·51. !--:i.-i ':,!:: 44 . -. 
•, . ~-. 
)r 
l 
I 
i : ..... : . I 
i 
i ·. I . · .. ,. 
. . 
-. ! 
·{~: '··' !~ 
' 
prepare the land for plantation three months prior to plantation. This is indeed 
encouraging, and no doubt it would contribute to improved survival rate. 
g) It is important that a big majority of beneficiaries in Endemahoni, Mekdela 
and Wad la appreciate the seriousness of land degradation. (Table 3.11). 
Table 3.11: Selected Conservation-Related Survey Results in the EOC Projects 
. · ... · 
.·~.::·~1.~~~~:~te~~~~~-i-· "" .... .. -: <·:·.}::~Jjf·~ ~ 
;~~ -~· S:9 6:~;;;~;~ ~1~ 
Beneficiaries who 
recognize that soil 
erosion- caused 98 80 88 67 
degradation is a 
rob I em 
Beneficiaries who say 
they have had active 
individual and 
@mmunity 84 89 64 17 
participation in the 
project-promoted 
conservation ro rams 
Beneficiaries who say 
they planted trees with 
support provided by 
the project (technical 36 40 11 11 
assistance, seedlings, 
etc. 
Beneficiaries who 
report the presence of 
an area enclosure for 37 34 30 
the purpose of land 
rehabilitation 
Beneficiaries who say 
they are getting grass 
for their livestock 
from enclosed areas 46 5 2 
through the cut and 
ca s stem 
Beneficiaries who say 
they collect fuel wood 
(dried leaves and 2 2 2 
wood) in the 
enclosures 
Beneficiaries who 
report active women 
participation in the 86 88 63 4 
conservation rograms 
Source: Project field offices 
45 
rn 
~j 
.... •; t·.···; :':·: 
:?:..~:. 
:~~1 
.•• I 
-' 
·; j 
:.~: 
~':~ -·.!'.; 
""?~ 
·•:j 
~· -· ~.,y .. ~ 
·.:~ . ;:·i 
' -- .. 
.":: 
!I:1 
:--~;~ 
; 
' r-..: ~:~.: 
:~~ ~. ;:·,< 
1#.,) 
.. 
.·~ -:.-· 
. 
Some comments on the results shown in the above table: 
• The results may send a message that the need for conservation and 
afforestation is not significant in Sodo. Empirical observations suggest 
otherwise. The need is big in Sodo also, although it might be less than in the 
northern projects. 
• Individual and community participation in soil conservation activities is low in 
Sodo (17%) but high in Wadla (89%). In Wadla and Endamehoni 
participation·is high probably because ofFFW, which apparently motivates 
participation. 
• It is surprising to see only 30% of the beneficiaries reporting enclosures in 
Mekdela where area enclosure is one of the project's main interventions. This 
could partly be attributable to the low level of participation of the community 
while deciding on area enclosure. 
• Women participation is extremely low in Sodo (40%). The apparent reason 
for this is the tradition prevailing.in the area that does not encourage women to 
participate in farming activities, let alone conservation tasks, that are largely 
regarded as a male function. It is a challenge to positively alter the attitude . 
• Results on tree planting and participation in area enclosure do not seem to 
tally with the realities on the ground as evidenced at the time of field visit, 
•• especially in Endemehoni. Enclosure-related activities have been more brisk 
than survey results would indicate. 
• It is good to learn that a high percentage of fanners acknowledge the 
importance of erosion-caused degradation. It is a very critical development 
issue in the project communities. Yet, area enclosure, an important means of 
rehabilitation, is not featuring prominently. There could be a number of 
reasons for this. One hopes that the lack of community and project perception 
about its importance is not one among the reasons. If it were, there is reason to 
believe that an opportunity was missed, and it should be reversed in any next 
similar projects. 
Food for the Hungry International (FHI) 
Crop Production 
At Lay Gayint the project activities included: (1) input distribution like 
vegetable seeds and fertilizers (2) training intended to build capacity at the 
household and woreda levels, and (3) introduction of root crops such as sweet 
potatoes and Irish potatoes. Vegetables like onions/shallot were also 
introduced with the intent of improving household income. Good agricultural 
land in the project area is very scarce, soil fertility low, topography mostly 
steep, and rainfall irregular. In such a situation a move towards root crops and 
vegetables and away from the traditional cereal and grain production seems an 
intelligent decision and could positively affect food security. 
46 
~ 
. 
. 
. 
·-·.1 :--: 
·.i;. ' ·: 
; : · 
·.:-. 
• l' .• 
·. 
Small-scale irrigation development planned at two locations have been 
completed. This \\Ould help farmers to produce grain at least twice a year. The 
schemes are small with a total command area of 26 ha. The irrigation systems 
(water ways) are of acceptable standards. Farmers have been trained and 
organized to operate the scheme. 
The major activities in Tach Gayint include supply of improved seeds of 
cereals (wheat, sorghum and teft) and vegetable seeds (cabbage, carrot, beet 
root, swiss chard, tomato, onion lettuce) and root crops (potato, sweet potato, 
'onion bulb). Accomplishment of grain seed distribution against plan was about 
66%·of the plan, largely due to seed supply-related reasons like not getting the 
variety of seed needed and at the time required; it was I I 7% in the case of 
other seeds. 
In Tach Gayint, the project supplied chemical fertilizer, and performance was 
84% of the plan. There have been a number ofother activities and in most 
cases performance was better than plan (Table 3.12). One of the outputs in 
Tach Gayint worth noting is the completion of two irrigation schemes with a 
combined 57 ha. of command area . 
At Simada activities have been similar with those of Lay Gayint Table 3.5 
shows that performance was equally satisfactory, in some case like input 
distribution even better. Provision of sweet potatoe cuttings was only I 0% of 
the plan. On the other hand, the three planned irrigation schemes have been 
completed successfully. They were operational at the time of the visit. The 
schemes with a total of 46 .ha of command area are well designed and 
communities adequately organized and trained to run the schemes. 
47 
f1 . ·{ 
u 
·.~ 
! : 
i_j 
n 
u 
lJ 
, 
. 
~ 
~~:1: ·~i~· :i': • ·.i·,:.:·~· . .t~itl~H;~<' -.:. '..:! 1!~"'.~~t 2~~· ...:~ .... ·{.~~ -~:~j .. ~-·~ . .... ~-. .· ·· '( ' . : · "·<:-~.: :::~~! :·: . . •. . ... 'I 
' ' 
.
•·: 
: :};~litH ~12:1ilfill!f~~~ '.:-.~~t :.;::/:· ~i; ~~~:Jtfi.t~ ·.·. .· ... ;:· .. ; .~~·::~~~i .:: . .'." f:J·~{~ .. ,_;fJ,';'! .. ··:u . .. 
. 
-
.. ill: 
·.• 
Production-Related Activities of FHI 
Kg. 66 52.02 78.8 47 54.76 116.5 59 195 330.2 
Fertilizer Kg. 118400 117925 99.6 147.5 123.5 83.7 102900 107900 104.9 ___ _j 
Seed Kg. 13700 4803 35.1 25 16.4 65.6 4000 10200 255.0 I 
Tools No. 100 200 200 1695 2196 129.6 1450 7502 51 7.4 
Root crops 
Sweet potato No. - - - 15000 8300 I 55.3 I 27000 I 2050 I 7.6 
cuttings 
• - Irish potato Kg. 66750 36397 54.5 98400 127900 130.0 34700 52200 150.4 
Onion/Shallot Kg. 8000 9503 118.08 21200 27700 130.7 
(3) Demonstration of field No. - - - 35 30 85.7 29 30 103.4 I 
crops I - >-·-------·! 
( 4) Demonstration of No. - - - - - - 500 958 19 J.(l I 
horticultural crops I ·-··- -- ------- -·- ·- ·-·--··\ 
5) Training .. - 556 486 
____ .,_87.4 ·----' 
• Cooperative leaders .. 
Farmers " 920 135 14.8 1 300 T 344 I 11 4.7 
Field day " 
Training project " 10 10 100 239* 235* 98.3* 
staff -l 
Training woreda " 18 26 144.4 - - - I staff i 
(6) Small scale irrigation " 2 2 100 1 I 100 3 3 100 
develoEment I 
* Project+ Government Staff 
Source: Project field office 
48 
" 
........ 
·. 
Livestock 
Livestock development and food security problems are strikingly similar among the 
FHI projects. Observations made during field visits and results of PRA surveys 
confirm this. Yet, livestock activities among the projects had significant variations. At 
Gubalafto and Tach Gayint, forage, introduction of income generating activities like 
distribution of poultry and small ruminants and training were focused. while at 
Simada the emphasis was placed on health and apiculture. Lay Gayint had virtually no 
activity. While the rational for the variation is not evident, performance rate was 
mixed in all of the projects. Mostly, outputs were lower than plan (Table 3.13). The 
performance was particularly weak with the distribution of poultry and small 
ruminants, an area that could possibly have a quicker return to improve access to 
food . 
49 
M u . . 
n u 
·%:; :., .. .... -: ; .. W!g :. :: ......... ;:~~:: ;r:;;i:iHHHH:~ ;# .. • I 
., •, : . ~:~: :: i:ii!Hn!l ,.· . :· .... -·: 
. , .};J·!}h :,.··:;1
1
1 ~::". •• · • 
· ··~k~.H.1 ;HJi: ftt- :··,. :. 
. ::J 
) · . 
.. 
"
·· !~~:: ~~i ! 
. ,
··
, 
I ..... ,!.. J 
Table 3.13: Output of Livestock Activities ofFHI Projects in th'e 1997/98- 2000/01 
Period .. 
; :~~~n. ·:·: . ~~ .:. 
·::.::::a ~;~:: " .. ~ .·r·· ··. ~ .. ?:-.· ... ~~~ .. ~ :.u~ 8 :~~ .. ;· ; ... f~ .. ~J ;? .. ·. "iJ!· ~~~~~~:· .. ··::.. lu8 ~~ii ~~A.~A~-:.:~ \,\o l"ii.."fi: ~a~ ~awr1~ .. ' . .. ,._, · . . ·_"- : .. : :.: _ i:naua. ,. . ac aJ1n . .•.. :. •·< " "'";::.,,... .. ~r.1,.,.., ~:. . : -:;>.'t'f.ZI!>'· '· ' <)f' .C.c.~··: Ul! d1l'.i:'Jl'..< .. ·~ -U.~ ~ '1~.. ,?l~ ...... :ir.;~~~<':• '"'-''.< ~.' .... ,,. · .. : • \" .. .,. '·:h·· s .. . 'T h G ou' t 
, J:. ~·,:~clivlfles · :'.x;_,~?::" '~~~ '· it Plan:··'·' ;('ctilli~ fi:O'!<» :~·'· mlin~.~ r.>"': ~ciua '" \' % . · ·. Plan( · ,:,A.ctual % Plan Actual · % 
Provision ofapicultural tools Set 25 65 260 
Provision of frame No. - 10 • 
Of smoker " - 9 -
Other related tools " - - • '--·---·--··· ··-··-· ---·-- ···-· ·-· 
Provision of animal health Birr 15000 14660 97--·--·- -·--·-·· __ _ ,__ .... -
equipment -·····---+----__, Provision of veterinary " 15000 12555 83 
medicines 
Farmers training on apiculture No. 213 154 72 150 141 94 
Farmers training on livestock " 305 277 91 
management 
Farmers training of improved " - 6 • ··· 
livestock management 
Grass seed multiplication/hill Ha. 4 4 100 1420000 1106640 77.9.l 
side fodder olanting 
Forage seed provision/backyard Qt. 13.5 11.5 85 - • 1500000 % 5468 (>4.,lll 
_forage planting 
Poultry provision 600 250 4 1.6 7 
·Cockerel No. 680 249 37 - - - • • 
·Pullets " 3400 1245 37 • • • -·--
• Sheep " • • - - - - 40 • 320 209 65.3 I 
Training on livestock " 238 46 19 • • - 250 254 I 01.6 
development 
Training in poultry management " 120 120 100 • - -
Training to animal health " 2 • • • • • -·· 
technician 
Training project staff " - • · • I 0 l 0 l 00 
Training woreda line office staff " • • • 5 13 260 
Provision of heifer " • • - • • • 20 • 2 . il 
Improved poultry breeding " - • • • • • 150 50 33 - - -- · 
demonstration 
Source: Project Field Office 
50 
" ~\~H~i !: .~ . ® 
..... :.;. 
·. 
·. -~.:: 
'· i 
; . 
Natural Resources Conservation 
Table 3.15 contains opinions of project beneficiaries on some selected 
conservation subjects. The percentage of farmers who report project support for 
tree planting is too low to believe in Simada in particular where the project has 
been actively supporting homestead planting. This and the lack of community￾driven demand for area enclosure seems to suggest the prevalence of low farmers' 
awareness about land degradation, although a big majority of interviewed farmers 
responded knowledge of the seriousness of the problem. 
The FHI conservation programs largely dealth with activities designed to 
rehabilitate degraded areas. Accordingly, hillside terracing, micro basins and 
biologically conserving the terraced areas featured prominently during the project 
period. In this regard, performance was satisfactory. In Lay Gayint, Simada and 
Gubalafto 98% of the targeted area of hillside terracing was achieved . 
Performance with tree planting was also high; ovei: 72% of the plan was achieved. 
The projects were also actively supporting farmer-based tree seedling production 
through micro-nurseries and individual tree planting. Outputs in this respect 
p~rall~led or surpassed targets. 
As can be observed in Table 3.14 below performance was equally satisfactory 
compared to plan in other conservation activities like checkdam construction, 
cutoff drain, and farmland terracing. Some 32 ha of area was enclosed for 
protection and enrichment planting in Simada; it was more than planned. But land 
degradation is most severe in the project areas. Productive and carrying capacity 
of land is already significantly curtailed. There seems to exist a gigantic need for 
area enclosure. The Jack of area enclosure in the projects other than in Simada, 
and the smallness of the plan figure in Simada are difficult to explain. 
51 
R 
Li 
n 
Ll 
f:;1·::: 
.::;· :.;.·. ~. :;:ijJLtf~fri:.~. · . ;·_;l·~~ , : . :-~ :;i;,.(h:~ il;,~;. ::i -.;, !.':JU~ .· ·'·: ·:~~~llU~::fGn{:~>~~i~{~ ·:~ ... ·.\·:·~~;~~~H~Hf~ 1Jr1,:··;~~ ,. ~: .- ~. 'I ) 
Table 3.14: Outputs of FHI Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the Period 1997/98 - 2000/01 
70 I 68.5 I 97.8 I 94 I 115.6 I 123 I 40 I 17.34 I 43.4 I 204 I 20 1.4 
construction 
3. Cutoff drain .. 36 28.3 78.6 18 24.9 138.4 40 8.2 20.5 94 (i 1.4 1 I (1.5..' 
4. Seedling raising No 5, 785,000 2,838,200 49.1 8,200,000 6,713,600 81.9 . . . 13.985. 551.~ I 65..' 
000 00 
5. Seedling planting . .. 2,800,000 2,077,400 74.2 3,300,000 2,420,300 73.4 180,000 60,000 33.4 6.280.0 4.557.7 I 72.6 00 00 
6. Support for No 49 30 61.2 19 19 100 . - - 68 49 I 72 
establishing private 
nurseries~ 
7. Homestead planting No - - - 2,500,000 2,372,000 94.9 - . - 2.500.0~2.372.0 I 94.<J 7~ ~).~ )()(l 792.(~ ;(i'"' --- ·1'ii<1-·-
. M icrobasin No - - - 328, 700 t\75.350 144.(1 400.000 32 1.220 XO.~ 9. Farmland terrace Km - - - 164 104 63.4·----i:no -· --;(;--r:q· <j() 
-I 0. Gabbion retaining M' - - - 1,670 840.9 50.4 - . - i .670 I 840.9 I 0. ~ wall 
11. Water way Km. - - - 3 I 2.3 I 75.4 I 6.5 
construction 
12. Area enclosure Ha. - - . 26 l 32 1 123.l I . I - I - I 26 I 32 I 123. l 
13. Sisal planting No. . . . . - - 105,000 36 500 34.8 I 05,000 I 36.500 I 34.8 
Source: Project field office 
" ~ ..... . ~7~i~{' fil 52 
·. 
·,:; 
Table 3.15: Selected Conservation-Related Survey Results in the FHI Projects 
(Percent) 
Characteristics }?HI Title II Projects 
LaiGayint Tach Gayint Simada Gubalafto 
Beneficiaries who ' i 
recognize soil erosion- ' i 
caused degradation is a 83. 82 ' i . 66 
problem ' i ~ I 
Beneficiaries who say I 
they have had active ! I ' individual and I 
community participation I 
i in the project-promoted 79 i 66 55 
conservation programs i 
Beneficiaries who say i 
I 
I 
they planted trees with i 
I 
support provided by the I 
project (technical 5 ! 17 11 
assistance, seedlings, 
etc.) 
Beneficiaries who report 
·the presence of an area 
enclosure for the 37 62 43 
purpose of land 
rehabilitation 
Beneficiaries who say I 
they are getting grass for . 
their livestock from 
enclosed areas through - - - the cut and carry system 
Beneficiaries who say 
they co11ect fue1 wood 
(dried leaves and wood) 2 - - in the enclosures 
Beneficiaries who report 
active women 51 28 26 
participation in the 
conservation programs 
Source: Project Field Offices 
Relief Society of Tigray (REST) 
Crop Production 
Crop production activities included distri~ution of vegetable seeds and fruit 
seedlings in Were leke, Adi Ahferom and Dega Tembien; four small irrigation 
schemes in Were !eke and Ahferom; and training of farmers in all project 
areas. Table 3. I 6 below sbpws that almost all planned activities were fully 
carried out. The development of irrigation schemes was nearly completed at 
the time of the visit Training and organizing users were in progress. 
53 
63 
83 
31 
30 
55 
-
63 
I 
m 
9 
l;i 
fl 
~ 
. 
. L
··· 
;~.ii~~:~~·· .. : .. 
. t;· ~Jf;Hmw;~ ~:!.L.~~· '-.· . :-~;f~'.i~m;~t~HJfilHr~:~.~· .,~.: )::.~ .... :~-· ,,_, M~- :. .~: ~;~~ ... ~~:~ ~~~ffil!l™~g~~~ ii.~;\~ ~~i~lliii~i ., n~,j~~:l .'i 
Vegetable seeds distribution 
Fruit seedlings distributed I No. 
Irrigation development 
- Micro dam I No. 
• Diversion No. 
Training of beneficiaries I No. 
Source: Project field office :~~;~~ :~·-1 . 
·;! r~L~~il ~-~ ~L;~ ·' 
:/ 
.· 
Table 3.16: Crop Production-Related Activities of REST 
1 
2 
3772 
I 
2 
3856 
100 
100 
102.2 2330 2205 94.6 2224 2287 ~·:} 100 102.8 1625 
" 
; 'JI~;:ilit~i: .. ~:~~ ~· ..... 11 ~;:J el[ 
1590 97.8 
54 
I 
-
• · .. . · . ... 1 
.. .._ :~ 
I 
~:Y;ri 
-. 
Livestock 
The livestock development programs of REST projects involved feed development 
and improving productivity with facilitating farmers access to genetically superior 
local cattle breed and Nubian goats. Modernizing of apiculture has been an important 
input to improve income. 
Table 3.17 below shows that the projects performed very well in respect to all 
activities. In spite of poor security situation as a result of the Et~io-Eritrean war that 
troubled development efforts relatively more in Tigray than elsewhere in the country, 
project performance was at par or exceeded the plan. Field observations and results of 
PRA surveys reveal that provisions and services were timely and backstopping to 
farmers was adequate. 
In spite of the impressive outputs this evaluation would like to note that some of the 
livestock interventions, notably distribution of improved breeds of animals, was not 
well targeted. Many of the visited beneficiaries looked wealthy by standards 
prevailing in their respective communities. For example, W/ro Almaz G/Igzabhere at 
lnticho borrowed Birr 1300 to buy a project supplied Begayit cattle. Almaz owns a 
business in Inticho, her husband works for Farm Africa, her daughter and son are in 
college, she rents a house at lnticho (rental Birr 80.00/month). Almaz beiongs, by all 
·counts, to a well-endowed household. Should she then be a beneficiary of a project 
that promotes household food security and targets the poor in particular13? 
13 REST considered the observation the tbm made a gross conclusion. It is not in fact a conclusion, it 
rather is an observation made to suggest there is ne::d to look into the past targeting experience rather 
critically with the intent of forth improving targ_eting strategies. 
55 
n ! '. ' ' 
: ; 
f-1 
' . 
Ll '. 
.. : 1.. . •• : 1• .. -· ..... ...... ............ •. :............. .. ... · .... .-, .. · .. . ..... . _; 
·::-.· .. 
• • .. ::•1 .. t .. ·. 1\\, .· . '{' ·, ;,. d .. , ::;.'; 
'· 
" "". 
. : .. : .... m 
.' 
Table 3.17: Outputs of REST Livestock Activities in the 1997/98 - 2000/01 
Merebleke } :.:, Plan Actual O/ o .. :·::if.;;/!':i 
No. 92 I :15 2R RO 
--
·
--" Dairv cow/2oat distribution 11 0 11 0 100 
Improved grass seeds I Qt. 25 100 17 17 100 25 25 100 25 25 100 
distribution 
Legume seeds distribution " 95 95 100 45 40 88.9 45 40 88.9 40 40 100 
- Distribution of local 2rass seeds " 15 21 140 10 10 100 10 10 100 10 10 100 
Fora2e develooment 615 629 102 313 295 94 355 315 88.7 
Source: Project Field Office 
56 
... 
., 
t~ ·-.. - ' ! 
. . ~ 
..... . . 
·. : 
·. 
Natural Resource Conservation 
The REST projects aim at improving household food security in drought-prone 
and food-deficit woredas through interventions leading to the preservation and 
sustainable utilization of the natural resource base. Conservation activities 
include: farmland terracing. hillside terracing, gully stabilization. seedling 
production and planting, area enclosures, training, and others. It is not the 
diversity of conservation activities that is striking at REST Title II projects, but 
the size or the extent of each activity. It is relatively big. For example, in the 
project life the combined area enclosed in the Ahferom, Dega Temben and Mereb 
Leke projects was 19,664 ha., considerably larger than area enclosed in the rest of 
Title 11 projects. Empirical observations suggest that the potential demand for area 
enclosure is vast in all the project areas. However, based on survey results 
especially discussions with farmers, it can be asserted that community-driven 
demand for enclosure is bigger in Tigray project areas than in others. 
Quantitative outputs compared to plan have been very satisfactory with all major 
conservation and reforestation activities as shown below by project over the 
period -1997/98 - 2000/01. (Table 3.18 and 3.19) 
57 
( , 
t
q 
:l 
--
r. ': ·~:~:i .', .;.:; ..~lli!filf~~~~ .. i;~ .. ~~~- ... :.\:(~?~~:~:: ~~HilliJ;: ·{· :: .. 1•• ............. ·-··. . .......... ......... . . ::S~~i~HiliH::~!i];~c: ~::·.::.: i:~. ~liffk ··-··'. ... . : ~:\ ..,,:·:=_; .. ;,flfl 
.. ~~· "$ 1:· ., l: . ·--· ... :.;.::·.,:.' .. :!::)~ ., ____ j 'i ' ' t'l"l :')'"' ... ·.< .. . :-u ... · : .::1 . . '•,11 Em ' .. " 
·":, 
.· 
Table 3.18: Outputs of REST Soil and Wate,r Conservation Activities in the Period 1997 /98 - 2000/01 
295 
2. Communal Planting No. 637 000 633 292 99.4 I 012 500 I 061 672 104.9 900,000 813, I I I 90.3 2,549,500 2.508.075 98A 
3. Homestead " " 876,690 803 504 91.4 679,500 650,1 00 95.7 . - - I ,556, I 90 1.453.604 93.4 
4. Area enclosure Ha. 3,827 3,873 101.2 13,046 14,696 112.6 - - - .72~ I 9.6M 110.0 
5. Stone bund Km. 404 401.6 99.4 465 41 0 88.2 504 133.5 26.5 U7J 94S. I 68.H 
6. Soil bund " - - - 35 - - - - - 35 0 0 
7. Check dam " 76 74.9 98.5 50 50.2 100.4 70 60.4 86.3 196 185.5 94.6 
8. Mic.re basin No. 54 000 84,909 157.2 - - - 50,000 - - 104.000 84,909 8 1.6 
9. Stone faced trench Km. 125 129.5 103.6 346 355. 1 102.6 150 - - 621 632.6 101.8 
I 0. Trench bund " - - - - . - IOI 94 93.I IO I 94 93.I 
l l . Private plantation " . - - - . - 599,000 668,688 113.2 599,00 668,688 113.2 
Source: Project field office 
58 
... 
~}. : .. ...... : •. :: 
ti~ :.;=~ 
.: ·. -:::: 
Table 3.19: Soil and Water Conservation in Central Tigra~· Zone 
Percent of Plan Achieved 
Dega Adi Mereb Total 
Tenibien Ahferom Leke 
I Hillside terracing ' 100 94 89 93 
2. Tree planting (communal) 105 99 90 98 
3. Tree planting (individual) 96 91 - 93 
4. Area enclosure 113 IOI 129 110 
5. Stone bund 88" 99 26 69 
6. Soil bund I - - - - 7. Trenches and checkdams 100 98 86 95 
8. Micro basin - 157 - -
9. Stone-faced bund 103 104 99 102 
·. 
NB: I. Figures are rounded off to the next whole number 
2. - means there was no activity 
Source: Project Field Office 
Stone-faced terraces are among the most commonly practiced conservation 
activities. The more widely applied conservation measures in order of importance 
are: stone-faced terrace, stone bund, soil bund and hillside terrace. It is observed 
that the measures are appropriate taking into account the objective conditions 
prevailing in the project communities. 
Alongside the physical conservation measures, a lot of biological conservation has 
been going on in the four Title II projects in the Central Zone. The household 
survey that the evaluation carried out reveals that 70% of the sampled households 
· · have planted trees. The survey results show that awareness is high about the need 
for soil and water conservation; there has been active community participation in 
the projects' conservation programs; and women participation has been 
encouraging (Table 3.20 below for selected survey results). 
59 
~ 
-:·-.;., 
·. 
.. .! 
.. 
Table 3.20: Selected Conservation-Related Survey Results in the REST Projects 
(Percent) 
REST Title II Projects I 
Characteristics WereLeke Mereb Leke Adi Ahferom Dega Tern bien I 
Beneficiaries who ! 
recognize that soil 94 ! 96 81 ' erosion-caused I 
I ' 
degradation is a ! : 
I 
problem -- Beneficiaries who say I 
they have had active I 
I 
individual and ' 
I community 86 88 90 
participation in the ~ 
; 
project-promoted i 
I conservation programs i 
Beneficiaries who say 
they planted trees with 
supporl provided by 
the project (technical 63 38 77 I assistance, seedlings, -- 'etc.) I 
Beneficiaries who 
report the presence of 
an area enclosure for 94 88 93 
the purpose of land 
rtthabilitation 
Beneficiaries who say 
they are getting grass 
for their livestock 82 52 79 
from enclosed areas 
through the cut and 
carry system 
Beneficiaries who say 
they collect fuel wood 
(dried leaves and 3 4 1 
wood) in the 
enclosures 
Beneficiaries who 
report active women 
participation in the 92 91 89 
conservation programs 
Source: Project Field Office 
The figures demonstrate: 
• The level of awareness of the beneficiaries about soil erosion being a cause 
for loss of production poteJJtial ofland is high in all project woredas. This 
probably is the reason for the demand-driven area enclosure and on-farm 
conservation that are evident among REST Title II Projects_ 
99 ! 
' 
I 
I 
I 
i ·-
92 
95 
91 
91 
69 
94 
60 
.· 
••• ! 
1 ·. 
.·-·. 
.;, 
• Similarly, individual and community participation in the project's 
conservation activities are remarkable (86 - _92%). Active and seemingly 
authentic participation seems to prevail. 
• Except in Mereb Leke where project-supported tree planting is low (38%), the 
majority of beneficiaries (60%) in other weredas reported practicing tree 
planting. 
• Percent of beneficiaries who agree that area enclosures help in rehabilitating 
degraded areas is over 88% in the four project weredas, another indication of 
desired community perception about conservation-based development. 
• The majority (52- 91 %) of the respondents said that they use grass from 
enclosed areas through cut and carry. As more access is gained to using 
enclosed areas motivation would be greater for new areas to come under 
protection. Beneficiaries who responded that they use wood from enclosure 
areas is low in all weredas except in Dega Tembien, where 69% of the 
beneficiaries do use wood and leaves from enclosures. This is not unexpected 
as the process takes time. The fact that there was harvest at all is encouraging. 
• Beneficiaries who responded that women actively participated in conservation 
activities is over 90%. This could be due to extensive FFW-related activities 
penneatiilg the region.14 
SCF 
Livestock 
A total of 66,649 livestock population belonging to some 9,516 households 
benefit from project water harvesting schemes (8 ponds) in Liben, Borena. 
The plan was to install hand pumps and cattle troughs to each of these ponds 
to ensure adequate and clean water supply. The technique envisaged to obtain 
clean water by natural filtering through seepage is a sound and appropriate 
one. Only two of the eight pumps purchased were installed. It was not possible 
to install the rest of the pumps due to financial constraint and soil and 
topographic limitations. 
Besides the ponds, five elas (wells) have been r~habilitated anq cattle troughs 
built in each site to facilitate livestock watering. The rehabilitation of these 
wells, apart from increasing water supply, reduces time and labor taken to 
fetch water. According to the beneficiaries 15- 20 people were required to 
14 REST authorities do not agree that FFW employment is not a strong factor for women participation 
in the conservation programs. The evaluation team believes FFW is an important but not the only 
element for active women participation. In most group discussions, it was women who were more 
vocal about improving the norms currently in force for the FFW activities. They thought the norms do 
not reflect market rates. The works are dacting, but payment is not commensurate. The evaluation 
team believes such beneficiary expressions are an important indicator of FFW attraction to women 
participation in the conservation programs. 
61 
n l _J 
: .. 
;. -. 
ITT 
!· ·.I l . ,:_.1 
, 
t·.· '
t:<". • 
n 
LJ 
l i 
u 
f1 
I
· l 
<.:J 
f) 
tJ 
q 
1. .• 
l"" 
fi 
u 
n 
' . < t ..... 
$i~: 1 ·1· .. 
., 
••· "i 
. ~ 
' 
._ ... _;j 
~~~ 
f=l 
., i 
:' 
~~ 
:-::i 
.. 
·. 
=~-~ ~~ ~ 
. ···:: 
.. 
draw water prior to the rehabilitation; it is now five to six people. The 
constrw.:tion of the watering troughs improved efficiency, and reduced loss or 
water. 
Besides, water development, (excluding pond rehabilitation) performance was 
well below plan in all activities in Libcn Borena Zone. The primary reason 
given for the poor performance was inadequate and late availability of project 
fund. Interventions at Filtu were fewer, in fact only two, and performance was 
better. 
Table 3.21: Outputs Compared to Plan for Livestock Activities in the Period 
. 1997/98- 2000-01- SCF/USA Projects 
Cattle trough 
construction 
Dipping bath 
rehabilitation 
Dipping bath 
construction 
Vet-post construction 
Support for livestock 
-.vaccination and treatment 
Supply of sprayer 
Supply of milk 
processing equipment 
Vet-scout refresher 
training 
Training on milk 
processing 
Livestock vaccination 
Livestock treatment 
Livestock condition 
survey 
" 
" 
" 
" 
Head 
" 
" 
" 
" 
" 
" 
Seasons 
Source: Project field office 
43 8 19 
4 25 
3 
7 2 29 
888,000 564,098 64 
200 87 44 
380 190 50 
55 24 44 
380 300 79 
IO 4 40 
Natural Rcilource Conservation 
60,000 136,988 228 
20,000 20,822 104 
Conservation at the SCF projects is restricted to water development, since there 
were not any. The consciously planned conservation activities. It was planned to 
construct 24 ponds, 19 wells and 43 troughs. To date eight ponds five wells and 
seven troughs have been constructed. Initially the locations for the water 
structures were selected by the Zonal Mining and Water Department. In other 
words, it was this office that had the mandate to determine priority areas for the 
construction. The first two PAs were selected on this basis. This procedure was 
later abandoned and the communities selected the rest of the locations. The 
criterion for selection was severity of water shortage and not necessarily 
62 
I~ ·:=· ; 
·I 
. -' ~ 
·. 
environmental considerations. In spite of this, the design and construction of the 
water systems were environment sensitive. 
The Liben project has a· nursery at Genale, 30 kms from Negelle. The strategy is 
lo plant about two hectares of wood lot around each pond catchment to protect 
sediment flowing into ponds. In addition to this, each pond is provided with a silt 
trap to control sediment entering the pond. 
The water development activity undertaken at Jidola is a very good example of 
how appropriate water harvesting structures could be developed. Proper site 
selection, design and appropriate construction techniques have been employed. 
The catchment is well vegetated and the risk for sedimentation is negligible and 
hence the pond would provide sustained use. Beneficiaries are content with the 
development in the site. The project has succeeded in showing that harvesting 
surface water is an efficient method for water development in the area. 
World Vision International (WVI} 
Crop Production 
The projects in Tigray (Tsed Amba, Atsbi Wombera) ran activities related to 
crop demonstrations, which were meant to influence productivity. These were 
carried out as planned. Irrigation development involving a river diversion was 
planned at Tsed Amba. At the time of the visit some 50% of the diversiOn 
work was completed, pumps were installed and canals were under 
construction. 
Training offanners, woreda line officers and project staff were carried out to 
increase local capacity as per the plan (Table 3.22). 
63 
Ill 
~ u 
n 
u 
n 
LJ 
.n 
•..;I 
! 
. 
. 
n 
Ll 
: :· : .. · 
.. 
·:. 
.. 
··
. 
... 
·.;, 
• Diversion canal construction Km. 
• Pumps 
Dam construction• 
" 
Kg/site 
A ronomy practices demonstration No. 
Train in 
• -Pro· ect staff No. 
Woreda staff No. 
Farmers No. 
Cereal croo demonstration 
Enset seedline: suool 
Vee:etable seed suool 
No. 
No. 
Train in 
• Proiect staff No. 
• Woreda staff No. 
Farmers No. 
Source: Projectjield office 
• Under construction 
'• • .lo "' • _, • • ,.,...,,. ... _. - ·-•• .. " ' • ••• • · --'" ' ""- 0:.'• 
2 
2 
261 
1 
5 
72 
2405 
2 
20 
1599 
I 
I 
219 
1 
3 
77 
2116 
3 
34 
1748 
. ' 
. ·;, 
• •
... ......... .r. .. .. _ ..... . 
,;.··.'j 
; 
50.0 
' 
50.00 . 
83.9 
100 
60 
106.9 
88.0 
ISO 
170 
109.3 
2 
I 
.' 4 
8 
176 
7500 
30 
14000 
20,000 
l 90 l 
l 234 l 
2 
1 
1 
6 
3951 
30 
12000 
11 .500 
91 
399 
··: 
I 
I 
" 
.• • • M•1M:o: 
" I " • 
100 
100 
25 
75 
52.7 
100 
• I •,: • 
..... 
--·····-
85.7 
57.S 
101.1 
170.5 
!BI 
64 
I -. 
;'~h1 
.. : 
~ ~~! -~:~ ~ 
·-.· 
;; .. 
The projects in the Oromia Region (Adama & Kersa Kondaliti} were engaged 
in the provision of see_dling of enset, sweet polalo and cassava to improve food 
availability. Since these root and tuber crops arc high yielding and relatively 
more drought-tolerant, compared to cereals, it is considered a step in the right 
direction to diversily coping strategies. In Adama, crop production-related 
activity was limited to training of farmers and project staff assisting farmers . 
At Badawacho Woreda (SNNPR) income diversification and crop-related 
project activities included seedling supply of cash crops (coffee and fruit} and 
food crops (enset, sweet potato). Irrigation development work is underway but 
going very slowly. Project performance was adequate. 
Training of farmers, staffs of line offices and relevant project staff went 
according to plan. 
Livestock 
Among the seven Title JI projects under WVI/E only three have had some 
form of livestock-related interventions, albeit, very limited in scope. 
Performance was satisfactory where there have been activities, except pullets 
and cockerel distribution in Kersa Kondaliti (Table 3.23). 
The h~usehold survey this evaluation has carried out reveals that over 65 
percent of rural households in Adama produce honey using the traditional 
methods. Yield is low and so is income. Household food security in the 
woreda is still not good. Yet, the project did not have any activity in this 
respect. It could be cost-effective to improve access to food. 
65 
t1 ~ 
a 
fl - ti 
~ ~"' 
~ ·: ! #-l: 
: ·1 i . .; 
~ ~ .. 
Ii" ~ 
ra 
n 
t 'l 
Lj 
n 
~- -~ 
Li 
,,., 
; s 
u 
~ 
(1 Ll 
C-'1. 
i ~ u 
~ E:o 
~ 
v 'j 
t_:: 
Ll 
l~"t. 
~ 
r~ r 
~ 
f 1 {] 
(";• 
'! i -~ (;J 
r~ 
l~ t,._,;i 
. · · 1:~1~~tlt~::~~;· ;fft~:\·;!~ . . 
'tl"'f''': .• " .. ... , .. '"<')•''"' 
''')'! . ' 
• • ·: • ! .. :}t· .:::·!r/U i~" t • ·~-::. if·f!· ~t;'ilH~~: ·: . · 
• ;; . ,.:,.. "1 ., .. "1ill!lt .. :i. '-'.! ......... : .• : .. J1..IJ,1L...l,,~tlUi.l';: . ..I: ... : . ,;~:.:. rh ' ; ... :.;[J .111:nam .. \:" 
· ... ' ..; .. 
. --: .. :--.. ~~··-~._...,..--,.. ___ ....:. .: . .. ~:~:~: • i p ..... 
. 
. 
. " .. ,:,i;!illl",::,· :·1::;:< .. :: . : .. . , .. : ., :,;: .. ·1, ;.' :',··:: :Htff J:\) :!.\~!~· .'· ·~:./ ! ... ~;'.•. :·~t~ . 
••• J •• 1 .. :1.Jl~~"·--~ ... _ ..... ~.::.:illlllilL . 
::: .. ·.'.:'.!1 \~''1:1 ~;u. tJ!I?< i'.lilliD . 
Table 3.23: Outputs of WVI/E Livestock Activities in the Period 1997/98 - 2000/01 
Kersa Kondaliti 
.% I Plan I Actual I 
..... :. ~:~ .: .. '.h'.tt ·· .. ·:;j .. :J Ii 
% 
Beehive demonstration 6 6 100 1 
" 3 3 100 
No. 388 334 86 
" - - - I - I - I - I 1200 I 806 I 67 
Provision of honey extractor " I I I I I I I I 100 
Source: Projectjleld offlce 
' 66 ... 
... 
.., • • 
~ I 
. 1 
.! 
., 
·. 
Natu1·at Resources Conservation 
The major activity in natural resource base maintenance in ·'Tsede Amba and Atshi 
Womberta Woredas is hillside terracing. Achievement was very low compared to the 
plan. Trench bunding is done above beyond the plan in the two wereads (> I 00%). 
However, trench bunding another major conservation activity, output surpassed the 
target. Still another major activity was tree seedling production where achievement 
was slightly bigger than one half of the target. 
Total seedlings raised in three woredas (Adama, Badawacho and Kersa Kondaliti) 
was over 10 million out of which only 1.4 million was distributed. The difference 
must have been seedlings distributed but not reported in Kersa Kondaliti, which had 
nearly 60% of total seedling production. 
67 
n d 
A[ .'· 
·.~ 
g 
0 . 
[
1 
.I 
j 
' i [
·) 
( .. 1-: 
' 
F-: 
L 
. . .: . 
...... 
-
.... -'"..;...., 
. .. ,, f 
-· .• 
'.:.:.:N .. : 
··
, 
.... . ·. 
. 
: ,; •:" ':; 
. :. ·i'.'/ 
• .... · : 
·: ;< ... ... · .. 
t " '" ....... 
. .. 
. 
. 
: ·" ·>!i .:,... 
.
•
. 
',i: 
. .. 
"" •r •• 
... ,. 
..1.,• •• ,1. ,:.J Li 
Table 3.24: Outputs of WVl/E Soil and Water Conservation Activities in the Period 1997/98 - 2000/01 
2. Tr·cnch bund .. 1540 1662 107.9 1852 T 2316.6 l 125 l - 1 - I ·I 1---38 ··- 3. Hillside terrace .. 575 159.3 27.7 538 269. 1 50 25 5 20 
4. Gabbion retaining wall M, 1920 2927 152.4 1124 I - I - I - I - I - I 3044 I 2924 I % 
construction 
5. Training in soil conservation No. - . . - - . 224 221 98.7 224 221 98.7 
No. - . - . - - 208 127 61.1 208 127 (i 1.1 
Km. - . . . . . 269 167.5 62.3 269 167.5 62.3 
No. . . . . . . 1,068,000 378,668 35.4 1,068,000 378,668 35.4 
I " . . . . . . l 068,000 218 206 20.4 . 1,068,000 21 8,206 20.4 
Km. . . . . . . 230 155.I 67.4 230 155. 1 67.4 
I. :::eedling raising No. 2 470 000 I 404,431 56.R 1,876 000 1,351 660 72. I 6.000.000 3.220.000 53,1___ I 0.:146.000 5.976.09 1 57.7 
2 . .Seedling distribution " 2 133 800 1 404,500 65.8 - - . - . - - .. ··65.f"" T Checkdam construction Km. 52 29.5 56.7 105 90.7 86.4 40 43.7 I 09.3 197 163.9 83 
4. Cutoff drain .. 38 15.4 40.5 66 148.5 225 66 42.3 64.1 170 20(1J 12 1 
con$truction 
·
- · - ·- - ·------· -----
5. Soil bund construction " 626 162.1 25 .9 . . . - . . 626 162.1 25.9 
6. Fanyajuu " 372 152.8 41.1 220 170.4 77.5 283 36.3 12.8 875 359.5 4 1 
7. Stone bund " 67 67 100 . . . . . . 67 67 100 
construction 
s.T;cnch bund .. 15 24.1 16 1.0 796 848.2 106.6 . . . 8 11 872.3 107 
9. Hillside terracin No. 55.7 188.2 337.9 55.7 -- 188.2 . . . . 337:9 - . -
W.Microbasin 53,750 67,340 125.3 790,400 1,013,300 128.2 . . . 844.1 50 1.080.640 128 
establishment 
Source: Projectfield Office 
68 
... 
" 
.
·. :=;~ 
~F.f§ 
~!?"?. 
:: ..... ..::! 
... ~ .. 
·. 
Soil bund is the most commonly practiced conservation activity followed by stone 
faced terrace in Atsbi Wcmbera, Lalay Tsed Amba, Kersa Kondality and Adama. 
It is considered appropriate under the circumstance. 
In Sodo Zuria and l-lumbo land degradation as a result of erosion and nutrient 
mining is a serious problem of agricultural production. Livestock production in 
particular is constrained by lack of grazing land. Land holding is about 
0
.1 
-
0
.25 
ha owing to high population density (over 600 persons per square kilometer). 
Therefore, the overwhelming majority of the population in the area is food 
insecure. Moreover, the prevailing climatic irregularities cause precarious 
conditions for agricultural production. In some years rains fail, still in some there 
is unexpected heavy rain that causes flood and hail storm that devastates 
production. For instance in the current fiscal year (2000- 2001) there was a hail 
storm incidence, which caused a considerable crop failure. 
Cultivating of vulnerable areas (steep hills lopes) prompted by population increase 
leading to cropping marginal areas aggravates degradation in the area. It is 
observed that up to 80% slopes are cultivated on the escarpments of Mount 
Damota. A wide-spread clearing of previously protected natural and planted 
forests on Damota Mountain is a critical issue to be noted in natural resource base 
maintenance. 
This evaluation makes the following additional notes about WVI/E conservation 
programs: 
• The conservation practices are of poor quality, and the techniques applied 
do not suit the conditions. For example, the application ofFanyajuu 
prevailing in the area regardless of the soil type and rainfall cannot be 
justified. 
• The physical conservation measures the team visited at Ziga Borkoshe 
were of poor quality, narrowly spaced and improperly laid out and 
constructed. 
• The interventions in natural resources did not consider the land use system 
while planning. Structural measures not recommended for grasslands have 
been applied. Constructing of soil bunds on grazing land that has little or 
no erosion problem was observed. 
• The conservation activities often overlap with the fanning seasons. The 
nonnally accepted season for conservation is the slack period (a period 
after harvest to the next season ofland preparation). 
There seems to prevail big community awareness about the seriousness of land 
degradation and the attendant soil loss, specially in the Tigray project areas (Table 3.25). 
69 
£1 
u 
n 
Li 
n 
Ll ' 
r.~' i : 
L 
' . t .; k-:.: 
t:;;j 
·.· 
1 
··I 
~1 
·.i 
... , 
. . 1 
. I 
: ~ .:·i 
I 
~ I 
.. i 
' 
;-. ! . : 
' ' 
.. 
, 
Table 3.25: Selected Conservation-Related Survey Results of WVJ/E Projects 
(Percent) 
WVl/E Title II froiects 
Ats bi Lalelay Kersa Ada in a Sod do Rumbo 
Characteristics Womberta Tsetse Kondaltiti .Zuria 
Beneficiaries who 
recognize that soil 
erosion-caused 99 97 66 57 46 47 
degradation is a 
problem 
Beneficiaries who say 
they have had active 
individual and 
community 92 99 47 43 17 30 
participation in the 
project-promoted 
conservation 
programs 
Beneficiaries who say 
they planted trees with 
support provided by -· 
the project (technical 
assistance, seedlings, 84 85 39 16 21 22 
etc.) 
Beneficiaries who 
report the presence of 
an ar~a closure for the 65 62 3 32 8 IO 
purpose of land 
rehabilitation 
Beneficiaries who say 
they are getting grass 
for their livestock 
from enclosed areas 79 65 - 86 42 60 
through the cut and 
carry system 
Beneficiaries who say 
they collect fuel wood 
(dried leaves and 0.91 - - 22 27 - wood) in the 
enclosures 
Beneficiaries who 
report active women 
participation in the 
conservation 97 99 22 32 8 2 
programs 
Source: Project Field Offices 
70 
· . 
. :. :: 
- -~ 
The Table demonstrates: 
• It is only 16% of the respondents who say they planted trees with the project 
support in Adama and equally low figures of21% and 23% in Sodo Zuria and 
Humbo projects, respectively. Yet, WVl/E had a respectable level of 
involvement in tree seedling production and distribution. It is hard to explain 
the lack of correspondence. It perhaps tells the existence of mis-direction of 
seedlings or even perhaps low survival rate. 
• Figures seem to have a regional dimension, low in SNNP and Oromiya and 
high in Tigray. While the latter is understandable (strong regional government 
drive for natural resources rehabilitation), the low response in the South would 
mean the opposite. But the problem (degradation) is also profound in the 
South and thus a possible challenge area for future projects. 
3.2.2 Health and Water Outputs 
Seven of the eight cooperating sponsors namely CARE, CRS, EOC/DICAC. 
FHI, REST, SCFiUSA and WVI/E have health components. The majority 
focus on water supply and health education, on issues like nutrition, hygiene 
and sanitation including water handling. CRS, EOC/DICAC, SCF/USA and 
WVl/E conduct TBA and CHA training. Some have been engaged in health 
care facility provision. Only two CSs, FHI and SCF/USA are involved in 
some family planning efforts. A summary of CS project health related 
activities are presented in Table 3.26. · 
71 
f3 
l ·• •A 
n u 
n i } 
u 
r''l 
I' Ll 
n 
u 
L1 
. 
··
-.: 
' 
. · ·· · · . .: ·. :.· .. · ': .. · 
..... . ... .. :• ........ . ....... ... j • 
. .:fi. .· 2 .. 
'(•'. 
'
.:: ., . •·• • l 11'"1"1 ...: ·. . ,'" :i •• i 
.. ; 
.. 
Table 3.26: OAP/Title II Health Interventions 
E/Shoa, East & 
W/Hararghe 
E/Hararghe, 
E/shoa, Gurage, 
Harari EfI'igray 
and Dire Dawa 
E!T'igray, 
N/Wollo, 
S/Wollo, Gurage 
Sodo 
Lay a,nd Tach 
Gayint, Slmada, 
Guba-Lafto 
Central Tigray, 
EastTigray 
Wolayita Sodo, 
East Tigray, 
East Shoa, 
South Shoa 
Liben/Borena, 
Filtu/Somalia 
CRS 
EOC/ 
DIC AC 
FHI 
REST 
WVI/E 
SCF/ 
USA 
•· 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Improved Health and Nutrition 
Improved access to Health services 
Improved water supply 
Hygiene and sanitation education 
Sub-Goal 2=improved utilization of food by vulnerable groups 
Strategic objective 1 =Improved health status of children and mothers . 
Strategic objective 2= Develop sustainable community structures for 
romotion of health of women and children 
Improve health status through improved water supply, health services, 
consumption of vegetables 
Decrease malnutrition including micronutrient deficiency in children as 
well as pregnant and lactating mothers. 
Increase accessibility of RH information and services. 
Increase immunization coverage 
lncrea5e availability and use of potable water and prooer sanitation 
Increased access to potable water supply to alleviate the domestic work 
burden ofn.iral women, reduce incidence of water-borne diseases 
All health activities limited to raising awareness through training in Kilte￾Awlalo 
Increase access. to potable water 
Improved household health and nutrition status 
Increased water supply and improved water quality 
Increase availability of health services 
Source: Project Site Offices, June 2001 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
.... _ 
·-·-· . .. . . - :--:;: .. 
Develop springs and wells, ground catchment 
Nutrition education and Vil. A distribution 
Education on water usage, waste disposal 
Utilization of latrines, fuel saving stoves construction 
Food orocessing, oreservation and oreoaration 
Health education including training CHAs and TBAS 
Food supplementation <2, pregnant and lactating mothers. 
Spring protection and hand-dug wells construction of health posts. 
Monthly ration, immunization, ANC. training and counselin 
Development of springs; water management training 
TBAs training 
Education in Hygiene and sanitation 
Horticulture development 
Health oost construction as well :is orovision of eouioment & furniture. 
Start weaning at 4 months, Vil. A capsule distribution 
FP education and CBD of contraceptives, immunization. 
Increase (P) using potable water 
Increase quantity of water used per :trn 
Increase availability and use of sanitation facilities 
Develop springs 
Hand-Dug shallow wells 
Drilling of boreholes 
Borehole and pond construction, spring development, roof catchment 
Training of CHAs and TB As in nutrition sanitation water management 
Awareness raising in AIDs and other STDS as well as fP. 
Demonstration of latrine 
Supplementary feeding and nutrition education 
EPI and Vil A supplements 
FP in collaboration with FGAE training ofTBAs in MCH 
Construction.of health posts 
Rehabilitation of ponds with separate access for humans and animals 
Construction ofbirka, training in water point management, construction 
of a health station at Fil tu 
,. 
72 
fl 
. : ' . ~ 
~ ~ 
·''!" •• 
. ' 
···:: ... 
' · 
:-.:::: 
...... 
.,. 
·. 
Projects· performance in respect to health interventions for the period 1997 /98 -
2000/01 are presented in Table 3.27 and 3.28 below by CS. Using the last column of 
the table, rating of CS performance is reviewed using a level of 80% to represent a 
satisfactory performance. 
Based on this. the performance of CRS and REST had outputs exceeding the cutoff 
point for all activities they have been engaged in. Although inter-CS variations are 
significant, under-performance is evident with the rest of the CS. 
The obvious question is why did this happen? There are common and CS - specific 
factors accounting for performing below plans. The first and perhaps the most 
important cause was inadequate and late provision of fund. This was a cause for 
frustration of project personnel and poor relation between project holders and local 
governments including line agencies. Moreover, prices of monetized commodities 
fluctuate, mostly downward, resulting in imbalance between planned and available 
fund. The donor response in the event of unfavorable balance is to reduce the level of 
activities, which could lead to program instability and reduced chance to sustain · 
programs. 
Problems stemming from monetization cut across sectors benefiting from the Title II 
Program. It is mentioned under the health section because it is the health programs 
that have relatively been more negatively affected, since cash component tends to be 
larger in the health interventions. Another common factor and a likely source for poor 
performance has been the role of communities in all aspects of projects, that is, 
community participation in project planning and management. The community 
participation is taken here in the context of ber;ieficiary involvement in decision 
making. Evidences obtained from focus group discussions, interviews with key 
informants and government officials suggest that community participation to date 
leaves much to be desired with all CSs, although there are variations among the CSs 
(in the extent of the problem). Field observations also suggest that objective 
conditions prevailing in the project communities would not allow authentic 
community participation (decision making) because community-based organizations 
are lacking and where available are weak. Provisions in the DAP for capacity building 
at the community level could not be considered commensurate with the degree of the 
problem. 
Among the CS - specific factors that have undermined project performance is the lack 
of good relationship between the project holders and government offices that is based 
on shared and common goal and objective. The tendency of discussing jointly 
implementation problems to seek agreed solutions has been lacking as observed 
during field visits. It is also observed that where the relation is more positive, for 
example among CRS and REST, projects performance was better in health and other 
sectors as well. 
Other problems like inadequate backstopping site project staffs, poor supervision, and 
inadequate health staff could also be cited as reasons for poor performance. 
73 
-l 
·p lJ 
... :it;.:J/.U;@, , -:~ ~::-::L-::!;fLi :;::~ f.:1;;y;::1;~filiJM ..... ~~fili;;~i/~ ;.::-;::: .. ~Li.. ~:.:~:: ;,:~.;-';;LL ., ·;'.':111filir~ti~ ~~s&:;di~~;:L;tr~~fat ........ "" . 
l .. \{~;!·- ~··. t.- -x~:.: c~~:2~] ruH ~i~~;~~TI ~Tum ~~r.:::n. c:::~:: :7 .:~~~ ~w.1~il f&1Rj ~m» . · 
Table 3.27: Major Health Ou.tputs of by CS · 
CARE Clinic construction I " I 3 I 2 I 67 I I I 
Health ost construction 
,.. I Latrine construction 
I 
; 
.. .. . 
I I I I I I 3 
.. ~? =:3 - Ii 
I 2 
Vegetable aardenina " 570 268 47 3138 690 22 110 294 267 408 229 I 56 I 3826 I 1491 I 39 
CRS lmoroved stoves " 0 2 - 15 I 31 12061 15 I 33 I 220 
113 
Latrine construction " 1 1 100 15 17 0 1 113 16 19 11 9 
Home visits " 104 104 100 103 103 100 80 80 100 287 287 100 
Food supplement (M) Prns. 1325 1325 100 1007 1007 100 807 807 100 3139 3139 100 
Food suoolement (C) " 3000 2996 100 411 9 3427 83 3897 3334 86 3509 2733 78 14523 12490 86 
Health education " 1500 1592 106 2825 2505 87 2507 2257 90 2307 1945 84 9139 8299 91 
1500 1404 94 1500 1123 75 1500 1187 79 1500 1056 72 6000 4800 80 
EOC/ Health post construction " 2 2 100 3 3 100 - - - 5 5 100 
DICAC Veoetable plots 160 60 38 380 65 17 100 123 123 640 248 39 
FHI FP services Persons 1200 283 24 2130 4532 213 3492 3041 87 6822 7856 11 5 
Micronutrient Suoo. II 11077 6192 59 14612 14265 98 25689 10467 41 
Latrine construction No 3 4 133 45 46 102 22 0 70 50 71 
Health oost construction " 4 3 75 3 3 100 3 0 10 6 60 
EPl/children Persons 1033 584 57 1033 1420 137 1033 2207 214 1033 2207 214 4132 6418 155 
EPl/mothers " 2000 312 16 2000 790 40 1000 1228 123 1000 1228 123 6000 3558 59 
SCF 1TBA Tralninq " 35 35 100 35 35 100 70 70 100 
FP IEC Material 1000 800 80 2000 3000 150 3000 3800 126 
Health Post No 2 2 100 
'NVl/E Latrine const. Demon " 1 1 100 I I I I 2 I 2 I 100 
Source: Project Field Offices 
'• 74 
... 
. 
-
i c.::."'.j re".;;? m:m"J ""'''!".'i .. r:::::l mm e.m1 1!!!!'7n 
57 
Roof catchments 4 I 2.2 I 55 I 7 I O I o I I I I I I 11 I 2.2 I 20 
Pond construction II I 7 I 5 I 71 I 15 2 13 22 7 32 
13 I g I 69 I 11 s 45 6 s e3 6 6 1 oo 36 - ·- -·59 l 
59 65 110. 0 16 - 80 86 108 139 167 120 
2 I 1 I 50 3 2 67 5 5 100 5 5 1 oo 15 ... _82.__ 
100 5 4 80 10 7 70 10 9 90 26 21 81 
CRS No. 
. . . .. . .. . .. . 1 I 1 I 100 2 2 1 oo 2 ·- 1 50 5 ·- --4· .. - --80-· 
EOC/ 
if>ICAC- Sprino and water " . · 2 2 100 5. _,_ .§ __ 
-
.. I·· FHI Sprino Development No 4 3 7 5 15 11 67 17 16 94 15 19 126 
REST 
SCF/ 
USA 
WVl/E 
Hand-duo well " 1. 2 200 13 5 38 14 7 t 50 
.... ,., ____ ,_,,, .. ,_ .. _ No. 24 24 100 \298 211: 21551 41 378t ___ 
Hand-dug well " 48 48 100 56 40 71 39 39 100 143 127 89 
Bore-hole I " 8 8 100 8 8 100 - 16 16 
Trainina I Sess. I I I I I I 20 I 20 I 100 I I I 20 I 20 
Pond construction I No. I I I I 2 I 1 I 50 I 1 I 1 I 1 oo I 2 I 1 I 50 I 5 I 3 
100 
100 
60 
Hand-duo well I " I I I I 2 I 1 I 50 I 1 I 1 I 100 I 2 I 1 I 50 I 5 3 I GO 
Birka Development I " I I I I 1 I 1 11 oo I 2 I 2 1100 I 2 I 2 11 oo I 5 5 I 1 oo 
Pond construction No 5 5 100 4 6 150 10 9 90 19 20 ... ... . 
Roof catchments " 1 1 100 2 2 100 
---· -·--·-·-· ... . ......... .. 
Bore-holes No. 13 7 54 7 7 100 5 - 25 14 56 
7 8 114 2 1 50 9 9 100 
. -· .. . .. 
, ,_,, __ ... ._.,, _,, 7 1 14 2 3 150 9 4 
Training (water 
Manaaement Sess. 2 2 1100 2 2 100 
Source: Project Field Offices 
,. 
'' 
.1; 
75 
.. 
'l1"l···1·1···' ....... 1··· , .. >;•1· 
·
1
!it::f:·. · .. : ·!( ·: : .. 
·:·.::1 ,,1). p-, ,. :"• ·• '• .. .,. 
:· .. :. · ·· :: : · . i· .. ·:: · 
p , I .. : 
··:-..· ·.::s .. ,::., 
·: : ·.:.? .• l . . ::·: ~ _ .. 
.. I 
·,j 
~~ i J 
·:-:~ 
.:...~ 
~ ...,. 
':.'"J':t 
.. :iJ !,"(j 
i:+.;1 
.;:;.:J 
"$! 
~~ -51 ~~...;·; 
~~:~ ~r.: 
··· ~ i 
., 
.. 
·~i ·t'\""\ 
' i ;.:1 
... ) .. . : . ~ 
·I ... :.j 
3.2.3 Physical Infrastructure Outputs 
The aggregate plan (all CS) was to construct 770 km of rural road. Actually, I 052 km (36.6% 
higher) was constructed in the period. The situation was similar with maintenance. The plan 
was to do 550 km ofroad maintenance, but perfonnance was higher by about 20% (Table 
3.29). The table indicates that there was a considerable inter-CS variation. Most of the 
increase came from REST projects. This could be due to considerable demand for such roads 
arising from relatively large engagement in land reclamation by all REST projects. 
Road density is low in most project areas even by Ethiopian standards. This immensely 
constrains projects' perfonnance, especially as regards conservation programs and income 
generation initiatives. Moreover, a considerable amount of food aid commodities can be used 
via FFW without affecting local food production in all project areas. There is a huge demand 
for FFW employment. All of this suggests that there is a strong rationale to increase the scope 
of road program in the upcoming DAP . 
76 
. 
'i i· " ·. ..,;•:';u1· · • · · .. , · · '-:'i·'"''' !'ilm1a111·,1,. ,.,,. ,. i ... 1~"111lll111mnm:1 :::... · i~: «lH~U'! .-~i ·l! .: •;: ii\ .. :'.;~J;i{:ii'.! ma itbi1.;.1+w; t!:tfiim1~ll!!:!d ~ml!lhi\i :'. ... ::· ::. :. .... ·. . ... . .· :1n1~u·1;ii;"•1 wl< 1·"1 .. , •• , .... ;i"l11·r:!· .. • . ·::," 1'.;:>y1.:1'1ll .'11l·iii i1iJ'i! {i-i 1! ,if i;· ···
-
·· : ....... ~1: : .... :., u ... ·.W .....:; ~r:-:.:.~:.:: .. :-.:..:~~?; . , f1 •• 
I ",• 
. :: : . :~. l 
·:: '
. 
Table 3.29: Outputs of Physical and Social Infrastructures by CS for the Period 1997/98 • 2000/01 
1. Access Road 
- Road survevina 
- Road deslan 
- New road construction 
- Road maintenance 
- Orv weather Road construction 
- Culvert /Ford 
- Bridae 
- Wooden bridge construction 
- Concrete bridge construction 
2. School construction 
3. School maintenance 
Source: Project Field Office t~:~ tt-r~: r~~ .. 1 L_:.;;_J 1..:.:;; ~ "'" c:::3 
Km 
Km 
Km 
Km 
Km 
No. 
!?TI;r:B 
13 
13 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
r·....., 
9.7 74.61 - I -
9.7 74.6 
- 54 67.65 
- - 58 53. 11 
- 47 35.6 
- - 12 8 
- - 4 4 
- - 4 2 
- - 2 0 ~ lii.M,,,y,,;1 ~~ ,,1w c::J 
·I - I - I - I - I 10 l 36 I 360 
125.3 I 67.65 I 90.511 I 110.7 \· 167 I 124.7 \ 74.6 
91 .6 I 41 I 67.124 1- 108.0 I 38 I 27.8 I n .2 
75.7 
66.7 
100 I - I - I - I 6 I 0 I o 
I I I I I 
50.0 
0 
77 
Wc':4l ~ ~ .c:J ~~..,.fi ,.,. •. .,.~ \ll\M\k~ ..__:0 4..:J :::. ~ ~ ml 
..... . .- .~:. ~}~~: .; :;.Jflim~~:~ .. ~~=~·::.:'. .... t·· .. ~.:~:'t~;L~~: ~~Ji.;fr~.:; : .. ~··· ..... ......... .. ~: ...... 
r:i:c,_ .. : ;~~f:;_. ;rr?. :~ fl .... .. a ;~E~~qjl! ·= ·• 
1. Access Road 
3d survevino Km 83 21.1 25 
- Road desian Km - -
- New road construction Km 105 59.1 56 
- Road maintenance Km 85 82.1 97 
- Orv weather Road construction Km 
- Culvert /Ford No. I 6 I 5 I 83 
I I I 
- Bridge 
• Wooden bridcie construction 
• Concrete bridoe construction 
2. School construction 
3. School maintenance I I 20 I 16 I 80 
Source: Proj ect Field Offices 
., 
.·.·.· 
................ O o ·~ .~/~~liillill~l~;~tilif: · .. ~: .: .. ~ .. R: . .:_. f ·~~ tt~t o 
278 
:.•:1 
. .:..1~ ....... .... : :: 
·!: 
580 209 ~i~;;. ~ ........... . " ·...-::;:~(·· _:~:i~) - - -
. ·: .. ~·~ ... .. :~ .. i¢.~Y~ ,;.: ... ·. ...... ~.; m 
Table 3.29 Cont'd ... 
99 130 132 
273 433 159 . . - 55.0 16.1 29 
12 12 100 
1 1 100 
78 
,. 
I . 
,..; 
.. 
·" .. -~ 
...-. .;.., 
~-~ 
.-;- ... , 
·.::: . 
.. ;: 
'!-....... 
CJ{Jl <J!TP/1{3 
SCECTIO:N2 
J:JffP,~P,<DJ}lrr'P, <J{PSVL<TS 
(CEPPCECTS) 
79 
... : 
. i 
.: ;! 
::·. •.••• '.,f 
I .. , 
_; 
: :.~ 
3.3 Eff~cts 
3.3.1 Intermediate Res~lts: Aggregate Picture 
Intermediate Result One -Increased Agricultural Production (JRJ) 
Evaluation results on IRl indicators are cast against baseline values in Table 3jO below 
by CS. Cereals yield per unit of area rose in 2000 in all CS. These reasons might have 
accounted for the increase. 
• Rainfall in 2000 was favorable in amount and distribution in most parts of the 
country, and grain production and yield were one of the highest recorded in recent 
times. 
• Contrary to 2000 rainfall was poor in 1997, the base year, and production and 
yield were poor too. 
• Title II soil and water conservation measures, although such measures normally 
take time before impacting yield, might have had an influence. 
The number of project households who used fertilizer in 2000 was slightly higher (26%) 
than in 1997. There are no evidences to suggest that the projects had any contribution to 
the increase. The change is mostly attributed to the government aggressive promotion of 
the use of improved agricultural inputs such as fertilizer and improved seeds. The 
percentage of households who used improved seeds in 2000 (12.5%) also showed a 
modest increase compared to 1997 (5.9%). The increase is again mostly due to improved 
extension services and not because of the Title II interventions. 
About 48% of the surveyed households reported that they practiced improved farming 
techniques, up from 35% in 1997. Improved farming practices referred to in· these cases 
include crop rotation, inter-cropping, soil conservation, compost use, etc. Title II projects 
promote these methods in one fonn or another and they must have had contributed to the 
increase. It cannot be assumed that the projects are the only factor for the increase since 
the government extension services, also extended to Title II farmers, focus on same 
practices. 
Area under irrigation is another _IRl indicator. The survey results show that Title II 
projects increased irrigated area from 60.4 ha in 1997 to 398.4 ha in mid 2000. In fact, 
when schemes that were nearing completion 90 operational area, over 600 ha. will be 
brought under irrigation with significant implications for food security of the benefiting 
households. 
This report wishes to make a few observations in respect to the use of irrigation in 
command areas already in operation as well as the parts that will be operational by the 
finalization of the first DAP cycle . 
There are several small-scale irrigation schemes completed and operating with the 
support of Title II program. The combined capacity is to irrigate over 600 ha. About 2400 
households are expected to directly benefit from the schemes. Rainfall irregularity and 
80 
.:::\::] 
.. ·· : 
.. •• · t 
·.• ·· .. 
shortage are perhaps the two most important food security problems in most Title II 
project areas. It is for this reason that development of small, farmers-managed and labor￾intensive irrigation schemes were underscored in DAP wherever such opportunities 
existed. Thus, the sche111es were included in the DAP not based on any prior assessment 
of technical, financial, or economic feasibility or on any systematic consideration of crops 
to be grown. Neither was much attention paid to crop programs (market or family 
consumption). In cases where production is for the market, availability of market for the 
products was taken for granted. 
It coQld be for this reason that either during or after the ·construction of the schemes the 
attention of project management is often directed to technical operations of the schemes 
such as organizing users into different task-oriented committees and training of farmers in 
water management. While appreciating this and noting that these technical aspects are 
critically important to the viability ofth~schemes, it is observed that the following 
equally important considerations are often side-lined. 
• Irrigati~~ technological input. It should increase productivity of whatever 
crop raised. This cannot, however, happen unless irrigation is complemented 
with other inputs such as improved cultural practices, ch~mical fertilizers, 
improved seeds, and other innovations that are appropriate to conditions 
prevailing in the particular site. The evaluation team observed farmers 
growing cereals under irriga!ion using mostly traditional methods, for example, 
broadcasting maize instead of row planting, using local seed of maize, use of 
zigzagged furrows, poor crop_ protection, poor drainage, etc. It is the 
impression that there is a need to develop an 'input package' with the object of 
optimizing return to the investment in irrigation. The projects need to develop 
the package in consultation with relevant line agencies. The package of inputs 
could vary from project to project depending upon the objective conditions 
prevailing in the particular project area. For example, assuming that the main 
irrigated crop is maize, the input package should involve row planning, 25 - 30 
kg/ha of seeding rate atthe minimum. This sort of thinking has not been 
evident. 
• Irrigation widens usability ofland and puts to task farmers to make a choice or 
choices among a wide range of possibilities. Irrigation increases economic 
options for farmers. Should farmers carry on using the pre-irrigation crop 
program? Or is a change in crop mix in order? Should priority be given to the 
staples or cash crops? Is it possible to introduce new cash crops? Because there 
is no community level capacity to analyze such options, this becomes the task 
of project management. Yet evidences are lacking that such elements of 
irrigation are given due attention. 
• Irrigation tends to increase demand for being more market oriented. This is 
particularly true to those schemes where production is mostly or exclusively 
for the market. Market becomes even more critical in the event where products 
are high-priced, perishable and bulky to transport like vegetables. It is again 
the impression of this evaluation that market has been taken, in most cases, for 
granted. In other words, empirical observations suggest that it has not been 
given the attention it deserves. 
81 
~ . 
. 
D 
n 
Ll 
·1 · 
iN :1'"''" 
I 
.:(f:'tii· 
·.t:::;· 
. 
·: · · .d1:!HH!:: 
.; ....... 1,J,, .... . . . ... ' . . ,·' .. " .. .. :·,11.,.. :, ..'•1'' . •l ll)li',,., " •: ..! · • • . . ·>: 11:::: 1it ::1 ;ti!:= 
... : ... : ;; ·. . ·:~· ·. .:;;i?fnH! 
:1, 
.' . '. ••• .. .!.! 
. : · .•1 .;1mlf·'/li'11'•:i111'!Wi"·"'n:, .;; r ·· · 1.·:ir;t;;n: ·; : ... . :: .. ~~Hlli ;~,t :L :~· .:.: : .. J . . " . '.::umt8! .. 
, ·:·:·:;r· m;.v ;1; 
O ' •'N: :'ll u~ t' 
i. 
.'· 
;,, tA:·•,' 
·
. ,; ~· ! . J ::::·~ Table 3.30: Results on IR1' indicators 
. .·· 
•; . "::~ :: ~~i ~,.8~'.U""k~m-..1·S>1, rJ., 1' ' ' I. ,.. .~ ),.,,,. , ... l ··r I.'. •· 1. ' p I, ~~$ .,~.~~~1··. 1~ •, ::r I I . ' . ·'1 l r ,., •. I &>=''"'"''~"""~'""''"'•" .,, ... -,,·~ .. "' .,, ....... r .• ,, ' • I"' w ~ - "·~~·~··,, .. ,,, .. ... It". '"··r ·rr·--· .. .... , ··rr·' "' ' I·, ,. I I 
~.i,r.,(lj_ l}l:}Ty; ~ ~1~11j,_1,1Jdi' l~J,il.« , .·, t.'il~l~.:f.,J . ,, _ J~it-!;J .. ,_ .. ci. , <~,t:B ,.•. fr,\,.:1·;.13*':,: ~:...J ~ .. :l::t~ll .1. t .... {3:=.Lr. ''" :S{.sJ.;,i. :!, · u:U.i " · A UD::i " - • ~,;, ',',"fr:.Jl;>·~ .. I·:·.,~ ,• 1 •' .·. ' l ' 1' l.:,' .J·'.~: ..L· "",•) : •• ;.·,,.::_~ ... ~1-(1 ;.,_._: ,\. 11-t.. .·,,) .;;_ ·,· .,~· I•. , _ , 11t l ft/ 1~ 'r' ( •'' , 
''" "'' •'~' :lr1~,- J.. ..,1· •, ,;, "· , ".ii. -__ ,,[. -.-·- , . .,,-", -.. -··1r"'""'- 'ft" .. ,-.... ,.__-~-,r,,·•7• :· ~['~-:l!"f·"'··,--; 7"--•-or- i-r;-''l':''c- -~r.~-- --- :- .. ,: ··" ,-- .--, .. ----- . , 1· -:·-e lt~·\:~ :~il1:~;,~1;r'.1:·i1•, '~1, i·':···. t ·.·, .,l~t·1' ~j' i,,• 1>'' ll· '1111,p·(~- :.;~ . )' i.~',:/ ',\, ,~1( 1;1 :::,r~ "~~l~i) :_.· ! ~- .... li/" ~ ilf1J- .._·' ~:·~~, ,1'~'·"' ·~ ·~' ·_-, ·~ .".: 
~-~,,!i.r·1~t~ 1f~k'l! [@!1,). 
·: ,' . , · "db-.'..· ·,_,., J!·iH:fl ~" i-lililiJ :;i ~filslri\ .. 1@ililti1b\il:J:W ltt{•J.!JiJi i!i&lf:.l!Jri,.: ffi©iJ,1l~ ;:iftili®: 1~~lOOJJ~~1J w.!.~J .• i;::l:Jr 1r • ~~1.iH i · .fJ!t": :{!ffft ~ 1. Yield 
,:.i,i;mai ..: ·· . ~· ·:i IDL 
I - • ~ ' :: 
. 366.74 \. 796 j (. ~ • Barlev Ko/ha NA NA 532 690.9 942.7 390.25 923 386 885 532 668.8 NA 872.7 201.3 747.1 
... .... 
-Wheat NA NA 867 630 825.7 437.7 884 416 923.9 532 847.3 NA 584 222.4 542 447.62 782 ·-· 
- Teff 766.6 5.53 612.7 636 651 .6 322.5 674.2 263.7 793.4 532 797 NA 693 165 591 .5 320.8 698 -
·-· 
·Maize I I I 581 .51 610 601 .9 332.7 988.6 274.25 758.7 206 946.3 532 998.6 NA 322.3 238 647.8 365.5 836.5 --.. 
• Sorqhum I I I 512.21 855 639.6 354.5 1051 248.7 628.8 . 833.7 532 788.8 NA 148.4 72 743.4 412.4 763.7 
2. Overall arain oroductlon Kg/ha NA 535 NA 468 NA 488 NA 567 NA 416 NA 428 NA 559<•! NA 4801 NA I 484 
3. % H.H usinQ fertilizers % NA 1.3 16.5 31 .6 29.8 25.5 12.25 22 22.6 6.7 00 42.5 00 16.1 40.7 40. 11 21 1 26.61 
4. % H.H using improved 5.91 12.sl seeds % NA 0.6 9.2 22.9 3 7.9 2.9 7.3 17.8 0.82 00 12.2 00 1.65 7.2 21 .5 
5. % H.H using improved 
agriculture practice % NA 21.1 38.5 44.2 NA 44.1 53.4 47.8 29 53.3 NA 44.4 NA 16.7 21.3 83.1 35 48.0 
6. Area irri ated Ha NA . - 145.8 - 3.3 55.3 299 5.1 9.7 NA 1.75 NA 0.75 - 8.4 60.4 398.4 
a) The figure seems on the high side. This is due to (1) maize, a relatlvely high yielding crop, dominated crop program in the areas and (2) area under 
crop/hh was relatively large. 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation 
82 
" 
.~ .:.~;:~ ··{.·" 
~·. . ! 
- ...... T" 
::....· . .: 
Intermediate Result Two - Increased Household Income (IR2) 
Table 3.31 below compares three of the five IR2 indicators selected to measure results for 
1997 and 2000. The table demonstrates: 
1. At the national or Title ll level, livestock ownership declined from 2.66 TLU/hh 
in 1997 to 2.17 TLU/hh in 2000. It fell in all CS's but SCF. The main reasons 
were lack of feed, poor weather, changing land use due to conservation measures 
like enclosures and overgrazing. These have been accountable to the persisting 
nature of feed shortage in most project areas. In the PRA seasons farmers thought 
that health problems were a major factor for the decline. The declining livestock 
ownership could well be an indicator of stagnant or retrogressive well-being in the 
project areas. 
2. Physical asset ownership is another indictor. This report selected seven types of 
assets among over 16 different assets on which data was collected to observe 
whether households owned more or less physical assets (excluding land, livestock 
and trees) in 2000 than in the base year. The assets are (1) plough and cart 
representing the group of assets used for production; (2) table, wooden-framed 
beds and blanket representing the group assets that are considered most basic; and 
(3) radio and watch representing the group of assets considered non-essential. 
Table 3.31 shows that in terms of these assets, ownership deteriorated in 2000 on 
aggregate level, another possible indication that there has not been any reduction 
on the level of poverty. 
3. Percentage of households that added luxury food items is.another indictor. This 
report took the percent of households reporting no consumption whatsoever of · 
items considered luxury as the proxy to monitor progress. As can be observed in 
the table, the results between the two years are very close. There is though a slight 
improvement in 2001, nearly 68% of the respondents said they did not add luxury 
food items against about 70% in 1997. 
4. The other two indictors ofIR2 on which there are no reliable data are income 
from cash crop and average saving from _credit society. Cash crop has not been 
properly defined and data collected in 1997 and 2001 are hard to tell whether they 
are referring to the same thing or source. Credit societies never materialized, it 
seems, because of the non-implementation of credit components of Title II due to 
the micro-finance regulations. 
83 
n ,J 
n 
tJ 
n Ll 
n 
u 
f1 
LI 
". .... "t",'"' . .. . . · .... • .. ", .. · .. .. '' ........ ·· · " 1 ·;>'' 1·' • • , .. , .,,. .. . 
. · .• .. ··• .: ·:· .... ·.: :"·:' .•... : ... .· .. P>::- .. . .• 
.. . : : .. ; ·· ··: · ·:·:: .!: :: .. ; ..... :·· ... ... .. ... .. ::;·.: : .. ·.>j : , ·.J.<f:l .< ..... 
·. .:: f''S'.7'!j .... :; .. :'; "'.'Hfffi m 
Table 3.31: Values on three of the five.,in'.dicators of result two 
1
1. Change in the number of 
livestock ownership I TLU I - I - I 2.631 1.601 2.771 1.491 2.821 1.941 1.811 1.401 3.981 2. 141 2.611 6.091 2.83 f 2. Physical asset ownership of 
households: · 
1 -:Production assets: I · Plough No.Iha - 0.62 1.47 0.71 1.06 0.62 0.83 0.72 0.69 0.94 1 0.6 0.12 0.30 0.79 0.78 0.99 0.65 
- Cart - - 0.01 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.01 0.02 0 0.8 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.05 
- Essential assets: 
- Table - 0.08 0.03 0.8 0.12 0.08 0 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.02 0.43 0.68 0.35 0.03 _ 0.68 0.08 0.07 
• Wooden framed bed 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.19 0.1 7 0.01 0.89 O 0.96 0.35 0.46 0.25 0.79 0.11 0 15) 
- Blankets 0.17 0.84 0.43 0.39 0.51 0.33 0.30 0.11 0.94 0.46 0.68 0.63 0. 43 0.4 0.84 0.54 
Non-essential assets: I 
' 
- Radio 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.2 0.18 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.02 O. 11 0.8 0.33 0.39 0.05 0.07 0.1 2 o 161 
- Watches 0.05 0.11 0.15 0.25 0.1 5 0.05 0.07 0.02 0.79 0.1 4 0.83 0.35 0.34 0.13 0.69 0.18 o 171 
3. Household that did not add any luxury 
food items I % I NA I 8.oJ 64.4 I 62 I 62.5 I 62.o I 82.2 I 80.5 I 98.2 I 91.8 I 65.6 I 61.7 I 47.3 I 43.7 I 72.8 I 72.5 I 69.6 I 67.7 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
84 
" 
. ; 
.. 
. . . . 
.: -- ! 
~~ ~~ I 
~~~·! 
~~~ 
I 
~,:;: 
; . 
: = 
·. 
Intermediate Result Three -Improved Health Status (JR3) 
There are seven indicators s.:i<:ctcd to monitor progress with Title 11 health and water 
(domestic use) intervention~ . Data on six of these are available for observing trends. 
Information on one indicator. namely, households with vegetable garden for home 
consumption, is not reliabk to report on because there is not in the real sense a plot or 
whatever size on which vegetable is produced exclusively for home consumption. The 
indicator should have read, .. Households that added vegetables in their crop program'', 
without any further qualification. 
Results on the six indicators are presented in Table 3.32 below. The table shows: 
• There has been considerable improvement in 200 I over 1997 in the case of 
diarrhea prevalence. under-weight and water coverage. It is likely that Title 11 
activities such as Vitamin A distribution, MICHA, latrine provision, protected 
water, FFW and relief assistance have contributed to the improved situation. 
Communities attribute whatever change to the projects in most sites. Even 
government offices acknowledge Title II achievement in the health and water 
areas. 
• In two cases, that is. in respect to ITBA-attended deliveries and morbidity no 
comparison can be made between 1997 and 2001 because there are no baseline 
data for the former. But the 2001 figures of 40% ITBA- attended deliveries 
and 20% of household visitation to health facilities favorably compare with 
nationally available data. 
• Title II project areas are relatively more marginalized and poverty is more 
pronounced. Still, the health indicators are either better than or about the same 
as the national averages. The Title II results are even more remarkable when 
seen against the socio-economic realities surrounding the project sites. 
• Water coverage in 2000 increased by a reasonable margin since the start of 
Title II projects. In spite of this, survey data reveal that the amount of water 
consumed has actually declined in 2000. Evidences are not readily available to 
explain the reasons. Based on personal experiences, the evaluation team makes 
nvo conjectures. The first is that water charges may reduce demand, and 
households may opt for unsafe sources to meet non-drinking water 
requirement. Secondly, the survey was made during the rainy season at which 
time households find protected sources a bit far and try to resort to harvesting 
rainwater near their homes oblivious of the safety aspect. If the latter is the 
case, then it means that the future programs have to dwell a lot more on health 
education. Also if water charge is indeed the cause of water consumption 
decline, it might imply that authentic participation of the communities was 
lacking in site selection and operational procedures of the water points 
developed with Title II support. 
85 
I] .
..... 
,:::i~. ~llif~ " ... . : ,:_·.:~i~~b~:.; \.:-. 11 .... : • ·~:-~·~~~:.~~~~~;~;~jf~~t ; ·. -· .. '. ·~·~.1tiMi2·~~3~ii ~~i .. ~i!;~ :~:~ ~idl!LliJ~~ .. ... . . ..... ... .. ... . .... . : .. J~~-· :·f:: . l!?)•f (!tf·:~ ·'. ~ii!:" t:•: :~\,~;:; ;{::': Prevalence of diarrhoea occurrence 
amon children O - 59 months old % NA NA 13 
2. Children under wei ht % " " 47.7 
3. Households using protected water 
source % " " 37.44 
4. Deliveries attended b TTBAs % II " . 
5. H.H that visited health posts twice in 
the last six months % " " -
I'". • I" 
... . 
...... \._ .... ~~:.:_:~:) i'",.1 • : •• • . ..... 1 
... 
. . 
. ;c~1U! l~;.1 •:..t• 
Table 3.32: Results on IR3 indicators 
7.7 14 4.8 8.8 6.2 17.7 4.2 14.2 
40.9 41 .7 24.2 47.7 50.8 63.9 38.4 57.9 
30.8 42.32 42.5 50.70 31 .9 24.94 26.1 29.79 
36.7 . 61 .8 . 31.6 . 50 . 
27.2 - 21 .9 - 18.2 - 17.8 -
. ; -·~· ..... .. \· ... '".:.) ····:·';":: ,: ...... :,. 
6.6 24.1 6.7 9 11.9 12.7 5.3 I 
51 33.2 44.9 48.1 37.9 45.4 41.1 
58.3 35.67 36.1 33.18 60.6 36.3 44.2 I 14.3 
39.5 . 69.45 - 32.1 NA 40 
25 - 26.351 - I 27.6 I NA I 20.5 
Lt/day 
16. Amount of water used /H.H I " I " J44.42J 45.8 141.51 J 34.8 l36.29J 31.2 J32.1 9 I 27 J39.62 J 39 J55.42J 38.5 J37.54 J 34 J40.63 I 35.7 I NA 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
.
•
. 
. . .., 
___ __;; _ 
I i77 
, • l 
86 
m 
~ : 
: .. ~ 
~: ~:: 
::~ 
~ 
~ ~-~ :X-ax 
:...r.._~ 
~ 
:;::r...c-: . ;:; .. '! ~ 
.'":::..:::; 
~;:;.! ~::- -':.- ·. ·.:·\:':: 
'._. . .... I 
Intermediate Result Four- Natural Resource Based Maintained (IR 4) 
Under the Intermediate Result No. 4, namely, Natural Resource Base Maintained, 
three indicators are specified in the OAP: (1) Communal land reclaimed through 
physical and biological means; (2) soil deposited behind checkdam; and (3) soil 
deposited behind hillside terrace. There are baseline values for some projects in the 
case of the first indicator and invariably none for the latter two. Even in the case of 
this indicator, it is difficult to know the area planted with trees (biological 
conservation) unless one has information on tree survival rate and planting distance. 
Such information is not available anywhere. The fact that there are no data on the 
other indicators should not surprise anyone since it is not practical and realistic to 
measure soil deposited behind a checkdam or a hillside terrace. The fact thafrealities 
that surround these physical soil and moisture conservation measures (type, size, 
materials used for construction, slope, etc.) are so diverse within a PA let alone 
among PA's preclude the adoption or use of such indicators. Moreover, the 
application of the indicators requires special skill further complicating their use. Other 
indicators such as tree survival rate, vegetation cover attained, native species of trees 
regenerated through area enclosure, depth of soil trapped inside checkdam by type of 
checkdam, etc., would have b~en.more pragmatic. 
Accordingly, analysis of Intermediate Result No. 4 is limited to qualitative 
observations. At this point it is pertinent to raise a few points regarding FFW, which 
is central to the efforts all CS's make to rehabilitate land. 
All CS's are engaged in natural resources conservation, some more heavily than 
others. The main objective is to prevent further degradation and to improve the 
producing capacity of already degraded land. The strategy is to focus on physical and 
biological conservation measures. Through Title II support a huge amount of such 
conservation works has been accomplished (see below for details presented by project 
and by CS). The conservation works also include construction and maintenance of 
rural roads. Between 1998 and 2000, the Title II projects constructed I 052 km and 
maintained 663 km of rural roads. The conservation works and the roads have one 
important thing in common. They are by and large products or outputs of FFW. 
Needless to state that FFW contributed immensely to the improvement of household 
food security through employment creation. ·on average it accounted for about 3-4 
months food need of the Title II beneficiaries in the year 2000. Although difficult to 
quantify, FFW programs helped to increase local food production, improved fuelwood 
supply, facilitated the movement of people and goods, improved surface water supply, 
and restored lost habitat for wildlife. 
More specifically this evaluation would like to make the following four observations 
on FFW for consideration in future programs: 
I} Document review (publieations of Grain Market Research Project, 1998, 
FEWS publications, food monetization studies) and grain and livestock prices 
observed at the time of evaluation reveal that FFW in Title II project areas has 
had little or no effect on local food production. 
87 
l~} 
~ ~-~~:1 ... : 
• "-1.~ 
,-·i 
.. ~~~~ · .. ;..:-J 
.]:;-=~ :-~ .,;·.~ 
~~ :..~:':: 
.. 
! 
~ 
$.~ :~.! 
·:;.. 
,_:,i 
A-!.n 
·.J 
~..j 
lit 
~ ..... 
. ·.:· 
. ; 
:. 
t:·1 
·' 
~~~ 
..• .. 
.. ! 
.·;. 1 
· . 
2) More outputs could have been achieved through FFW over the Titk 11 project 
period had it not been for delayed and reduced delivery of food aid n:sources. 
With some CS. FF\V resource obtained was 50'% or less of the planned 
amount. 
3) In some CS, FFW wage payment was alien delayed due to weak project 
administration. and this has been a cause for poor project-beneficiary and 
project-local government relations. 
4) FFW wage rates have not been reflecting the going wage rates. They have 
been considerably below labor cost. This reduced FFW contribution to 
creating assets at the household level. and this in return perpetuated 
dependency at the household level. 
Intermediate Result Five: Emergency Response Capacity Increased (IRS) 
This evaluation has observed that almost all Title II projects have been providing 
support to project woredas on: 
• 
• 
• 
Monitoring food supply situation through seasonal crop assessments 
Grain and livestock price monitoring 
In a few woredas, Title II Program supported the setting up of c-class weather 
stations. 
• All project woredas have a disaster prevention and preparedness plan 
(availability of a standing committee for the purpose, operating procedures for 
the committee, linkage mechanisms with higher authorities within the regional 
organizational structure, etc.) 
• In the household survey households were asked whether they receive 
information on weather, grain and livestock prices. Majority of the 
respondents receive information from development agents, neighbors and 
traders. The share of the projects was under one percent in all projects. 
3.3.2 Intermediate Results - Africare 
IR1 
Africare was not covered in the 1997 baseline survey. But Africare has its own 
benchmark figures from 1999 crop year. The evaluation survey results are compared to 
these figures. 
The 2000 yields of the two major crops-maize and sorghum - were less by 35% and 27%, 
respectively over the baseline values. The improved maize and sorghum seeds the project 
supplied were not complemented with chemical fertilizers, most likely accounting for the 
lack of positive results. Rainfall irregularity was also experienced. Rains started late and 
· this was not good to early planted crops like maize and sor-ghum.15 
15 Africare believes that the soils in the project area do not require chemical fertilizers. There is no scientific 
evidence in support of the view. 
88 
··.,:-1 
·:1 
I 
- . i :. i 
.. i 
. -i 
.· i ...... i 
• ! 
. -·-: 
···· .. 
The pr~ject reportedly supplied sorghum and maize seeds in 2000. Yet only 0.6% of tht: 
surveyed households used any kind of improved seed. The project did not provide 
chemical fertilizers, yet about 1.3% of sample households used fertilizers. The survey 
also shows that 21 % of the surveyed households used improved cultural practices. Th is i'.> 
encouraging because ii happens among Agnuak farmers who used to be complete 
strangers to improved techniques of crop production before the project. 
IR2 
There are data on livestock ownership, physical asset ownership and luxury food items 
added for 200 I. Similar data are not available for 1997 for comparison. Livestock 
ownership is very low 0.73 TLU/hh. Anuaks, the Gambellans in Gog, are almost 
exclusively crop producers, and low livestock ownership is expected. 
IR3 
Africare did not have direct health interventions. 
3.3.3 Intermediate Results - CARE 
·IR1 
Decrease in yields of maize and sorghum in Kurfachele by 48%, and 42% respectively 
•• were observed in 2000 over the baseline. In Grawa maize yield was less by about 16% 
. but sorghum yield showed an increase of about l 0%. Improved yield situation was 
observed in Bedeno, where maize and sorghum yield rose by 69% and 97%, respectively 
(Table 3.33). The table further shows that maize and sorghum in Chiro, Gubakoricho and 
Kuni significantly . 
In Adama crop yields increased in 2000, with some remarkably. For example, teffyield in 
2000 increased by about 64% over 1997. Sorghum also showed a higher yield in 2000. 
In Bosset, yields of teff and sorghum rose by 50% and 54%, respectively in 2000, while 
in maize yield decreased slightly (Table 3.33) 
. _Per household teff and maize declined by 16% and 42%, respectively. 
There are no cred~ble reasons to explain maize and sorghum yield behavior in CARE 
projects. For example, in Kurfachele more farmers used fertilizers, improved seeds and 
improved farm management practices in 2000. Yet, productivity of these crops declined. 
On the other hand, in Bedeno the percentage of farmers using fertilizers, seeds and 
improved farming practices also increased in 2000 but by less points. Yet, maize and 
sorghum yields increased significantly. Rainfall was rated better in 2000 than in 1997. 
This should have resulted in higher crop yields, but it did not. It stands to reason that the 
explanatory factor could be the responses the surveyed farmers gave. They might have 
either inflated or deflated resultc; knowingly or unknowingly. The effects of the projects 
on crop productivit'J and overall grain production could not be expected to be significant, 
since there have not been interventions to directly influence yields or overall production. 
89 
Pl 
w 
I 
0 
. • •> 
: {~N;r~CJ..: .. ~/:: ~r:~;;~·:< ."~t°:i .. :. ·.!: i\ :~.=tW . i~U \ .. :. . :· ... 1: • • I• .,0 ., I ... ..:r;~ .. H .. .. .. ::,~c ...... ·: . i. · '~:·! !>')~ 11tl.l,-;1li! ''f,•· ,-. · ·· l; · .: ,;H,ih..': 
• ~..... \:;, ........ i:,,~ lJ ·-··---·· ·- •• .i.il .. ~ • •. ·-··· ... ; ..... ...... _(~ 3J.: .. .... £::~i~~l . 
.1 -~'.f . ;J:~;~. : .... :; ·~:~ ~~': .~·~ ~~: !'.~ i::· am ~~:.,·<. ,...1 . ·.' , . ·. : .. :L :::' fiim · :~~t~:j~ 'f . T~~ •• ·••• .... .. .... · ••w> n;,.,,L.:J; ... j.1 ... :.:--1 ••• ~ ..·~~.:~ ~f: ..... 
_
.::: m 
" 
Yield of Major Crops 
(Kg/ha): 
• Barley . 479 . 681 . 223 . 193 . . 400 . 178 . 759 . 866 
- Wheat . 367 . 1510 . 470 . 147 . . - - - 942 . 1000 
• Teff . 2017 . 1721 - 964 1216 383 1216 . 1216 452 389 640 389 577 
·Maize 912 476 912 1538 912 769 1520 311 1520 147 1520 625 569 601 569 651 
- Sorahum 720 417 720 1421 720 792 1216 698 1216 571 1216 485 516 919 516 814 
Overall Crop 
Production (Kg/hh): 
- Barley . 17 - 5 - 2 . 26 . .5 . 2 - 148 . 7 
- Wheat . 8 - 8 . 4 . 1.5 . . . . . 164 - 2 
- Teff . - - 6 . 3 . 5.8 81 . 81 11 337 284 337 224 
- Maize 85.2 56 85.2 310 85.2 86 187 168 187 55 187 180 397 229 397 416 
- Sorahum 144.6 745 144.6 96 144.6 71 333 317 333 381 333 68 70 9 70 61 
IMooaodog lodioator.: 
- % HH using 
fertilizers \ • I 59.8 I . I 8.5 I . I 65.0 \ 18.9 \ 13.2 [ 18.9 I 4.4 \ 13.9 I 53.1 I 40 I 32.1 I 40 I 17.2 
1- % HH using 
I 57.0 I 2. 1 I 6.7 I 2.1 I 118.5 I 118.5 I I I I 6 I I 6 I 1 improved seeds I 2.1 63.3 7.9 4.5 42.2 1.4 0.3 
1. % HH using 
;improved Agri. 
Practices 25.7 55.3 25.7 59.3 25.7 61.0 57.0 27.6 57.0 31 .7 57.0 L 34.5 1. 30 l 31 .7 l 3_0 l 52.8 - Area irri ated ha . 63.72 - 0.4 . 33.70 . 4.8 . 0.5 - 38.6 • 0.25 3.51 - -- - · - - ---· -· -
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures Is CARE 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
- in 2000 means there have not b~en enough.observation to make use of simple statistics like the mean 
.,. 
90 
: . ... 
~~· • ·. 4 
. ·' : 
. ' 
-·· 
. • i 
. ;.·....,:_.-
IR2 
The 1997 and 200 I values on livestock ownership, physical asset ownership and luxury 
food items added for CARE projects are presented in Table 3.34 below. Notable 
observations include: 
• Livestock ownership increased in Chiro, Grawa and Bosset in 2001over1997. In the 
rest of the projects ownership declined. It is hard to point out the reasons for the 
increase or decrease. In group discussions farmers seriously contend that livestock 
number is continuously declining due to feed shortage and rampant livestock diseases. 
Agricultural offices oflocal government tend to confinn the farmers' view . 
• Ownership of physical assets in terms of number per household changed very little 
between the two years. This coupled with declining trend of livestock ownership 
seems to indicate that there was no asset creation at the household level over the 
project period. 
• The situation with luxury food items added is similar to asset ownership; there was no 
significant change. 
Table 3.34: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for CARE Project 
-Grawa l.55 2.58 0.28 0.21 42.8 45.4 
- Bedeno 1.77 1.59 0.26 0.21 35.06 38.00 
- Kurfachelle 1.63 1.28 0.29 0.21 39.04 42.09 
(2 West Harar he 
- Chiro 2.28 2.97 0.47 0.30 27.6 31.75 
- Guba Koricha 3.10 2.53 0.42 0.26 30.52 34.79 
-Kuni 2.34 1.70 0.50 0.31 44.8 47.2 
3 EastShoa 
- Adama 7.32 6.84 0.33 1.4 30.16 33.17 
- Bosset 2.4 3.84 0.5 0.31 29.64 31.01 
So~rce: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
IR3 
All CARE projects that have registered improvements are found in cash crop (coffee and 
chat) areas. Bosset should have registered an improvement as well with its high income 
generating irrigation schemes, but this has not happened . 
91 
:.~~+{11~ x<<. ?"<·: . '.·:filmr;::·:: .. ; '' . ' . ~·1p11/) .• ,,>::11 "1~" .··· '.·ft); ~' 1•~11~·.::. ~ :7!. · . -r:;,.~:t~fll!li~~J l!U!!~:~ .. · :::· :.•· ~_?,,j~I :;~ ·,·. : , '. ' ,:.~,- , ;J .. :P.htillt! .. ~:i!!t:-~~!l'.!: ..... :;;._ '.:...o..:i" 1 J !' • L-~fu~i..:r.: •~·(:; 1f:, t• 0 .' ".•'j ·:,, .:,l,lf"f!'!'' . c::· ...... · ........ 
_
, ..... 
·--·· ...... __ _ ·!·~~ C·:• •,1' '.:: :( •"··"·'.I 
. ·. ~ 'r, ... ·.···: . ~~· . 
Indicators 
, HEAI;;TH. 11. Prevalence of diarrhea 
STA'filJS .. .. ,. occurrence l'.M?t©v£Ei · : f int~~ii\~cii~ :;/_~\; J·2-:-chlldrenunder weight ·' Resu~d' '·,._,« .•. , .. 1 
1 ~ ... 
•\F.· '::;':/ ;·,':·: ·, '. ,......,.3 ...,. H:-:-ou-s-e'""ho...,l,...,d·s· -us-:i-ng--
·•"
. 
!: :~tJ~ijlt .. : i :~ um ;~~ :·~q J ,·• 
Table 3.35: IR3 Results of the CARE Title II Projects 
· 6'ss# ·~Y .. : .. ·J ?;,!"_" .•.• :_:·. Adama 
B'asii.year : ~o::r}~'. a~~ ycar · 2001 · Unit value · · 'viliue 
% I • I 4.6 I - I 4.9 
% 32.5 60.0 35.4 48.3 
% 34.7 55.8 
___ C.;;.hiro 
Base year 
vnlue 
38.4 
2001 
21.7 
31.9 
23.1 
;;?ta 
Gubn Korichn 
Base year I 2001 
value 
lri.7 
35.5 ~8.5 8.6 
Kuni 
Base year 
value 
47.J 
.......... : 
: · .. ;!· 
2001 
10.-l ~7. ~ 23.4 
... ,. . · • · rotected water sources 't" if;;'. ::~. ,:;.:: :?; 4. Deliveries attended by % • 35.4 • 37.3 •. ' 40.5 ___ J __ , 5.0 - I ,1 1JA .~:~~~~ ... ·· •. :'.i~ ::}~:tf,f trained TBAs .V · '.*~i.'~; ~~\ii:~~ -s-HH--t-h-at-v-is-i-1.e_d_h_e-al_th _____ 0_Vo---+---.--+--2-l._0__, ____ ---+--3-5-.-l -+---.---+--J-9-.---i-----t-----i-----t-- 6
' :.: :./.r .: ·· · : · · .: posts twice in the last six "' ~ -J_ 292 1.'' .:;. • · months ;>·~- ·;~ :-!'.~f.:~ . .. :: .. :;·>--6-. _Am_o_u_n-to_f_w_a_t-er_u_s_ed ____ L_l/_da_y_/_H_H_..,__4_7_.9 _ _,__4_3 _ _,_ __ 5_0_.3 __ ...__5_5_._0_ ....... _4_5-.9---o--3-4 __ ..__4_6_.4 _ _,_ __ _ 47 ~9.J I 4~ ·'·:· ·:. :: • :·1.·-:. ~:;:.;~·P!!,?; :-t~;- ·>:· ~.rAxail'aSleli>Ts~in"ef<li'i'.litr0r <?'~~is aW;oii'a1 t:e "fnce womllirlot~c~~our · ·pu'ri>'oS'e;' i:eTWorecia level :;\:. ~3. ~ft¥~7f .. ~t ~!?~:~:~;{·::"::;'~ ~~i:~:~ !:~~~~\~:.~~;.'.~~Xf~if~~ :: HENflTH'STA"TUS."''" 
IMPROVED;, .. ::. 
I. Prevalence of diarrhea occurrence 
lntetthediate Result•.; 2. Children under weight % 
7. 1 
47. 1 29.8 
.. , ,, :O;.;: ~i0Z,fBeileno . ... 
.. ~~t~ i~ar ·. value" 2001 
8.0 
59.2 J 1.2. 
Table J.J5 continued ... 
Base year 
"alue 8.9 Grawn 2001 9.9 O.~ ; Nor~/~~j .. :. ··· 1.•( • .. : . ·)_t 
• '. [,~ ~ .;, ·.• ·' .• :·i--3-. H·-ou-s-eh_o_ld_s_u_s-in_g_p-ro-t-ec-t-ed-w-at_e_r -+---o/c-o--+---_---+--8-9. 4--4---.---41---0 ----- 55.(; 
sources ~··· 4. Deliveries attended bv trained TBAs I % 42.1 47.5 ... ·16.g--
S. HH that visited health posts twice in I % 21.7 19.4 26.7 
the last six month 
6. Amount of water used I Lt/dav/HH 31.1 57 39.4 32 36.4 55 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
" 
92 ~ 
·""·-· 1 
... 1 
~~ ··:·: . 
~t~ =---l - i 
;.;;-.i 
·. 
There arc baseline values for two indicators: Children under-weight and amount of waler 
used (source not distinguished). In respect to these two indicators the situation households 
face in all project locations is deplorable. Children under-weight increased in Bosset, Adama. 
Guba Koricha and Kuni. Water consumption decreased in Bosset, Chiro, Kuni, and Bedeno. 
Generally consumption in 2001 was below WHO minimum requirement by 16-53%. This is 
in spite of !he fact that water was and still remains one of the most important support areas. 
But use of safe water in project communities seems significantly higher than the national 
average, and the areas where projects (except Guba Koricho) showed commendable results 
(see Table 3.35). 
Some deterioration was observed in children's underweight in Adama, Guba-Koricha, Kuni, 
and significant deterioration in Bosset. As mentioned above, Bosset should have registered an 
improvement, but this has not happened; instead a decline occurred. There have been 
instances in the past where extra money earned from development work went mainly for 
drinks. Women's empowerment and more consultative family resource use could have 
helped. 
In places where there was no improvement in the percentage of households using safe water 
distance traveled to water sources and water charges could be factors. Mos't water 
development ventures impose a nominal charge. The charge, however small it might be, 
cou!d deter use because of low affordability. 
3.3.4 Intermediate Results - Catholic Relief Service {CRS) 
·. , IR1 
Data on IRl indicators for CRS Title II projects in 1997 and 2000 are shown in Table 
3.36 below. It reveals that there were significant productivity increases in 2000 over that 
of 1997 cereals, notably maize and sorghum. Over three-fold increase in maize yield was 
reported in several of the projects (Hundene, Fedis, Jarso). Very high sorghum 
productivity increase was also reported for Jarso (431 %), Fedis (I 01 %), Hundene (85%). 
Wheat, barley and teff yields were generally more favorable in 2000, but the changes 
were less dramatic. Despite the fact that there is expectation that the CRS conservation 
activities (rated highly qualitatively and quantitatively) could influence positively crop 
productivity, it is not likely that this could be the major thrust for the huge yield increases. 
The year 2000 was a good production year because of the favorable meher rains in 
amount as well as in distribution. The 'belg' rain in the year was inadequate and this 
affected maize and sorghum in most places but not in Hararghe. Farmers re-planted and 
the extended rains of the meher season resulted in relatively high maize and sorghum 
yields in Hararghe in particular. It seems thus evident that the favorable rainfall .in 2000 
was by and large behind the high productivity increase in CRS Title II projects. 
Overall household production, on the other hand, did not correspond to the yield rise. The 
2000 figures were in many instances lower than the baseline values. The mean area under 
cereal p.-oduction decreased in all projects, in some by as much as 60%. It seems evident 
that the decrease in cultivated area was the major reason for cereal production per 
household. 
There has not been a significant change in the proportion of households using 
productivity-increasing inputs - fertilizers and improved seeds. The trend was decreasing 
93 
fl LI 
'1 b 
a l 
' 
~ Ll 
~~ 
~~?-~ l 
--· 
i 
' 
I 
~ i 
·! 
t 
~·· ·: 
I .... t:··: ·.; ·; 
fJ 
.1, 
' 
.. number of fertilizer users (Jarso, Fedis, Adama) and increasing numbers of users of 
improved seeds (Jarso, Gulomekeda, Hundene) in 2000. The combined influence of this 
on crop yields might not be much. 
Although there are no baseline figures to compare with, the percentage of farmers using 
improved cultural practices in 2000 was very encouraging, and perhaps this had some 
contribution to the 2000 relatively high productivity discussed above. Nearly 50 percent 
of surveyed farmers employed improved practices of one type or another in Hundene, 
Gulomekeda, Fed is, Kombulcha, and Jarso. There is reason to believe that the projects 
had a role (conservation programs, farmers' training). Discussions with farmers 
individually and in group indicate that there is a lot of appreciation for this low cost 
approach to increasing productivity. 
There are irrigation schemes here and there but the effect of this on production is yet to 
materialize since the schemes have either not been completed or went operational only 
recently at the time of the visit. 
To recap, it is difficult to say that the projects brought any significant change in food 
production to date, although it could be argued that the projects' support for conservation 
and.capacity enhancement at the household level might positively affect production in the 
futur~, perhaps in a sustainable way. 
94 
..... ·;:.:: : '·. : . ·:~~;:::! . ' ..... t'l~ ·>~ . :~r;;~r~~~~;:~:tmmr. · .: ~ . ·,. ·~RUf,ff~i~''°~~~ij>/j!~Lt,1:.;.~H ·· .. :1• : •• , rl~!H~R!'·· '.., 1 ~·:: f:~;.~~ :-~ .. ~:J~~·filr~H~.~l!f; ~ftJi~t~ :.>~t~~t~~ . "· ... l ... ~: .. · ......... . : .. :::·1~{! .:: . ... · :.: ~:s~:~r.JB • I . ;' j: ... . ··: 
.. .: 
Table 3.36: IRl Results of CRS Title II Projects 
Yield of Major Crops (Kg/ha): 
- Barley 960 834.6 NA 1028 NA 700 890 - 890 . 890 00 
- Wheat 760 778 NA 760 NA 639 840 . 840 - 840 00 
- Teff 700 712 NA 783 NA 523 - . . . - 00 
- Maize 650 745 NA 972 NA 609 430 1640 430 1584 430 
- Sorghum - 766 NA 666 NA 545 490 1274 490 1355 490 I 808 
Overall Crop Production 
(Kg/hh): 
·Barley 363 145 NA 27 NA 222 133.5 1 133.5 81 133.5 00 
·Wheat 315 105 NA 76 NA 273 221.4 2 221.4 . 221.4 00 
• Teff 553 345 NA 100 NA 323 . 3 . 27 . 00 
• Maize 251 292 NA 580 NA 247 51 .5 105 51 .5 92 51 .5 
• Sorghum 6 NA . NA 8 195.4 227 195.4 83 195.4 I 271 
!Monitoring Indicators: 
89 I 32.8 I NA I 6.1 I NA I 29.0 I 28 I 10.6 I 28 I 31 I 28 I 22 - % HH using fertilizers J i- % HH using Improved seeds 1 0.1 " 2.0 " 1.3 4 5.2 4 13.9 4 19.8 
- % HH using improved Agri. 
'Practices NA 37.3 " 29.4 " 38.1 NA 41.6 NA 47 NA I 38.5 
- Area irri ated ha 0 - - . - - 0 0.88 0 0.19 0 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures is CRS 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
• in 2000 means the number of observations made were too small to make any good use of simple statistics like the mean. 
NA= Not Available 
95 =~~ m;;: ~ C"~ II:~ ti:'~ mnll G~;:.~ ~ ~ tW"J r~~ mJil.'rJI r;-~ . t'D ~;::; ~;i::;~)l c:m ~ m 
. i·· 
. . 
·
.. . ;· :::f:: 
1 . ..... O M :-: .. . 
,• 
Yield of Major Crops (Kg/ha): 
- Barley (Kg/ha) 890 833 890 -
- Wheat (Kg/ha) 840 1388 840 -
- Teff (Kg/ha) - 416 - -
- Maize (Kg/ha) 430 1865 430 1230 
- Sorghum (Kg/ha) 490 989 490 1130 
Overall Crop Production 
(Kg/hh): 
- Barley 133.5 17 133.5 -
-Wheat 221.4 8 221.4 -
- Teff - 6 - -
- Maize 51 .5 57 51 .5 164 
- Sorohum 195.4 76 195.4 109 
Monitoring Indicators: 
- % HH using fertilizers 28 15.8 28 50 
- % HH using improved seeds 4 3 4 19.7 
- % HH using improved Agri. 
I I I Practices NA 50.3 NA I 51.1 - Area 0 - 0 2.1 I 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures is CRS 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
890 
840 
-
430 
490 
133.5 
221.4 
'· -
51 .5 
195.4 
28 
4 
NA 
0 I 
.:!:\;. ...... .. . 
.. ..... ".... 
/ 
.· 
1465 
1527 
833 
1541 
1411 
55· 
151 
.56 
46 
65 
21.2 
4.5 
55.6 
0.13 I·. 
...... 
410 
290 
-
-
-
89.4 
31.3 
-
-
I 
- i 
71 
4 
NA 
0 I 
' 0 .. + M " 
,) 
Table 3.36 Cont'd ........ 
1127 890 838 
963 840 551 
600 - 833 
909 i 430 1461 500 I 490 I 907 
206 134 1 
43 221 8 
2 0.4 I 
6 I 52 I 79 
1 195 --
35.7 0 26.8 
13.4 4 5 
49.1 
I 
I 47.2 
- NA 
- in 2000 means the number of observations made were too small to make any good use of simple statistics like the mean. 
NA= Not Available 
96 
,. 
•••• ' .. I ' · 
- fl[ 
;-~:~ j - ' -::_: .. ·,: ~; 
.-'·'-! 
~¥.-~ 
~~ 
: .. ·: i·-::-· 
-.. 
·~-- ... 
IR2 
Table 3.37 providl:s data on household livestock and physical asset ownership and 
consumption of luxury food items in 1997 and 200 I for CRS Title I I projects. The Table 
shows: 
• In seven of the ten projects where there arc data for 1997 and 200 I. livestock 
ownership declined, in some rather sharply (Hundene, Goroguttu). In three projects 
(Goluomekeda, Kombolcha and Fed is) livestock ownership of households increased. 
Like in CARE projects there are no distinctly known reasons either for the increase or 
decrease. Farmers are strongly. inclined to believe that herd size is decreasing due to 
feed and health problems, implying that livelihood means have been weakening in the 
project areas in spite of the Title II interventions. 
• There is not much difference in the level of physical asset ownership of the 
households between the base year and 200 I. 
• In almost all projects, the percentage of households who said they never consumed 
any luxury food item is less in 2000, but the difference is small with most projects. . . 
Ta\Jle 3.37: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for CRS Project 
,,. ~~~~ t: :.:. ~~;'; '•· 
-. .Projects 
. Ji; O.Olk ; £. .. J9§ . Geulomekeda 0.66 1.17 0.22 20.52 25.97 
Adam a 2.15 2.02 1.36 34.74 39.99 
Du da bora 4.51 2.99 0.52 39.38 42.9 
Dodota Sire 1.33 0.37 40 
Jari>o 1.56 l.08 0.27 0.20 33.78 37.8 
Kombolcha 1.18 1.30 0.36 0.25 38.54 40.8 
Fedis 0.76 1.30 0.23 0.20 26.12 31.20 
Meta 2.78 1.64 0.47 0.25 34.64 39.00 
Goro tu 2.5 1.44 0.27 0.26 43.78 48.02 
Hundene 1.86 0.63 0.59 0.20 48.54 49.5 
DireDawa 3.81 2.83 0.40 0.28 21.9 23.01 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
IR3 
Table 3.38 shows that CRS health performance has been impressive. Under-weight 
prevalence decreased, immensely in some projects. Diarrhea prevalence seems low, and 
percentage of households using safe water sources is high in most projects by Ethiopian 
standards. CRS has been focusing on children in several different ways: it was engaged in 
growth monitoring, provided supplemental feeding to both mothers and children. These are 
bound to contribute to improved nutritional status of children. Communities as well as local 
authorities expressed concern, especially in East Shoa, that FACS program might encourage 
parents to go for more children in order to obtain the monthly ration of flour and oil. 
97 
; 
~.~ ·i 
i 
1 
·f:t 
"'"l 
"I 
:l 
:5J 
. ·;1 
.. iJ 
~ 
.:·.:1 
! 
. 
i 
I 
"l 
i 
; 
l 
. ' 
. i
I 
i 
~ 
i 
! 
~~~ : 
~~ ., 
:i l 
""" 
~ ·.-... 
i 
' 
, . .,., 
;.··: 
: ·.i 
I 
9 
~1 < 
.r.:::1 
r-.::j i:'.'· 
fiA g}-.. 
~;;-~ 
::····j 
. ~ 
'.l 
d 
' ' I :. , : I 
~"J 
' · 
. .; 
f:.~ 
::::i 
:\f; 
r-=-i .. :. 
.. ' •"• 
~ '· ~ . ... 1 ., 
.. '~ 
e::1 .. 
... ! •. j 
:· 
.. ~, . 
.. 
There was a decline in the amount of water used by households at Dugda-Bora, Hundene, 
Dire-Dawa, and at a significant level in Adama. Most of the planned water development 
goals have been achieved. Still, water consumption (lower in 1997 by 25% to 61 % compared 
to WHO minimum rural requirement) declined in 2000. This should be a concern area in the 
future programs. 
98 
;. 
.i··: 
r..::::J 
·:. :. ·.: '. : 
2. Children under weight 
3. Households using protected 
water sources 
4. Deliveries attended by 
trained TBAs 
5. HH that visited health posts 
twice in the last six month 
6. Amount of water used 
2. Children under weight 
3. Households using protected 
water 
:riif,,•.:··! .. 4. Dehveries attended by 
health posts 
. ; ·.; twice in the last six month \,:· J(·.';. 6. Amount of water used 
... · ;'1-:'. .. 
t:;':;'ll 
·· .. :· 
.J,, · .. :" .. ·,1.·': ,. .. .. 1t·::11 
. . .. ·: 
,• 
, 
,· 
Table 3.38: IR3 Results of the CRS Title II Projects 
% 40.9 32.3 . . 40.4 10.8 1 54.2 l 19.4 I 57.7 l 32.6 
% 56.l . 30.0 . 17.4 I . I 57. 1 I . I 4.0 
% 67.4 . 91.7 . 62.2 . 73. 1 . 76.2 
% 13.9 . 15.5 . 24.2 . 25.4 . 21.1 
Lt/day/H 48.5 34 . 27 32.3 32 38.1 48 32.9 33 
H 
CRS ... 
I % I 45.5 I 22.3 I 53.3 I 22.3 I 36.8 I 14.6 I 43.8 I 24.0 I 39.3 I 30.3 I 62.3 I 34.0 
% 56.1 76.7 27.5 88.2 72.5 . 17.2 
I I 53.4 
% 39.1 47.4 51.4 62.7 . 58.2 
I I 51.2 
% 33.3 28.9 28.3 23.6 . 11.7 
I I 15.2 
Lt/day 35.0 47 34.4 35 57.4 35 44.1 41 61.0 26.0 
/ill! I I 25 
cmilli (!"' ....... ,,,,,. Ila " 
··
.
'
.;;:ilr. :· 
99 
ii1:m G 
: . =·~ ; •.· .., . ·! 
·.; 
··i 
f 
; 
..... .... · ... . .. · 
····• 
:. r 
IR4 
·. 
Under IR4 of CRS. there arc a few observations this evaluation wishes to note. These 
include: 
I . There arc observations indicating that a significant reduction of soil loss has been 
attained due lo conservation activities. Farmers talk about yield increase from land 
treated with conservation measures. Yield increase is normally more significant in 
areas having moisture stress. 
2. Severely degraded hillsides have been rehabilitated through area enclosures, 
enrichment plantations and gully stabilization measures. These activities have 
increased availability of wood-based products (fuel wood and construction 
material), though the beneficiaries have not yet started to utilize them. Procedures 
will have yet to be worked out for the utilization. Availability of animal feed has 
also increased due to area enclosures and planting of improved forage trees and 
grass species. The bene~ciaries use grass and fodder from area enclosures 
through cut and carry arrangement . 
3. Project sources reveal that about 400 hectares of severely degraded hillsides have 
been rehabilitated through area enclosures. The rehabilitation process has been 
enhanced through the construction of micro-basins and enrichment plantations. 
The planting of forage species such as Acacia VXK7, Leucanea and Sesbaina has 
made these areas more productive and increased biomass. 
4. Bund stabilization activity through the planting of improved forage species such 
as phalaris, setaria and elephant grass in addition to stabilizing the structures has 
helped to increase livestock feed availability. Several gullies have been treated 
with checkdams. 
5. Traditional farming practices involving the techniques mentioned in combination 
with the introduced conservation practices provided effective moisture 
conservation and erosion control. Runoff farming practice is known in the 
traditional farming system where road discharge is let into farmlands to increase 
soil moisture. 
6. Degraded land rehabilitation through area enclosure, enrichment plantation and 
over-sowing of grass seeds is showing a good recovery in Kombolcha. The area 
seems to have rehabilitated well and the natural vegetation is emerging. Farmers 
expressed satisfaction with the increased supply of grass from the area enclosure. 
There were no waged guards to protect the enclosures. It is the community that 
assumes the responsibility. This is good for sustainability and a good indication of 
the existence of sense of community ownership. 
100 
f.l ..... 
~ _ .. __ ·.:! 
PJ ":.,.! 
~~-·~ 
. ··-
:· i 
' ! . ' ·.-·.; 
3.3.5 Intermediate Results - EOC/ DICAC 
IR1 
Cereal yield in 2000 rose sharply over the base year in all EOC projects (Table 3.39). 
In terms of crop production increasing interventions, EOC projects had little to offer. 
Input credit was suspended. Extension services were kept at the minimal level due to 
government regulations. Irrigation schemes did not materialize in time to expect changes. 
The activities the projects had that could have some contribution to increasing 
productivity were soil and water conservation programs and training given to farmers. 
The contribution of such activities to raising crop yield does not normally occur in the 
short-term. It is thus evident that the very high yield differences between 1997 and 2000 
could not possibly be attributed to the projects. The change was largely due to favorable 
amount and distribution of the meher rain in 2000 . 
· There has not been a significant change in the use of fertilizer and improved seeds 
between 1997 and 2000. Neither was this expected due to the absence of interventions 
promoting the use of these inputs. Except in Endamahoni percentage of households using 
improved farm management practices was slightly less in 2000 than in 1997, implying 
'that farmers' training and conservation efforts did not result in increased application of 
improved cultural practices. In Endemahoni, the 1997 figure, 96%, is not credible. The 
analogous figure for 2000 was 40%. It is unlikely that big proportion of farmers would 
•• give up using improved crop growing methods in a time frame of3-4 years. Factors that 
· could possibly lead to such a reduction such as lack of knowledge, shortage of labor, lack 
of.motivation from previous experience did not occur according to empirical observations 
and results of discussions with farmers. That is why the credibility of the 1997 result is 
put to question. Practicing improved cultural practices, might not be credible . 
There was no change in the size of irrigated land between 1997 and 2000. 
To sum up, crop production and productivity in EOC projects were better in 2000 than in 
1997. The difference is due to natural causes and not project- induced. 
101 
a 
u 
.t ; , ·. . {\:~i~i .. · "· .,: ~~·:;:_}:)!lfilYJi':/~L:::~.J:.~x,.;;~llliQ~llllilt .: .. ~ ... :: .. '... ~~----· _____ ..._:__·_ .. _._ .. ... -~1lilf'. :ik~{7~LUil1~+:.;~,~: 1 ..i: . .i..Jb~MJL_._ -·~ .. : -... .. .... :.~ :::.:, i~:·i. .)·"· I,'• ·,·· .. --·:"~~ ~~~ ~·~~ iil£1l!fi .. ~ ' ..... -~' ·.:.·:; ~~; ': Ui~~~i~~ ,/ ~~~l ~ .. ~~ .. ~ ·' 
Table 3.39: IRl Results of EOC/DICAC 
Yield of Major Crops (Kg/ha): 
- Barley 342 830 404 805 422 1238 393 666 
-Wheat 382 841 547 745 433 1230 373 739 
- Teff 273 650 477 823 258 801 282 679 
- Maize 500 500 294 - 303 1025 - 757 
- SorQhum 300 620 495 640 200 1452 - 890 
Overall Crop Production (Kg/hh): 
- Barley 109 152 158 192 118 281 181 107 
-Wheat 95 114 175 251 125 275 192 104 
- Teff 112 147 272 41 52 12 113 158 
- Maize 66 4 121 - 46 11 - 78 
- Sorghum 120 75 163 2 50 16 - 44 
Monitoring Indicators: 
- % HH using fertilizers 10.6 12.6 5 17.8 10.1 19.9 27.3 37.7 
- % HH using improved seeds 5.2 6.4 4.5 8.9 2.2 8 6 
- % HH using improved Agri. Practices 69 53.7 48 41 .1 96.5 39.8 56.8 
- Area Irrigated (ha) 50 57.01 56.5 57 115 115.37 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures ls EOC/DICAC 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
- in 2000 means the number of observations made were too small to make any good use of simple statistics like the mean. 
NA= Not Available 
102 
... 
. . ii;~;~ ··-;. ''-~~ia ' 
·-· fil. 
. ··~ : 
-
~ 
;~J.;:J 
~ 
~ :.;:§J 
::_ :··! 
"<d .. ·..:.·.J 
·-:··i 
.":'-~ 
. ": j '.·"·:J ~-:. .... ·J .. ·1 ·:, ~: 
.: .... : 
·I i . ·. -. ~ 
- .. ;.- f 
·. 
:• ..... 
IR2 
In the northern EOC projects, livestock ownership at the household level decreased in 
2001 compared to 1997. In Sodo it showed a slight increase in 2001. There has also not 
been any appreciable difference in physical asset ownership for the project beneficiaries 
between the two years (Table 3.40). If livestock and physical asset ownership is to be 
used as effect indicator, it stands to reason that the EOC projects had little or no effect on 
the.well-being of the beneficiaries in this cycle of Title II. 
Table 3.40: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for EOC Project 
Endamehoni 2.14 1.85 0.16 0.17 13.28 15.21 
Wad la 2.02 1.90 0.15 0.14 14.56 16.01 
Mekdella 2.54 1:84 0.09 0.46 4.5 11.06 
Sodo 2.06 2.17 0.20 0.46 33.68 35.71 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
IR3 
Table 3.41 depicis that many positive changes have been observed: percentage of 
households using protected water sources has increased with a corresponding reduction in 
the incidence of diarrheal diseases in children; morbidity has also gone down. 
Underweight in children has worsened in Wad la and Mekdela. Figures of 52.8% for 
Wadla and 57.5% for Mekdela compare badly with the regional average of 45.0%. 
Except in Sodo, water consumption declined in 2000 compared to 1997. The amount 
consumed in 2000 was very low even by Ethiopian standards. Water charges and 
awareness problems are suspected to be the reasons for low water coverage. 
103 
I 
D 
B 
I 
n 
u 
0 ti 
tm:1 
., 
• ~~ :.:··:".'.:: r:~!rP.i: j fll filllttJmf f'!i1•:i'j!i;;,:;i'.:('.:,·;·:;;;!:•:r;,,· .; ':<;·.,);':.,.;,;.·')':)i;: •. :11:·11!'.'>, :~'.,:i·1m1 ·'~'~· ,l··~ '~i'r .r: t .. ,• . ·P::·: ! :t:!~:f n(:; C ' ! .,~·:· " .... •··· o ;··• ••i' o r.;; , •1' o ·t,!f' • 1 ' ·'·~':- ~:.· , .. '0 ;~,;a:,~ rJll nm1~1 UYfililHl fi]ii:'i':.! [1:u.t; [;E:~~:~~: f~C~] 2TlS:W 'ill$ rr&. : Table 3.41: IR3 Results of t)1e EOC Title II Projects tAi1lll • 1•::· ·: .: '• - ., , I I • '••"f,J . . :'. :·Endam.ehoni Wadla Mekdel:i Sodo . , .. ~9.s~ car · · 2000 ·Base ~ar 2000 Base year 2000 Hnse year 2000 . ·.~;i;,1.·... Indi.cat9rs ._ , .,_, .. · " ' .Yn(t.··,:. · :.;,.<<va'lfic·. .• · -.::-::0,<aliie value value I. Prevnlence of diarrhea % 25 2.4 38 5.7 30 11.2 23 5.5 occurrence 2. Children under weight % 65.1 54.4 40.4 52.8 49.7 57.5 46.9 I 38.6 3. Households using protected % 1.0 10.6 I 1.0 I 44.4 I 5.0 I 68.8 I • I 3.9 water sources 4. Deliveries attended by % 2 36.4 T • T 29.0 I 19.8 I 39.0 I • I 22.2 trained TBAs I I 5.HHthatvisitedhealthposts % 20.4 3.9 I 15.2 I 11.8 I 14.4 I 22.7 I 18.7 I 34 .6 twice in the last six month 6. Amount of water used Lt/day/HH 30.5 24 I 53.0 I 22 J 39.2 J 19 J 22.9 I 60 Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
., TI~~ ~:1~J1 m 104 
3.3.6 Intermediate Results - Food for the Hungry International (FHI) 
IR1 
Yield figures for 2000 were considerably higher in 2000 than in I 997 in the projects 
(Table 3.4:2). Jn Gubalafto Woreda the 2000 cereal yields were also high but could not be 
compared to any baseline figures, sine such figures are not available. 
The high yield figures in 2000 are largely due to adequate rainfall in the meher season. 
Unlike in other Title II projects, it is likely that the projects would have influenced these 
high yields because: 
• 
• 
• 
Farmers were provided with a sizable quantum of fertilizer over the period; 
They were also supplied with improved seeds, although not on the same scale as 
fertilizer 
The project-supported irrigation schemes in Lay Gayint, Tach Gayint and Simada 
have s~~rt.ed operation 
Despite the introduction of irrigated farming and provision of fertilizers, the percentage of 
farmers using fertilizer and improved seeds deteriorated in 2000 especially in Lay and 
Tach Gayint. Two reasons could be advanced to explain the situation. The first is fanners 
were not able to repay their 1999 input loan from government or quasi-government 
sources and as a result they were barred from the credit facility in 2000. Secondly, 
•• incremental production from the input use were not attractive enough for farmers to carry 
on using the technologies. The situation seems to indicate that fertilizer and improved 
seed might not be the solution. The situation seems to indicate to improve household food 
security in the project areas. 
The proportion of fanners using improved crop production techniques increased markedly 
in 2000 compared to the base year. Would this be fanners' response to declining use of 
fertilizers and improved seed for economic reasons? If this is true, it is much welcome 
and needs to be supported in future programs. 
105 
Q 
0 
g 
A 
ti 
-o 
I 
I 
I 
I 
R 
a 
u 
0 
a 
u 
e 
u 
H 
g; 
.. ,,4 
o·, . ' .a 
·i 
r:_;~~. l~1h.:1~JJJH'. .''. .·: \": ••.••. ::.·:": :::~.{ _JIJ!;;i~i ·LE/.L" .. {~iDW.;:)1iW!f:. _ : ....... ~.~~.:.. ~ ~ . 
__ :_~~L ~ ~~~.~~,~>'i;:t~•Wd~~!itid~:1:.:{3;'.:: 
-~1iill~_ ... : .... ... ';, . . ... :~;{fif ;s~1;· ~SlTC ~· 1· .. ·~ ·:1 tJ~f::"·~~ .. ;, :s$~~~:?~H ·" \\. ... ·: ... 'f, 
..... .. ".Mr,• : ~:;_::i' m; .. 1y~ ~ti!?:~) .... ~·:.:!~~ .:. : ; ~!}!~ .'3 tm 
: .. 
Table 3.42: IRl Results of FHI Title II Projects 
i ;r.,0( .. :..,-,:: .;::.: :·.1lil·it.:\.d••1:.1 •. 1~:'.1;; il~' >' ... ., .... : ..:. .·,:: .. '.'!,I·;;· .· o:;:i;:1 ll!P1 ='·.·.·;: .. .,,,,1iliJ!,ll):•1 ;~: l::~tz:<i Wi~ ."·'.r: ~');ai; ·. Jl~ .. (ili . =. Q£ ll~ = /:~·; ... ~l : >:1 l::.lf:j'' llP~~I! ·:<N°.l!J · . : ~~~)~~~·:·. :~h~ ~~~l:-:. ;::·~ r·~~ .::,: :.~ :.:~·.:c· ... ~·:·.-.- ::·.-::: _: - · ·· ,.,_ . - : :_ .... ;: :~ ·/;<·~ .. ~~:::\: >> ., .::::: :_ .: .· /.<~iL:· <: ··>>: ~· >·:~.: :r:~U~.<: ·~t: ::.: .> .. :/ ... < \,· ·. ~, .· · .... . ·.·· ::::}.:/ :.,. :~~J ;·:· .;·:\.: :-.- . <'. •• • :'.· · :r ~ ·: :;. .- . :-: ... _. ·1 i: ... :.·-.. :~ · .--:~> .. ~'.·! .. ~;'Vi: :,•;\c,'.· .. , ... '.> .... ,,,., :,, ·:""" ; "· i:' '. ·, ': . "·' :" ''· ', ...... :l' ': ·•t:•• u ,,;,, . '. /.•Ve:l ~ ":\\•"2'·1 ""''.:'.' :\\ ;il f':~ -:~ :;: /.· ~·~ ;"~":~-1 .. ; .... \Vif.:i ,., .. ,, .. !,. , , 1,.i . .-,~ 11 :»~: ! ;': : " k: jl' (:;,:I' 11 V~ a l(:V• ot« l1:t:._;1-...J;,' •. · ,-_.-.~·· .•...•.. 1 ···• .·. • ·. • . '·." - ·. , ,,_.·. r, t..:,..\ ,.~'.: .'" ·'· .. 111 ..... /~;.. .·1111 ,,:\ .... ,_ , .... f..:~ ...... :r.~• ~ ... \.:.. , ... t~ ~_., J~.ll.!Ji,;:J .. ·.1-._ :.r\~ J.:.n . ..... . : i. • • '-.- •. ' ~., J"'.,\:::. . ... • /'J~ ,. , 
Yield of Major Crops (Kg/ha): 
- Barley 499 986 570 938 475 798 NA 801 
- Wheat 454 863 628 1056 584 947 NA 886 
• Teff 274 914 407 762 374 712 NA 932 
- Maize . 468 555 100.3 269 845 NA 1111 
- SorQhum . 354 . 824 . 1063 NA 828 
Overall Crop Production (Kg/hh): 
- Barley 205 68 158 37 129 62 37 
- Wheat 164 138 215 89 176 56 24 
• Teff 138 93 140 141 194 243 146 
- Sorghum . 6 145 31 112 12 71 
- Maize . 4 . . . 40 145 
Monitoring Indicators: 
- % HH using fertilizers 24.5 6.1 24 12.2 42 7.2 I I 1.3 
- % HH using improved seeds 8.5 0.6 21 2.1 42 0.6 
- % HH using improved Agri. Practices 12 55.9 33 61.1 42 47.5 I I 48.7 - Area irri ated ha 7.6 . 5 . 2.7 . 2.0 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures is FHI 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
- in 2000 means the number of observations made were too small to make any good use of simple statistics like the mean. 
tJ• NA= Not Available 
:. 
106 
... 
. . .. ~ 
."'\:.··. 
... 
~~ ~- ... 
IR2 
In Lay Gayint, Tach Gayint and Simada livestock ownership per household significantly 
declined in 200 I compared to 1997. For example, it decreased from 3.65 TLU/hh in 1997 
to 1.17 TLU/hh in 2001 (Table 3.43). The rate of decrease was equally high in Simada. 
In Gubalafto there are no baseline data, but livestock ownership is as small as it is in the 
other projects. In several discussions, farmers in all the projects showed displeasure to 
physical soil conservation measures because they said the bunds, stone bunds in 
particular, breed crop pests and reduce grazing area. They attributed declining livestock 
ownership to feed shortage resulting from the conservation works. 
Table 3.43: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for FHI Project 
Proje~ts 
0.11 
0.07 5.07 
0.08 7.10 
Gubalafto 0.07 8.00 
Source: 199-7 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
IRJ 
There has been a considerable decline in diarrhea prevalence, and children under-weight, 
and the number of families using protected sources of water increased (except Simada). 
Morbidity figures look reasonable by the country's standards. All of this indicates that 
FHI Title II projects improved health status of the communities. FHI's engagement in 
family planning activities could be a major explanation for commendable health 
achievements. 
Table 3.44 indicates that the number of households using water from protected sources 
was I0.1% in 2000 against 6.7% in 1997 for Lay Gayint and Tach Gayint, while at 
Simada it actually decreased by 5.4%. The amount consumed has also been low (lower by 
56% to 69% than WHO minimum for a rural household). Distance traveled to the 
watering points and water fees could be the deterrents. 
,: 
107 
:·_: · · \.· 
u 
nj , . 
.. 
{ 
··.::i:: 
•" ·::~i . .. .. . '.i~~~t~··,>. ,::~: ;::~~;~.~~.;E;~~+ . :.~:-..-:~?}: . . 1;tt<:~ ... :::. :~i;!~< . r • :·; 
1
' '.'~:~~::~~: I :•11f:, •",,1',1 l•if\' ' ' ~!<• " '-'•:.U.:· , .... ".u . ...... ·-... • ....... _ :.......... _ 
. ;: . : . : . :: 
... ,. 
'" 
" ::7~ ..:ir 
,:. 
Table 3.44: IR3 Results of the FHI Title II Projects 
I. Prevalence of diarrhea occurrence 
2. Children under weight 
3. Households using orotected water sources 
4. Deliveries attended bv trained TBAs 
5. HH Lhat visited health posts twice in the last 
six months 
6. Amount of water used 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
' "· 
% 
% 
% 
% 
Lt/day 
/HH 
55.1 
13.5 
88.1 
33.9 
20.1 
23.6 
52.8 
15.2 
27 
I ·2001 
4.6 
69.1 35.5 68.7 48.1 
28.7 35.4 16.2 12.4 
74.2 58.l 79.2 52.8 
18.9 - 13.5 
29.3 25 33.3 26 
·.·.: . :,":"-..~ .. ".:i'd1 !q ..... -
·.J I 
Guba-Lafto 
Base year 2001 
value 
- i. I 
- so-:-o-
- 34.6 
- 36.4 
- 22.9 
. 30 
108 
,. 
:. ! ..... 
~ _. ·; ' 
. ; 
'1": ••• • 
3.3.7 Intermediate Results - Relief Society of Tigray (REST} 
IR1 
Among the REST Title II projects, activities meant to directly influence grain production 
and productivity were limited to soil and water conservation measures, irrigation and 
training of farmers. It was planned to provide credit to purchase fertilizer and improved 
seeds. But this was not implemented. The planned irrigation schemes were not completed 
up to the time of the evaluation. 
Be that as it may, the 200 I survey results reveal that cereal yields in 2000 were 
comparable or close to national average yield. It is not possible to compare yield between 
the base year and 2000 by crop because data are not available for 1997. There are, 
however, data on cereal yield for all the four projects both for 1997 and 2000 (Table 
3.45). REST provided the 1997 figures and they look suspicious because they are 
identical for all projects. If they are to be relied on, then yield differences between 1997 
and 2000 are large. Cereal yields 2000 were significantly higher, about 45% in Mereb 
Lekhe, about 37% in Adi Aheferom, nearly 39% in Degua Tembien, and 79% in Were 
Lekhe. 
In all the four projects cereal yield increased in 2000 compared to the 1997 base I ine 
results. The projects have been supporting moisture conservation measures, and a lot of 
work has been done in this regard. This, coupled with farmers' training and the existence 
of a strong linkage between government agricultural extension and the projects, is 
•• expected to have some contribution to the yield increase in 2000. 
T~e percentage of farmers using improved seeds and fertilizers was high, though not 
compared to the 1997 figures because data are not available, but seen against the history 
of the use of productivity- increasing inputs in the region. The advent of fertilizer and 
improved seeds in Tigray is very recent due to civil unrest and past government policies. 
A few years ago the proportion of farmers using chemical fertilizers must have been 
insignificant. The evaluation survey indicates nearly 40% of the sample population used 
fertilizer in 2000 in Mereb Leke, 50% in Adi Ahferom, 42% in Dega Tembien, and about 
40% in Were Leke. These figures were close to the national average. It goes without 
saying that the increase in the use of fertilizer and improved seeds contributed to the yield 
increase observed in 2000. 
There was also a positive development in respect to the use of improved farm 
management practices. Although there are no baseline data to compare change, in 2000 
some 70% of the surveyed households in Dega Tembien used improved cultural practices 
of some form, 54% in Were Leke and 53% in Adi Ahferom. 
Finally, it can be argued that the projects contributed to the higher cereal yield obtained in 
2000, although the extent of the contribution might be modest. Externalities such as 
favorable weather and regional government's effort to improve access to fertilizers might 
have accounted more for the change . 
109 
~ (~ 
u 
·~ ·' ~ 
:J 
n 
u 
.... ~~~:L :. ; (;/it • ~1;:,~•. ,• , 1, •(; :1 \i !! ;,' J~ll/'. ;v._•;.t~ I ,1., , , , ;;•;; . • <r~~a1:i;:-: :·:. .; .: .: .. ','· ~.Hlt~ .. 1i1'ul:~~ .. 1 :. • ... • ·: • • • .:.r.r1t~,1·:.~ 1;ft~·.:tt; ... -.. .. : .. . ._: . ·'-t.. .:~~r,\ . .. .... .. : ................ ; • ..:: ... :.itu.f' .. oH .. :, .. :.• 1.~ ... :l.:.;. i,•41oC\::.ti:HJ"i. •• U ... :: ... ,_,.. ~,.... . ' .• -.. .. - · •. :...__: __ ... ... ....... .. ........... ... _ ___ ._ ..... ' i•· Ao•!A1'i,!:!.. !.l:t.U~ -~~.:... • .i ... ~--- . .... . . .:· ... J: '"· :-:L~i r:-,--:··· 
!.:· ••• r. ·. i~r ::\~ . .. ·<::· ....... • t -:.:~~~ · ~ZJ :~111 ·-·· ... ) ·;fl)lHfi . ~-~ ff;~t~ ~·. ;;· 1•: "-· :...:.:. · .. .:. ·""'::-·· : ... J: ,:;.~ )~ . ..; f,1i 
.: 
. 
Table 3.45: IRl Results of REST Title II Projects 
Yield of Major Crops (Kg/ha): 532 773 532 729 532 742 532 953 
- Barley - - 800 631 968 
-Wheat - 936 ' 734 1018 
-Teff 816 689 917 854 
- Maize 934 527 826 1261 
- Sorghum 885 781 777 1267 
Overall Crop Production (Kg/HH): 243 758 243 865 243 496 243 628 
- Barley - 3 106 29 
-Wheat 3 50 99 48 
• Teff 118 235 98 291 
- Maize 19 14 8 78 
- SorQhum 107 19 7 49 
Monitoring Indicators: 
- % HH using fertilizers NA 39.6 NA 49.5 NA 41.7 NA 39.4 
- % HH using improved seeds NA 2.7 NA 15.3 : NA 19.6 NA 11.3 
- % HH using improved Agri. Practices NA NA NA 53.3 ', NA 70.5 NA 53.8 
. 
- Area irrigated (ha) 1.5 0.25 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures is REST 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
• in 2000 means the number of observations was too small to make any good use of simple statistics like the mean. 
NA= Not Available 
110 
.•. 
~:{~~~1 
~-~ : 
. -· ! 
... i 
; 
. 
' . \ 
~-· ~ ... 
... ) 
IR2 
Data are available both for 2001 and the base year only for Degua Tembien and Wereleke. In 
the first, livestock ownership increased considerably. In most other Title II projects livestock 
ownership declined. In Wereleke, tJiere was a small decline in 2000. Again the decline is 
ignorable compared to most other projects. The feed development initiatives, which are 
stronger, must have contributed the situation in the two REST projects. The change in 
physical asset ownership is, like in other projects not significant. 
Table 3.46: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for REST Project 
De a Tembein 0.84 0.26 38.3 
Merelehe 
Wereleke 2.86 2.56 0.09 36.8 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
IR3 
It was not possible to find enough base-year values for comparison. Where available, a 
· decline was observed in many instances. It was particularly evident as regards under￾weight of children in Were Leke and Degua Tembien. Even though there was no base￾line figure to compare with, Adi Ahferom 2000 figure of 83.8% underweight is greatly 
alarming. It is higher than the regional average estimated at 60.0% as well as the CSs 
average of 62.2%. 
There was decline in the percentage of households using protected water sources in Were￾Leke, although the value was higher than the national of about 45.4%. The amount of 
water consumed per household increased in all projects, but the amount was small 
compared to WHO minimum requirement of 20 lt./day/capita for a rural household. 
111 
~ 
ti 
~ 
t1 
........ . Jdi~·: .·.' .... :. ·;~: .:- :':<·;~r1m1L- _ L~ :.:<'.-:·;:,1tt;; Jiirn1; : · :i~·~\U~~ . ::t; ~i;· . : f .'~~: .. .2 ~t.:. .. ,·; .: :·.-. ·~~: VHi i;i;;!:fm ....... . J :.:\Hi 
Table 3.47: IR3 Results ?f.the REST Title II Projects 
c., , . .:;;;:.· .. ~J ~; ~:· :·y('.::.~: ~~l~p1k :'. ;J~~;;~ j~~9.f.} -·; ;~i{~~~1 I -· ' , ·:. >'. . \.. ·~ : .. ~:T .. ~,.,~di,:A:hfcrom :., 'lJ"il'S~Y:ear ·' 2001 : '::: ~i'iu'~ Dega Tembicn Base year I 200 I value 
4 .5 
. I. Prevalence of diarrhea I % I • I I 0.5 I - I 7.9 
r 
3.5 
occurrence 
2. Children under weight % 54.7 60.8 83.8 65.7 59.7 
3, Households using % 
: .... ,,., ~;;i rotected water sources 62.9 49.4 62.0 62.0 59. 9 
· :·:"· :> .• h -,:, ·' 4. Deliveries attended by % • - • • 
i•: · .• . &\ ... · :·; . trained TBAs 27.8 29.8 35.7 64.99 
' :·.)~: \:'. A. 5. HH that visited health % - 29.4 
· · · ·;-. "·;.. · post~ twice in the last six 29.6 24 ,6 
111onlhs 
6. Amount or Waler used ___ ., ___ _ LU day/ 
HH ,. ·. . . . . ,.: . 40.3 36 47 38 39.9 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
' 
' 
" 
17.0 
--·-·····- i 
35 
,. 
i; ' l 1/· 
. ..~: · n~ ~!t~ GlZ 
11 2 
.. 
··.; 
·.·· 
:·· . ~_: 
_ ....... 
:-} 
' ., 
-. 
IR4 
The communally reclaimed land is assumed to be the same as area enclosed. It is also 
assumed that all the physical conservation measures and communal tree planting 
activities took place in the enclosed areas during the project period. Compared to, the 
baseline values, percentage area increase of reclaimed land in 200 I is presented below: 
Degua Tembien 
Adi Ahferom 
Mereb Lehe 
Were Lehe 
Percent 
73 
65 
47 
26 
A number of factors could account for this encouraging result. The most important of this 
could be the existence of high community awareness that the underlying causes of 
household food shortage and low productivity are soil erosion and land degradation. 
Moreover, there is commitment to reverse the degradation process at the government, 
relatively more pronounced community and household levels. Empirical observations 
suggest that the commitment has international support since many donors and NGOs 
participate in the conservation programs in one way or another. 
There are observations indicating that conservation and reforestation efforts have had 
positive effects on the environment, such as: 
• Reduction in soil loss 
• Improvement in hydro logic behavior like longer use of water bodies 
• Increase of vegetative bio-mass 
• Increase in the availability of wood-based products 
• Increase in moisture availability (conserved moisture in the soil) for crops 
• Increase in the supply of animal feed 
3.3.8 Intermediate Results - Save The Children (SCF) 
IR1 
The two Title II projects SCF implements are in pastoral locations where normally crop 
production does not feature prominently. It is because of this that DAP interventions were 
on livestock and water development. The projects had no direct role in the area of crop 
production (cereal and pulses), and there were no results in respect to IRI. 
It is, however, interesting to note that cereal production is an important economic activity 
and deductively an important livelihood source in Liben Woreda, Borena Zone. Maize 
production is also important in Filtu Woreda, Somalie Region. Survey result shows that 
36% of households had maize field of0.93 ha/household in 2000. 
In Liben Woreda, about 46% of surveyed households grew barley, 41 % wheat, 41 % 
maize, and 16% teff. The reported yields in the case of barley, wheat and teff in 2000 
were not significantly lower than the national average in the same year. It should also be 
i 13 
~~ ~ 
u 
I .,_ 
£J 
~ 
p 
u 
'J 
.:! 
1~ . -·.; 
·~J~ . 
_; 
.i 
. I 
! 
! 
!· 
.···1 
noted that over 32% of the surveyed households used chemical fertilizers, 3.3% improved 
seeds, and over 30% improved farming practices (see Table 3.48). All of this seems to 
suggest that any project aiming at improving the supply side of household food security 
cannot ignore crop production in Liben Woreda. 
Table 3.48: IRl Results of SCF Title II Projects 
r~::11~:i~{~tJi~~l:iii!LJ*Q{ Yield of Major Crops (Kg/ha): 
- Barley NA 
-Wheat NA 
- Teff NA 
- Maize NA 
-Sorghum NA 
Overall Crop Production 
(Kg/hh): 
- Barley NA 
-Wheat NA 
- Teff NA 
- Maize NA 
- Sorghum NA 
Monitoring Indicators: 
- % HH using fertilizers NA 
""% HH using improved seeds NA 
~ % HH using improved Agri. 
Practices NA 
- Area irriqated (ha) NA 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures is SCF/USA 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
872 NA -
589 NA 150 
764 NA 150 
517 NA 186 
238 NA 136 
205 NA -
221 NA 0.8 
43 NA 0.8 
119 NA · 62 
1 NA 7.2 
32.3 NA 0 
3.3 NA 0 
30.1 NA 3.4 
- NA 0.75 
- in 2000 means the number of observations made were too small to make any good use of 
simple statistics like the mean. 
NA= Not Available 
114 
r ··....-
. -·-
-
... 
¥1~( 
IR2 
Livestock ownership in 2001 increased in both projects. The increase in Liben was · 
significant. Two reasons could explain the change. The first is the project 
interventions, especially the improved water supply for the stock. The second is that it 
is common practice among the pastoralists to replace reduction in herd size a natural 
disaster like the 1998/99 drought might have caused. There was not much change in 
respect to physical asset ownership (Table 3.49). 
Table 3.49: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for SCF/USA Project 
·Projects ': .~ .. 
Liben 
Fil tu 
--- Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
Other Observations 
SCF 
Milk production is one of the most important indicators of livestock productivity. In 
pastoralist communities where livestock are a major source of food, milk productivity 
becomes an important indicator. Owing to this, data on milk production was sought by 
seasons to capture seasonal variation. 
Table 3.50: Average Milk Production in Liben and Filtu16 
r.:- :,:""' ::• -, ... =- .. -. ---=:. ~ 
~.~.·~~j '::·~c~;:;rf Y.~~ 1: :· - ~- ~ 
Liben Wereda: 
Cows Lt/day 1.34 0.37 0.826 0.470 
Camels " 0.40 0.18 0.094 0.022 
Goats " 0.14 0.03 0.113 0.059 
Total Lt/HH 1.88 0.58 1.033 0.551 
Filtu Wereda: 
Cows Lt/day 2.38 6.37 .664 .335 
Camels 3.70 7.91 1.042 .436 
Goats " 1.14 2.93 0.228 .145 
Total Lt/HH 17.21 7.22 1.934 0.916 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
N.B: Figures for 1997 look exaggerated by all accounts, empirically or otherwise. They are suspicious 
to say the list 
16 One of the comments SCF made on the draft report was to use the 1997 baseline survey data figures it 
provided to the evaluation. However, the team has not been able to find data on milk production in WASS 
documents. 
115 
l . ·: ··j 
...... . 
..... , 
-·:::;! :=- ;~ 
. ·j 
I 
i 
· I 
I 
I . ! 
: 
•· ... 
Milk production showed high seasonal variability. The main reason for the variability is 
the scarcity of water and pasturage. The feed and water programs have bcet1 designed to 
reduce the seasonal variability. There has not been any visible contribution from the 
projects in this regard yet. 
Tablc3.51: Lactating Cows, Camels and Goats in Libcn and Filtu Wcrcda 
··'. ·- t~;?7 2001 . ·• -:~- :; . 
Mahit'i.!: % Mature Lactating. % ··_Type .- I,~g~ting dffi~}Jj; ....... 
. anli.Jials fadating · femaies animals iaciating 
Liben Wereda I 
Cows I 1450 494 34.I 345 162 47 
Camels i 195 64 32.8 28 14 50 
Goats 690 211 30.6 90 49 54 
Total 2335 769 32.9 463 225 49 
Fi/tu Wereda 
Cows 3169 1117 35.2 112 90 80 
Camels 4357 1296 29.7 125 66 53 
Goats 5104 2170 42.5 186 146- 78 
Total 12630 4583 36.3 423 302 71 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
In the pastoralist areas lactating animals are a very important indicator of livestock 
productivity and welfare. Table 3.51 indicates that the situation has markedly improved in 
... this regard in both projects in 2001 compared to 1997. Although the contribution of the 
projects cannot be ascertained yet it could be considerable, notably in Liben. 
IR3 
Th.ere was a decline in the amount of water used by households at both Liben and Fil tu. 
These sites experienced severe droughts in 1998/99 leading to the drying up of several 
water sources. 
Percentage of households using protected water sources of 36.1 % for both Liben and Filtu 
was a notable achievement although change could not be monitored for lack of baseline 
data. The proportion of children underweight has increased by over 100% in Liben and 
three reasons could account for this. The first is high livestock mortality that occurred in 
1998/99 which deprived, especially children, food and milk. The second is bush 
encroachment resulting in reduced feed (browsing materials), especially for camels and 
goats. Thirdly, unlike pastoralists Borena there are empirical observations suggesting that 
among Somalie pastoral households children do not enjoy priority in the allocation of 
food in the family. 
In addition, the water development effort has reduced migration and the community 
awareness about the use of clean water improved. The FFW interventions helped to 
reduce the foorl gap. 
116 
.. 
"·" ' 
'. 
(V"l'lll•'·"" 
liil1'1'•'f,11.' 
: .. ".:" .'j!"ii"·". '.J''• ·.l .. > 
. 
. 
·:·.· .\· 
/ 
l 
... i ... i!.{i!l1it:t 
Table 3.52: IR3 Results of the SCF Title II Projects 
2. Children under weight 
3. Households using protected water 
sources 
4, Deliveries attended bv trained TBAs 
5. HH that visited health posts twice in 
the last six months 
6. Amount of water used 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
.. 
!}- .: ••••• i+i•il, .. I""'"'.".., '""''."Pl' khl.<l1,u ... ,,,, 
Jiiit 
% 
% 
% 
% 
% 
Lt/dav/HH 
,,v ......... ., 
.. t, . ./ ::.:.: •. :.. . : .: 
: .. :2000 
... 
-
• • < • 
.. 
- 7.2 
23.4 49.6 
- 36.1 
- 50.0 
- 34.4 
44.16 33 
Fil tu 
Bnse year value 
58.1 
66.81 
,. .... ,.,••:if 
\:(. 
2000 
6.3 
40.3 
36.1 
88.9 
llU 
44 
;.] 
117 
,.., .. 1 L ... .... 1 
_@t 
fil 
.. ; ~ 
!'r' 
(~~- . 
···.~-.. 
•; : 
·~.· 
3.3.9 Intermediate Results - WVl/E 
IR1 
WYE Title II projects have had activities intended to positively influence crop production 
and productivity. These included: 
• Agricultural demonstrations 
• Agronomic practices 
• Irrigation 
• Farmers' training 
• Extension services through agriculture offices 
• Soil and water conservation 
The activities were carried out in most instances according to plan. Did these activities 
increase crop yield as anticipated? In 2000 cereal yields were reasonably good in most 
Title II projects. They were significantly higher than the 1997 yields, the year Title II 
projects started operation. For example, in Adama and Tigray projects cereal yields in 
2000 rose two-fold or better compared to 1997 (Table 3.53). A number of factors must 
have accounted for the increase. Rainfall was better in 2000 in all project locations, 
according to local sources. Although it is hard to quantify the share of the project 
activities to the observed yield improvement, yet there are empirical evidences (FGD 
discussion results) suggesting that the projects had a contribution. 
In the Tigray projects, the yield increase was in spite of a reduction in the percentage of 
households who used fertilizers in 2000 (70% used fertilizer in 1997 against 50% in 2000 
in Laylay Tsed Amba). Moreover, the project activities were relatively less in scope in the 
north. This could mean that external factors like more favorable rains in 2000 strongly 
influenced the yield increase. The same argument might hold for WYE Title II projects in 
the south especially Adama, where only 32% of the surveyed households used fertilizers 
in 2000 against about 80% in 1997. Decline in fertilizer use was likely because of 
restricted access to credit and high fertilizer prices. Defaulting farmers were denied credit 
in 2000. Despite this, cereal yields in 2000 were significantly higher than in 1997. This 
means that t_he rains had a big role in the increase. 
The situation was quite different in Badawacho. Cereal yield in 2000 declined 
considerably compared to 1997. Overall cereal production to a household also declined 
markedly. The reasons seem to be external. Rainfall in 2000 in the Title II project area in 
the woreda was not as good as elsewhere. Farmers did not have the customary access to 
input credit, and less farmers used fertilizer and improved seeds. 
The percentage of farmers who practiced improved farming techniques was reasonable in 
the Tigray projects (53% in Atsbi Wombera and 59% in Lay Lay Tsed Amba) but not so 
in southern projects (Adama 30%, Sodo Zuria 50%, Humbo 52%, 56% Kersa Kondaliti, 
and 61% in Badda Wacho) in 2000. The figures for southern woredas are regarded low 
· because farmers in these parts are accustomed to using improved farming practices such 
as rotation, manure, compost, inter-copping and others. 
118 
;. 
. ·-· ··""' 
·~~:-;; 
~~~l r~ •; • 
.... -_. 
Land is becoming scarcer in the south project areas and landholding is decreasing. This · 
should have led to more intensification, meaning increased use of the techniques. It is true 
that land scarcity in the south is forcing farmers to compromise physical soil conservation 
measures that compete for land, and the reduction in the use of improved farming 
methods might be reflecting this reality. 
There was virtually no change in the size of irrigated farming between 1997 and 2000. 
This means that the projects did have results in this regard. 
To recap, there was increased crop productivity in the Tigray projects and in Adama 
mostly, it seems, due to favorable rainfall. PRA survey results indicate that Title II 
projects contributed to the yield improvement, although the size of the contribution could 
be small . 
119 
n 
Ll 
f" 
l' 
u '' 
!
-'} 
.·!; ' , w 
/ 
. .. !1}\f)i::. 
' · .:1rnt. _ .::. •. .-::-. .. :;. .. ..... . . : .... ·;; .. . .. . ...... .... : .. . 
. ·' :f;i, · .... 
; 
... :-
Table 3.53: IR 1 Results of WVI/E Title II Projects 
Yield of Major Crops 
(Kg/ha): 
·Barley 589 1134 NA 294 NA 300 410 820 410 746 
-Wheat 438 1325 NA 774 NA . 290 815 290 1167 
• Teff 528 741 NA 1420 NA 106 . 637 832 
- Maize 597 1074 NA 750 NA 658 . 150 421 
• Sorqhum 504 860 NA 931 NA 709 . . 661 
Overall Crop Production 
(Kg/hh): NA 908 NA 336 NA 304 . 360 . 344 
- Barley NA 147 NA 14 NA 0.8 89.4 245 89.4 255 
· Wheat NA 107 NA 17 NA . 31 .3 98 31.3 62 
• Teff NA 351 NA 31 NA 2 . 17 . 11 
· Maize NA 297 NA 245 NA 284 . o·.8 . 4 
- Sorghum NA 6 NA 29 NA 18 . . . 12 
i. 
Monitoring Indicators: 
· % HH using fertilizers I 79.5 I 32.1 NA I 33.1 I NA I 23.6 I 71 I 50.5 I 71 I 50.0 
- % HH using improved 
seeds I 16.3 I 1.5 I NA I 17.1 I NA I 15.6 I 4 I 23.5 I 4 I 19.3 
- % HH using imprbved 
[Agri. Practices 88.1 30.1 NA 49.6 NA 51 .9 NA 52.6 NA 58.8 
- Area irri ated ha . . . . . 0.25 0 1.0 0 2.0 
Source: 1. The source of baseline figures Is REST 
2. DSA Agricultural HH Survey Results, 2001 
I 
I 
'. :1 
. zt 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
NA 
• in 2000 means the number of observations was too small to make any good use of simple statistics like the mean. 
NA= Not Available 
554 511 I 
458 539 
395 631 
477 1069 I 
604 853 
661 . NA 
90 NA I 
299 NA 
210 NA 
58 NA I 
4 NA 
I 26.8 I 63.8 I 
I 22.7 I 4.5 I 
28.5 I 61.3 I 
55.8 NA 
,. 
.. :., .. . .. :;, :. . i:·.· . 
I 
•' 
00 
216 
79 
00 
72 
65 
51 
61 
120 
-~ 1:~i!I .·.·;.:>:t -·. ·: ~ 
! 
.... ... ' -:.::::.·.-
;;-;·: • 
,_ 
-. - .: . 
- ., 
. 
IR2 
Table 3.54 below indicates that in most of WVl/E projects livestock ownership declined 
in 2001. In fact, it is only in Adama and Kersa Kondaliti that it increased since 1997. 
There are no evidences to explain the increase in.these two woredas, while the decrease in 
the rest of them could be due to scarcer food supply and deteriorating animal health 
services empirically observed across the country. 
Ownership of physical assets showed some improvement in 2001 with several of the 
types monitored in the survey. But the change is not really much to think that the asset 
base of households has changed for the better since the launching of the projects. The 
remarkable change in radio ownership in Adama coupled with the increase in livestock 
might suggest household income rise, which farmers disclaim as evidenced during FGD 
household survey results also indicate falling income. 
Table 3.54: Changes between 1997 and 2001 in Respect to Ownership of Livestock, 
Physical Asset and Luxury Food Items added for WVI Project 
. _ Pr::oje~ts 
:-. 1997 
Adama 39.7 
Kersa Kondolati 0.58 31.56 
Sodo Zureia 0.65 21.6 25.7 
Atsbi Womberta 0.20 18.44 22.91 
Lela 1 Tsedamba 1.12 0.14 31.01 
Humbo 2.23 1.45 0.18 0.45 33.34 35.78 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
IR3 
Overall, WVI!E seem to have made some remarkable achievements. Diarrhea prevalence 
figures for 2000 lqok good and better than most rural areas in the country. In the Tigray 
projects children under-weight in 2000 were considerably high. The unrest that prevailed 
in the area over the last three years and persisting rain shortage could be the main factors, 
and not necessarily poor projects performance (Table 3.55). 
The amount of water used decreased in Atsbi, Humbo and Adama. It could be due to 
unsatisfactory achievement in respect to boreholes (56%) and hand-dug wells ( 44%). 
12 1 
~~ . : ~ 
\ .<: 
.. ,_:.: 
·-:. __ "') 
:HF~;· .. ~!: :. ;.:. • .. :::.· .. ::~;:;~ ... O• .. ~~~l:~~-: ~:::. :_ .. 00 :ffO ·- · · ·:: •• f M:M .. J.~~ :' .... l'.:~ t.' ... · . .l .. ·'· ·' ) 
' ·~·: Table 3.55: IR3 Results of the WVE/E Title II Projects 
1·: ... 
• .. • ..I : ....... . : :. ·. 
·. ~- ;:: ·: ~r ~~ .. .~·,;,.::~.:;~ ·~,> ... :.c .... ·"::. .. !;;;1i ·:;,t . .Sodo:Zui!is:·•":"; '-"'.' ·::\lfumbo .. ·, -~~ .. ~· .. ·=( :'"··' ··~:::~~:~~/::~!; )'(iii~:·.1:± ·~ . . . '.'":".::r.-... ~. ~ •. '. • ...• .; . )-1•rl'-t''>' .... -;,,. t'<".11: .... ;1//.1,~ ·.· •, \\: :iB1i ila~ii'cilo'. · : : :,,A'dai:ha · :/ .. .. .... .. ~ ...... . I" . ' . I ;~l~7);~[ .~Yi:}::\?;,~: ·~· ~·.:~ ·~- :~ .'.f.:: . ·. . . ;:'B'li'se'" I 2000' Ba~ ~:·~ 2000 ·1· ·Base 'i · 2000 
~~~.h " ... !"~; litra.~ ~~~i ... ,; ~iU\,~l\1 ...• _, : •. , .. ~i'lue"'"'L :;.:,·::,:·b; ~rtliili~~ t;,'x;·:T-H '.i\Jllmi·"' :~:, ·:·:f:/ 
4.4 I -~ 
11 J::Il?~l.;1'J;I;• ~ '·c t I. Prevalence of 
1,S:r.ATil,S:>"" .. d diarrhea occurrence % - 25.0 - 19.4 - 8.7 - 5.8 - 9.4 
M~tli0¥.Boi :; 48.J 26.9 
I 
'ini~mi~diai~ 2. Children under % 68.6 70.0 - 69.0 45.7 37. I 39.7 24.4 46.7 38.0 . I R~sult No.));, wei~ht · 3. Households using 
protected water 
:,, .. ·.;_, sources 
4. Deliveries attended 
• ,1 by trained TBAs 
% 66.8 76.8 
% 34.8 
28.9 6.8 62.8 80.0 56.5 86.1 
17.9 17.1 30.0 30.6 
::<:.:;.''.
'·;.;;;~:! 5. HH that visited 
·. ::.~ ., ... ·:':.: ·;{ health posts twice in % - 33.9 • 13.3 - 24.4 - 26.7 - 30.6 .> ·'.·'. r.;:("'jj the last six months 't.:.~:; {~;y~,~ 6. Amount of water LtJday 33.7 26 29 25.8 38 28.5 33 31.4 18 
. -· · ·"" used /HH 
Source: 1997 baseline survey and 2001 evaluation survey 
76.9 I - 68.4 
44.8 - 55.3 
28.6 - 31.I 
21.0 1"50:3 I 42.0 
... 
;1': 
,., _.:iii ~ 122 
-- CJfJlPT'r:E(](3 ,. .. ,-
~SP,CCJ'IO:N 3 
Tit{e II <Prag.ram I1npacts 
_ 
,~ _) 
3.4 Title 11 Program Impacts 
3.4.1 Introduction 
Title II rural projects seek the same strategic objective (SO) - Enhanced Household Food 
Security. There are three indicators selected to measure SO impacts, namely, (1) Reduction in 
child stunting11; (2) Decrease in the length of period households faced food shortage in a 
normal production year; and (3) Reduction in the use of severe coping strategies. The results 
of this evaluation are cast against the analogous figures obtained in the 1997 baseline survey, 
wherever possible in order to find out the extent to which the projects have been able to 
positively affect the well-being of the beneficiaries. 
Indices were constructed to evaluate the impact of different CS on the reduction of the use of 
severe coping strategies. 
The comparism is based on the baseline survey of 1997 and 2000. Data are available on 18 
different coping strategies seven of which are considered severe coping strategies18. Indices 
are constructed on the entire 18 as well as on the seven severe coping strategies to see the 
impact of the projects. 
~· To construct the indices the Laspeyres method is used. The attempt is to observe the change 
in aggregate value of the use of coping strategies between the base year ( 1997) and mid 200 I 
(the time of the final evaluation). 
The formula used is: 
Index= I Cpc x 100 
ICpb 
Where Cpc - responses (in percentage) of the current year 
Cpb - responses (in percentage) of the base year 
W - weight 
The mean ratio of responses from the baseline survey on coping strategies are taken as 
weight (w). 
17 One of the major points the CS and other stakeholders raised on the draft final evaluation report was the 
reliability of the data set from the household survey, especially the nutrition data. Accordingly, 2-person team 
(one each from CARE and DSA) was set up to further clean the data. It presented its findings to CARE and it is 
annexed here-with (Annex 6) for information to the CS. 18 The seven coping strategies regarded severe include: 
• Reducing the amount of food normally consumed 
• Eating wild food 
• Distress migration 
• Selling personal effects 
Selling productive assets 
Withdrawing children from school 
P~3c: .: ing maternal buffering 
124 
;. 
3.4.2 Overall Picture* 
Child Stunting 
Stunting of children in the age group of 6-59 months have improved in 2000 in all CS 
compared to 1 997 as shown below. 
1. National (all CS) 
2. Africare 
3. CARE-Ethiopia 
4.CRS 
5.EOC 
6.FHI 
7. REST 
8. SCF 
9. WVliE 
Stunting Results(%) 
1997 2001 · 
61. l 39.5 
NA .18.6 
55.2 43.7 
56.8 34.3 
66.6 54.5 
85.9 56.5 
71.9 46.1 
45.4 40.5 
65.9 39.6 
Source: 1997 baseline and 2001 evaluation surveys 
Cross-tabulation results indicate that there is statistically significant association 
between stunting and episode of illness (P= .002), use oflatrine (P=.001) income 
(P=.000), water source (P=.000), land/livestock/ox ownership, (P=.000), mother 
education (P=.00 I), and education status of the head of household. 
Food Shortage 
Households in the project areas have up to four sources of food for consumption: own 
production (the part used for own consumption), purchase, FFW (used for own 
consumption), and relief. In the household survey farmers were asked to tell the length of 
time each source was sufficient to cover the family need in 2000. The 1997 baseline 
survey asked farmers to tell the length of the period the household did not have enough 
food for consumption in the last I 2 months without being specific about the source. In the 
comparison presented below it is assumed that the 1997 data on food shortage did not 
include relief. The food shortage data for 2000 have been adjusted accordingly. 
Survey results show the length of the period Title II households faced food shortage in 
2000 was less compared to 1997 nationally19• At the CS level, the change was positive 
with most of them, even though the size of reduction was small as shown below. 
In section survey results are presented by CS, project and for Title II (all CS). Aggregated results for the 
three SO indicators are in Annex 4. 
10 The food shonage indicator refers to a normal production year. It should be noted that available data (CSA, 
FAO) i;1dicale thm 2000 was better than a normai prod:ictioil year. 
J '} - ~) 
... _ .. ;. 
. ..... 
~· 
r:.~ 
:· ... 
1. National (all CS) 
2. Africare 
3.CARE 
4.CRS 
5.EOC 
6. FHI 
7.REST 
8. SCF 
9. WVJ/E 
1997 
5.6 
NA 
5.6 
5.2 
5.5 
8.8 
4.1 
2.2 
5.5 
Food Shortage 
(Months) 
2001 
4.7 
5.7 
5.1 
4.6 
5.7 
5.3 
3.6 
1.4 
4.3 
Source: 1997 baseline and 2001 evaluation surveys 
Coping Strategies 
This evaluation understands that the 1997 baseline survey took seven coping mechanisms to .·,.-
•. · .. constitute severe coping strategies. These are: 
• Reducing the amount of food normally consumed 
• Eating wild food 
• Distress migration 
• Selling personal effects 
• Selling productive assets 
• Withdrawing children from school 
• · Practicing maternal buffering 
At the national level, slightly less number of beneficiaries made use of severe coping 
strategies in 2000 (I 997 base year). At the CS level also, except in two CS, percentage of 
households that reverted to practicing severe coping strategies was less in 2000. Weighted 
aggregate indices of coping strategies (all coping strategies and severe coping strategies) are 
presented below. 
I. National 
2. Africare 
3.CARE 
4. CRS 
5. EOC 
6. FHI 
7. REST 
8. SCF 
9. WYliE 
Weighted Aggregated Index (2000) 
(Base year, 1997) 
Severe Coping All Coping 
Strategies Strategies 
99.4 
124.6 176.4 
118.5 164.0 
78.1 103.5 
80.0 106.4 
96.9 11 7.9 
58.3 68.5 
90.4 ! I :2 . I 
Source: 1997 baseline and 2001 evaluation surveys 
126 
., 
.... . 
. .. . 
100 l 
I 
Figure 1: Stunting Prevalence in 2001 Compared to 1997 
----------------·----. 
I 90 1 ---
80 !--------. ------- -·-··-·. ··-·-··-· ·-·--- -------- 70 ----------- --· -····------------ ---
---- ----------------
; 
_J I 
' ; 
~ 60 
s 
g 50 
~ .. 
Q. 
Cl> 
Ol 
<II 
-c 
Cl> 
u 
.... 
Cl> 
0... 
30 
20 . 
10 
0 
10 
9 
8 
7 
6 
5 
4 
3 -
2 
1 
0 
' ·~alional 2. Africare 3. CARE- 4. CRS 5. EOC 6. FH/ 7. REST 8. SCF 9. WV/IE 
; !CS) Ethiopia CSs 
Figure 2: Food Shortage in 2001 Compared to 1997 
1. 2. 
National Africare 
;a!I CS) 
3. CARE 4. CRS 5. EOC 6. FHI 7. REST 8. SCF 9. WVl/E 
CSs 
Figure 3: The Use of Severe Coping Strategies in 1997 and 2001 
B1997 l 
82001 
~-~ I 
m 1997 !; 
1 : 
112001 H 
' 
140 -,----·----- - --··-·-·-·-·-··---·-······--------------- ···--·---·-··------·-·-··----- ---1 
120 
Cl> 100 IJ) 
C1I 80 .... 
c 
Cl> 
0 60 .... 
Cl> 
n. 40 
20 
0 
1. 2. 3. CARE 4. CRS 5. EOC 6. FHI 7. REST 8. SCF 9. VVVl/E 
National Africare CSs 
El 1997 
112001 
--------·-- -----
127 
:· 
3.4.3 SO Results - Africare 
Stunting 
The title II project in Gambella started operation in 1999 and thus it was not included in 
the 1997 baseline survey. Accordingly, there is no benchmark stunting figure to compare 
with the evaluation result. However, Africare had carried out a nutrition survey (2000) in 
1999 and stunting then was 24.3%. It was down to I 8.6% in 200 I. 
Cross-tabulation results indicate that there is no statistically20 significant association 
between stunting and any of the livelihood indicating variables. · 
Food Shortage Duration and Application of Severe Coping Stra~egies 
There are no baseline values to evaluate impact in respect to reduction in food shortage 
and the use of severe coping strategies. The 2001 survey results indicate: 
(I) On average a household in the project communities did not have adequate food 
supply for 4.25 months in 2000. 
(2) Female-headed households were worse off (4.4 months) compared to male-headed 
families ( 4.19 months). The difference was not statistically significant (P=.157) 
(3) Africare is trying to introduce ox-ploughing among the Augnak farmers, still 
dominantly hoe-cultured. Among the surveyed households, only 13 or 7.5% 
owned oxen, not necessarily used for agriculture. Those who owned ~ 2 oxen had 
a much shorter food shortage time (1.25 months compared to 4.5 months in the 
case of oxless and 5.6 months for those who owned on~ ox apiece). Assuming that 
ox ownership had a positive contribution agriculturally (increased food 
production), the promotion program is supportive. 
(4) Africare also distributed improved seeds and chemical fertilizers the use of 
technologies did not have any meaningful association with either reducing food 
shortage or decreasing the use of severe coping strategies. It should be noted that 
the intervention period was short compared to other CS projects. 
10 The livelihood variables this evaluation chose to look for any possible association with stunting are: 
(I) Demographic vari"ables - family size, sex of head of household, 
(2) Nutrition health variables -
(3) Wealth-related variables -
128 
•, 
3.4.4 SO Results- CARE 
Stunting 
The evaluation survey results show that the nutritional status of children has improved 
in all CARE projects in 200 I compared to the base year (Table 3.56). Could the 
reduction in stunting be attributed to the project interventions? Or was it the result of 
other factors, including increased food supply in 2001 due to relatively good meher 
rainfall that was observed across the country? Under the intermediate results 
presented in section 3.3 above one observes that there were some changes in 
livelihood systems, for example: 
• Crop production generally increased in 2000 compared to I 997, despite 
reduction in cropped area/household in 2000; 
• An average household owned less livestock in 2000 than in I 997, largely 
due to the 1998/99 drought-like situation observed in most CARE project 
woredas; 
• There was not any significant difference in physical asset ownership; 
• Although health figures for 1997 are lacking, the 2000 results on the 
prevalence of diarrhea, watet coverage, and children underweight are 
comparable to national figures for CARE projects, thus it is likely there 
was some positive contribution from the CARE projects in this regard; ano 
• There was no remarkable difference in household income from all possible 
sources between 1997 and 2000. 
These points seem to suggest that the improvement in stunting could be opportunistic 
arising from external factors such as rainfall, food distribution through relief, FFW, or 
others21. 
Table 3.56: Child stunting in 1997 and 2000 among CARE Title II projects 
... 
• 63.7 36.5 
• Girawa 55.5 49.6 
• Kurfachele 62.0 40.7 
2. West Hararghe: 
• Chiro 50.3 54.6 
• Gubakoricho 44.2 35.0 
• Kuni 56.9 47.9 
3. East Shoa 
• Adama 52.5 39.0 
• Boss et 57.1 46.0 
Source: Tlie 1997 baseline and 2001 evaluation survey 
21 This evaluation understands that child stunting is a 'process'. It could start in the mother's womb, and that it is 
not a function of or.e season's good fortune with rains. But, it also understands that improved food availability 
over a season could have an impact on the nutritional status of children. 
129 
(-!: 
j:-; 
i .... : 
' > 
i..-: 
Some cross-tabulation findings 
-. 
(1) Demographic Variables 
• Households having larger family size show relatively less stunting prevalence 
across CARE rural projects but the difference is not statistically significant · 
(P==.705). Chiro is an exception. Households with family size;::: 6 show high 
stunting, which is not unexpected. The difference is not, however. statistically 
significant. 
(2) Asset ownership: 
Land and labor (economically active population) are major livelihood variables 
among rural households in Ethiopia. One would expect an inverse relationship 
between asset ownership and child prevalence stunting. According to the survey 
results, this has not been the case with a few of CARE projects. In fact stunting in 
Kunni, Kurfachele, and Bedeno is higher among households having higher 
number of economically active population and relatively more land. The 
difference is not however statistically significant. It is not the same with livestock 
and ox ownership in these woredas. Stunting prevalence is lower with households 
having more livestock and oxen. 
(3) Health: 
• Stunting is higher with mothers who dropped breast feeding earlier than the 
desired time and also in the case where supplementary feeding started earlier 
or later than normally recommended lengths of period. It is observed that the 
differences are statistically significant (Kurfachele breast-feeding P==.003 and 
.000 supplementary feeding, Gubakoricho breast feeding P= .008 and .001 
supplementary feeding). 
• The proportion of stunting among children from households using safe water 
supply is higher than those using unprotected water source in Basset and 
Gubakoricho. In the rest of the CARE projects the association between 
stunting and safe water use corresponds to the conventional wisdom. The 
difference is not statistically significant (P > 0.05), except in Grawa (P= .024). 
To sum up, stunting in children was lower in 2000 compared to the base year, in 
all CARE projects, an improvement in the nutritional status of children in 2001 
compared to 1997. This could, at least in part, be due to Title II interventions. 
Food Shortage Duration and Application of Severe Coping Strategies 
Table 3.57 reveals that there has been improvement in terms of households that had to 
live without adequate food in 2000 over 1996 in the project communities. The 
improvement could be due to good harvest in 2000 in most projects. But it should also be 
noted that those projects that did not have particularly good 2000 meher rains (Grawa, 
Gubakoricho and Kuni) also achieved notable results. Evidently, the projects must have 
had their own contribution towards the reduction of the length of period of food shortage. 
130 
... 
Whether this could be sustained under less favorable weather conditions is difficult to tell. 
It could be argued that household food security in all projects is not yet secure. 
Table 3.57: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping Strategics 
in 2000 in CARE Title II Projects 
·. 
Use of Coping Strategies 
Projects Food shortage months -(Perce:_nt, base year 1997) 
1996" 2000 AU Coping Severe 
Strategies Coping 
Strategies 
I. Bedeno 5.6 4.23 (3.97) 151 125 
2. Grawa 7.1 5.13 (4.41) 146 120 
3. Kurfachele 7.2 5.09 (3.97) 130 106 
4. Chiro 6.8 3.08 (3.0) 124 71 
5. Gubakoricho .6.0 0.49 (.44) 225 I I 1 
·6. Kunni 6.6 0.63 (.05) 118 95 
7. Adama 3.3 2.49 (1.88) 317 130 
8. Bosset 5.6 1.24 (.86) 449 149 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
Attempt was made to see whether there is some association between food shortage and 
some selected key factors considered to have influence on reducing food shortage at the 
CS level. The main results include: 
I 
l 
i 
(1) Households having large economically active persons (more labor) had shorter 
food shortage months and the difference was statistically significant (P=.001 ). 
This clearly underscores the significance of labor to rural household food security. 
(2) Households having more land, livestock, oxen, and household assets have less 
food shortage months, and for most of them the difference is statistically 
significant. (P=.000). 
(3) Fertilizer, improved seed and improved cultural practices users seemed better in 
food availability and access than non-users. The difference was statistically 
significant. The finding suggests that CARE should strengthen its support to 
enable farmers use the low-cost technology of improved cultural practices 
wherever the prevailing objective conditions allow. 
The table indicates that, except in Chiro and Kunni, the CARE projects have not been 
able to reduce the use of severe coping strategies. For example, in Bosset, additional 49% 
of the sample population used severe coping strategies in 2000 compared to 1997. It is not 
easy to explain inter-project variability in the application of severe coping strategies. The 
prevalence of cash crops and rainfall condition seem to influence the extent of the use of 
severe coping strategies. 
These findings (both food shortage and coping strategies) strongly suggest that future 
projects should focus on providing assistance to farmers that will enable them use 
improved farming practices. Since a priori they are cost-effective and they contribute 
meaningfully to reduce food hort ge and the application of severe coping strategies, 
aggressively promoting these practices could be rewarding. 
13 1 
--~ 
~~ .. 
~ 1 . !..a 
!:""• 
; .. t .. ~ • 
... 
) .... ~3 
3.4.5 SO Results- CRS 
Stunting 
Among the cooperating sponsors, it is CRS that sponsors a large number of Title II 
projects. 11 of them, many of which are located in highly marginalized areas. Survey 
results indicate that in all projects but Hundene and Sire Dodota child stunting 
improved in 2000 compared to the base year Table 3.58 Dire Dawa and Dugda Bora 
where stunting looks considerably lower than the country average of about 50% (CSA 
Demography and Health, 2000). Notwithstanding the improvement there was decline 
in the nutritional status of children in 2001 compared to 1997 in three rural projects -
Hundene, Adama and Sire Dodota. 
Table 58: Child Stunting in 2001 Compared to 1997 for CRS Title II Projects 
1 . East Hararghe: 
• 
• 
Fed is 
Goroguttu 
Kombolcha 
Jar so 
Meta 
2. Dire Dawa 
3. Hundene - Harari 
4. East Shoa: 
• Adama 
• Duga Bora 
• Sire Dodota 
5. Gulomekeda . 
68.8 
56.0 
56.0 
55.2 
53.5 
39.2 
42.9 
52.l 
66.7 
66.9 
75.4 
Sources: 1997 Baseline and 2001 Evaluation Surveys 
48 
17.8 
49.3 
43.3 
15.0 
24.2 
43.0 
51.3 
32.9 
68.8 
25.3 
The lack of improvement in Si~e Dodota could be low agricultural productivity. Teff 
and maize are the main crops in the woreda. Survey results and also data obtained 
from the woreda agricultural office indicate that yields of the two main crops were 
low (650kg/ha maize and teff 550 kg/ha) in 2000; good production year. Sire Dodota 
is located in low altitude area where. crop productivity is low due to erratic rainfall, 
and poverty is more pronounced. 
Some Results of Cross-tabulation Analysis 
The following results emerge from the analysis of association between stunting and key 
nutritionally important variables. 
11 CRS sources consider stunting figures in Gorgutlu a!l.J Meta for 2000 unacceptabl)' low. Data processing 
(from entering to deaning) was re-checked, but there" '~ not change in the results. 
132 
;. 
···· .. " 
(1) Demographic characteristics: 
• Jn Fedis, Jarso, Goroguttu, Hundene, and Sire Dodota stunting prevalence was 
higher among male-headed households, while in others the reverse was true. 
In all cases the difference was not statistically significant 
• One would expect that, other things being equal, households with larger 
family size would have higher stunting prevalence. That was not the case in 
Sire Dodota, Kombolcha and Hundene. 
(2) Asset ownership: 
• Level of stunting did not show a significant variation by land, livestock and ox 
ownership in all the CRS projects but Gorogutu and Fed is where stunting was 
low for households having more livestock and oxen. In both cases the 
difference was not statistically significant. 
• On the other hand, households having more labor and physical assets showed 
lower stunting prevalence in most projects, although the difference was not 
statistically significant 
(3) Health: 
• Prevalence of child stunting was very high in Kombolcha (83%) and Fed is 
(42%) compared to others among households that reported higher rates of 
episodes of child illness. The difference was statistically significant (P=.0003 
Kombolcha and P = .021 Fedis) 
• Households with vaccinated children showed lower stunting, in most projects. 
But in Duga Bora and Kombolcha the reverse was the case and the difference 
was statistically significant in both cases (Dogda Bora P = .002, Kombolcha 
P=.002). With several projects (Sire Dodota, Gorogutu, Dire Dawa) there was 
no association between stunting and vaccination. 
• The prevalence of child stunting was high among those who started 
supplementary feeding earlier (0-3 months) and among children who 
continued exclusive breast feeding after seven months. The association was 
statistically significant in Dugda Bora P= .002, Sire Dodota P= .000, 
Kombolcha P= .026, Fed is P= .0 I 6, and Hundene P= .0002. The situation was 
similar with households who stopped breastfeeding early and continued 
exclusive breastfeeding for long. 
• The situation with safe water is perplexing. In six projects (Dugda Bora, Sire 
Dodota, Kombulcha, Meta, Gorogutu and Hundene), households using safe 
water sources showed higher stunting. This could indicate a major utilization 
problem. 
133 
:;- - :. ~ 
. : 
Food Shortage Duration and Application of Severe Coping Strategies 
There hav~ h\'.~n r~markable achievements in respect to reducing food shortage months in 
all prqjccts hut (iulomekeda. The problem in the latter must have been the Ethio-Eritrea 
\\·ar that cau:'l'.d a considerable disruption in production and other livelihood means (Table 
3.59). 
Table 3.59: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 
Strategies in 2000 in CRS Title II Projects 
Food shortage months Use of Coping Strategies 
(Percent, base :rear 1997} 
Projects . ··1996" 2000 AH Coping Severe Coping. -. . .:_ . . ' Strategies Strate.gi_es 
Gulomekeda 6.6 7.03 96 l 94 
Fed is 4.6 0.41 132 134 
Kombolcha 7.0 1.00 181 153 
Jarso 7.2 0.74 94 101 
Hundane 6.3 0.70 133 107 
Goroguttu 6:6 0.66 302 157 
Dire Dawa 7.5 . . 
0.21 346 157 
Me fa 6.5 0.02 233 156 
Adama 1.7 0.03 232 187 
Dugdda Bora 4.3 0.20 444 102 
Sire Oodota - 0.61 NA NA 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
An attempt was made to observe whether food shortage has association with selected key 
variables that are thought to have influence on food availability and access. Some of the more 
important findings are presented below: 
(I) At the CRS level, female-headed households had longer food shortage months. This is 
in conformity with empirical observations in the country. The difference was 
statistically significant (P= .000). 
(2) No meaningful association was observed with land or ox ownership. 
(3) Households having more of their farms in 'woina-dega' climatic zone faced longer 
-food shortage months than others. 
(4) Non-users of fertilizers and improved seeds had longer food shortage months than 
users and the difference was statistically significant (P=.001). 
(5) Farmers using improved fanning practices had shorter food shortage months than 
non-practitioners, and the difference was statistically significant (P=.000). The result 
underpins the importance of aggressively pursuing the promotion of this low-cost 
means of enhancing food production. 
On the other hand, weighted aggregate indices on copirig strategies indicate that, except 
in Gulomekeda, the percentage of farmers using severe coping straiegies increased in 
2000 compared to the base year. For example, in Duga Bora it nearly doubled. This is an 
indication of lack of progress in reducing poverty or improving household food security. 
134 
·- .!' . 
It is also observed that there is meaningful association between using severe coping 
strategies and fomalc-hcadedncss. asset ownership. use of improved inputs and farming 
practices. 
To sum up, CRS projects made an impact on ·reducing food shortage. but not in decreasing 
the application of severe coping strategies. This could mean that in the food shortage 
months (2000), the intensity of the shortage could have been more than in the base 
forcing more households to revert to the severe coping strategies. Also, analytical 
findings strongly suggest that CRS should increase its support for promoting improved 
farming practices. since it can be judged a prior that the practice is low cost and it has the 
potential to reduce food shortage and the use of severe coping strategies. 
3.4.6 SO Results - EOC 
Stunting 
Nutritional status of children was high in all the four Title II Projects in 2001, even 
though there was some improvement since the base year (Table 3.60). 
Table 3.60: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in EOC Title II Projects 
1. North Wello: 
• Mekedela 52.0 62.7 
• Wadla 39.l 50.0 
2. Endemahoni 56.7 73.5 
3.Sodo 60.9 70.9 
Source: 1997 Baseline and 2001 Evaluation 
Stunting was the highest in Sodo. There are not credible reasons to explain it. 
Households in Sodo own relatively more land, more livestock, generally receive more 
rainfall, and operate in less rugged terrain, and land degradation is less severe. 
Moreover, there are n:iore reliable and diversified income sources. 
It is not the improvement between 1997 and 2001 but the magnitude of stunting at the 
time of the survey that should be of concern. By any standards, the stunting figures 
are disturbingly high in all projects including Wadla where stunting is a bit lower. 
This however corresponds quite well with the kind and level of Title II interventions. 
Activities to increase crop production were limited, if any. The irrigation programs 
did not materialize. The focus was placed on soil and water conservation. While this 
might be an acceptable strategy, it should be clear that any impact on stunting from 
the conservation measures cannot be achieved in a period of three years. 
It is worth noting thac in almost all discussions held with all groups of beneficiaries, 
participants held strong views that welfare in general and stunting in particular would 
have been worse without the pr_ojects, and this evaluation is supportive of the view. 
135 
.,. .. 
--
···: ... 
Analysis of Relationship 
Cross-tabulation analysis was made to observe any association between stunting and 
some selected variables. The results are presented below. 
(1) Demographic characteristics 
• While there seems to be little association between stunting and sex of the head 
of households in northern projects, there is association in Sodo where female￾headed households showed considerably higher stunting, although .the 
difference is not statistically significant (P = .592). There are observations 
indicating that gender problems are more acute in Soddo where traditions tend 
to bar women from participation in FFW employment, decision making role, 
etc. It was observed during focus group discussions that generally awareness is 
low in Sodo about gender issues, an a~ea requiring more attention in future 
interventions. 
• Households having very small (~ I person) and very large family size (2': 6 
persons) showed lower rate of stunting prevalence in the northern projects, 
especially Endemahoni and Mekedela. The difference is statistically 
significant (P = .048). Since resource base is very poor in these areas, future 
interventions need to pay much more attention to family planning services. 
(2) Asset ownership: 
• Stunting shows no association with land, livestock and ox ownership, labor 
and household assets. That is, households having more of these assets did not 
have lower stunting as conventional \Visdom would have suggested. This 
could stem from critical shortage of cultivable land and limited non-farm 
income generating opportunities. Conventional methods used to increase 
cereal productivity such as fertilizers, improved seeds, draft animals might not 
produce results towards improving nutritional status. Other options such as a 
structural change in the cropping pattern (more towards perennial crops and 
away from annual crops, feed development together with introduction of 
improved animal breeds, improved apiculture production, fuel wood for the 
market, and consciously assisted inter- and intra-regional migration need to be 
seriously considered if change is sought in earnest. 
• There has been an attempt in the northern projects to introduce backyard 
farming, notably vegetables production for consumption. Although activity in 
this respect remains at demonstration level, there were some adopters. The 
adopters had higher stunting in Endemahoni, Wadla and Sodo. There were no 
replicators in Mekdela. 
(3) Health: 
a. Households who reported episodes of child illness had higher stunting 
rates in Wadla (P = .25) and Mekdela. That was not so in Endemahoni and 
Sodo where households who reported no illness had higher stunting. In 
both cases the difference was not statistically significant. 
J 11\ 
_, -
b. Households reportedly using safe water had higher rate of stunting in 
Wad la indicating that there could be some sort of utilization problem. 
c. Those households who started supplementary feeding at the age group of 4 
--6 months had lower stunting in Endeinahoni and Mekdela . Households 
with longer breast-feeding showed less stunting prevalence in all projects. 
Most mothers stopped breast-feeding after the first three months (majority 
of Ethiopian women breast feed for longer period). 
These results seem to suggest that there is need to pay more attention to health education, 
family planning services and household food processing in future programs. 
Food Shortage Duration and Application of Severe Coping Strategies 
The constraints are many and formidable to reduce household food shortage in the project 
areas EOC has been operating, especially in the north. The project activities have not 
been measuring up to the situation at hand at the time. Neither could they because of the 
gigantic nature of development problems: severe land degradation, acute shortage of 
agriculturally suitable land, persisting weather irregularity (inadequate and poorly 
distributed rainfall, frost, etc.,), horrendous topography, lack of access to market due to 
very poor provision of roads, etc. Yet, the survey results show that there has been 
reduction (Table 3.61). The reduction holds even when food obtained from FFW 
employment is excluded. This is indeed encouraging. But, can the situation be sustained 
or is it a kind of fluke resulting from the favorable 2000 meher season? It seems likely it 
is the latter. 
Table 3.61: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 
Strategies in 2000 in EOC Title II Projects 
Endemahoni 6.3 1.42 62 85 
Mekdela 6. 7 6.42 442 I 09 
Wad la 5.9 2.96 230 64 
Sodo 3.1 0.32 287 51 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
Cross-tabulation analysis is made to see the relationship of food shortage with selected 
variables. Some of the results are presented below. 
(1) Female-headed households had longer food shortage months and the difference is 
statistically significant (P= .002). 
(2) Households having small family size (s 2 persons) and those having less 
economically active persons had longer food shortage months. This confirms the 
empirical observation that labor is an important livelihood source. 
(3) As it could be expected, the vulnerable groups such as oxless and landless had 
longer food shortage months (oxless 3.56 months, one ox 2.76 months,;:::: 2 oxen 
137 
,, 
...... 
.. 
1.5 months: landless 4.61 months, :2'. I ha 2.(13 months). The difference in the case 
of land l)\\ ncrsh ip is not statistical!) signi llLanL 
(4) Fertilizer and improved seeds users had kss l~lOd shortage months. 
(5) Interestingly. use of improved fanning practices and practicing soil and water 
conservation did not result in shorter food shortage months as it would have been 
anticipated. That is. those households practicing improved farming techniques had 
actually longer food shortage months (P=--~. OOO), and the same with those who 
practice soil and \Vater conservation (P=.000). 
Table 3.61 shows that except Mekdela the rest of the EOC projects have decreased the 
percentage of farmers who used severe coping strategies. 
3.4.7 SO Results - FHI 
Stunting 
Malnutrition of children seems very high in FHI projects (except Gubalafto ), although 
available data show that there have been some improvement since the 1997 baseline 
survey as shown below: 
Table 3.62: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in FHI Title II Projects 
.~ .; 
--~ :i ~. !-"::~ · ·_. -----,,.,....:..,:'-------""'\~-"'-±~ 
f 997 
., -· 
.:,~.i: ~ Project~ .. 
': . :~ : .. 
(1) Lay Gayint 85.6 
(2 Tach Ga int 85.5 
(3 Simada 86.9 
(4) Gubalafto Not available 
Source: 1997 Baseline and 2001 Evaluation 
In the four FHI projects, the use of fertilizer and improved seed significantly dropped 
in 2000 compared to 1997. There could be valid reasons for the decrease like lack of 
financial incentive to farmers. The decline could also be for no good reasons in 
which case it is considered unfortunate for household food security. On the other 
hand, more households have put into use improved crop management practices in 
2000 than in 1997 and this is very encouraging. It is unlikely, however, that the 
incremental production, if any, from the latter would offset production lost because of 
the reduced use of fertilizers and improved seeds. In spite of this; cereal yields 
increased and crop production per household showed a slight improvement in 2000, 
indicating a high likelihood that the production and productivity increase could be due 
to the good meher season the project areas experienced. The improvement in children 
nutritional status could very well be due to the projects' diversifying crop production 
through the introduction of tubers that seem to be more appropriate to the areas. The 
findings also show that child under-weight, prevalence of diarrhea occurrence and 
proportion of households using safe water improved, implying that the improvement 
in stunting could also be due to this. 
138 
,-. 
·. 
The gains might or might not be sustained. Whichever way it goes, it cannot be 
denied that nutrition remains a big threat to \\cl far~ and child dcvdopment in the 
pr~jcct areas. 
Analysis or Relationship . 
An analysis was made to observe the association between stunting and selected 
livelihood variables. The results are presented below. 
(1) Demographic characteristics: 
• Female headed households showed lower stunting rate in Lay Gaint, while 
male-headed households in other FHI projects had less stunting Jn all cases 
the difference was not statistically significant. 
• Households having very low (S 2 persons) and very high (2 6 persons) showed 
very high stunting rates in Lay Gayint and Tach Gayint. This might indicate 
lack of labor, and high rate of population growth could encourage stunting 
·--among marginalized households. 
(2) Asset ownership: 
• Land, livestock and labor are the critical livelihood sources in the project 
areas. Yet, there was not significant difference between child stunting in those 
households owning more labor and land and in those that own less or none of 
these assets. There was no meaningful association between stunting and asset 
ownership in general. This could be largely due to critical shortage of 
cultivable land and the prevalence of unfavorable conditions for cereal-based 
crop production. Conventional methods used to increase cereal productivity 
such as fertilizers, improved seeds, draft animals might not produce the 
desired results on improving nutritional status. Other options such as a 
structural change in the cropping pattern (more towards perennial crops and 
away from annual crops), feed development together with introduction of 
improved animal breeds, improved apiculture production, fuel wood for the 
market, and consciously assisted inter- and intra-regional migration need to be 
seriously considered if change is sought in earnest. 
• Households having more revenue from non-farm sources had lower stunting in 
all projects. This indicates that future interventions need to pay more attention 
to supporting non-farm income generation opportunities. 
(3) Health: 
• Households reporting no episodes of child illness had significantly lower 
stunting rates in Lay Gayint (P= .005), Tach Gayint (P= .75), and Gubalafto 
(P= .021 ). b Simada households reporting no episode had more stunti1~g. 
• In Lay Gayint and Tach Gayint and Simada, households using safe water 
sources had less stunting. The difference in all cases was not statistically 
significant. In Gubalafto, safe water users had higher rates of child stunting. 
139 
I· 
l··i 
":- -
i . 
• 
• 
• 
Households who started supplementary feeding in the age groups of 0-3 and 4-
6 months had considerably lower stunting in Lay Gayint (P = .0168). It was 
not so, however, in Simada. In Tach Gayint those who started in 4-6 months 
had the highest stunting rate. 
Households where breast-feeding was stopped in the age group of 0-6 months 
and those where it was extended up to 25-36 months had greater stunting 
incidence in all the four projects. 
There was no association between stunting and vegetable production . 
Food Shortage Duration and Application of Severe Coping Strategies 
FHI projects have reduced the length of food shortage period and decreased the use of 
severe coping strategies for the beneficiaries (Table 3.63). 
Empirical observations abound to remind one the enormity of destitution in FHI projects 
communities. Livelihood sources are fragile and very poorly provided for'. Still, the 
frighteningly high food shortage months recorded during the 1997 baseline survey 
considerably declined in 2000, although it was still very high in Gubalafto in 2000. 
Observations made during the field visit and results of discussions made with diverse 
groups imply that food shortage remains a very serious problem in all the projects. In 
many focus group discussions, especially those held with resource poor and women, 
views were expressed that food shortage was as solid as it was in 1997. But the empirical 
results from the survey reveal that there has been some positive changes, most probably 
influenced by the favorable meher rains in 2000 and also by the crop diversification 
efforts of the project. 
Table 3.63: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 
Strategies in 2000 in Fill Title II Projects 
Pro)~c.ts 
8.9 3.95 134 
9.1 3.8 122 
Simada 8.4 2.3 167 
Gubalafto 6.12 NA 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
FHI projects have had some provisions of technological inputs, introduced root crops to 
diversify crop production and spread food risk, and irrigation schemes were made 
operational in the period. 
23 Gubalafto was not included in the 1997 baseline survey, thus unable to monitor 
change. 
140 
Cross-tabulation analysis performed to observe any possible association between food 
availability and key factors considered to have a role in food supply reveal the following 
results: 
(I) Female-headed households experienced longer food shortage months (4.45 
months against 4.02 months for male-headed). This confirms the conventional 
wisdom that in marginal locations and in situations where labor is a critical 
factor female-headed households are more vulnerable. 
(2) Households with larger family size (2: 6 persons) and those having more labor 
had less time of food shortage (P=.202 for labor and P= .011 for family size). 
(3) Oxless farmers had longer food shortage period than those owning one or more 
(oxless 4.5 months, one ox 4.07 months, 2 or more oxen 2.70 months). The 
same situation prevailed with livestock and land ownership. 
(4) Farmers with no non-farm income had significantly longer food shortage than 
those who had off-farm income (no non-farm income 4.89 months, I 00-500 Birr 
3.2 months). This underscores the importance of promoting the access part of 
household food security, given opportunities exist. 
In the case of coping strategies, there was a reduction of nearly 20% in Lay Gayint, 
15% in Tach Gayint and 3.0% in Simada in the number of households who used 
severe coping strategies. 
3.4.8 SO Results - REST 
Stunting 
Stunting results from the evaluation survey indicate that there has been a significant 
improvement, especially in Were !eke, (see Table 3.64 below): 
Table 3.64: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in REST Title II Projects 
.. Pr<l s~ 
Dega Tembien 73.l 
Were leke 71.9 
Mereb leke n.a 
Adi Ahferom n.a 
Source: 1997 and 2001 Evaluation Surveys 
n.a means not available 
,·001 Xe,.: 
57.4 
45.6 
37.4 
56.8 
Where data are not available for comparison it is conjectured that the status with 
stunting could be better in 200 I compared to I 9_97. The bases for making such a 
statement are the results obtained during field visit from various sources: focus 
group discussions with different groups of beneficiaries, interviews with 
community leaders and local authorities, and personal observations of members of 
the evaluation team. Some of the more important observations include: 
• There is relatively more focused, demand-driven, goal-oriented and 
coordinated effort at conservation work. In many instances it is iinked to 
14 1 
--, 
:._ ... 
.. ·. 
·. 
conserving moisture to increase crop and teed production. There are already 
encouraging signs: gullies have hecn converted into agricultural land, feed 
supply from enclosures is increasing. woody biomass supply is increasing in 
spite of fuel wood extraction from enclosures, water bodies are recharged. 
There is a concerted effort to diversify livelihood systems: horticultural 
development through provision of fruit seedlings. vegetable seeds and running 
of promotional trials, introduction or better producing local livestock breeds 
(cattle and goats), spirited support towards increasing apiculture productivity 
and also making the sector market-oriented, consciously promoting private 
wood lots intended for the market 
• There is more cohesiveness, unity of purpose and being output-or result￾oriented among development actors: communities, government offices and 
REST. There is relatively more organizational (institutional) capacity at the 
community and local levels. 
• There has been a tremendous effort to increase the stock of community assets 
such as rural roads constructed using labor-intensive technologies, social 
infrastructures, drinking water supplies, and irrigation schemes. 
• Tigray suffered of an immense loss of productive resource base. Drought-like 
condition is becoming a permanent feature. There is relatively more awareness 
about these and other formidable development challenges at all levels: 
household, community, woreda, zone and regional level. This should not be 
interpreted to mean that there is no awareness problem. There is, but it cannot 
be denied that the level of awareness is sharper in the region than elsewhere in 
the country. 
It is based on these evidences that the evaluation holds a strong impression that 
the Title II projects have impacts on improving nutritional status of children. 
These same reasons lead one to believe that, other things being equal, the 
improvements made to date could be sustained. 
Despite the likely improvement, stunting prevalence is worrisome in the project 
areas, notably in Degua Tembien and Adi Ahferom where livelihood resources 
seem to be better. 
In the following paragraphs a few cross-tabulation results between stunting and 
key factors of significance to nutrition are presented. 
(1) Demographic characteristics: 
• Female-headed households had relatively more stunting in all projects but 
Degua Tembien. In all cases the difference was not statistically significant. 
The occurrence of stunting among female-headed households was higher with 
REST projects than other Title II projects. There are no empirical data to 
explain the finding. This evaluation suspects that it could be link~d to the 
relatively high women participation in FFW. Participation is believed to 
increase women's overall wcrkload and this might have nutritional 
implications. The lower stunting prevalence among female-headed households 
in Degua Tembien could be due to the presence of day-cares where children 
are supplied with supplementary ration. 
142 
·-
-. 
I lousdwlds " ·ith largo.: faniil~ k (, p..:rsnns) shnn-cd higher rate of stunting in 
;ill .,f1hl· pn~icr!s. ahlh'ugh tho.: diffn..:ncie was 11ll stati~ticali) signifo.:anl. 
l·k•u:-dhdds ha,·ing vcr:, small si/.c (· 2 p1:rsons) also had high child stunting. 
·1 his might suggest that labor a,·ailahility could be an important nutrition 
f:tcti·ir. 
(2) Asset owm·r·ship 
• Households relatively more endowed with labor, land. livestock and ox 
ownership. and physical assets did not have lower stunting as it would be 
expected in Adi Aheferom and Mercb Leke. In Dega Ternbien, the association 
\\·as as expected except with labor in which case there was no association with 
stunting. That is, households having more persons in the age group of 15-65 
years did not have lower child stunting than other clusters. At Were ]eke 
households with more land, livestock and oxen had less· stunting. 
• REST actively promotes diversification of livelihood sources. The 
introduction of improved local livestock breeds, support to modernize 
apiculture, eucalyptus production intended for the market, promotion of 
horticultural cro.p{and feed development endeavors are all geared to earn 
revenue from sources other than the traditional crop and livestock farming. 
The higher the income earned from these sources the lower was stunting 
incidence in all projects but Adi Aheferom (P= .009). This finding 
corroborates REST endeavor in this regard. 
(3) Health 
• Households reporting episodes of child illness exhibited lower stunting 
occurrence in Mereb Leke and Adi Aheferom. This is not unexpected, while 
the reverse was true in Dega Tembien and Wereleki. In all cases the difference 
was not statistically significant. 
• In all projects but Dega Tembien, households using safe water sources had 
higher stunting prevalence: This is not also expected. This indicates that there 
is need to focus more on what happens in the handling of water from the water 
points to the final consumption. 
• It was only in Mereb Leke where households that started supplementary 
feeding in the age group of 4-6 months had lower stunting (P= .03). 
• Households who terminated breast feeding in the age group of 0-6 months and 
those that extended it beyond 24 months had higher stunting in Dega Tembien, 
Mereb Leke and Were Leke than other groups. The difference, however, was 
not statistically significant. 
• Maternal educati0n and production of vegetables for consumption did not have 
any meaningful pattern of association with stunting prevalence in any of the 
REST projects. 
143 
,. 
_; 
... ~ .... 
Food Shortage duration and application of severe coping strategies 
No investigator of rural development of any sort could escape being overwhelmed by 
two factors in Tigray. The first is the severe damage done to renewable natural 
resources. Secondly, the region has had more than its share of weather variability, 
notably rainfall, and long-drawn conflicts and civil unrest. This and the legacy of 
development policies of the previous government in the region makes obtaining 
results from a development project like Title II more challenging. In spite of this, 
Table 3.65 shows that there has been some positive development as regards reduction 
in the length of food shortage time and decrease in the use of severe coping 
mechanisms since the 1997 baseline survey. 
Table 3.65: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 
Strategies in 2000 in REST Title II Projects 
Adi Ahferom 4.6 3.75 ... -· NA NA 
Were Leke 4.7 2.42 I I 7 91 
Mereb Leke 5.03 4.95 NA NA 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
Notwithstanding the improvement, food availability and access to food remain 
precarious in the Title II project communities. The 200 I survey results show that 
sources other than FFW and relief on average covered only abut 7.0 months food need 
in Were Leke, 4.33 months in Mereb Leke, 5.92 months in Adi Ahferom, and 5.41 
months in Dega Tembien in 2000. Relief supply in the same year covered household 
food need for 4.35 months in Mereb Leke, 3.26 months in Adi Ahferom, 1.68 months 
in Dega Tembien, and 1.16 months in Were Leke. 
Still, there are evidences suggesting that Title II Project had some achievement in 
respect to the two SO indicators. For example: 
(1) Results of focus group discussions and interviews with key informants and 
government experts indicate that project activities such as honey production, 
tree planting (eucalyptus), livestock development including feed improvement 
enabled households to earn more revenue. 
(2) A big majority of surveyed households reported that they have access to feed 
and fuel wood from rehabilitated areas. 
(3) A large number of farmers have started vegetable production in their backyard 
to augment food supply. 
( 4) There has been increased milk production from the introduction of genetically 
superior local breeds of cattle and Nubian goats. 
144 
"'::··,. 
Cross-tabulation results indicate: 
(I) Female-headed households experienced longer food shortage months ( 4.06 
months against 2.98 for male-headed). The difference is statistically significant 
(P= .000). 
(2) Households located in 'kola' climatic zone had longer food shortage months (4.26 
months, 2.90 months 'woina degas' and 2.19 months 'dega'). 
(3) About 36% of the sampled population were oxless, and this group experienced 
longer food shortage months (4.08 months against 3.12 for one ox and 2.37 
months for 2'.: 2 oxen), and 100% of the oxless resorted to using severe coping 
strategies. These findings suggest that being oxless is an important food security 
factor. 
(4) Food-for-work employment is an important livelihood source. Accordingly, one 
would expect labor availability would have a strong association with food 
shortage time. But the survey results did not corroborate this. 
(5) Soil and water conservation is a major economic activity in the region. About 90% 
of the households surveyed participated in soil and water conservation programs 
of the projects. The non-practitioners had longer food shortage months (4.87 
moQth ag~il)~t 3.05 for the practitioners). The difference is statistically significant 
(P=.000). 
3.4.9 SO Results- SCF/USA 
Stunting 
Stunting in 2001 improved compared to 1997, in the SCF projects (Table 3.66). The 
1998/99 drought decimated livestock, the single most important livelihood source, in 
· both project areas. It normally takes quite sometime to build on livestock following a 
devastation of the magnitude of 1998/99. ln spite of this, nutritional status of children 
at the time of the survey compared favorably as shown below: 
Table 3.66: Child Stunting in 1997 and 2001 in SCFfUSA Title II Projects 
(I Filtu (Somalie 42.2 
(2) Liben Borena 48.4 
Source: 1997 Baseline and 2001 Evaluation Surveys 
Analysis was made to see how stunting relates to some variables. The results are 
presented below. 
(1) Demographic characteristics: 
• The proportion of female-headedness is high in Filtu (perhaps due to semi￾permanent male migration) and female-headed households had relatively 
iower child stunting, 40.2% against 44.0% for male-headed households. The 
145 
-. 
siwation is even more remarkable in Libcn wh~rc :-.tullling is 27.J'Yo with 
li:malc-headctl h.1usch1•lds <~6 CJ% malc-hcackd). 
H1:iuseholds having very Jow.(s 2 persons) anti largt: 1;.1mily size(? 6 person:-,) 
had more child stunting. In both cases the difference " ·as not statistically 
significant. 
(2) Asset ownership: 
• 
• 
In pastoral systems livelihood almost wholly depends on livestock ownership . 
Because of this one would expect an inverse associati0n between child 
stunting and size of livestock ownership. The survey results indicate that it 
was not the case in the projects. Households owning more livestock did not 
have lower stunting. This could mean livestock productivity as well as off-take 
or production of livestock for the market leave a lot to be desired. 
Very few households in both projects reported no amount of income from non￾agriculture sources. Those who reported did not demonstrate better nutritional 
status of children. 
(3) Health: 
• In Liben households reporting child illness had higher. stunting, while in Filtu 
the reverse was the case. The difference was not statistically significant in 
both projects. 
• 
• 
• 
• 
In Liben households using safe water sources had higher stunting, while in 
Filtu the difference in stunting rate was small (users 37.3% and non-users 
46.3%). As with almost all Title II projects, Liben and Filtu need to give more 
attention to the utilization aspect of 'safe water'. 
Households that had complete vaccination experienced lower stunting 
corroborating the significance of EPI program to improving child 
development. 
Very high stunting rates were observed for households that started 
supplementary feeding late(:?: 7 months) in Liben in particular. 
Extended breast feeding beyond 24 months (probably for lack of 
supplementary feeding) meant high stunting in both projects. The difference 
was statistically significant in the case of Fil tu (P = .001 ). 
Food Shortage duration and application of severe coping strategies 
The food gap in SCF projects was very high in 1997 and it did not yield much in 
2000. In fact, in Liben it aggravated as Table 3.67 shows. But the situation with the 
use of severe coping strategies is different. There was a considerable decrease in 2000 
compared to 1997. In Liben the percentage of farmers who used severe coping 
strategies decreased by some 46% and in Filtu by 73% (Table 3.67). This could be 
I .f6 
.. 
·. 
due to the fact that there \\as recovery from the devastating drought or 1998/99 and 
re-stocking of livestock materialized in ~()00 . 
Table 3.67: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 
Strategics in 2000 in SCF/USA Title II Projects 
·--·Use of Coping Strateg~;-···1 
Food shortage months (Percent; base year 1997) I 
Pr:ojects . 1996 2000 All Copiiig · Sever Coping I 
Strategies : Strategies 
Liben 4.6 7.54 53 54 i 
Filtu 9.6 8.45 27 27 ! 
; 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
3.4.10 SO Results -WVl/E 
.Stunting 
Child stunting was very high in 1997 among all WVI/E Title II projects. Although 
there have been improvements in some (East Shoa projects and Soda Zuria) 
remarkable, stunting remained disturbingly high in East Tigray in 2001 (Table 3.68). 
Table 3.68: Stunting Prevalence in 1997 and 2001 in WVI/E Title II Projects 
_;:· . 
. !: 
1 East Tigray: 
• Atsbi Woberta 82.l 82.9 
• Lay Lay Tsed Amba n.a 69.7 
(2 Walaita: 
• Soda Zuria 55.3 18.5 
• Humbo 62.3 39.0 
(3 Bada Wacho 61.4 6.4 
(4) East Shoa: 
• Adama 67.0 42.6 
• Kersa Kondaliti 73.l 37.7 
The high stunting prevalence in East Tigray woredas could be attributed to the Ethio￾Eritrean war that caused loss of productive labor, dislocation, destruction of 
productive assets, and lack of security at the community level, all with negative 
implications for the livelihood systems at the household level. 
In south (Wolaita and East Shoa) communities and local authorities, especially the 
latter, have been very critical of WVI/E approaches to operating the projects. Some 
openly wondered whether there was any purpose in the continuation of the programs, 
especially if program integ:ation and sustainability beyond WVI support, were to be 
underpinned. 
147 
i: 
' 
In spite of all of this, in focus group discussions and interviews these same sources 
admitted that without the WVI/E programs, Title II projects included, the nutritional 
status of children would be worse off considerably. 
Some of the more nutritionally important survey findings as they associate to child 
stunting are presented below. 
(1) Demographic characteristics: 
• Stunting among female-headed households was relatively more severe in Kersa 
Kondaliti, Atsbi Woberta, Tsedamba, and Humbo. This is expected on ground of 
empirical observations that female-headed rural households are resource poorer 
and more vulnerable. In the rest of the projects, stunting was higher among male￾headed households. This also could be possible because empirical observations 
indicate that male dominance in the allocation of household income exists, and the 
tendency is that allocation to conspicuous expenditures (alcohol, 'chat', and the 
like) is disproportionately high compared to expenditures on food. lt should, 
however, be noted that the household survey reveals that there is shared decision 
making while selling coffee (main cash crop in south), Goint decision 61%, 
husband only 29%, wife only 10%). Joint decision dominates in livestock sale also 
(husband only 31 %, wife only 11 % and jointly 58%). On the use of sales 
proceeds, the decision making role changes. In the case of coffee joint decision 
increases, 75%, husband only I 7% and wife only 8.0%. It is the same with 
livestock revenue; joint decision dominates, 71 %. The survey results do not 
corroborate the empirical experience in respect to male domin.ance in decision 
making on sale and use of income from cash crops. 
• Hou~eholds having very low ~ 2 persons) and very large ~ 6 persons) have 
greater stunting occurrence with all projects. The latter was particularly high in 
Atsbi Woberta, Tsedamba, and Humbo. This is also expected. Small family size 
means economically active persons are not available, and large family size means 
more mouths to feed. This underscores the need to emphasize family planning 
services in future interventions. 
(2) Asset ownership: 
• Households owning more land and livestock including oxen did not have less 
child stunting in East Tigray communities, Sodo Zuria, Humbo, and Adama. This 
is expected since in these areas rainfall is very irregular, good agricultural land 
exceedingly short, feed shortage very critical. The latter (feed development) is 
critically important and should feature more prominently in future programs. In 
Kersa Kondaliti, households with more land, livestock and oxen had lower 
stunting. In all cases the difference was not statistically significant. 
• All surveyed households in Sodo Zuria and Humbo did not have oxen, and this is 
not significant to nutrition because anima' draft power is not important to food 
production in the woredas. 
• Households in all projects, but Humbo and Sodo Zuria, with higher income from 
non-farm sources had better child nutritional status. In Sodo Zuria and Humbo 
148 
;. 
•, 
there was no reported income from non-farm sources. It is another area that 
requires close attention in the future similar interventions, since it has important 
implications for household food security and nutrition. 
(3) Health: 
• 
• 
• 
Households reporting no episodes of child illness in Adama and Tsed Amba had 
more stunting prevalence. In both cases, the differen~e was not statistically 
significant. 
In all projects but Tsed Amba, the difference in child stunting is marginal between 
households using safe water sources and those not using. 
Those households that started supplementary feeding in the age group of 4-6 and 
~ 7 months had lower stunting than other groups in Kersa Kondaliti, Adama, and 
Humbo. In Soda Zuria households who started supplementary feeding after 7 
months had higher stunting, perhaps indicating no impact from health education 
interventions. 
• When extending breast-feeding above 19 months (perhaps not complemented with 
supplementary feeding) resulted in higher stunting in Tsed Amba, Atsbi 
Wombera, and Kersa Kondaliti. 
Food Shortage duration and application of severe coping strategies 
Household survey results in Table 3.69 below show there were remarkable changes 
for the better in 2000 compared to 1997 in respect to achieving these two aspects of 
SO. Food shortage period decreased in all projects, while only in Humbo and Adama 
the percentage of farmers who used severe coping strategies actually increased. 
Table 3.69: Length of Food Shortage and the Extent of Use of Severe Coping 
Strategies in 2000 in WVI/E Title II Projects 
Source: The 1997 baseline and 20001 evaluation surveys 
149 
... 
~ 
:~.· 
~-
!:-· 
.. 
·-
Other major lindings relating to the two SP() indicators include: 
(I) Femak-heacku households cons1i11111.·d ](l'J..·o of the surveyed hnusdwld:-. in 1he 
WYliE projects. about the same as tht: national average. This group experienced 
more dongated food shortage, 4.4 month~ against 3.24 months for malc-hcadcu 
households. 
(2) Households with more labor had shorter food shortage time (2. 74 months against 
3.5 momhs in the case of those having kss labor). 
(3) Households having less livestock had. as \\·ould be expected, more extended food 
shortage (4.14 months for those owning~ I TLU against 1.94 months for those 
having ~4.0 TLU). The difference is not statistically significant. 
(4) About 61% of the surveyed households \\·ere oxless and a further 26% had one ox 
per household. These two groups had longer food shortage months (3.78 months 
oxless and 3.70 owning one ox). 
(5) Households who employed improved farming practices of one type or another had 
considerably less food shortage time (3.33 months against 4.8 months for non￾practioners). The difference is statistically significant (P= .000). 
3 .5 Other Title II Results 
3.5.1 Community Participation 
Community participation means d m(.Uifferent things to different people. To some, it is the 
·• involvement of people in development by free contribution of labor. To others, it includes 
the contribution of material resources. Participation is also perceived as synonymous to 
people's contribution of free labor and money for the implementation of blue-print 
development plans or projects. Still to some, participation is letting people provide 
information needed to design development projects. 
While all these things may not be unrelated to participation in development context, 
conceptually community participation means much more. It means the consultation of 
beneficiaries and communities in the formulation of projects and programs and the fixing 
of priorities. Above all, it means letting people make decisions on all aspects that affect 
their lives. Community participation is a development strategy that places the focus of 
attention on equity (improved access to productive resources for the poor) and self￾reliance at the community and household levels. 
To sum up, community participation is a process in which the poor themselves become 
more aware of their own situation, of the socio-economic reality surrounding them, of 
measures they themselves can take to begin changing their situation. In a project 
environment, participation means the involvement of the beneficiaries in deciding in all 
aspects of project design - from the inception to post-project evaluation. 
The results of the PRA surveys this evaluation has carried out reveals that the 
communities believe, in mo~t ca~es strongly, that they have had active participation 
during need assessment and implementation. From these discussions the following results 
emerge: 
150 
.. 
-, 
·- ... : ... 
In the 123 focus group discussi1lns held with beneficiaril..'s in 39 rural Title II 
prnjl..'tts. participation in thl' i"i irm nf labor and/or mah:ri;d ,_., HnrihutiPn was 
ml..'nt inned in all or them . 
• Participation in tree species scb.:tion was cited in 27 FCiD 
• There were twelve cases asserting that it is the communities who decide on areas 
to be enclosed and utilization there-from. 
In some 37 cases mention was made that communities participate in the selection 
and mobilization of people for involvement (free labor) in project activities. 
Success with community participation in Ethiopia rarely advances beyond extractionist 
paiticipation characterized by labor and material contribution. This is largely due to the 
absence of viable grass roots organizations. In rural Ethiopia, there are formal and 
informal sector village-level organizations. The former include the kebele system, an 
integral part of the government structure. The kebeles perform political as well as 
development functions. In most kebeles, there are development committees in charge of 
development for the kebele administration. Empirical experiences indicate that the 
development arm of the kebele organization lacks capacity (manpower, finance and 
logistics). 
Jn addition to kebeles or peasants' associations (Tabias in Tigray), there are agricultural 
cooperatives. These are farmers' grass roots organizations. They provide input supply, 
credit and marketing services to members. At present, as will be the case in the future, as 
well cooperatives provide a window of opportunity to effect authentic beneficiary and 
community participation in project planning. 
There are also informal sector grass roots institutions. They are set up to perform social 
and religions functions. These organizations lack development orientation, experience 
arid capacity to be used as forums to bring about effective community participation. 
There are, however, experiences, albeit limited and mostly urban, in the involvement of 
informal organizations like 'idirs' as partners in development programs. Although there 
have been some promising results, yet it seems too early to fonn any opinion on the 
potential of the informal sector organizations for use as the channel to bring about 
meaningful community participation. 
The situation in the Title II project areas with regard to formal and informal community￾based organizations (CBO) is similar to the country picture. It seems in recognition of this 
that in some DAP provisions were made to set up task forces (one each for agriculture, 
conservation, water and sanitation). Members of a task force were to be drawn from the 
community, kebele and the project. The objective was to widen community participation 
in a sustainable manner, and the task force was intended to be the medium. Major 
decisions pertaining to project implementation and benefit sharing were to be effected by 
the task force. 
Therefore, it would be na"ive to expect enhanced community participation at the decision 
making level, simply because of the lack of strong and development-oriented CB Os and 
::ilso because 0fthe lack of democratic tradition. The envisaged task force-shave not 
emerged in most places. Where they did, they were not what they were supposed to be in 
form and mandate. The major complaint one could level against the projects in this regard 
would be the scope of program and resource provision for improving capacity at the 
community and local levels were 1~oi commensurate with the need. 
i51 
f~ . 
... _:..... 
Finally, it is important to note at this point that future DAP should consider the possibility 
of using existing informal sector institutions in its endeavor to build up local and village 
level capacity. 
3.5.2 Gender Aspects 
From the outset gender-based programs, more specifically activities consciously planned 
to enhance women empowerment, were few and far between. Credit provisions to 
promote income generating activities focusing on women were planned, but they did not 
materialize. Women's compounded responsibilities in the household economy were not 
seriously considered in FFW employment, (e.g. same norms are used for men and 
women) food shortage, household food processing and preservation, etc. One should not 
thus expect much women empowerment results. However, the following results are 
important: 
• In nutrition, food shortage and use of severe coping strategies, female-headed 
households benefited less than male-headed households 
• Women participation in FFW programs was high, especially among projects in 
Tigray. 
• Women hold high appreciation for the project-supported water programs in all 
project areas . 
• In decision making, the role women play is encouraging on such issues as what 
and when to sell, how to use the income from sale. Joint decision on cash crop 
sale is over 60% for all CS. The joint decision is equally strong (55%) on the 
application ofrevenue from cash sales. 
• Women participation in existing CBOs leaves much to be desired. 
• There is a tremendous appreciation for health care and mobile EPI programs the 
projects assisted. This would benefit women by bringing the facility to their 
locality, avoiding long distance travel. 
3.6 Operating Environment 
3.6.1 External 
This evaluation has not been able to find the major assumptions DAP has made in 
order to effectively realize its strategic objective. Nonetheless, there have been some 
external elements factors that have restrained project achievements. 
These factors came from three sources: Government policies, notably govemment￾NGO relationship; conditionality that surrounds the external assistance to the projects; 
and nature-imposed constraints. 
Government - NGO relationship: There is a very good team work between the 
government offices and project management in REST projects. The relationship and 
team spirit in the projects EOC operates is not at the REST's level, but it is positive. 
CRS has also good working relation with local government offices. This seems to 
stem from the fact that CRS is not directly involved in project operation; rather, 
implementation is through partners, mostly indigenous NGOs. Africare does not have 
any relation problem because it operates in Gambella where every external assistance 
152 
..... -.. 
... _.~ .. 
is considered a novelty. It is in the projects the international NGOs operate that this 
evaluation observed poor project - local government relation. The lack of legislation 
that clearly stipulates the roles ofNGOs, especially international NGOs in 
development as well as relief seems to account for the poor relation. It seems it is 
because of this that the perception of NGO role differs from region to region and from 
woreda to woreda. 
Another important issue this evaluation would like to flag is that the government 
Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Management strategy does not make a 
distinction between FFW and relief-oriented Employment Generation Schemes 
(EGS). FFW could be a powerful means of development if used judiciously, 
especially in relatively more marginalized areas. Its purpose should not only be asset 
creation at the community level and improving household access to food. It should 
also be directed at creating asset at the household level. FFW has not been doing the 
latter in the project areas because of the absence of clearly stipulated directives on the 
application of FFW resources. 
The Proclamation to Regulate Micro Finance issued in 1996 was not anticipated at the 
time Of designing OAP, and that must have had implications on the first and second 
Intermediate Results. The attainment of these results was contingent on the provision 
of credit for agricultural inputs and for income generation activities focusing women. 
These were not implemented because of the micro finance regulation. 
Conditionality of the external assistance: It could perhaps be more appropriate to 
call it the nature instead of conditionality of the USAID support to the projects. Most 
of the finance of the project operation came from monetized food aid commodities. 
All CS's reported availing the fund has been irregular and inadequate. Table 3.70 
below shows they have had an ax to grind, so to speak. One even wonders how some 
of them-like EOC- were even able to operate at all. 
Table 3.70: Project Funds and Resources Actually Availed Compared to Plan 
ercent 
1998 ·. > : ,, l;.' 1999. i/~(' -~';f;'-:;.0.: <:· . ._ ;, ~ 200 ~ _;::_ ;'. 
cs. 1Wonetiied FFW.(Relier:· :M:}>hetized FI!-W lf!~lief . 
:: _ ·, ~1:~Earni~g Co~moditiilii)'" .. '/E?frii~g ci6Tu~~4Jnes) ·:: ~~ '.: . · ~~:~r · : · ~- ··· :~ · :::{ -' ~.:- ~r.·<~~~ ~?~--~ ~':_ .. _:: ;·· .. ·-:~~!!if:. 
CARE 72 100 69 100 93 
CRS 63 74 94 89 85 
EOC 29 9 27 55 56 
FHI 76 101 32 100 51 
REST 80 100 57 
WVl/E 41 29 70 77 76 
Sources: Cooperating Sponsors 
N.B: Africa re provided a plan figure for one year only and SCFIUSA did not 
provide any data on the subject 
93 
78 
50 
100 
100 
108 
The main reason the projects in all CS gave in all instances for output shonfa lls is the 
irregularity of project fund flow. The implications of this for the realization of 
intermediate results and the strategic objective is evident. The donor is a\\ are of the 
153 
. ' 
problem and it is learnt that a stlldy team is already set up 111 review issues associated 
'' i1h nHJ1w1ization or fouJ nnJ resources in Ethiopia. 
Nattffc-ca used constraints: Drought, shortage and irr..:gu lari ty <1f rain fa II seriously 
constra incJ performance with ramifications for impacts a Im, 1st in all pr~jcct an.:os. hut 
more visibly on REST, SCF!l !SA. East Sirna CARE/CRS \\.VJ/F. prnjects. 
3.6.2 Internal 
Internal environment here refers to the CS management capacity and the extent to 
which they have been able to link up and coordinate well activities with communities 
and other stakeholders, notably relevant government offices. The CS own 
management capacity (quality and quantity of expertise at project sites, logistics 
support to staffs, responsibility and authority delegation. capacity of head office to 
backstop field staffs, staff motivation at all levels, and availability of operating 
systems and procedures) was found adequate, although understandably variation 
existed among the CS. 
With regard to community participation, there is still much to be desired. Participation 
did not exceed labor and material contribution, collaboration in the provision of 
information to monitoring and evaluating groups, and membership in various 
functional committees (water, health, irrigation, etc.). 
The Task Force idea contained in the DAP proposals to bring about authentic 
·• participation did not materialize in many of the projects. Community-based 
organizations are lacking and where available they are not strong to warrant authentic 
participation (decision making). It is observed that the projects operate with and 
through formal sector organizations like development committees, but the approach is 
only formality rather than objective or goal-oriented. The efforts the projects have 
made to enhance the capacity of grass roots organizations or institutions (fonnal and 
informal) have been wanting, based on observations made during field assessment. 
IV. Lessons Learnt: Some Discussion 
-. 
The uiscussion in this section is premised on three questions: (I) have there been 
interventions that were not included but should have been considered in the DA P in 
· order to better achieve the strategic o~jective? (2) has there been any missed 
oppo11unity to better integrate Title 11 activities into the main development stream? 
And (3) could the projects that had FFW component donl.'. better to enhance capital or 
asset formation at the household level? 
4.1 Relevance and Appropriateness 
This evaluation held discussions with 123 rural beneficiary groups involving over 
1230 persons (over 35% women)24• Among the major topics raised in these 
discussions were the relevance and appropriateness of the activities of Title II 
Program. The discussion on relevance was made to focus on whether the activities 
were appropriate to reduce poverty and improve household food security, whether 
they were compatible to the resource base of the communities and individual 
households, and whether the interventions were affordable. The discussions were also 
made to focus on whether the projects were designed to enhance community capacity, 
enable households to increase assets, improve access to social infrastructures and 
market. 
The results demonstrate that some 87% of the participants felt that the Title II 
activities have been relevant to improve food security in a sustainable manner and 
consistent with the socio-economic realities in the project areas. There was a 
. consensus that the projects addressed priority development needs. The remaining 13% 
are those who were not sure or unable to distinguish whether the interventions were 
indeed most wanted to solve food problems. The results of key informant interviews 
(123 women and 123 men) and discussions with government offices at the woreda 
level confirmed the views of the group discussions. The only departure in this respect 
was reported in the Hararghe CARE projects where woreda government officials as 
well as experts did not agree with the choice of the project sites. They believed that 
there were more marginalized locations. 
Communities and government are supportive of the projects' strategies: (1) focus on 
food security and being poor-focused; (2) emphasis on conservation-based 
development; (3) sensitivity to gender aspects of development; ( 4) emphasis on 
promoting appropriate and cost-effective technologies; and (5) attention to local 
capacity building. 
While this evaluation agrees to the opinions expressed above, it believes that there 
were some missed opportunities that could have made important contributions to 
achieve the SPO. In the opinion of the team, a typical Title II projects should have had 
activities shown in Figure 4 below. Figure 5, on the other hand, tries to depict the 
actual situation as the team observed it. The activities that look particularly 
conspicuous omissions in the latter are: 
·Types of beneficiary groups used in the data colle~tion stage ar~ 1:xp!ained in 1he methodology S•~ction . 
155 
• Food processing (flour mills in particular) 
• Food preservation at the household level (awareness raising) 
• Family planning and maternal education (some projects have had some 
interventions) 
These and other gaps in OAP of significance to future similar programs are reviewed 
below by sector. 
4.1.1 Crop and Livestock Production25 
I. Title II projects in the Amhara Region and Tigray have a unique problem. Long 
years of abuse in the use and management of renewable natural resources rendered 
cereal crop production under the existing farm management practices non￾feasible. The gradual phasing out of the production of cereals in the weredas 
seems imperative. This is because of the fragility of soil (most of the top soil 
already gone), increasingly erratic rainfall, acute shortage ofland that forces 
farmers to cultivate steep slopes, land preparation requirement of cereals (s·oil 
being disturbed several times annually), etc. The question of what then was denied 
a serious consideration in the OAP. This evaluation believes agricultural 
development problem, notably in these northern weredas, is big requiring a big 
solution. The most tempting solution is to stop all cereal production under rainfed 
conditions, significantly reduce livestock population, enclose all areas with slopes 
exceeding 15 degrees and undertake enrichment tree planting. This cannot, 
however, be considered a realistic short-to medium-term solution, but it certainly 
deserves a serious consideration in any long-term development strategy. 
Courageous and visionary land use policy, consciously facilitated intra-and inter￾regional resettlement or permanent migration need to be seriously considered. The 
Government development strategy underpins that agriculture should play the lead 
role. But can this be realistic across the country, especially in highly marginalized 
parts (making up about 50%)? Measures such as resettlement, issuing and 
implementing land use regulations, and facilitating a major change in land use 
may not be suitable for NGO operation or Title II. While appreciating this, it is 
felt that DAP preferred not to articulate the most fundamental .agricultural 
development problems in such areas, and it did not give sufficient consideration to 
non-cereal production options. 
2. DAP was formulated in 1997. Regional micro finance companies (Dedebit in 
Tigray, ACSI in Amhara) have been operative at the time ofDAP formulation. 
Yet, the implications of such policy for the administration of input and income 
generation credit, key to achieving the first and second intermediate results of the 
special objective, had not been analysed. This prevented the implementation of 
input supply envisaged in the DAP. While this evaluation is aware that there is 
need to be cautious in the use of fertilizers in the project areas, inputs such as 
fertilizers and improved seeds might be justified on financial and sustainability 
terms in some project areas. Input credit provision may have to be limited to farms 
with well-drain_ed soils, having adequate rainfall or where there is supplementary 
irrigation. 
25 This evaluation qrongly contends that in rural communities where mixed farming (crop and livestock) 
preva ii~. hou s~ hL)l,i :·ood production is pivotai to hou5efmld food security. Strengthening the former is enhancing 
and :>ustainin.;! !he '.;;a<::r. This conte1•t!on is the basis of:hc disc11ssio11 in this sub-section. 
156 
;. 
Figure 4 : Factors Influencing Nutritional Status of a Typical 
Ethiopian Rural HH and Their Inter-relationships 
*The core elements of Title II Program Strategic Objective measured by level of stunting 
157 
"· 
Figure 5: DAP Activities under Implementation to Improve 
Nutritional Status of a Project Household 
I 
-----
Increased Income 
from Cash Crop 
*The core elements of Title II Program Strategic Objective measured by level of stunting 
158 
3. Crop c.lin:rsilication that revolves arounc.l the introc.luction of Irish potato as a partial 
replacement to barley, introduction of improved sheep breeds in the high altitudes anc.l 
production of trees including fruit trees as an alternative to cereals and pulses should 
have been given a more serious consideration. At the minimum such enterprises could 
have been included as pilot programs in the DAP. There should have been a 
proposition for a more aggressive promotion of backyard· farming targeting vegetables 
during the meher season for household consumption26. Food availability ebbs in July 
to October in the project areas. Rainfed vegetable production could help to ease food 
supply shortage at this period. 
4. Varieties of improved seeds to be distributed to farmers in these drought - prone areas 
are not characterized based on days to crop maturity to fit into the length of growing 
season of the project area. Nearly all the project areas have chronic and transitory 
shortage of rainfall. The proxy indicators need to consider whether a household is 
using varieties of the correct crop maturity group tuned to the length of growing 
season. The already existing indicator 'percentage of households using improved 
seed' should have read 'percentage of households using improved seed varieties 
tuned to the length of growing season'. - . ;:._ . - -. - - .. 
5. Irrigation intervention seems to concentrate on tapping perennial rivers and springs. 
Possibilities of water harvesting during the main rainy seasons have not been 
considered in the DAP. Title II projects focused mainly on irrigation schemes 
involving the construction of micro-dams and diversions that could be costly and 
location-specific. Though rainfall in these project areas is erratic and of short 
duration, the amount during the peak period is considerable to enable storage and 
.. utilization. Other water harvesting techniques such as ponds, roof catchmet, etc., with 
the object of promoting vegetables production, have not been emphasized sufficiently. 
6. Livestock constitute an important part of the livelihood systems of rural households in 
all project areas. It plays a critical role in the household food security. Although it 
yields little at present, its potential to contribute to household income and food 
security could be considerable. The existing extremely low livestock productivity is 
due to pervasive provenance of preventable and controllable diseases and lack of feed. 
Communities identify shortage of feed and diseases as priority development needs. 
Yet, several Title II projects were nearly oblivious of this. 
4.1.2 Health 
I. Impression is gathered that relevant health interventions have been compromised 
on the belief that efforts to enhance agricultural production and increase income 
will have positive implications for health. While accepting the truism, there 
should have been more _but appropriate health interventions to strike a better 
balance between health and other sector development interventions. For example, 
in Lay Gayint in one PA, of the observed 37 women 17 had goiter, and yet it was 
26 OAP have acti\·iiies on the promotion of vegetable production wiih the aim ofimpro\·ing the quality of diet at 
the household be!. Tf:!s evaluation would like to note that the ac!ivities planned and reso;m::es ailoca:d for the 
promotion wor:- ::'.111;..;;J have been wider in scope. • 
j -o ), 
not identified as a development problem nor has there been any initiative to 
reduce the incidence. 
2. Africare is not as yet involved in direct health interventions, but its consideration 
of food processing, through support for grinding mill, is encouraging. It is very 
likely that this will contribute to improved women's health status through 
reduction of workload. The lack of grinding mill has been identified as a priority 
in many of the women FGD. Its omission where felt need is strong is conspicuous. 
3. Family planning services and food processing at the household level were not 
given the attention they deserved. Empirical experiences indicate that normally 
there is a strong relationship between household food security and family size. 
More mouths to feed means less per capita food, especially for poor households. 
In both cases, women are central: women give birth, they produce and process 
food to feed the people. The impact of multiple births is not just too many mouths 
to feed, but also a source of ill-health to women. Another important cause of 
women's illness is overwork, especially from tasks related to feeding the family 
like water collection, stone grinding and fuel wood collection. Health 
interventions that are meant to impact food security should be those that have a 
bearing on health as well as on food processing and consumption. In this instance, 
family planning and assistance to simplify workload would have brought 
improved women's health and better and more food to the family. 
4.1.3 Natural Resources 
I. Although rehabilitation of natural resources through physical and biological 
measures constitute the major operational area for most Title II projects, yet 
there are a few that did not have any conservation activities in the first cycle of 
OAP. This was in spite of the existence of a huge demand for soil and water 
conservation. Since potential exists in these project areas to improve HH food 
security through soil and water conservation practices, the lack of focus in this 
regard is considered a missed opportunity to enhance further household food 
security. 
2. The Title II projects pro~ide support for the establishment of communal and 
private woodlots, or tree planting. In this regard, tree seedling supply in a cost￾effective and sustainable manner is critically important. In appreciation of this, 
the approach one CS followed was to establish and strengthen private nurseries. 
Technical, material support and training was given to individual farmers willing 
to run nursery activities. This strategy should have been pursued, at least on a 
trial basis, in other Title II projects. 
160 
.. -: 
~-
......... 
··-.:,.. 
4.2 Sustainability of Title II Activities and Results 
Sustainability in terms of project is a function of integration of project activities into 
the regular development stream, and development of local capacity that is.capable of 
sustaining capital assets created with the support of the project. It is essentially the 
result of the following six factors. 
• Authentic community participation in the planning and management of the 
project, which determines ownership; 
• Capacity enhancement at the community and local levels; 
• Gender sensitivity of the project activities, or the role the project plays in 
empowering women; 
• The capability of the project to network with its major stakeholders; 
• The capacity to generate and make good use of critical information about 
the performance of the project; and 
• Having a well-thought out phasing out strategy 
Ownership, capacity and phasing out strategy are particularly significant for 
sustainability. While duly noting that there is considerable inter-project and inter￾activity variability, there are empirical observations that tend to suggest that sense of 
project ownership among communities is not at the level it should be, especially with 
conservation and physical infrastructures. In most projects, communities consider the 
conservation programs as an employment outlet. This should not be understood to 
mean that the communities and individual farmers lack appreciation or are not 
supportive of the conservation activities. Such appreciation exists. The projects might 
in fact have contributed to enhancing the appreciation. What is observed here is that 
perhaps farmers and community contribution towards the conservation programs is 
not at the level to generate commitment or sense of ownership. 
There are remarkable achievements to the credit of the Title II programs both in 
conservation programs and rural roads. If the Title II support were to be withdrawn, 
evidences are lacking in support of either the continuation of the conservation 
programs, at least at their current level, or in sustaining (maintaining and repairing) 
the project results (outputs) to date. 
Two reasons stand above others to explain the situation. The first is inadequate 
stakeholder involvement, especially local government and relevant line agencies. In 
the majority of woredas in which Title II projects operate, dissatisfaction was voiced, 
in several places strongly, about the role of government as a major stakeholder in the 
projects. Local authorities including agricultural offices reported poor to very poor 
planning and working relations in their respective woredas. The most often mentioned 
complaints are lack of information sharing, poor networking, poor coordination, 
absence of agreed forums to discuss common problems and solutions, lack of 
appreciation of the fact that both parties seek the same objective, etc. 
DAP consciously or othenvise did not have any defined initiative to enhance 
productive participation of local government in the project. This in the judgment of 
this evaluation \Yas a missed opportunity. 
161 
· . 
The second reason is that there is little, if any at all, difference between pre-Title II 
period and the present time in terms of organizational capacity at the community 
level. DAP had at least one good idea- setting up of task forces-. but it failed to 
provide enough resources to ensure their successful emergence. It does not also seem 
that there was awareness of the need to provide mechanisms to monitor the successful 
evolution of the task forces. 
4.3 Self-reliance at the Household Level 
It is common understanding that household food security is a derivative of household 
self-reliance. It is also true that most of the project activities such as income 
generation and food-for-work have been the main Title II tools towards enhancing 
household self-reliance. Yet, there are observations that indicate dependency 
continues to surge. It means household self-reliance has not been evolving. The issue 
this evaluation flags in this regard is the lack of clarity that surrounds the use of food 
aid resources channeled in the form ofFFW. FFW could be a powerful means of 
development if used judiciously, especially in relatively more marginalized areas. Its 
purpose should not only be asset creation at the community level and improving 
household access to food. It should also be directed at creating asset at the household 
level. FFW has not been doing the latter in the project areas because remuneration￾wise it is considered the same as employment generation scheme (EGS). FFW wage 
rate is survival-based as it is in the EGS and not market-based as it ought to be. The 
Title II projects have not been able to positively impact asset ownership of the 
beneficiaries mainly due to the under-pricing of labor employed in FFW activities. 
The rationale for non-application of the going wage rate for FFW employment is not 
clear. Government Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Management directive was 
quoted in a few cases as the reason for not basing FFW enumeration on market wage 
rate. But a close review of DPPM shows that there is overtly expressed provision to 
this effect in the policy document. Rather the reason seems to be that the relevance of 
this aspect of FFW escaped attention while designing DAP. 
162 
V. Conclusions and Recommendations 
Title II projects seek across the country the same strategic objective, the same 
strategies. Similarities of project interventions are considerably larger than their 
differences. Because of this the major conclusioi1s of this evaluation are common to 
all, especially the rural projects. This should not be understood to mean that 
conclusions specific to a project are lacking. There are, but they are not brought out in 
this summary section. The section is summarized under four headings. 
(I) Assumptions violated; 
(2) Main findings 
(3) Lessons learnt 
( 4) Main recommendations 
5.1 Assumptions Violated 
5.1 .1. The inability of some projects to implement credit component of DAP was 
harmful to food availa~ility and access. 
5.1.2. The projects experienced cash now problems arising from monetization of 
food aid commodities, in some projects the problem was very serious. Quite a 
few projects did not have a conducive operating environment due to poor 
relation with line ministries and local governments. There were harsh weather 
conditions, notably severe irregularity of rainfall. Security was lacking in a 
few project locations. In spite of these and other operating constraints the 
performance of the projects (realization of planned outputs) was satisfactory. 
5.1.3. Food availability in Ethiopia depends heavily on 'belg' and 'meher' rains. 
The 'belg' rains in 2000/01 were poor, but not the meher rains. The latter 
accounts for over 80% of the grain production. F AO and CSA figures tell that 
the 2000 meher production was the highest recorded in the country. Most 
project areas had good meher rains and this possibly improved availability. 
This fact could have bearing. The message here is the evaluation lacks 
concrete evidences.to suggest that the change in the nutritional status of 
children can be sustained. 
5.2 Main findings 
5.2.1. The nutritional status of children looked better in 2000 compared to 1997 in 
many of the Title II projects. There is reason to believe that project activities 
such as promotion of vegetable production, feed and other livestock programs, 
improved access to water, health services, and improved access to markets 
contributed to the improvement in the reduction of stunting prevalence. 
However, there are no strong evidences in support of sustaining results like 
reduced stunting (see Table 5.1). 
163 
-: 
5.2.2. In the overwhelming majority of the projects, the length of the period 
households experienced food shortage had decreased significantly in 2000 
compared to 1997. The basis for the decrease might not be structural changes 
in the production systems or sustainable income rise from dependable sources. 
Rather, it could be because 2000/0 I was relatively a better agricultural year. In 
other words, better food availability, access and the attendant reduction in 
food shortage in 2000 is difficult to wholly attribute to the projects. and it is 
not certain whether it can be sustained (see Table 5.1). 
5.2.3. There has not been any significant change over the life of the projects in terms 
of the use of severe coping strategies. In fact, the overall picture is that (all 
projects considered) the situation in 2000 worsened compared to 1997 in this 
regard. 
5.2.4. Agricultural productivity improved in 2000 compared to 1997. In most 
projects, cereal yields were considerably higher in 2000. But this did not come 
from wider and higher use of fertilizers and improved seeds. In fact, the 
percentage of farmers using fertilizer and improved seeds has declined in 2000 
over 1997 in most projects. Grain production to a household decreased in 2000 
compared to 1997. The findings of this evaluation indicate that there was 
decrease in the cropped area per household. This together with the likely 
increase in the number of households accounted for the shortfall in per 
household gain production. 
: ... -
5.2.5. Livestock ownership declined in most projects. Some of the planned income 
generating initiatives did not materialize due to the Government micro finance 
policy. 
5.2.6. Child under-weight, wasting, prevalence of diarrhea occurrence, access to safe 
water sources and morbidity have shown a declining trend in most project 
communities in 2000 compared to 1997. The improvement is mostly attributed 
to the project interventions, especially the water programs. 
5.2.7. On the other hand, in most cases households reporting access to safe water 
sources did not have lower stunting rates implying that there might be 
problems deterring the use of the sources or the manner in which the water is 
used domestically. Moreover, contrary to expectation, the amount of water 
used per household decreased significantly in most project areas. 
5.2.8. The most visible strength of Title II projects (in most areas) is the contribution 
they are making to maintaining the natural resource base. The qualitative 
aspects of soil and moisture conservation measures and work outputs are 
impressive. In many of the focus group panels, farmers expressed that the 
conservation practices are already positively impacting crop productivity and 
increasing feed and fuel wood supply. 
5.3 Lessons learnt 
5.3. J CS stakeholders communities and relevant government offices alike 
strongly believe that project interventions address the priority 
development needs and have a strong relevance to improving 
household food security. 
5.3.2 While this evaluation is in agreement with the stakeholders' views, it is 
in contention that there were activities not included (flour mills, family 
planning services), which could have made important contributions to :•· 
food utilization aspects of household food security. 
5.3.3 Food availability, the crucial constituent of food security in rural 
Ethiopia where mixed farming system prevails, could have been more 
enhanced if livestock feed development, perennial crops such as fruits, 
private woodlots intended for the market, irrigation, and horticultural .. ~ 
crops were more emphasized in terms of program scope and resource 
'-. allocation. 
. .. . 5.3.4 The main strategies the projects pursued are focus on food security, 
emphasis on conservation-based development and targeting the poor. 
While accepting the appropriateness of the strategies, it is argued that 
the inadequate attention given to capacity building at the local and 
community levels is not consistent with the strategies. 
5.3.5 Gender sensitivity has generally been taken to mean women's 
participation in activities, especially FFW, and it was not clear whether 
it was linked to benefit sharing and the level of involvement in 
community-based organizations. Interventions that could have 
empowered women more like family planning, cooking fuel supply, 
and food processing technologies have not been adequately focused or 
not included at all among the interventions. I 
., 
5.3.6 Community participation, support for community-based organizations, 
and initiatives to bring about better coordination between the project ~ ~ 
· and government programs have been weak, as a result sustainability of 
the project interventions and outputs is doubtful. 
5.3.7 There are observations attesting that farmers are accepting that it is 
they who should assume the lead role in conservation development 
now more than before, and this is attributable to the role the projects 
have been playing t9 raise awareness. . .. 
165 
.f 
Table 5.1: A summary of SO and IR results of Title II.projects by CS 
% NA 18.6 I 52.2 43.7 56.8 I 34.3 66.6 54.5 85.9 56.5 I 71.9 I 46.1 I 45.4 I 40.5 I 65.9 I 39.6 61.1 39.6 
WAI 
Use of severe coping 1997-
----· 
____ strate ies 2000 - - - 124.6 - 118.5 - 78.1 - 80.0 - 96.9 - 58.3 - 90.4 99.4 
Length of period households 
had food shortaoe 
2. IR1-lncreased Agricultural 
Production 
Month NA 
Ko/ha 
5.7 I 5.6 5.1 5.2 I 4.6 5.5 
NA NA 532 1690.91942.71 390.25 
5.7 8.8 5.3 I 4.1 I 3.6 I 2.2 I 1.4 I 5.5 I 4.3 5.6 4.7 
923 386 885 532 1668.8 1 NA 1872.71201.31747.11 366.74 I 796 
8.47. NA 
.•. " " I I NA I NA I 8.67 I 
Te ff 766.6 I 5.53 I 612.7 
630 t825.71 416 1923.9 532 3 584 222.4 542 
636 651.6 322.5 1674.21-·25·3.7-793.4 532 I 797 NA 693 165 591.5 320.816981 
---·-· ·-·--Maize " 581.5 6.10 601.9 332.7 988.6 274.25 758.7 206 946.3 I --- I 998.6 - - I NA I 322.3 -- I 238 I 647.8 I 365.5 I 836.5 
·-· 
__ 
. 
_____ Sorohum" " 512.2 8.55 639.6 354.5 1051 248.7 628.7 - 833.7 532 788.8 NA 148.4 72 743.4 412.4 763.7 
Overall cereal production Kg/hh NA 581 NA 522 NA 446 NA 516 NA 361 NA 345 NA 329 NA 427 NA 435 
-------Household used fertilizers % NA 1.3 16.5 31.6 29.8 25.5 13.25 I 22 22.6 6.7 - 42.5 - 16.1 40.7 40.1 21 26,6 
Household used improved 
seed 
Used improved farming 
ractices 
% 
% 
NA 0.6 
NA 21.1 
38.5 I 22.9 3 I 7.9 2.9 
44.2 NA I 44.1 53.4 
7.3 17.8 0.82 12.2 1.65 I 7.2 I 21.5 5.9 I 12.5 
47.8 29 53.3 NA I 44.4 NA 16.7 I 21.3 I 83.1 35 I 48.0 
I rrioated area Ha. NA 145.48 3.3 55.3 229 5.1 9.7 NA I 1.75 NA 0.75 I - I 8.4 60.4 1398.4 
3. IR2 - Increased 
I ownership I TLU I - I - 12.631 1.60 12.7311.491 2.82 11.941 1.81 11.40 13.9812.1412.61 I 6.0912.8311.80 I 2.66 12.11 I 
i Physical asset ownership of 
No. 
Stunting figures are as it June 2001 
0.05 0.08 0.19 
0.08 0.03 0.08 
0.2 0.18 
0.12 0.10 
0.04 
0 
0.16 .0:01 
0.08 0.01 
0.02 0.11 0.26 0.33 0.40 0.05 0.20 
0.07 0.02 0.14 0.50 1.01 0.03 0.27 
.,. 
0.12 
0.08 
0.18 
0.16 
166 
• 
Wooden framed 
... i;· 
/ 
bed " - 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.19 0.17 0.01 0.26 0 0.04 0.35 0.70 0.25 0.55 0.11 0.24 
···
- --
·
--
···· ..... ·--.. -· 
Cart " - - 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.01 0 0 0.28 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.05 
--
.. ... 
- -- -
·
- ·-- --- - -
__ .. 
·
- ·· ... ..... - ·- ···- · .... .• .•. . • . ••• ··-··- -- ··--·-·· !---· ... ---- --·· ··-----I""----·--·------
fJlouqh " - 0.62 1.42 0.83 1.0G 0.42 0.83 0.79 0.69 0.52 1 1.17 0.12 0.97 0.79 1.14 0.99 0.80 
.... ........ 
-·--·-···-
. 
------------·· 
Watches " - 0.05 0.11 0.25 0.25 0.15 0.05 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.14 0.21 0.35 1.79 0.13 0.49 0.18 0.38 
·-
. 
·
-· - - . --~-·--'--'----l-___;..--+--'----1----+----+---+---t----+---
Blankets " - 0.17 0.84 0.48 0.39 0.51 0.33 0.34 0.11 0.08 0.46 0.71 0.63 0.80 0.79 0.67 0.54 0.48 
HH that didn't add any IL~X~J!Y.Joo items % NA 8.0 64.4 62 62.5 62.0 82.2 80.5 98.2 91 .8 65.6 I 61.7 I 47.3 I 43.7 I 72.8 I 72.5 I 69.6 I 67.7 ~.l~:.l.!.~1p roved Health Status 
Prevalence of diarrhea 
occurrence among children 
.. 
_,_ ... ?.~ months old % NA NA 13 7.7 14 4.8 8.8 6.2 17.7 4.2 1.2 6.6 24.1 6.7 9 11.9 12.7 5.3 
... 
- -
..... .fhildren underweight " NA NA 42.7 44.9 41.7 24.2 47.7 50.8 63.9 38.4 57.9 51 33.2 44.9 48.1 37.9 45.4 41 .1 
Households using protected 
·
-----
.. 
-!':'.ater source I " I NA I NA I 77.44 I 30.8 I 42.32 I 42.5 I 50. 7 I 81 .9 I 24.94 I 26.1 I 29. 79 I 58.3 I 35.67 I 36.1 I 33.18 I 60.6 I 36.3 I 44.2 
, Deliveries attended by 1
\ l~~As . ... ·-----I " I NA I NA I - I 36. 7 I - I 61.8 I - I 31 .6 I - I 50 I - I 39.5 I - I 69.45 I - I 32.1 I NA I 40 
. I fl I 11101 visited health posts 
............. !.~~.'.=.Jn last six months " I NA I NA I - I 27.2 I - I 21.9 I - I 18.2 I - I 17.8 I - I 25 I - 126.35 1 - I 27.6 I NA I 20.5 
Lit/day/ 
.. _ ...... . ~~£~!1J. of water used hh I NA I NA I 44.42 I 45.8 I 41 .51 I 34.8 I 36.29 I 31.2 I 32.19 I 27.2 I 39.62 I 39 I 55.42 I 38.5 I 37.54 I 34 I 40.63 I 35. 7 
5. IR4 -Natural Resource Based 
maintained 
1. Communal land 
reclaimed through 
physical and biological 21,44 
means Ha. - - - - NA 150 NA 160 NA 32 NA 6 
2. Soil deposited behind 
hillside terrace - - - - - - - - - -~ - - - - -
-T- i .... - ......... ~;i~~::::ted behind - - - - - - t----- - ~:a--· 1 · 1 · 1 · 1 · 1 
6. g'~;~~ ~;~heanncZe~esponse ···-- ·-.. - ---.. --- _ ----~ ___ I _ 
16 I 
7 .r 
... .. ~ .. .. 
.,p.;,,'1!1"·:.:..., .. .... :~i" ... ~ R# iht r.~a,,jj\' ·~::',·i:.]~ I 
I 1. Appreciate updated 
i 
I 
I 
I .... ?!~_.fl lan in place I I NA LYes NA '--·--·---·- : ~:: I ~: Yes NA Yes ~· (\~-~c: ss lo early warning I __J___!i.ij_'t_~j__'.'JA _lJ'..<!.s 
Sourc:e: Baseline survey 1997 a11d Evaluation Survey 
NA Yes 
... .. ... ... 
. ~;;T; l~3.~1iff6 ~~~s~ Yes NA Yes NA Yes NA Yes L NA I Yes 
Yes NA Yes NA Yes NA __'.0~ 1:;!~ ... -1 .. ~~s. 168 
5.4 Recommendations 
This evaluation understands there will be future DAP. One was at the design stage while 
the evaluation was in progress. The following points are raised hoping they could be 
useful and relevant to such future programs. 
5.4. l. Land degradation is perhaps the single most important development 
problems in Ethiopia. There are reliable sources that claim that economic 
livelihood based on agricultural production may cease to exist over the 
next 50 years in most project areas unless the process of degradation is 
reduced and eventually halted. There is strong rationale to continue 
placing the focus of attention both in terms of scope and resource 
allocation on rehabilitation of natural resources. 
5.4.2. Conservation-based development in Ethiopia requires a structural change. 
Land use and farming practices that aggravate land degradation need to be 
controlled through appropriate measures, mostly action programs and 
policy, especially in the highlands of the Amhara and Tigray Regional 
States. This would require a huge investment in road infrastructure, 
incentives to move from annual to perennial crop economy, long term 
investment credit targeting livestock feed and breed development, a shift 
to hoe culture with the attendant change in crop program once again away 
from field crops to root crops, etc. The DAP programs in North Wello, 
South Gonder, Tigray and similar other places should be designed in this 
spirit. 
5.4.3. Results of the household survey demonstrate that nutritional status of 
children is positively associated \vith on-farm conservation measures, 
vegetable production, and improved farming practices. These are 
appropriate technologies with a huge potential to improve food availability 
and access. They have to be provided with more financial allocation with 
the object of covering more households. 
5.4.4. Rainfall irregularity characterize Title II project areas. This requi(es 
exercising care on the types of technologies being promoted. Seeds 
d~veloped for high rainfall area would not \•.:ark. Neither would chemical 
fertilizers unless supported with supplementary irrigation. Irrigation is 
critically important in the project areas and every opportunity to actualize 
a potential should not be overlooked. The performance of the on-going 
DAP with respect to irrigation was sloppy. This is to suggest that the 
promotion of improved seeds and chemical fertilizer should be linked with 
irrigation, and irrigation should be given more attention. 
5.4.5. An element of vital importance for sustainable irrigation is the training of 
farmers in various techniques of irrigation water management including 
proper timing and methods of application, amount required, supply 
schedule, water budgeting, and choice of crops and agronomic techniques. 
Although the degree varies, sloppiness was observed in projects where 
ther~ a!·e operating irrigation schemes. Capacity building of C BOs is 
J 6.:> 
' 
critically important in such ·schemes, an~ this needs to be focused in future 
programs. 
5.4.6. There are signals indicating that communities are not making good use of 
protected water sources. One such signal is the lack of association between 
stunting prevalence and use of protected water sources. The same is true 
with households reporting vegetable production. This calls for intensified 
health education that any future programs need to duly note. 
5.4.7 Gender needs to be mainstreamed from the very early stage of project 
initiation and gender expertise should be involved at the design stage. Th~t 
did not seem to have happened in the on-going OAP, a thing that should 
not be allowed to occur again 
5.4.8. Project sustainability is a function of(I) active and authentic community 
participation and (2) the existence of close relationship and coordination 
with other agencies, including government, implementing programs 
similar to that of the projects. Both areas require increased attention. In the 
case of the first, the measures involve training, frequent follow-on training 
programs, leadership training, experience sharing visits, technical 
assistance, putting in place systems and procedures, etc. In the second it is 
largely having the will, determin.ation and commitment to develop good 
working relation. There should be willingness on the part of the project 
staff to assume the lead role. Regularly held forums to discuss common 
problems, seek joint solutions and draw follow-on action plans could help. 
5.4.9. There is acute scarcity of good agricultural land in most project areas, 
especially in northern and southern areas. There is strong rationale for 
practicing intensified agricultural production. Accordingly several 
projects have been promoting crop diversification with emphasis on 
vegetables and root crops. Results obtained were encouraging. There is 
need and purpose to further strengthen the intensification of target crops 
like vegetables that have the capability to reduce malnutrition. 
5.4. l 0 Farm management practices such as crop rotation, intercropping of 
mutually complementing crops, moisture conserving measures, etc., are 
critically important to strengthen household food security. The projects 
have been actively promoting these activities. There is need to redouble 
the effort in this direction. 
5.4.11 In some project locations potatoes are planted along the contour in rows 
between ridges and terraces. It is a good example of conservation-based 
farming practice that need to be promoted wherever possible. 
5.4.12 Construction of soil bund ·on grazing land that has little or no erosion 
problem was observed in some projects. Since it practically serves no 
purpose, such pra~tice should be discouraged. 
170 
·, 
5.4.13 Indicators specified to measure project rcsulb pertaining to the lR4 arc no1 ' 
practical and, therefore, not applicable. 11 i~ suggested that the following 
indicators should be opted for in the future DAP. 
l. Percentage of trees planted that established well in the communal 
woodlots; 
2. Vegetation cover attained; 
3. Native species of trees regenerated in the enclosed areas; and 
4. Depth of soil trapped inside checkdams 
5.4.14 Child stunting is still a big problem in the project areas. Programs such as 
MICAH and vitamin A distribution should be strengthened. 
l 71 
i 
I 
. ' J 
i 
' ' 
. , '. 
1?.§jerence 
1. AfriCare ( 1998): Development Activity Proposal 
2. AfriCare ( 1999). Development Activity Proposal Amendment, FY 2000 
- FY 2002 
incorporating Ethiopian Food Security initiatives. 
3. Barbara. 1981, Concerns of the Pastoral Community, Oklahoma 
4. CARE ( 1997). CA RE-Ethiopia DAP Food and Livelihood Security Program. 
5. CARE. 1997, Development Activity Proposal, Addis Ababa 
6. CRS (December 1997). Title 11 Special Objective Food Security and Nutrition 
Baseline, volume 
2. 
7. CRS (December, 1997), Title II Special Objective- Food Security and Nutrition 
Baseline, volume 1. 
8. CRS (FY 2000). Catholic Relief Services/Ethiopia Program, USAID Performance 
Monitoring Plan 
- DAP results FY 2000 
9. CRS, 1997, Development Activity Proposal, Addis Ababa 
10. CSA 1997/98, report on National Fertilizer Bench mark, Addis Ababa. 
11. CSA, 1996/97, report on national fertilizer Bench mark, Addis Ababa 
12. CSA. 1998, Population and housing census of Ethiopia 
- Results at Country Level 
Vol.1. Addis Ababa 
13. CSA, 1998, the 1994 population and Housing census of Ethiopia 
- results for Amhara 
region. volume 11, Addis Ababa 
14. CSA, 1998, the 1994 Population and housing Census of Ethiopia
- Results for Ti gray 
Region, Vol.I!, Addis Ababa 
15. CSA, 1998, the Population and housing Census of Ethiopia 
- results for Oromia 
Region, Vol. I I, Addis Ababa. 
16. CSA, 1998, the Population and housing Census of Ethiopia 
- Results for Southern 
Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Region, Vo!.! I, Addis Ababa 
17. CSA. 1998/99, Agricultural Sample Survey- report on farm management practices, 
Addis Ababa 
18. CSA, 2000, Report on Area and Production for Major Crops Vol.I, Addis Ababa 
19. Earl K Bowen/Martin K. Starr, 1982, basic Statistics for Business and Economics 
20. EOC-DICAC (Nov. 1997) Project Proposal for Mekedella and Wadla Food Security 
Projects, FY 1998 
- 2003 Title 11 DAP. 
21. EOC-DrCAC (May, 1998) Food Security Program Previously Approved Activities 
(PAA) for FY-1999 
22. EOC-DrCAC Development Activity Proposal, Mid-term Evaluation, DSA (Nov, 
2000), 
23. Federal Democratic republic of Ethiopia, 1996, Food Security Strategy 
24. FHI (1999) Title II Development Activity Proposal (DAP) Amendment 
25. FHI (July 1998) Tach Gayint & Simada Integrated Food Security Programme 
26. FHI (July I 998) Lay Gayint Integrated Food Security Programme 
27. FHI, 1999, Development Activity Proposal 
28. ILCA (1976). Livestock Production in Tropical Africa, E. Jankhe 
29. Janke, 1974, Tropical Livestock Production, ILCA, Addis Ababa 
30. Mu lat Demeke, 1997, Grain Market Research Project- Promoting Fertilizer use in Ethiopia 
31. REST ( 1998). Title 11 Development Activity Proposal (OAP), Mekelle, Ti gray 
32. REST. 1998, De
velopment Activity Proposal, Addis Ababa 
33. 
S
C
F. I 998. Development Activity Proposal Addis Ababa 
172 
\ 
i. 
.. 
' 
r 
l 
t 
f, 
[ 
·f 
t 
• ! 
i· 
' l 
! 
' f· 
l 
' 
34. SCF/USA (May 1997) Title II Development Activity Proposal 
35. UN ( l 967) ~'lethods of Estimating housing needs·. 
36. WAAS, 1997, Title J( Special objective food security and nutritional baseline survey 
part I. Vol.I, Addis Ababa. : 
37. \V AAS, 1997, Title 11 Special Objective Food Security and Nutritional Baseline · 
survey Part II. Vol. 1, Addis Ababa 
38. WAAS. l 997. Title 11 Special Objective Food Security and Nutrition Baseline Survey 
Part 11 Vol.1 l. Addis Ababa. 
39. WYE (1999). Annual Result Report 
-lO. WYE (Oct. 1997). Title;·u Development Activity Proposal 
·. '*.: 
.., ~ i. : J 
. 
.. 
.. 
._, 
' '·