EVALUATION OF USAID JAMAICA'S ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRAM
_________________________________
Submitted To:
U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
KINGSTON, JAMAICA
December 18, 2000
Purchase Order No. 532-O-00-01-00016-01
 Modification No. 1
2
PROLOGUE
The Present
Strategic Objective of USAID/Jamaica’s environmental program is to
improve "the quality of key natural resources in selected areas that are
both environmentally and economically significant.”
The Future
Strategic Objective should be broadened to improve "the quality of life by
protecting natural systems in the terrestrial and marine environment that
provide the basis for sustainable economic development and social
progress."
The Direction
Is being provided by current programs aimed at strengthening
governance, environmental awareness, community advocacy,
public/private partnerships, and integrated urban and environmental
planning and management.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page Νυµβερ
Prologue 2
Executive Summary
A. Overview 4
B. Approach 5
C. Summary of Findings and Conclusions 6
D. Recommendations for USAID's Environmental Portfolio 9
Background
1.0 Objectives of the Evaluation Effort 14
2.0 Task Synopsis 14
3.0 Team Approach and Methodology 15
Findings and Conclusions
4.0 SO2 Level Findings 17
5.0 Program Activities 18
6.0 Impact of Program Activities on Jamaica Civil Society 28
7.0 Conclusions 31
SO2 Program and Operational Recommendations
 8.0 Recommendations for USAID's Environmental Portfolio 33
 9.0 Program Coordination 42
10.0 Financial Consequences of Program Modifications 44
11.0 Relevance of SO Monitoring Indicators 45
12.0 Changes to the Strategic Objective Framework 47
Attachments
A. Summary of Current SO2 Programs 50
B. Evaluation Team Task Descriptions 51
C. Documents Reviewed 53
D. Environment and Natural Resources Information 54
E. USAID/Jamaica Environmental Portfolio Evaluation: Findings
And Recommendations
Natural Resources Management Specialist 55
F. Performance Monitoring under USAID/Jamaica
Strategic Objective 2: Improving Key Natural Resources 63
4
EVALUATION OF USAID JAMAICA'S ENVIRONMENTAL
PORTFOLIO: IMPROVING KEY NATURAL RESOURCESS
_______________________
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. OVERVIEW
Jamaica’s economy is heavily dependent on tourism, the leading generator of
foreign exchange earnings and revenue. The linkage between a thriving tourism
sector and the quality of the natural environment is universally acknowledged.
Given the competitiveness of tourism in the Caribbean region, this sector is
exceptionally vulnerable to any conditions that threaten to curtail customary
tourist activities such as swimming, snorkeling and related water-contact
recreation.
Jamaica’s tourism industry is concentrated in a narrow band along the north and
northwest coasts. This combination of economic, environmental, and geographic
factors underlies the importance that is attached to improving coastal water
quality in a number of key north and northwest coast tourism locations. From the
standpoint of both public health and ecosystem viability the principal threats to
coastal water quality stem from the presence of unacceptably high levels of
microorganisms, organic matter, and nutrients.
Coastal water quality is impacted by point and nonpoint sources of pollution from
land-based activities. Accordingly, USAID, jointly with the Government of
Jamaica, has established a three-tiered approach to improving coastal water
quality by working at the community level, the enterprise level, and the
watershed:
• The Coastal Water Improvement Program (CWIP) is focusing on policies and
practices for improving coastal water quality through support for community￾based environmental management projects in key north coast tourism
locations.
• Environmental Audits for Sustainable Tourism (EAST) has concentrated on
improving environmental management in individual hotels and industrial
establishments in coastal tourism locations.
• Ridge-to-Reef Watershed (R2RW) will be concentrating on improving
agricultural and land utilization practices in the upper watersheds of two north
coast tourism areas.
5
Both CWIP and EAST began in 1997, and will end at the same time, in
December 2002. The recently initiated Ridge to Reef Watershed project, still in
its mobilization phase, will extend for five years, through mid-year 2005.
A four-person team was assembled by USAID/Jamaica to review the activities
being carried out under these programs. This review was conducted,
intermittently, between October 23 and December 9, 2000. The evaluation team
has concentrated its attention on CWIP and EAST since these programs have
focused on coastal water quality and resource conservation issues, and have
been underway for several years. It has also considered the work being done by
other donor organizations, principally CIDA and, to a lesser extent, the European
Union (EU).
B. APPROACH
Three years is a very short time period for assessing the direct impacts of diverse
environmental activities on coastal water quality and marine ecosystems. What
can be evaluated, however, is the progress that has been made in initiating
activities that, over time, point toward achieving significant and measurable
results. In the case of CWIP, a parallel approach has been followed at the local
and national levels for improving environmental management through:
• Establishing local partnerships and providing support for community-based
environmental initiatives, and
• Facilitating national policy and planning pertaining to environmental
management systems (EMS), ocean and coastal resources and, strategic
planning for improved water quality management.
The methods employed by CWIP and EAST to mobilize support for sustainable
environmental activities are new to Jamaican society. The team was particularly
interested in the extent to which such activities have affected institutional
relationships within civil society.
This current evaluation was not designed as an in-depth critique of either CWIP
or EAST, both of which have met or exceeded expectations. Nor did it seek to
undertake a technical analysis of specific program activities. Time constraints
precluded more than an overview of an unusually complex series of activities and
organizational relationships that have been evolving over the past several years.
Rather, the evaluation was designed to be forward looking, providing a
springboard for recommending midcourse corrections for the CWIP and EAST
programs in their remaining two years of project activity.
Looking beyond the next two years, the team was also charged with preparing
recommendations to guide USAID/Jamaica in the design of the SO2 program for
6
the intermediate term, 2003-2005, as well as for suggesting a longer-term
perspective for the next strategy round, the period 2005-2009.
In conducting this work, the team reviewed pertinent reports, undertook site visits
that afforded an opportunity to interview a cross-section of stakeholders,
attended two workshops and, in the final week of team collaboration, presented
its findings and recommendations at an extended briefing session that was
attended by USAID staff, representatives of key GOJ agencies, and all SO2
program contractors. Many of the comments and suggestions made during that
meeting have been incorporated in this document.
Principal findings and conclusions are summarized below, followed by a synopsis
of the major recommendations.
C. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. Coordination with the Ministry of Land and the Environment
Many of USAID’s SO2 program activities fall within the policy purview of
the Ministry of Land and the Environment. At the same time, AIDs
principal “partner” in conducting the CWIP and R2RW programs is NEPA,
a statutory body created through the consolidation of NRCA and Town
Planning. There is an obvious need to clarify the institutional relationships
and management arrangements between the Ministry, USAID and NEPA
in order to implement AID’s SO2 program portfolio in the most policy
effective manner.
2. Strengthening GOJ Agency Capacity
Capacity building has been an area of SO2 program emphasis at the local
level. Going forward, USAID could usefully assist central government
agencies in improving their capacity to address key issues. This is
particularly true of two agencies, PIOJ and NEPA.
PIOJ’s effectiveness is constrained by inadequate technical capacity,
particularly with respect to sectoral expertise. A more effectively
functioning PIOJ could be of immeasurable assistance to donors, and to
recipient GOJ agencies, in coordinating their programs to achieve
maximum results.
NEPA is going through a process of consolidating NRCA and Town
Planning and is in need of establishing internal mechanisms for integrating
environmental and urban growth policies. This is a tall order under the
best of circumstances. Given budgetary constraints, personnel shortfalls,
and regulatory complexities, the task can be daunting. Broad support will
be needed. In the interim, USAID could be of considerable assistance to
NEPA in developing mechanisms for integrating environmental and
7
development policies and programs by drawing on the expertise of its
current SO2 contractors.
3. Program Accomplishments
In general, the accomplishments of the two principal USAID/SO2
programs, CWIP and EAST have been outstanding. The results of field
visits and interviews leave little doubt that the programs have generated
wide stakeholder support. Community NGOs and CBOs have been
energized to voluntarily undertake a wide array of environmental projects.
The work has also elicited high praise from GOJ agencies and PSOs that
have been involved in the respective programs. The expertise and
effectiveness of contractor personnel was repeatedly cited by stakeholder
respondents as key to the success of the various program components
including CWIP’s community-level initiatives, the coastal water monitoring
and sampling, the EMS initiatives, the wastewater training, and EAST's
environmental audit program.
4. Institution-Building
Significant institutional breakthroughs have been made in establishing
public participation models at the local level, as exemplified in the
formation of the Advisory and Monitoring Committees in Negril and Ocho
Rios. The emphasis on implementing program components through
establishing partnerships and stressing organizational capacity-building at
the local level has succeeded in broadening program reach, enabling a
sense of local “ownership”, thereby increasing the prospects for long-term
sustainability.
5. Success of the “Bottom-Up” Approach
CWIP’s activity in the EMS and wastewater components, which began at
the community level, has led to policy initiatives that are being considered
for adoption at the highest levels of government. Similarly, EAST’s
environmental auditing program, begun at the individual enterprise level, is
now expanding to sectoral involvement and participation by GOJ
agencies. These are examples of how a “bottom up” approach to
addressing local environmental issues can contribute to the formulation
and adoption of national environmental policy.
6. Building on Program Accomplishments
There are numerous opportunities for building on the accomplishments
that have been made to date, as for example:
8
• Strengthening the demand-driven community initiative program by
impaneling experts to conduct “threat analyses”, thereby providing
local stakeholders with a broadened perspective in deciding on
which projects to undertake.
• Elevating local NGO’s to partnership status by accelerating and
possibly simplifying the certification process.
• Assisting existing partners to evolve to a higher order of
participation based on their core capabilities and potentialities.
Taking the latter example, the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory (DBML)
now operates in the same capacity in Ocho Rios as NEPT does in Negril.
DBML could be repositioned to play a more prominent role in coastal
water quality sampling and analysis, and marine resources management,
relinquishing some of its current community-level work. Similarly, another
NGO could be groomed to assume the project oversight functions now
exercised by DBML.
7. SO2 Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
The reason for planing, monitoring, and evaluating is to be able to
effectively manage resources, to measure progress, and to demonstrate
that the projects in the SO2 program portfolio are achieving planned
results. USAID requires planning and achieving of results to be tracked
and reported. Inputs and outputs are also tracked but, without a
measurement of effectiveness, there is insufficient data to determine
whether the targeted results have been achieved.
In order to achieve desired results, and to ensure sustainability of those
results, appropriate planning is required at the SO2 level. Such planning
calls for specifying the "cause-results relationships" of the "inputs and
outputs" that are projected to lead to the "planned accomplishments".
Measures or criteria are needed in order to assess the quality and
effectiveness of programmatic actions and the acceptability of systems
that are put in place.
SO2 is at a juncture in implementation of its activities. The SO2 team
needs to review its performance monitoring plan to determine whether it is
adequate to ensure that scarce resources are being used most effectively
to achieve sustainability of the planned results. The attached report (see
Attachment F) on performance monitoring provides a number of
recommendations that will strengthen the performance monitoring and
management of SO2.
9
8. Geographic Focus and Absorptive Capacity of NGOs/CBOs
The geographic focus of program activities during the next two years will
shift dramatically to Portland. In addition to CWIP, EAST and R2RW will
be working in the Port Antonio/Portland area, as will ENACT the Green
Fund, and the EU. CWIP has only a 12-month window to commit its grant
funds to community-level initiatives in Portland. Whether there is the
capacity among the NGOs and CBOs to put these funds to effective use in
so short a time is open to question. As an option, all or a portion of CWIP's
grant funds earmarked for Portland might be used to sustain on-going
projects in Negril and Ocho Rios
D. RECOMMENDATION’S FOR USAID’S ENVIRONMENTAL PORTFOLIO
1. SO2 PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
1.1 Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Protection
In designing the SO2 portfolio, consideration should be given to the
need for biodiversity protection in relatively pristine and in sparsely
developed natural areas subject to emerging development
pressures.
1.2 Gender
Gender issues should be considered in the design and
implementation of all programs in the SO2 portfolio. It is understood
that “gender” pertains to both men and women. This is important to
stress, since within the context of Jamaican society, gender is
generally taken as pertaining exclusively to issues affecting women.
USAID should consider gender training for SO2 partners.
Contractors for SO2 should ultimately involve local partners who
have expertise in gender considerations.
1.3 Program Coordination in the SO2 Portfolio
Because of their interrelationships, the three programs in the SO2
portfolio should be managed as components of a single integrated
program. This will maximize available financial and personnel
resources, eliminate areas of overlap, and assist USAID’s SO2
team in assessing the extent to which the intermediate results of
the entire portfolio contribute to the SO2 strategic objective.
10
2. NEAR TERM PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: 2000 - 2002
2.2 Emphasize Sustainability in Developing Annual Work
Plans
The criterion of sustainability should be applied to every activity in
CWIP’s and EAST’s program design for the next two years.
Program activities in all components must ensure that there is an
institutional and financial basis for the continuation of the activities
that have been initiated.
2.3 Extend the Timeframe and Expand the Geographical
overage for the CWIP’s Wastewater Component
Community organizations in Negril and Ocho Rios, as well as the
National Water Commission, have strongly endorsed an extension
of the wastewater program component. NWC wants program
coverage to be expanded to include Montego Bay and Portland.
Given the success of the work accomplished in Negril and Ocho
Rios, this component of CWIP should be continued through the life
of the project.
2.4 Review the Water Quality Monitoring Program
Review and possibly redesign the water quality sampling protocols
based on experience gained over the course of the past two years.
Consolidate the program for analyzing coastal water quality
samples at the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory. Provide the
DBML with the capabilities for conducting both chemical and
biological analyses. Assist DBML in developing a “business plan” to
implement these measures by investigating potential sources of
funding and revenue generation.
2.5 EMS Implementation
CWIP’s work has facilitated the formulation of EMS policy by
NEPA. Once these policies are promulgated, CWIP should assist
NEPA in their implementation. In the interim, CWIP’s contribution to
the EMS work over the next year is best served by successfully
completing those community-level grants that it has initiated. It is
recommended that EAST pursue the array of EMS activities spelled
out in its Phase III program design.
2.6 Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Policy
In mid-year 2000, CWIP provided funds for the Council on Ocean
and Coastal Policies to prepare a comprehensive policy document
11
on coastal and ocean resources. Many of the policies adopted by
the Council fall within the jurisdiction of NEPA. While NEPA needs
to assert firm leadership and direction in implementing these
policies, CWIP (through CR5) is in a position to provide assistance
to the units within NEPA that are operationally responsible for the
biodiversity and protected area components of the marine and
coastal environment. Work on these components is now underway
in NEPT and CWIP should be prepared to assist in the effort.
2.7 Skills Transfer in Community Organization and
Intervention
A process should be instituted for transferring both the skills and
the lessons learned from CWIP to NEPA staff. CWIP’s experience
in working at the community level and in building partnerships
between local groups and central government entities could be
invaluable to NEPA staff in sensitizing them to local concerns, and
in providing training in organizational development.
3. INTERMEDIIATE TERM PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS:
2003-05 -- BRIDGING THE TWO STRATEGY PERIODS
3.1 Develop an Upper Watershed Program for the Negril and
Ocho Rios Watersheds
A major effort at watershed management is needed for the North
and South Negril rivers in Negril, and for the Dunns, White, and
Turtle rivers in Ocho Rios/St. Ann. Water quality in these rivers
should be evaluated for their relative contribution to coastal water
quality degradation. Sources should be identified and targeted
interventions designed.
A comprehensive program addressing pollution sources in the
upper watersheds of these rivers would significantly contribute to
the protection of coastal water quality in both Negril and Ocho Rios.
Test results show that high coliform levels, attributed to riverine
transport of pollutants, have seriously impacted near-shore coastal
water quality, a situation that is particularly acute at the mouth of
the Dunns River.
3.2 Develop an Environmental Awareness and Advocacy
Program for Management of Coastal Resources
Providing pertinent, accurate, and timely environmental information
to the public is potentially empowering. The objective of this
12
program would be to apply modern information technology to
advance citizen advocacy, and public awareness.
A start has been made in the water quality monitoring program to
relay analysis results to the public in a "user friendly" format. As a
result, the Negril Chamber of Commerce is contemplating putting
coastal water quality information on the Internet. Water quality data
could be posted. So could information pertaining to Blue Flag
certification, ISO compliance, and Green Globe certification.
DBML or some other respected, non-partisan entity, such as UWI’s
Centre for Marine Science, could act as an environmental
information clearinghouse in managing such a program.
3.3 Fisheries Management / Marine Protection Program
The depletion of shellfish and reef fish stocks has long been identified
as a severe problem in Jamaica. Stock depletion is part of the
general problem of habitat destruction and species depredation. This
was recently confirmed by the findings of the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid
Reef Assessment (AGRA).
Fishermen cooperatives and associations from Negril to Port
Antonio should be involved in developing programs for fisheries
protection. There is an opportunity to “partner” fishermen’s
organizations with Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory, NEPA and the
Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture in developing
appropriate strategies and programs.
4. LONG TERM PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: 2005-09 --
NEXT CYCLE OF SO2
4.1 Biodiversity Protection in Urban Development Planning
With the consolidation of NRCA and Town Planning a new chapter
in Jamaica's development history has opened. Urban development
and environmental protection are joined in a single administrative
entity. If this consolidation is to succeed, the policies guiding urban
growth and environmental protection must be integrated.
Building upon its collective experience with DEMO, CWIP, EAST,
and R2RW, USAID is exceptionally well positioned to assist NEPA
in integrating environmental objectives into development plans and
development orders.
13
As with the CWIP model, a two-tiered approach should be devised.
At the central government level USAID's environmental program
should focus on assisting NEPA to develop urban growth strategies
and development guidelines that are compatible with the protection
of coastal and marine ecosystems.
At the local or area-wide level, USAID's program focus should be
oriented toward mobilizing community involvement in developing
local environmental agendas, devising community self-help
programs, designating protected natural areas, ensuring public
access to the coast, generating eco-friendly business opportunities,
identifying flood-prone, seismic and other high hazard areas, and
facilitating public education and outreach.
4.2 Protected Area Management Planning
The protection of biodiversity is an objective of both USAID and the
Government of Jamaica. Potential priority areas for the preparation
of protected area management plans include Portland Bight, Black
River, Cockpit Country and, Pedro Bank and the offshore cays.
While none of these areas fit the criterion of tourism revenue
generators, nor are they hot spots of polluted coastal waters, they
are important to the future of Jamaica, and must be protected from
inappropriate development and the misuse of natural resources.
14
BACKGROUND
1.0 OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION EFFORT
As set forth in the Scope of Work, the aim of this assessment is to review the work being
conducted under USAID/Jamaica's Environmental Strategic Objective (SO2) Framework
to determine whether the activities are adequate to meet the Strategic Objective:
“…improved quality of key natural resources in selected areas that are both
environmentally and economically significant”.
Meeting this objective is tied to progress made in achieving three Intermediate Results:
• Increased adoption of environmentally sound practices
• Adoption of policies for improved environmental management; and
• Improved effectiveness of wastewater management
Achieving the Intermediate Results is based on the success of three environmental
projects: The Coastal Water Improvement Project (CWIP), the Environmental
Assessment for Sustainable Tourism (EAST), and the Ridge-To-Reef Watershed
(R2RW) project. (These projects are summarized in Attachment A, which was
reproduced from the Scope of Work provided to the evaluation team.)
Since R2RW is still in its mobilization stage, the principal focus of the evaluation team
was on activities carried out under CWIP and EAST. The team sought to assess the
strengths and weaknesses of the program design and program activities as well as the
lessons learned in their implementation. The team also examined the program being
conducted by CIDA/ENACT in the Portland area. While unable to interview other
international donors, the team was aware of the activities of IDB, EU, UNDP/CAP, and
UNDP.
The evaluation team was charged with recommending program directions for the
remaining two years in the project life of CWIP and EAST, though December 2002.
The team was also charged with recommending activities that would extend beyond the
project life of CWIP and EAST, to the end of the current strategy period, September
2004, during which time AID’s SO2 budget would approximate $2 million annually.
Equally imperative was the charge to formulate a longer-term perspective, taking the
Mission’s environmental program into the new strategy period, 2005-2009.
In conducting the evaluation, the team has been particularly cognizant of the need for
integration among all of the projects, as well as the desirability of linking the activities
undertaken during one time period to those that are projected for succeeding time
periods.
2.0 TASK SYNOPSIS
The evaluation team was charged with a series of tasks that are summarized below.
(Attachment B lists detailed tasks contained in the Scope of Work.)
15
• Through interviews and document review analyze the goals and objectives of
the Environmental Strategic Objective Framework and other relevant
materials pertaining to the SO2 program.
• Review the major activities of the SO2 environmental program as they are
being implemented by the Coastal Water Quality Improvement Project
(CWIP), Environmental Audits for Sustainable Tourism (EAST) Phase III and,
the Ridge to Reef Watershed (R2RW) Project.
• Assess the relevance of the program’s activities to the Strategic Objective
Framework within the context of environmental issues in Jamaica and the
priorities of the GOJ.
• Review the present Monitoring and Evaluation indicators used by projects
and their appropriateness to the R4.
• Assess how Program Activities impact Jamaica’s Civil Society in terms of
levels of capacity, sustainability and participation, especially for Non￾Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Community Based Organizations
(CBOs).
• Recommend potential new activities for the Environmental SO2 Team to
consider as follow-on activities to CWIP in 2003 that respond to
environmental issues in Jamaica and are consistent with the priorities of the
GOJ.
• Recommend improvements or modifications to the Strategic Objective
Framework or the method of implementation to take the environmental
portfolio into the new strategy period (2005-2009).
3.0 TEAM APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Team Composition and Responsibilities
A four- person team conducted this evaluation as follows:
• Team Leader, Ralph Field: Responsible for coordinating team activities and
preparing the draft and final reports based on the input of the team members.
• Biological/Natural Resource Management Specialist, Laura Cornwell:
Responsible for the review of the environmental program activities with
respect to their biological and natural resources management considerations
and policy initiatives.
• Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, Albert Merkel: Responsible for
analyzing and assessing the strategic direction and indicators for the
Environmental Portfolio, and for making recommendations on indicators and
program activities that meet the goals and objectives of USAID in Jamaica
and Washington.
16
• Institutional Specialist, Winston Anderson: Responsible for reviewing the
management and institutional relationships of the SO2 program and for
assessing its impact on NGOs and local communities and for addressing the
USAID management and financial requirements for proposed new or
modified program activities.
3.2 Conduct of the Evaluation
3.21 Document Review: A list of pertinent documents that were
reviewed by the evaluation team appears in Attachment C.
3.22 Field Work: The evaluation team conducted field visits to the
target areas, Negril and Ocho Rios, between November 1-7. This
afforded the opportunity to meet with a cross section of
stakeholders. Unfortunately, with the exception of one project in
Ocho Rios, time did not permit site visits to inspect the various
community-level projects or to meet with local citizen participants.
3.23 Workshops: On November 8, USAID organized a program review
workshop in Kingston attended by representatives of GOJ
agencies, international donors, and SO2 program stakeholders.
Two of the team members also attended a one-day (Nov. 11)
Ridge-to-Reef workshop in Portland that provided an overview of
that program.
3.3 Report Preparation
This report was prepared in two stages between October 23 and December 9.
The first stage extended from October 23 to November 17, 2000, and involved
five days of fieldwork during which three members of the team (team leader,
biological/natural resource management specialist, and institutional specialist)
held extensive interviews with stakeholders in Negril and Ocho Rios. The
evaluation specialist joined the team in Kingston after the fieldwork was
completed, but did attend an R2RW workshop in Portland. The second stage
occurred between December 4 - 9, during which time the team reassembled in
Kingston to review and provide input to a draft report prepared by the team
leader.
The team leader prepared the final document after vetting of the draft report by
team members, USAID staff, and others designated by USAID/Jamaica.
Because of the complexity of the assignment, the diversity of expertise
represented on the team, and the disparate schedule of individual team
members, it was decided, with USAID/Jamaica concurrence, to include individual
contributions from the biological/natural resource management specialist, and the
evaluation specialist as attachments (E and F) to this document.
17
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
4.0 SO2 LEVEL FINDINGS
4.1 Biodiversity / Ecosystem Conservation
Biodiversity/Ecosystem Conservation is a minor component of the current
USAID/Jamaica portfolio and is not only a priority of both the US and Jamaican
governments, it is an important component to the overall objective of improving
quality of key natural resources. Because biodiversity/ ecosystem conservation
is an important component of a comprehensive strategy for improving quality of
natural resources, its inclusion would greatly compliment the current suite of SO2
activities. Under the current SO2 Strategic Objective, a particularly compelling
case can be made for more work in marine protected areas
4.2 Gender Considerations
Gender refers to the ways in which culture defines the rights and responsibilities
of men and women and how these interact. Currently, gender considerations are
slated for inclusion in the R2RW component of USAID/Jamaica’s SO2 portfolio
but are lacking in both CWIP and EAST. Consideration of gender is a mandate of
USAID and a priority of the Government of Jamaica
The Jamaica National Environmental Action Plan for 1999-2002 states that “The
Government will develop a Gender Equity Mechanism for analysis and
assessment of all projects including those addressing environmental issues.”
(Action 1.23) (NRCA, 1999). Gender analysis can help to effectively and
efficiently target resource benefits and activities according to economic, political,
and cultural realities and helps to anticipate impacts that projects may have on
the people they are intended to serve.
Without a more thorough analysis, it is not possible to determine how significant
the effect might be on program effectiveness and efficiency, were gender
included.
4.3 Support for Strengthening GOJ Agency Capacity
Capacity building has been an area of emphasis at the local level. Going forward,
USAID could usefully assist central government agencies in improving their
capacity to address key issues. For example:
• PIOJ’s effectiveness is constrained by inadequate technical capacity,
particularly with respect to sectoral expertise. Its effectiveness in donor
coordination, and program planning of other GOJ agencies, could be
improved by the provision of appropriate technical assistance to enable it to
drive the (donor coordination) process. A properly functioning PIOJ could be
of immeasurable assistance to donors in coordinating their program agendas
to advance the policies and program objectives of recipient GOJ agencies.
18
• NEPA is going through a process of consolidating NRCA (with its natural
resource and environmental mandate) and Town Planning (with its urban
settlement and project review responsibilities). NEPA needs to develop
internal mechanisms for integrating environmental and urban growth policies.
This is an exceedingly difficult and complex task. If NEPA is to emerge as a
pillar of the government's program for achieving long-term, sustainable
development, it will need substantial organizational strengthening. Both CWIP
and EAST are working on programs that bridge environment and
development. Additionally, they have developed techniques for applying EMS
at both the community and sectoral levels. The experience of EAST and
CWIP could be of considerable assistance to NEPA in developing
mechanisms for integrating environmental and development policies and
programs.
5.0 PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
Items 5.1 - 5.5 below focus primarily, but not exclusively, on activities covered
under the CWIP project in Negril and Ocho Rios. Item 5.3 includes the work of
both EAST and CWIP. The remaining items in this section consist of team
findings that are germane to operational and related aspects of current SO2
programs.
5.1 Community – Based Initiatives
Overall
With a budget of $1.25 million for community-based initiatives, this is one of
CWIP’s principal activities. Twenty-two community-based projects have been
funded to date, with a duration of between three months to two years. The
grants have a two-pronged purpose: (1) To carry out specific activities that
relate to the overall objective of improving coastal water quality, and; (2) to
build organizational capacity leading to USAID financial control and
accounting certification; in turn, increasing the potential eligibility of NGOs
and CBOs in accessing funds from other donors. This latter purpose is key to
assuring the sustainability of local organizations in undertaking environmental
programs
The program of community-based initiatives has been most widely applied in
Negril. Seven of these grants are being administered through the Negril Area
Environmental Protection Trust (NEPT); four are being managed under the
aegis of the Negril Chamber of Commerce. Nine grants have been made in
Ocho Rios. The Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory (DBML) administers five
grants, one jointly with Friends of the Sea. Four community-based groups are
participating in a solid waste management program with oversight being
provided through the DBML. (This was the one community-based project that
the team had an opportunity to visit.) No grant commitments have been
made in Portland since activities are not scheduled to commence until early
in 2001.
The grant program is "demand driven" with the activity focus being
determined by the community. The only condition is that the activity bears
some relationship to the coastal water quality criterion. In some instances,
19
that relationship appears somewhat tenuous. Nevertheless, the program is
actively managed, has generated considerable support, and appears to have
mobilized local energies.
Relative to sustainability, the prospects seem good, particularly for the solid
waste projects. In other instances, environmental education and community
animation, for example, considerably more support needs to be provided
before any "results" can be assured. Whether the "trainees" go out and
effectively "teach" and "animate" probably depends on some degree of
continuity in both active monitoring and funding. Program sustainability needs
to be addressed by CWIP and EAST in preparing annual work plans for 2001.
Negril
Although time precluded visits to view community projects, discussions with
coordinators gave the impression of well-managed projects, with
considerable enthusiasm being generated locally, and with some economic
benefits to participants.
In general, the community-based projects fell into the following categories:
solid waste management and recycling; organic farming and re-vegetation,
and; awareness and education. Discussions with representatives of NEPT
and the Chamber of Commerce indicated solid support for the grant program,
and high regard for the manner in which the program is being implemented.
There was also the acknowledgement that CWIP assistance would be
diminishing and that the projects would have to be self-sustaining if they were
to survive.
Ocho Rios
CWIP's community-based activities in Ocho Rios began about a year ago
and, in a relatively brief period, nine environmental grant activities have been
initiated covering solid waste, education, and community animation projects.
CWIP identified two immediate strategic partners in Ocho Rios: Discovery
Bay Marine Laboratory (DBML) and the St. Ann Chamber of Commerce
(SACOC). DBML and SACOC have achieved USAID certification and both
are administering local grants under the CWIP program. Two additional
organizations were identified as capable of achieving certification and
strategic partner role – but with some strengthening and capacity building: St.
Ann Environment Protection Association (STAEPA) and Friends of the Sea
(FOTS).
The team had an opportunity for a very brief meeting and area drive-through
with the Pimento Walk/Parry Town Project Steering Committee. It served to
reinforce the impression of strong local "buy-in". There was evident pride in
the work being done through this four-community solid waste collection
project.
During the course of the local interviews (in both Negril and Ocho Rios) some
complaints were voiced over the "excessive” and "time-consuming"
paperwork that was required from grant recipients. This appears to cut both
ways as it was also acknowledged that CWIP's procedures have led to tighter
management control and more stringent accountability in handling finances.
20
Portland
About $200,000 in grant funding is expected to be available from CWIP for
community-based projects in Portland. The startup schedule for work in
Portland is February 2001. However, based on contractual requirements,
CWIP will have only about ten months, through (Dec.15, 2001) to program for
grant funding in Portland. R2RW has allocated approximately $400,000 for
community-based initiatives in the two targeted watersheds. Assuming a
50/50 split, $200,000 would be available for Portland.
5.2 Operation and Maintenance of Municipal Wastewater Systems
Overall
This program has generated the broadest support both at the local and
central government levels. Discussions with both operational and central
management personnel of the National Water Commission revealed
unanimity in their desire that the program be continued and expanded.
There is little doubt that the program has resulted in major breakthroughs in
both policy and operations. The training and equipment-supply program,
funded through CWIP, has assisted in improving the operational efficiency of
the local sewerage systems. At the policy level, the development of a strategy
for public-private partnerships, and of a cost structure for establishing
connections to the local collection systems represent major advances, with
potential ramifications for the privatization of infrastructure going well beyond
the current program.
Policy, under CWIP's wastewater component, has follower two parallel, and
potentially complementary approaches. On the one hand CWIP has
encouraged the GOJ, Ministry of Water and Housing and the National Water
Commission to consider public-private partnership arrangements to leverage
capital and, theoretically, to enhance service quality. This has led to the new
National Water Policy (1998) embracing commercialization through the use of
public-private partnerships.
Simultaneously, CWIP has been supporting the formation of public
participation models at the local level. These are the advisory and monitoring
committees (AMC) formed in Negril and Ocho Rios. These models, using
memorandum of understandings (MOU), attempt to prompt dialogue between
relevant public and civil society stakeholders to assure effective operation
(good operation and maintenance resulting in quality effluent discharge) as
well as maximum wastewater system utilization (i.e. maximized connections
and flow).
Negril
Considerable progress in wastewater management has occurred over the
past two years. However, major problems remain, particularly with regard to
sewerage connections and flow volumes, as well as with the quality of the
sewerage plant effluent. While most of the properties along Norman Manley
Blvd. are connected, only 12 percent of the properties in Negril are connected
21
to the local collection system. As a result, present flow volumes represent
only 27 percent of the Negril treatment plant’s design capacity. According to
knowledgeable respondents, many of the properties in the West End continue
to rely on cesspools or even to dispose of raw sewage into the ocean.
Fortunately, westerly currents carry pollutants away from the major beach￾hotel complex. However, coral reefs and other marine habitat are being
impacted. Because of littoral drift and the location of offshore sampling
stations, the analyses of coastal water quality may not reflect a totally reliable
picture of coastal water quality in the Negril-Green Island area.
While progress is being made on point-source disposal, a persistent problem
continues to be non-point source pollution from biological and chemical
agents entering coastal waters from the North and South Negril rivers. CWIP
is attempting to address some of these problems through the funding of
demonstration projects for potential replication as, for example, organic
agriculture projects, local solid waste and sanitation projects, and in-stream
water quality monitoring and sampling. However, the scale and duration of
these efforts is unequal to the magnitude of the pollution problems associated
with agricultural activities and settlement patterns in the upper watersheds.
Ocho Rios
Time precluded interviews with National Water Commission (NWC) personnel
in Ocho Rios. However discussions with personnel at DBML, and with NGO
representatives confirmed that the problems identified in Negril also apply to
Ocho Rios. These include the paucity of sewerage connections, and the
seriousness of nonpoint source pollution. River flows throughout the Parish
carry high pollutant loads, which contaminate coastal waters. Water sampling
analyses conducted by the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory over the past
year have documented significant water quality concerns attributed to flow
from the Turtle, Dunns, and White rivers.
Both urban and agricultural runoff is a major contributing factor to the
pollution of coastal waters in Ocho Rios. It is reported that storm drains
become inoperative during heavy rains. The need for improvements in urban
infrastructure was stressed in interviews with local NGOs.There is a strong
conviction that the Environmental Advisory Group is key to improving
conditions. Ocho Rios is an area that is far more complex, economically and
politically, than is Negril. A major challenge in "environmental diplomacy"
faces the CWIP program if it is to establish the same kind of partnership
arrangement with development interests in Ocho Rios as was done so
successfully in Negril.
.
Portland
No activities have been undertaken by CWIP in Portland. However, in
discussions with representatives of the National Water Commission, they
stressed the importance of having CWIP work with the community in
preparation for major improvements in wastewater management that are
being programmed for Portland.
22
5.3 Environmental Management Systems (EMS) and Practices
Overall
From the outset of the program, CWIP’s approach to EMS has been to work
at the community level, with leadership being exercised by a local partner
such as the Chamber of Commerce. Simultaneously, CWIP has been
working closely with NRCA’s Pollution Control Division in developing a
national EMS strategy. This strategy, spelled out in a Green Paper, prepared
by CWIP staff, for submission to NRCA, is currently under consideration by
Cabinet for promulgation as a White Paper. Once adopted, the EMS policy
will be implemented by NEPA. CWIP's success in working at both the
community and the national policy level attests to the capability of its staff in
building bridges between civil society and central government.
EAST has been particularly active in this component, but at the enterprise,
rather than at the community level. The focus of EAST activities has been on
working with individual hotel establishments in conducting environmental
audits and, as an inducement, supplying them with a limited amount of
equipment, primarily for water and energy conservation. EAST has also made
initial inroads in working with manufacturing plants, no small achievement.
By pursuing a very focused set of activities, working at both the individual
enterprise level and through the Jamaica Hotel and Tourism Association
(JHTA) and the Jamaica Manufacturer’s Association (JMA), EAST has
established a positive record and a well-defined identity. The currently
programmed (Phase III) effort is considerably more ambitious than earlier
activities. It contemplates expanding out from the focus on the single
enterprise and trade association to involvement with the larger community,
with a newly added emphasis on generating economic growth through
sustainable tourism development. A principal target for this latter effort will be
Portland.
Negril
EAST has been very successful in working with a small number of hotels in
Negril. The level of enthusiasm is high in the four hotels that have
implemented the EAST audit recommendations. Tangible results have been
achieved in reducing operating costs and increasing profitability. In addition,
EAST has provided training in EMS to the entire staffs of participating hotels,
with the resultant diffusion of the "lessons learned" to the dwellings of the
hotel employees and, hopefully, to their local communities. As an indication of
the support for the work performed by EAST, the environmental managers of
the participating hotels have voluntarily organized to conduct training
programs so that other hotels may profit from their experiences.
CWIP’s EMS activities in the “Greening of Negril” has also elicited high praise
from Negril's Chamber of Commerce. This community-directed program,
conducted under the aegis of the Chamber, has focused on waste collection,
source minimization, and recycling. Whereas the EAST program has been
enterprise specific, CWIP’s community-based EMS activity has been
consistent with it’s overall strategy of emphasizing local capacity-building,
23
public outreach and education, and pilot projects that incorporate best
management techniques consistent with local resources.
Ocho Rios.
CWIP’s initial efforts in Ocho Rios have centered on community solid waste
collection (mentioned above), sustainable agricultural initiatives,
environmental education, water quality monitoring, wastewater management
initiatives, institutional strengthening, and support for the Advisory
Management Committee (AMC). Based on the current programs of CWIP
and East there is a fair degree of overlap in projected activities.
Portland
No activities have been initiated. However, as mentioned above, EAST has a
fairly ambitious (Phase III) program scheduled for Portland, while the NWC is
looking to a strong CWIP wastewater role in the Port Antonio area.
5.4 Coastal Water Quality Monitoring
Overall
The coastal water quality monitoring component represents another
significant breakthrough affected through the CWIP program. The coastal
water quality monitoring program is based on a partnership arrangement
between all of the relevant stakeholders – the community, hoteliers, National
Water Commission, NRCA/NEPA, and the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory.
It is a unique model operating as follows:
• Sampling protocols are developed with stakeholder participation
• Hotels in Negril Ocho Rios provide the boats
• Volunteers from the community collect the samples
• Chemical analysis of the samples is done by the Discovery Bay Marine
Laboratory (DBML)
• Biological analysis of the samples is done by NEPA (NRCA)
• The National Water Commission (NWC) does both chemical and
biological analyses of coastal water samples (to assure inter-laboratory
calibration of data) as well as analyses of sewage plant effluent
• Communities are provided with the sampling results, in user friendly
formats, and are encouraged to use the data to assess the environmental
problems confronting them, and to develop appropriate management
responses.
Lessons learned since the inception of the program point to the need for
reviewing, and possibly modifying, sampling protocols. Nevertheless, the
achievements that have been made far outweigh any deficiencies in the
implementation of the sampling program. DBML, NEPA and NWC are aware
24
of shortcomings and it is anticipated that they will be addressed as the
program evolves.
Some additional team findings that may be appropriate for consideration in
reviewing coastal water quality sampling and analysis activities are offered
below.
• Anomalies: Results from the current bimonthly, water quality sampling
protocol have indicated some anomalies, for example, elevated levels of bacteria
(Sailor’s Hole and Dunns River) and nutrients. The current sampling protocol is
designed to set up a baseline for water quality and has not been designed to
indicate sources of anomalies, which is appropriate in this initial phase of data
collection. Raising awareness amongst program participants and community
members, and providing rigorous, scientifically defensible data are goals of the
monitoring activity. Once anomalies are identified, community members/NGOs,
particularly in Ocho Rios, were not aware of a focused, action plan for follow-up
in order to seek a source.
• Standards: The current water quality monitoring protocol is directed toward
USEPA standards for fecal coliform that represent a human health standard.
Current analyses do not desegregate human and animal sources. Other
parameters, such as nutrient levels, are measured with ‘levels of concern’ being
utilized as a standard against which to evaluate the percentage of samples falling
within acceptable limits. Elevated levels of nutrients are known to compromise
reef health. All indications are that the health of the coastal marine environment
off the north coast of Jamaica is severely compromised. Results from a recent
survey of live coral cover varied between 0 to 30% with an average of 11.7%.
Sixty percent of the reef was covered with fleshy algae. Using nutrient
concentrations as proxies for indicators of coral reef health is essential, but there
is opportunity here for improvement.
• Sampling Regime: The current sampling regime is appropriate for
generalized, baseline data collection. Beyond the baseline period, however,
several factors will need to be considered and the protocol redesigned.
• Analysis: The current water quality analysis procedure is cumbersome, over
duplicative and potentially compromised through multiple transportation and
handling procedures. Discovery Bay Marine Lab (DBML) analyzes samples for
nitrates (as total and inorganic nitrogen), phosphates (as total and inorganic
phosphorous), total suspended solids, chlorophyll, pH and BOD. NRC analyzes
samples for fecal coliform bacteria and NWC analyses sample for BOD,
suspended solids and fecal coliform bacteria.
Sustainability of program funding, following the termination of CWIP, stands
out as a priority consideration that needs to be addressed over the course of
the next two years. A number of options warrant consideration, including
approaching the hotel/tourism sector for financial support. Consideration
should also be given to cost savings by reducing the number of chemical
parameters that are currently being analyzed.
There is a strong economic rationale for continuing the monitoring program in
centers of high tourism concentrations. As with other aspects of the Coastal
Water Quality Improvement Program, the monitoring program could result in
significant economic benefits to the participating communities. Insofar as
25
coastal water quality monitoring is a condition for "Blue Flag" certification,
complying communities have a competitive advantage in a highly competitive
industry. This goes far in explaining the strong support for the program from
the hoteliers and Chamber of Commerce in Negril, as well as from the
Ministry of Tourism and Sport, and NEPA.
Negril
NEPT provides oversight for the coastal water quality monitoring program in
Negril. As noted above, the hotels provide the boats, and community
volunteers do the sampling under the guidance of DBML. Sampling stations
are located several hundred feet offshore, and in the North and South Negril
rivers near their confluence with the sea. Sampling is done bimonthly, and
sampling results are reported back to the community. Plans are now being
discussed for putting the sampling data on the Internet. It is obvious that the
tourism sector in Negril attaches significant economic value to this program,
particularly as it relates to Blue Flag certification.
Water quality information has resulted in local environmental initiatives to
address identified problems. These include the removal of informal
settlements along the South Negril River, improved sanitation facilities at the
Norman Manley Sea Park, improved solid waste management, and some
stream bank revegetation.
Ocho Rios
DBML provides oversight for the coastal water quality monitoring program in
Ocho Rios. By-and-large it functions much the same as in Negril. However,
the pollution problem in Ocho Rios is both more serious and more complex
than in Negril, and does not appear to have as strong support from the
tourism/hotel sector as is the case in Negril.
Portland
No monitoring program of coastal water quality is operative in Portland.
5.5 Support and Coordination for Coastal Zone Management Activities
Whereas CWIP has assumed a proactive role in the other program components,
it has tended to take a responsive stance in the coordination of coastal zone
management activities. The exception to this is in its work with the NWC, and in
development of the EMS strategy where it did take the initiative. When called
upon, it has provided funding and staff support to selective activities as, for
example, to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade for the preparation
of a major policy document on coastal and ocean resources (to be the basis for a
Green Paper). Additionally, funding has been provided for a number of technical
studies including financial support for the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef
Assessment which surveyed coral reef health and fishery stocks along the north
coast of Jamaica.
5.6 Information Base for Community-Based Decision Making
Currently, the design of program activities, particularly for CWIP and R2RW, is
largely based on community interest. That is, general program objectives are
26
brought to community stakeholder meetings and members indicate priorities for
interventions. This bottom-up, participatory approach is a priority of USAID and
the GOJ, and has been key to the success that SO2 program activities have
enjoyed.
On the other hand, programs are not as effective as they could be in terms of
integrating environment and natural resources information in a comprehensive
way, across the suite of activities. Rather than replacing stakeholder
participation, including more robust methodologies and information into the
planning and design of program activities can compliment and strengthen the
current bottom-up approach.
5.7 Ecosystem Protection in Urban Development Planning
For well over a decade there has been growing acknowledgement that land￾based sources of pollution represent the greatest threats to near-shore marine
habitat. The indiscriminate filling of wetlands or their use as solid waste dump
sites, has destroyed breeding and nursery areas for fish and shellfish.
Sustainable development in Jamaica is incompatible with environmentally
destructive patterns of development and land utilization that threaten the very
resources upon which its tourism economy is dependent.
The rationale for focusing USAID program resources on urban development
issues in coastal tourism areas was noted in the original CWIP program design
as follows:
"The concentrated growth of tourism facilities has been accompanied by
an equally large concentration of worker settlements within and on the
periphery of the principal tourism centers. This influx …is posing a
severe strain on the capacity of coastal communities to provide basic
services to its citizens and, as a consequence, is threatening the natural
resource base on which tourism depends. Key coastal ecosystems are
now under varying degrees of stress -- reefs, beaches, estuaries, waters,
wetlands and vegetated hillsides are all being negatively affected. A
continuation of these trends represents a serious threat to the
sustainability of the tourism sector and to the economy of Jamaica."
The recent policy paper on ocean and coastal resources prepared by the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade (funded by CWIP) notes that
"…about two thirds of Jamaica’s population lives in coastal towns and
cities. Inadequate urban infrastructure and high levels of poverty,
combined with the concentration of population in coastal locations have
contributed to the pollution of coastal waters and the degradation of
coastal habitat. Low-lying residential areas in close proximity to the coast
are particularly vulnerable to damage from hurricanes and storm surge,
as are squatter settlements in river flood plains."
With the consolidation of NRCA and Town Planning, NEPA has the opportunity
to integrate environmental objectives into development plans and parish
development orders. Building upon USAID's cumulative experience with DEMO,
27
CWIP, EAST, and R2RW, the SO2 program could assist NEPA in mobilizing
community support for the designation of coastal and marine protected areas,
provide for public access to the coast, address problems of urban stormwater
runoff, and provide guidelines for environmentally sound coastal development.
5.8 Consideration of the Marine Environment in Program Activities
Particularly in Negril, consideration of the marine environment is largely lacking
from the current program even though the Negril Environmental Protection Area,
the area of interest for CWIP in Negril, contains both terrestrial and marine
components. While the Negril Coral Reef Preservation Society (NCRPS) is
developing a management plan for the Negril Marine Park with funding from the
European Union, management jurisdiction is not assigned to any organization
and is not part of the EU’s program. NCRPS currently acts in this capacity but
does not have authority.
Because of the lack of coordination between CWIP and NCRPS’s activities,
opportunities are being missed. For example, NCRPS is gathering information
on fish catch per unit effort to develop some baseline fisheries data. They are
utilizing video transects to examine benthic trends in algal biomass and have a
water quality monitoring program for nitrates and phosphates that DBML was
unaware of. They have also conducted some work on the North Negril River.
It should be noted that since the team conducted its interviews, a memorandum
of understanding has been signed by Negril area Environmental Protection Trust
(NEPT) and NCRPS which clearly defines the roles and responsibilities with
respect to management authority for the Negril Environmental Protection Area.
The broad division of responsibility for the marine environment lies with NCRPS
while NEPT is charged with an overall coordination role as well as primary
responsibility for the terrestrial environment. This is a very encouraging
development.
5.9 Fisheries
A fisheries component is lacking in current SO2 program activities, particularly in
Ocho Rios, where fisherman and fisheries cooperatives are not engaged in the
stakeholder process.
The depletion of shellfish and reef fish stocks was recently confirmed by the
findings of the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRA) which conducted
an intensive survey of north coast coral reefs and fish stocks. (CWIP and
USAID/Washington contributed funds for this study.) The AGRA study reports, for
example, that at 6 transects per site over 52 sites, only 45 individual snapper
were recorded. Those that were recorded were half the size of snapper from
similar habitat in less disturbed sites. Several fish types, such as angelfish and
grouper, were wholly absent.
Stock depletion is part of the general problem of habitat destruction (principally coral
reefs, seagrass beds, and coastal wetlands) on the one hand and species
depredation on the other. These problems are compounded by the fragmentation of
28
management responsibility for habitat management within the various divisions of
NRCA, and between NRCA and the Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture.
5.2.0 Upper Watershed Management
There is some indication that the North and especially the South Negril rivers are
major sources of biological and chemical contaminants from, for example, agro￾and other chemicals, animal waste, soil and other sediments, and are posing a
significant threat to the marine environment. Although there are some targeted,
community initiated activities in the upper watershed such as organic farming,
improved sanitation, planting of vegetation in riparian areas and improved
practices on animal farms, a threats analysis has not been conducted.
A comparable situation exists in Ocho Rios with respect to the watershed areas
of the White, Turtle, and Dunns rivers. High fecal coliform counts have been
detected near the mouth of the Dunns River below the falls. Currently, no firm
plans have been made to mitigate the situation. Since the UDC “owns” the falls,
there is some institutional complexity in directly addressing the problem.
The Portland Area represents a significant opportunity to develop a
comprehensive, integrated watershed management program with lessons
learned from CWIP and EAST and integration of the new R2RW. Because there
are several other donors in the area, coordination will be key as will sensitivity to
capacity of local organizations.
6.0 IMPACT OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES ON JAMAICA CIVIL SOCIETY
Civil society organizations, in the area of the environment, comprise a wide range of
entities at the community or wider societal level (CBOs, NGOs, PSOs) engaged in
seeking to improve the coastal and marine environment in a sustainable manner. These
organizations have been strengthened to the extent that they have become technically
more proficient in dealing with environmental problems, and have won increasing
respect from government entities by engaging them in technical dialogue and by
developing effective partnership arrangements with such agencies.
Both CWIP and EAST have contributed to this through institutional strengthening of
carefully selected strategic partners, providing assistance in financial management,
project implementation/administration and accounting. As a result, these organizations
have been able to leverage national resources to support local community projects.
There is no doubt that the success of these initiatives has been, in large measure, due to
the technical support provided by both CWIP and EAST. This has been amply
demonstrated in the arrangements leading to the institution of Advisory Monitoring
Committees and the Water Quality Monitoring program.
6.1 Wastewater Management/Advisory Monitoring Committees
The evaluation team was advised that, prior to CWIP’s intervention in Negril, the
relationship between the NWC and the community was non-existent or at best
very strained. Both were simply not communicating. Through CWIP’s
intervention, community organizations were strengthened and gained the respect
29
of the NWC resulting in the formation of AMCs of specially identified community
organizations, in a public–private partnership arrangement designed to allow
private sector, as well as community and stakeholder input in the management of
national wastewater management systems. The institution of Advisory Monitoring
Committees (AMC) formalized through MOUs in Negril and latter in Ocho Rios,
constitute a signal achievement of CWIP. This model merits replication both
locally and elsewhere.
6.2 Water Quality Monitoring
Water Quality Monitoring: In the area of water quality monitoring, effective
public–private participation mechanisms have been formulated involving major
stakeholders – NEPT having oversight responsibility, communities, NWC,
NRCA/NEPA, hoteliers, fishermen and the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory. A
similar program has been instituted in Ocho Rios though with less success to
date. What is very significant in the monitoring program is the allocation of
responsibilities to all participating stakeholders in an operation where each
stands to benefit. The sustainability of this program will depend to a large extent
on an increased public awareness and the extent to which stakeholders see real
economic benefits for themselves.
6.3 Inter-Agency Steering Committees
Inter-Agency Steering Committees (ISCs): ISCs and similar arrangements, for
CWIP and EAST, whereby a wide range of principal stakeholders come together
every six months to ensure alignment of broad program focus and consistency
with the Government’s overall macro-economic policy directions have proved
useful in the past. An important advantage is that it brings together civil society
organizations at the local level with national agencies in a participatory process
that seeks to ensure that Government’s policy prescriptions are at the forefront of
decision-making.
6.4 Diversity of Civil Society Organizations
From field visits and discussions, Ocho Rios constitutes the most diverse mix of
civil society organizations (large/small hotel owners, absentee ownership,
Chamber of Commerce, FOTS, STAEPA, fishermen, DBML, other business
interests) of varying sizes, differing interests and varying levels of commitment to
environmental management issues. These differences pose difficulties in the
extent to which the intended objectives and outcomes from specific project
interventions (CWIP, EAST, R2RW) can be realized.
CWIP’s activities in this area have been focused on solid waste management
activities engaging community based projects, a public education program and
water quality testing through the mechanism of the public–private mechanism
developed in Negril (AMC). Institutional concerns raised here relate to whether
there is not a need for better rationalization of CWIP’s methods of intervention
which will ensure greater sustainability but also effectiveness. A case in point
relates to the use of DBML for not only water testing (for which it is eminently
qualified) but also for administering the community grants program to the four
communities of the Ocho Rios watershed area. While this is understandable
30
given the lack of adequate capacity in civil society organizations, capacity
building and sustainability are not served by this arrangement in the longer term.
CWIP could concentrate on strengthening organizations such as STAEPA and
FOTS, over the next two years, to assume management of community projects
irrespective of the source of funding. This would also allow DBML to play a more
significant role in actual water quality monitoring.
6.5 Absorptive Capacity
As of February 2001, all three projects (CWIP, EAST, R2RW) will be
implemented in the Portland area. This will pose considerable problems relating
to absorptive capacity. In addition, ENACT has been involved in environmental
activities involving a wide number of stakeholders, many of whom will be the
same partners drawn on by USAID programs. It is important that the necessary
coordinating mechanisms be established across all projects, as well as with the
ENACT program, from the outset to avoid projects “tripping” over others and
resulting in less than efficient allocation of scarce resources. The implementation
of the three projects thus presents both a challenge and an opportunity to draw
on experiences and lessons learnt from both Negril and Ocho Rios in addressing
a comprehensive program affecting upland, coastal and marine systems and
involving a major international natural resource, the Rio Grande, the single most
important tourism attraction for the Parish and which is yet to experience a level
of pollution comparable to the Dunns River. Additionally, the establishment of an
AMC along the lines of the Negril model could assist in engaging /educating
environmental and community groups in preparation for greater public – private
management of wastewater water disposal systems both now and later when any
central treatment facility is established in the Port Antonio area.
6.6 Overall Considerations
The capacity of NEPT, as an umbrella organisation, to address environmental
concerns has been considerably improved by institutional strengthening in
strategic planning, training at the Board level and administration of community
grants. This has also been true of strategic partners in Ocho Rios. The initial
EMS grants have been significant in building capacity and assisting hotels to
implement environmentally friendly practices for which they have seen the
benefits in reduced operating costs. The success of these hotels that have
achieved “Green Globe” certification has rekindled the interest of hotels that had
fallen out of the program to adopt management practices that are not only
environmentally friendly but have the potential to contribute to their profitability.
While civil society organizations have been strengthened, there has been a
virtual vacuum of government agencies, with the notable exception of the NWC,
at the local level, particularly in Negril. Enforcement of sound environmental
practices has therefore been negatively impacted, for instance, by the
unavailability of environmental wardens to police the environmental regulations.
At the local levels, the Planning Institute of Jamaica (PIOJ), because of capacity
constraints, has not been sufficiently active in donor coordination activities on
behalf of the Government. What might be desirable is for national level
institutions to form important operating linkages with such bodies as the Social
Development Commission and Parish Development Committees, within the
31
framework of local government reform, in achieving better coordination at the
local level.
While some level of coordination among donors/lenders takes place at the
regularly held meetings organized by this group, this potentially can be an
important instrument for achieving real cooperation and collaboration with the
government. While admitting to the positive benefits donors can derive from
meetings among themselves, there is clearly a need for this process to be driven
by the PIOJ exercising its mandate for coordination of Official Development
Assistance. USAID’s current chairmanship of the donor group, however, provides
an excellent opportunity and increased leverage for it to seek to achieve greater
collaboration and coordination between its own programs and those of other
donors, at least during the present term.
Institutional changes at NRCA/NEPA involving a merger of three organizations
(NRCA, the Land Utilisation Commission and the Town Planning Department)
present both opportunities and challenges. While this process of reorganization is
scheduled for completion by 2001 April 1, any possibility that this deadline is not
realized will create additional concerns for implementation of the program of
recommendations involving CWIP. Additionally, cooperation with CWIP could
involve a different/new set of operating relationships requiring time for
familiarization with the program as well as any proposed changes. The Ministry
of Land and the Environment, under which NRCA/NEPA falls, is also undergoing
changes to make it more policy focused. The Ministry, however, suffers from a
serious capacity constraint that will need to be addressed if it is to effectively
carry out its mandate in support of NRCA/NEPA. It is also very important for it to
focus on providing broad policy direction and not involve itself at the operational
level of program implementation. These changes could pose potential difficulties
for effective program implementation over the two-year period depending on the
success with which such changes are carried out.
The contractors have recorded a very effective and productive relationship with
the SO2 office of the USAID/Jamaica Mission in meeting the demands of both
USAID’s Head Office in Washington as well as the Government of Jamaica.
From all indications, the office possesses the necessary capacity in its present
staff to ensure effective program execution and has been well guided by its team
leader for the bilateral program. It is clear that the unit functions as a team,
possessing the necessary managerial and human resources development
capacity and has also provided expert guidance to the evaluation consultants.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
7.1 Absorptive Capacity of Portland's NGOs and CBOs
Current programming calls for a concentration of activities by EAST, CWIP, and
R2R in Portland. In addition, Portland is an area of concentration for CIDA and
the EU. It is questionable whether there is sufficient institutional and
organizational capacity in the Port Antonio area to usefully put these resources to
work. With numerous projects engaging a limited number of local stakeholder
organizations, the resulting overload could waste limited development resources.
32
Considering the economic importance of Ocho Rios and Montego Bay and the
environmental problems that they pose, a disproportionate allocation of financial
and personnel resources is being made to Portland. This is particularly true with
respect to the grants program that would be initiated in Portland by CWIP. CWIP
could more usefully redeploy some of its resources to Montego Bay and Ocho
Rios. These latter two areas are in worse environmental shape than Port Antonio
and are economically more important to the tourism sector.
7.2 Consolidating Gains vs. New Starts
In setting up the CWIP program for the next 18 months, a good deal of thought
should be given to balancing the benefits of initiating new community level
projects vs. consolidating gains in projects now underway. CWIP still has two full
years to go, but it only has 12 months to initiate new grants. While there was little
time to view, no less evaluate, project results, there was a general impression
that current projects may need more time to ensure sustainable results. USAID
and the GOJ should evaluate the relative costs and benefits of concentrating on
existing projects to insure sustainability vs. the launching of new initiatives.
7.3 Advancing Coastal Policy and Implementation Capabilities
In working with the National Water Commission, CWIP has had the effect of
actively driving policy, with excellent results, and with all parties expressing
satisfaction. With the exception of the water quality monitoring program,
comparable success has not been achieved with NRCA (now NEPA), particularly
with its coastal zone management, community education and outreach, and
watershed management units. While some coastal policy and marine resource
studies have been conducted with CWIP funding, the level of integration between
NRCA and CWIP activities lacks the consistency and integration that
characterizes the NWC/CWIP relationship.
7.4 Partnerships
CWIP’s strongest and most sustainable local partnerships have been established
in Negril with NEPT and the Chamber of Commerce. In Ocho Rios, the Discovery
Bay Marine Laboratory is playing the same role as NEPT plays in Negril. To give
this umbrella NGO role to DBML, while convenient in the short-run, is not
sustainable in the long run, since this combination outreach-oversight role is
peripheral to the Lab’s primary areas of interest and commitment. This is not to
imply that the future contribution of DBML is to be reduced. Quite the opposite.
Its role should be significantly enhanced, but not in managing demand-driven,
community-based grants.
Active consideration should be given to bolstering the roles of Friends of the Sea,
STEPA, and/or SACOC as principal partners through which local grants should
be funneled. These organizations have a history in Oho Rios that precedes the
inception of CWIP, and their membership base is broadly representative of the
business community, the marine recreation and fisheries sector, and
environmentalists. It is worth noting that Friends of the Sea sees its role as a
proponent of, but not manager of, an Ocho Rios marine park, positioning it to
develop a broad-based community coalition.
33
SO2 PROGRAM AND OPERATIONAL
RECOMMENDATIONS
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USAID’S ENVIRONMENTAL PORTFOLIO
It is assumed that over the course of the next decade, USAID’s environmental
programming will be consistent with, but evolve beyond, the current strategic objective of
"improving the quality of key natural resources in selected areas that are both
environmentally and economically significant." This strategy is intended to integrate
natural resources management, environmental protection, and sustainable economic
development.
In preparing recommendations for each of the three time periods, key considerations
included: (1) leveraging the results achieved in one time frame so as to build upon and
maximize benefits in successive programming periods; (2) developing programs and
projects that empower community-level groups to implement environmentally sound
policies and practices on an ongoing basis without direct donor support; (3) emphasizing
the relationship between environmental enhancement, economic growth and the quality
of life.
In devising the following set of recommendations, the team was cognizant of budgetary
limitations and, hence, of the advantages of harmonizing USAID program activities with
those being advanced by other donors, particularly CIDA, the EU, and UNEP/RCU.
Within this context, three questions were posed in considering program options (1) Are
these the right program activities to achieve AID’s strategic results; (2) Are there other
activities that would provide greater and more sustainable benefits to Jamaican society;
(3) How might USAID's strategic objective evolve in a manner that was consistent with
past policy, but responsive to new opportunities.
Based on these issues, the following recommendations for USAID's environmental
program were prepared.
 8.1 Near Term 2000-02: Priority Program Areas
8.1.1 Emphasize Sustainability in Developing Annual Work Plans
The focus of CWIP in the next two years needs to be on sustainability. Program
activities in all components must concentrate on ensuring that there is an
institutional base for the continuation of the programs, activities and partnerships
that have been initiated in the prior three years. Where sustainability cannot be
assured, there are four options: (1) Reconfigure the activity to increase the
chances for success; (2) where there are serious doubts about sustainability,
scale back the project to ensure that any core gains are retained, and wind down
the effort as rapidly as possible in order to redeploy the funds to more promising
areas, (3) transfer the activity to another program in the SO2 portfolio, (4) seek to
incorporate the activity into the program of another donor.
34
The criterion of sustainability should be applied to every activity that is included in
CWIP’s program design for the next two years.
8.1.2 Extend the Timeframe and Expand the Geographical Coverage for
the CWIP Wastewater Component
This activity stands out as among the most successful of CWIP’s program
activities. The National Water Commission has referred to the work as invaluable
and, at the local level, respondents in both Negril and Ocho Rios lauded the
CWIP efforts in this area. The Wastewater Advisory and Monitoring Committees,
the training activities for wastewater plant operators, and the provision of
supplies and equipment have been central to the success of the Negril and Ocho
Rios programs. It is strongly recommended that these programs be extended,
and expanded geographically to include Montego Bay and Port Antonio.
Although Port Antonio does not have a central sewerage system, there is a
compelling need for establishing a partnership arrangement between NWC and
the community with respect to the following:
• Informing and educating citizens about plans for a centralized treatment
system; the probable disruptions that will be caused and how best to prepare
and cope with a protracted period of construction activity.
• Work with NWC and the Ministry of Health in assessing the public health
implications of deficiencies in the present sewerage and water supply
systems.
• Coordinating with NWC on the construction of interim systems to replace
failed septic systems and pit latrines; and/or, retrofitting component parts of
the larger system ensuring that future hookups would be less costly.
• Together with NWC, reviewing the lessons learned in Negril and Ocho Rios
with the community AMC to avoid a repetition of the mistakes in Port Antonio.
• Providing training for policy makers in the NWC to more effectively implement
newly adopted strategies for connections, as well as assisting in the
implementation of private sector participation in managing NWC-owned
installations.
NWC presently has a wastewater management unit. This unit should be the
focus of CWIP’s assistance as a means of consolidating past gains. The
following areas have been identified as most critical by NWC: Training for
operators; provision of needed equipment, and; technical assistance that would
allow the Commission to do instant sampling and analysis in the field.
35
8.1.3 Sustain and Review the Coastal Water Quality Monitoring and
Testing Component
The inception of the water quality monitoring program is one of CWIP’s most
significant achievements. It has broad support at all levels. It has engendered
active partnering between the public and private sectors, and between local and
central government entities. Nevertheless, there are opportunities for improving
the current program.
Sustainability
Ensuring program sustainability should be a priority over the next two years.
Funding is key to placing the program on a secure footing. Joint public/private
financial support would seem to be economically feasible and socially equitable.
Moving toward the formulation of such a cost sharing arrangement should be a
program objective of the several USAID contractors.
A concerted education effort will be needed, particularly in the private sector, to
link the benefits of water quality monitoring to tourism and recreational use.
Given the nature of the tourism sector and the social/economic profile in Ocho
Rios, this will present a greater challenge than was encountered in Negril.
It is generally recognized that with the termination of CWIP, alternative sources
of funding must be found. Among various options, several are suggested below.
1. Defray portion of costs by financial support from tourism industry.
This sector has the most to gain economically from maintaining an
acceptable level of coastal water quality. Here is an opportunity for CWIP
and EAST to collaborate on developing a strategy that will gain
acceptance from the private sector (JHTA and JMA) and from the GOJ,
particularly from the Ministry of Tourism. USAID should direct CWIP and
EAST to collaborate in this effort.
2. Reduce costs of sampling and analysis
Concentrate sampling on known hot spots. Test for parameters that relate
to specific objectives. The following parameters that are currently being
measured should be reviewed to determine their continuing importance to
the overall sampling protocol:
 Chlorophyll: Levels are not detectable in seawater
 Total suspended solids: Not detectable in seawater
 Total phosphorous: Not significantly different from inorganic phosphorous
 pH: Fairly constant in seawater
3. Earmark beach license fees to coastal water quality programs. Link
the fee schedule of beach licenses to maintaining coastal water quality
standards
36
Hotels are charged an annual fee for beach use. If the waste discharge
methods used by the hotels degrade coastal water quality, thereby
endangering public health and/or threatening marine ecosystems, they
should be charged accordingly. This is a variant of the "polluter pays"
principle. It is not a simple option, but there are numerous precedents on
which such a program could be patterned.
Use of Science
A team consisting of experts from DBML, UWI, CWIP staff, NGO science
officers, etc. should be convened to comprehensively examine the suite of
information currently available on north coast marine systems, including the
water quality monitoring data and recently obtained AGRA study data. This
information should be analyzed and recommendations made that are accessible
and can be widely distributed to stakeholders. A targeted set of bioindicators
should also be considered for both the aquatic and marine environment.
Establish a Single Center for Conducting Water Quality Analyses
The program for analyzing coastal water quality needs to be consolidated.
The Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory is the logical choice for assuming this
function. It has an international reputation for scientific achievement. Its findings
would be regarded as unbiased. It would also provide an excellent training
ground for students and younger scientists.
In order to perform this function it will be necessary to provide the DBML with
capabilities for microbiological analyses, including testing capability to distinguish
between human and animal sources of fecal coliforms. A proposal to move in this
direction has been made previously. The proposal should be revisited in light of
the growing need for establishing a center of excellence to serve both Jamaica
and the larger Caribbean region.
CWIP could provide short-term assistance in assisting the DBML to develop a
“business plan” to implement this consolidation by investigating potential sources
of funding and revenue generation that would include providing testing services
to the private sector. There is evidence of an increasing need for microbial
analysis from the private sector. DBML could provide this service while securing
additional resources for operations, students and research.
Action Plans
When water quality "anomalies" are identified, an action plan is needed for
community members to follow-up, including targeted technical assistance with
results interpretation and intervention.
8.1.4 EMS Implementation
Implementation of the EMS policy recommendations, facilitated by CWIP, will
significantly strengthen NEPA’s capacity to work with the private sector. This is
an area in which NEPA needs a great deal of assistance since it is starting from
37
scratch. It is also an area in which CWIP has made significant advances and
would be in a position to assist in moving NEPA from policy formulation to
program implementation once a clear direction emerges. That direction must be
provided by NEPA.
In the interim, CWIP’s contribution to the EMS area is best served by
successfully completing the community-level grants that have been initiated.
Although the evaluation team had minimal opportunity to observe the local solid
waste management projects being conducted in Negril and Ocho Rios, these
activities elicited strong support from the grantees in both communities.
Accordingly, it is recommended that CWIP's EMS community-level activities
should continue for another year, and then be terminated in the final year of the
project.
JHTA and JMA are the principal organizations through which EMS techniques
can be most effectively disseminated. In working with these organizations, EAST
not only reaches owners and managers, but directly provides training to staff and
employees. This has a ripple effect as the lessons learned are transferred to the
homes and communities where the workers live.
It is recommended that EAST pursue its EMS activities in support of obtaining
ISO 14000 certification in the manufacturing sector and Green Globe certification
in the tourism sector. It should be noted that, as a condition for Green Globe
certification, the hotel must sponsor a community initiative that has a direct
environmental benefit, thereby leveraging the impact of the EMS program.
Hotel managers in the Negril area, with whom the team spoke, emphasized the
desirability of having EAST provide technical assistance in support of their
activities in “carrying the gospel” to hotels, originally targeted, that had fallen out
of the program. Measures to facilitate this process should be pursued.
EAST should strengthen its relationship with the JMA by continuing its work with
manufacturing entities, using targeted plants to demonstrate the benefits of EMS
to the manufacturing sector. The proposal to set up an environmental fund is a
move in the right direction as it will contribute to the sustainability of EMS
activities in both the tourism and manufacturing sectors.
The environmental audit program should be continued but with a changed
emphasis. The audit program should have a two-pronged approach: (1)
Conducting scaled-down, less costly audits, and (2) providing training on auditing
techniques to Jamaican consultants and management firms to assure long-term
sustainability through local technical capacity building.
8.1.5 Ecosystem Conservation Elements in R2RW
In the R2RW, USAID/Jamaica has an interesting opportunity to examine the
different roles that protected areas might play in integrated watershed
management. While the Blue and John Crow Mountain National Park is at the
38
headwaters of the Rio Grande watershed, Montego Bay Marine Park is the
receiving waters for the Great River Watershed – the two regions of focus for
R2RW. Through the Parks in Peril program, the Blue and John Crow Mountain
National Park (BJCMNP) is currently the biodiversity/ ecosystem conservation
component of USAID/Jamaica’s SO2 portfolio. Continuing efforts in BJCMNP
would complement currently planned activities for R2RW in Portland. Similarly,
work with the Montego Bay Marine Park would complement upland R2RW
activities in the Great River watershed and would fill the gap of marine protected
area work.
8.1.6 Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Policy
In 1998, the Government established the Council on Ocean and Coastal Zone
Management, within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade. CWIP
provided funds for the Council to prepare a comprehensive policy document on
coastal and ocean resources. While the policy impetus must come from
government, CWIP should be prepared to assist in the transition from the
formulation of broad policy to the design and implementation of specific program
initiatives.
Many of the policies adopted by the Council on Ocean and Coastal Policies fall
within the jurisdiction of NEPA. While NEPA needs to assert firm leadership and
direction in implementing these policies, CWIP (through CR5) is in a position to
provide assistance to the units within NEPA that are operationally responsible for
the biodiversity and protected area components of the marine and coastal
environment.
CWIP should also retain some flexibility to fund special studies that are germane
to coastal resources management The recently completed study, funded through
CWIP, linking beach sand accretion in Negril to calcification of algae on sea
grasses is an example of such technical and scientific support, as is the funding
provided by CWIP to the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment.
8.1.7 Use of Threats Analysis in Programming and Project Design
The "bottom-up" approach in determining community-level project initiatives could
be buttressed by providing participants with a scientific basis for arriving at program
decisions. While the community should make the final decision, the information
available to them in making choices could be significantly enhanced by conducting
"threat analyses" in the targeted communities. These analyses could be conducted
by panels of experts recruited from a variety of agencies and institutions. Illustrative
examples of how such techniques might be applied to current SO2 programs
appear in Attachment D.
8.1.8 Skills Transfer in Community Organization and Intervention
A process needs to be established for transferring both the skills and the lessons
learned from CWIP to NEPA staff. CWIP’s experience in working at the
community level and in building partnerships between local groups and central
government entities could be invaluable to NEPA staff in sensitizing them to local
39
concerns, and in providing training in organizational development. Collaboration
in this effort between CWIP, NEPA, the Social Development Commission and the
Social Work Department of UWI is recommended.
8.1.9 Public Sector Coordination and Capacity Enhancement
USAID's SO2 team and its contractors are implementing programs that are
unusually complex from an institutional standpoint. This complexity is
compounded by the evolving nature of agency relationships within the
Government of Jamaica. USAID and its contractors need to maintain close
liaison with the directors and senior personnel of the pertinent GOJ ministries
and agencies, yet it is not always clear where and to what extent coordination is
needed.
In order to effectively implement USAID's SO2 program portfolio, particular
attention needs to be given to clarifying the evolving set of relationships between
USAID's SO2 team and its contractors, on the one hand, and the Ministry of Land
and the Environment and NEPA, on the other. NEPA, a statutory body attached
to the Ministry, is USAID's principal partner in conducting the CWIP and R2RW
programs. NEPA itself is in process of welding together two large and complex
planning and regulatory agencies, NRCA and Town Planning. Add to this, the
need to consider the role of PIOJ in its review of donor programs, and the
scenario is further complicated. A number of these agencies could benefit from
efforts by USAID to provide management training through seminars,
consultations, and exchanges.
With respect to NRCA/NEPA, USAID may need to broaden support to the host
organization in the next two years, subject to the organizational structures that
may be put in place in that organization, if sustainability of its programs is to be
achieved. The same applies to the Ministry to which NEPA is attached. While no
discussions have been held with either body to determine the possible forms of
such assistance, it is important for USAID to keep this option open.
8.2.0 Develop a Gender Strategy
As soon as is feasible, the role that gender plays in all of USAID/Jamaica’s SO2
activities needs to be determined in order to identify strategic interventions for a
more efficient and effective program. USAID should consider gender training for
SO2 partners. Contractors for SO2 should ultimately involve local partners who
have expertise in gender considerations. USAID/WIDTECH and
USAID/LAC/RSD could assist with this planning and development process.
 8.2 Intermediate Term 2003-05: Bridging the Two SO2 Cycles
8.2.1 Develop Program for Upper Negril and Ocho Rios Watersheds
A major effort at watershed management is needed for the North and South
Negril rivers. Water quality in both rivers should be evaluated for relative
contribution to coastal water quality degradation. Sources should be identified
and targeted interventions designed. While a great deal of work has been done in
40
Negril, a comprehensive program addressing pollution sources in the upper
watershed would significantly contribute to the protection of coastal water quality.
In order to address the high fecal coliform levels at Dunns River Falls, and given
CWIP’s prior success in establishing public/private partnership arrangements, a
similar effort should be undertaken to partner the Ocho Rios Environmental
Advisory Group (EAG) with the UDC.
8.2.2 Develop an Environment Awareness and Advocacy Program for
Coastal Resources Management
This program would represent a transition between the work accomplished by
CWIP and EAST, and the initiation of a program for the protection of biodiversity
and the enhancement of coastal water quality by ratcheting up communication
and information sharing capabilities of NGOs and CBOs, private sector groups,
and research institutions.
The essence of the program would be the posting and sharing of information
pertaining to the environment. The Negril Chamber of Commerce has been
contemplating putting coastal water quality information on the Internet. What is
being proposed incorporates and extends that concept. Water quality data would
be posted. So would information pertaining to Blue Flag certification, ISO
compliance, and Green Globe certification. DBML or some other respected, non￾partisan entity, such as UWI’s Centre for Marine Science, could act as a
clearinghouse.
The purpose would be to apply information technology to advance citizen
advocacy, and public awareness. It would be a powerful inducement to maintain
environmental standards and to publicize particular achievements of
communities, commercial establishments and organizations.
8.2.3 Develop a Fisheries Management / Marine Protection Program
Strategy
Fisherman organizations for the entire north coast could be partnered with
DBML, NEPA and the Fisheries Division to develop a comprehensive strategy for
fisheries, including shellfish, protection. Environmental and economic
considerations should be given to aquaculture for both food and ornamental
fishes in order to relieve the pressure on wild stocks. Particular attention should
be given to management measures for the protection of conch, an endangered
species under CITES.
The groundwork needed to launch such a comprehensive strategy and program
should begin well in advance of 2003. Among other considerations, institutional
roles need to be addressed early in the process. Nominally, the Fisheries
Division would play a lead role. The Fisheries Division has monitoring and
management authority but is understaffed and is primarily concerned with licensing
and other operational activities. CITES is overseen by the Wildlife Division of
NRCA/NEPA, while the Coastal Zone Management Division is responsible for
coastal and marine habitat. Personnel connected with DBML have the most
extensive experience in the subject areas, and could bring considerable expertise to
41
such a project. It is suggested that DBML take the initiative in establishing a
program design for presentation and discussion with potential partners, including
the USAID/SO2 division.
8.3 Long Term 2005-2009: Future Directions for Next Cycle of SO2
8.3.1 Integrating Biodiversity and Ecosystem Protection in Urban
Development Planning
The greatest threat to marine flora and fauna in Jamaica's major tourism centers
comes from environmentally destructive patterns of development and land
utilization, deficiencies in urban infrastructure, and the disregard for natural
processes in the exploitation of coastal resources.
Degraded coastal water quality and the destruction of coastal and marine habitat
stems from multiple sources. These sources need to be identified and mitigation
measures devised. This requires the inception of a planning process that is
dependent on reliable information, sound technical judgement, broad stakeholder
participation, public investment, and the political will to implement plan
recommendation.
The consolidation of NRCA and Town Planning provides a unique opportunity to
integrate environmental and biodiversity protection into development orders and
plans for parish development. Building upon the collective experience with
DEMO, CWIP, EAST, and R2RW, USAID is exceptionally well positioned to
assist NEPA in mobilizing community involvement in designating protected
areas, providing for public access to the coast, and planning for environmentally
sound development.
Development orders will have been prepared, or will be in process of preparation
for many of the areas in which CWIP and R2RW will have been active. Working
with local NGOs, CBOs and private sector interest groups to deal with issues
affecting the design of the physical environment, that at the same time conserves
and protects coastal and marine resources is consistent with USAID’s
programmatic history. It is also consistent with USAID’s interest in strengthening
the institutional capacity of GOJ agencies to adopt environmentally sound
policies and practices.
At the central government level USAID's environmental program should focus on
assisting NEPA to develop urban plans and growth strategies that are compatible
with the protection of coastal and marine ecosystems.
At the local or area-wide level, USAID's program focus should be oriented toward
mobilizing community involvement in identifying local environmental problems,
devising community self-help programs, designating protected areas, ensuring
public access to the coast, stimulating eco-friendly business opportunities, and
public education and outreach.
By the year 2005, all parish and area-wide development plans or development
orders should contain environmental components, with appropriate management
42
guidelines, regulatory provisions, and monitoring programs. The time is past
when the urban environment (where the majority of people live and work) and
natural systems should be considered in isolation. NEPA has an opportunity and
an obligation to bridge that divide. And donor organizations have a vital
supporting role to play.
8.3.2 Biodiversity / Ecosystem Protection
Jamaica has unusually high levels of both floral and faunal endemism and has
been ranked fifth among islands of the world in terms of endemic species.
Vascular plants, alone, include 923 that are found no where else in the world.
These are found principally in remote and less developed areas of the island.
Potential areas for biodiversity/ecosystem protection would include Black River
and Cockpit Country. While neither of these two areas fit the criterion of high
tourism revenue generators, nor are they hot spots of pollution, they are longtime
candidates for the promulgation of protected area management plans. (This is
especially true of Black River for which an initial plan was developed by NRCA
under the DEMO Project.)
USAID/Jamaica should consider the Black River Lower Morass as a priority for
biodiversity/ecosystem conservation work. Reasons for its inclusion are
compelling. This site is the largest freshwater wetland ecosystem in Jamaica and
has an area of approximately 5,700 hectares. It is a complex of shallow brackish
lagoons, limestone islands, tidal marsh mudflats and mangroves near the coast,
and extensive freshwater marshes with peat formations. The wetland has been
designated by Jamaica for inclusion in Ramsar’s (intergovernmental Convention
on Wetlands) list of wetlands of global importance.
Cockpit karst is another top priority for biodiversity/ecosystem conservation that
should be considered by USAID/Jamaica for inclusion in its SO2 portfolio.
Several factors contribute to this recommendation. Cockpit Country, the karst
(porous limestone) and conical hills and valleys in central Jamaica, is an island￾within-an-island of specially adapted biodiversity and contains very high levels of
endemism (Windsor Research Centre). The region is largely uninhabited and as
such, is one of the last remaining refuges for many of Jamaica’s globally unique
species. In recognition of its global importance, the area has been nominated as
an UNESCO World Heritage Site.
9.0 PROGRAM COORDINATION
There is scope for improved coordination of programs within USAID's SO2 portfolio as
well as among the bilateral and multilateral donor organizations. This is true with respect
to subject area focus as well as areas of geographical concentration. As a starter, the
programs being planned for the Port Antonio/Portland area should be reassessed. Initial
impressions are that too many donors are programming too many activities in too short a
time.
This is an appropriate time for performance planning in light of the considerable changes
in the activities of the SO. The new R2R Project is starting. The other projects are in
process of revising their activities. In the next two years many changes in field activities
43
are contemplated or recommended. The resources available to the SO are limited as is
the time allowed for accomplishing the planned results. Findings in this report indicate
that there is a need to better coordinate action among the partners implementing the
program. There is opportunity to better inform the stakeholders of the accomplishments
and goals of the SO.
The following series of actions are recommended:
1. Complete a comprehensive portfolio review as described in ADS 203.3.3.
2. Develop updated cause-effect pathways for results in SO-2.
3. Harmonize inputs from all partners leading toward results
4. Identify benchmarks (targets) that monitor achievement identified in the
causal pathways.
5. Develop SO results packages, using the core concepts of teamwork and
participation, that clearly lays out the casual linkages for achieving results.
Identify indicators of results at the output level, and quantify activities and
inputs provided. All administrative environmental1
 requirements should be
included. Required reports as well as systems of assessing and learning
should be established as well.
6. Using the results packages, developed in 5. above, and the SO indicators,
develop a Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) for the SO following the
guidelines in ADS 203.
7. Modify the SO budget to reflect funding for ADS2
 performance monitoring, to
include cost of collecting and analyzing data, special studies, and
evaluations.
8. Include the PMP in the Strategic Objective Agreement for SO-2.
9. Outline reporting requirements that support the new monitoring plan and
other requirements. Insure that reports provide analysis of progress as well
as inputs and outputs and are clearly tied to the PMP.
Additional information on planning, monitoring and evaluation for improved management
of this SO can be found in the attached report (see Attachment F) on performance
monitoring.
9.1 SO2 Contractor Coordination
Based on brief discussions with persons directing the three major projects in the
SO2 portfolio, the need for coordinating program activities is acknowledged. The
various chiefs-of-party are scheduled to meet in the near future to address this
matter. But COPs need guidance from the client since they are understandingly
 
1
 ADS 204 provide information on the SO Team’s environmental monitoring requirements
and the Initial Environmental Evaluation.
2
See ADS 203.3.2.1
44
reluctant (and may be unable contractually) to make program changes without
firm direction from or approval by the USAID SO2 unit.
9.2 Donor Coordination
Currently, the key donor agencies for Port Antonio are USAID, the EU and CIDA.
CIDA’s ENACT and Green Fund, and AID’s EAST, CWIP and R2RW could, or
could not, turn out to be mutually reinforcing. Discussion of coordination at this
start-up phase would be useful. There are good intentions all around, and no lack
of willingness to discuss the issues. Someone simply has to take the initiative to
get the issues on the table. Ideally, NEPA, and particularly PIOJ, should be
involved in this process.
The Donor Coordinating Group should be expanded to include multilateral
agencies, particularly UNEP and, possibly, UNDP. The Regional Coordinating
Unit (RCU) of UNEP’s Caribbean Action Plan (CAP) is headquartered in
Kingston. The United States is signatory to the Cartagena Convention and is a
major contributor to the UNEP/CAP. (The US delegation at CAP meetings
regularly includes representatives of NOAA, EPA, and FWS.) The program focus
of the CAP stresses biodiversity protection and enhancement of coastal water
quality. It would seem appropriate and informative to include UNEP in meetings
of the Donor Coordinating Group.
10.0 FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS
The following information was compiled from a variety of reporting documents provided
to the evaluation team by the USAID SO2 staff, but should be regarded as preliminary.
The figures need to be verified by the CWIP COP.
10.1 Reducing CWIP Community Grant Funds for Portland
CWIP has approximately $200,000 available for community grants in Portland
through the period, December 15, 2001. This is the last date for grant approval in
order to comply with contract requirements for orderly closeout of grant activities.
This amount is in addition to $200,000 in grant funds available through R2RW for
the 5-year period. (The R2RW grant budget is approximately $400,000 for the
two targeted watersheds over for the Life of the Project.)
10.2 Reallocating CWIP's EMS Program Funds to the Wastewater
Component
It is clear that both NWC and community organizations strongly endorse an
extension of the wastewater component for continued training and support in
Negril, Ocho Rios, Montego Bay, and for new wastewater activities in Port
Antonio. CWIP's current budget for this activity is close to exhaustion.
Elsewhere in this report it was recommended that EAST assume the bulk of EMS
activity at the enterprise and local levels.
45
If CWIP were to terminate EMS activities in project years 4 and 5, it is estimated
that approximately $230,000 would be available for reallocation.
At the moment, the evaluation team does not have sufficient information about
the status of CWIP’s community-based EMS activities to assess the timing or
magnitude of any possible reallocation of funds; whether current programs can
be phased out without serious disruption; whether all of the funds should be
reallocated; or whether a reserve should be retained for CWIP later participation
with NEPA in the implementation of EMS strategy once the relevant policies have
been adopted. If, as recommended (in 8.1.4), CWIP's community-based EMS
activities were to continue for one more year, and then terminated, approximately
$115,000 would be available for reallocation to the wastewater or some other
program component.
11.0 RELEVANCE OF SO MONITORING INDICATORS
As reported in “R4 Results Review”, March 15, 2000, the key SO results indicator is
“Improved coastal water quality in terms of percentage of samples meeting U.S. EPA
standard for fecal coliform”. The Review goes on to state that “Fecal coliform measures
have implications for human health and coral reef ecosystem maintenance.”
Coliform measures are not significant indicators of coral reef health in the absence of
other parameters, particularly nutrients. These reef-related parameters are being
analyzed and, it is understood, are now included in the results indicator. Two
observations: (1) Current EPA standards for recreational bathing distinguish between
animal and human coliform levels; it is the latter that pose the greatest threat to public
health since they are associated with viral and bacterial presence; (2) the Negril sewage
treatment plant was never designed to remove nutrients from the effluent which is
discharged into the South Negril River.
The finding that “The water quality of the Negril coastal zone is of acceptable quality”
may or may not be meaningful from the standpoint of either public health or of coral reef
protection and regeneration. The “Results Review” itself raises doubts about the
relationship between the SO objective and the stated indicator. Quoting from the
document:
“Overall 69% of samples met the (EPA) standard for fecal coliform This reflects
an improvement over the 62% baseline and 65% target. The bad news is that the
North and South Negril Rivers have very high nutrient and coliform rates
attributable to agricultural run-off, nutrient-rich effluent from the sewage treatment
plant and informal settlements in the watershed and along the rivers. The effects
are not yet manifest in coastal water quality, but the potential is lurking. (Meaning
unclear.) We are developing programs for improved agricultural and sanitation
practices.”
The reference to the development of improved agricultural and sanitation practices may
refer to the R2RW project that targets the Great River Watershed in Montego Bay and
the Rio Grande Watershed in Portland. As far as is known, program activities in the
upper watersheds of the North or South Negril rivers are limited to the four community￾based pilot projects – two composting, organic farming, bee keeping, and. Local
46
sanitation projects. Realistically, these don’t address the problem of high coliform and
nutrient loads in the North and South Negril rivers.
If the Negril sewage plant does not treat nutrients, and no activities have been
programmed to affect agricultural practices in the upper watershed, then the causal link
between CWIP activities and reduced level of nutrients and coliforms and coastal waters
is tenuous.
The integrated program activities that are being carried out by CWIP in Negril are
designed to improve coastal water quality. An excellent start has been made, and if
sustained, in time they will. But the process is complex, time consuming, and expensive.
The result indicators should reflect that understanding.
A more inclusive result indicator, based on a weighted rating system that incorporates
both qualitative and quantitative measures is called for.
An example is illustrated below:
A Result
During the past (sampling sequence) the regional wastewater management
system in Negril has improved in operational efficiency and community support
by a factor of (1-10).
This factor is based on values accorded to the following indicators listed below.
B. Indicators (to be given weights based on relative importance)
• Percent increase in the volume of treated effluent;
• Number of hours given to training of sewage plant operators;
• Reduction of reported O and M problems;
• Community meetings and other evidence of stakeholder participation
in waste management decision-making;
• Number of new connections to the sewerage collection system;
• Percentage of coastal water samples meeting NEPA and/or Ministry
of Health standards for water-based recreation (and marine habitat
protection).
C. Causal Activities
The result (in A above) is directly attributable to the following integrated program
activities conducted by CWIP:
(1) Implementing a wastewater training program and providing needed supplies
and equipment;
47
(2) Launching a community-based coastal water sampling program;
(3) Establishing a broadly representative Wastewater Advisory Monitoring
Committee;
(4) Increasing the institutional capacity for biological and chemical analysis of
ocean water samples.
These causal activities need to be discussed in both quantitative and qualitative terms in
order to convey a sense of what is going on. Using matrices and tables to replace
straightforward narrative explanation masks the reality of what is being accomplished
and what more needs to be done.
Achieving the SO2 objective of improving coastal water quality is inherently complex,
costly, and long-term. It requires broad stakeholder participation, and heavy investment
in economic and social infrastructure, as well as changes in societal values and
consciousness. It is a mistake to try and simplify what is generally recognized as a
difficult problem requiring long-term commitments.
In tracking the SO2 program, it is advisable to stick to the facts, and not try and leapfrog
in claiming results that cannot be substantiated. The SO2 program, as currently
conceived and being implemented, has accomplished a great deal in a short time. Its
long-term contribution will be in instituting a process that is sustainable and can be
replicated to other areas of Jamaica.
 Further comments on the relationship between SO2 objectives and results indicators
are provided by the work of the Evaluation Specialist. These appear in item 12.0 below,
and in Attachment A.
12.0 CHANGES TO THE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE FRAMEWORK
Effective monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems support several important
management requirements. These include:
• Account for planned, contracted, and important inputs provided to customers and
partners.
• Monitor planned actions.
• Assess effectiveness of inputs.
• Analyze progress toward achievement of results.
• Detect unexpected results or problems.
• Provide information for identifying and planning future activities.
• Furnish decision-makers feedback on achievement and effectiveness of inputs
and outputs and progress toward achievement of results.
48
The existing M&E systems of SO-2 are substantially employed for accounting of
contracted and important inputs with few provisions for evaluating the effectiveness of
these inputs or evaluating progress toward identified levels in causal pathways. ADS
2033
 provides considerable information and guidance on the development and use of
causal pathways4
 in M&E systems used for management of Strategic Objectives. It is
clear that the expected consequences of quality M&E systems would improved
management and knowledge of achievement of the planned results.
The SO-2 team is a point where modification of its M&E system can be initiated without
disruption in the implementation of activities. At this time, new starts and modification of
ongoing activities are being initiated. Analysis of the ongoing activities are being done to
indicate future directions for the SO. The analysis being conducted can be organized for
defining causal pathways that should become the basis for M&E including data collection
and analysis for improved reporting of the effectiveness and progress of the SO
supported activity’s inputs and outputs.
The Findings and Recommendations for the M&E system were developed using
guidance found in the USAID ADS 200 Series5
. As these are internal operating orders
for USAID, the Findings and Recommendations are directed to the SO Team but
address the needs of stakeholders, partners and customers as well. Knowledge of
USAID operating procedures and policies is required to fully recognize the value of the
information provided. The SO Team should work with its partners in developing
understanding of the requirements of a M&E system that measures inputs and
effectiveness and achievement of results while following guidelines in the ADS.
Recommendations are detailed in the attached report, Performance Monitoring under
USAID/Jamaica Strategic Objective 2. Included in the recommendations are steps that
will lead to a comprehensive, more effective M&E system for the SO Team as well as
establishing data collection methods, targets and benchmarks for assessing progress
and achievements.
It is clear that this is an opportune time for refining the management system used in the
SO. Principal findings in the Monitoring and Evaluation Report focused on the
mechanisms that could be improved. These are summarized below.
1. There is opportunity for the SO Team to optimize achievement of results by updating
and harmonizing activities included in SO-2 Results Packages
2. The present reporting requirements of this SO focus on assessment of impact or
progress analyzing the effectiveness of the measures of input/output completion.
The measures used are mainly quantitative. There are few qualitative measures of
 
3
 Automated Directive System (ADS) is the internal operating system used by USAID. It is
available to anyone at the USAID website on the Internet.
4
 Causal pathways represent a series of interrelated actions (inputs, outputs, or partial results)
that are expected to produce achievement of sustainable results targeted by the SO. Included
are targets, benchmarks and other measures for analysis of progress and achievement. Causal
pathways form the foundation for effective management using M&E as a principal tool.
5
 ADS 200 Series provides planning and achieving guidelines including M&E requirements and
procedures.
49
progress reported. There are few reportable targets to measure effectiveness of
inputs and outputs.
3. Achievement of the Goal of SO-2 could be improved if outputs accomplished and
results achieved were better communicated to important decision-makers and other
donors.
4. The strategic objective and the intermediate results are appropriate and represent
measures in achieving as defined in the ADS. The SO and IR indicators are
quantitative and measure specific achievements. There is scope to add an indicator
at the IR level that qualitatively measures effectiveness and acceptance of the
changes supported by the SO. An Indicator of long-term results could measure
results of improved quality of natural resources at the goal level of the SO.
5. The Strategic Objective Framework identifies a number of outputs that directly
contribute to achievement of the IRs. These appear to be reasonable targets.
Causal pathways leading to these outputs have not been updated to include the new
activities in R2RW or to coordinate and integrate all of the activities funded by SO-2.
This leads to sub-optimal management of the SO
6. There are a number of important outputs and measures of success that are
discussed in SO documents but are not tracked or reported in the monitoring and
evaluation systems used in SO-2.
For additional discussion on these findings and the recommendations associated with
them see Attachment F.
50
ATTACHMENT A
Summary of Current SO2 Programs
The Coastal Water Quality Improvement Project (CWIP)
A five-year bilateral initiative with the Government of Jamaica (GOJ) funded at a level of
US$9 million. CWIP, which started in December 1997, promotes sound environmental
practices through an integrated coastal resources management approach by working with
all sectors of society from community to government. The target sites for this project are
Negril, Ocho Rios and Port Antonio and the strategic partners in the GOJ are the National
Water Commission and the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA).
The Environmental Audits for Sustainable Tourism (EAST) Project
The EAST project is geared at improving the environmental practices of Jamaica’s vital
tourism and manufacturing industries, and strengthening their ability to meet international
standards. The aim is to improve their competitiveness and contribution to Jamaica’s
economic development and environmental management. The project has been a success
and is in its third renewed phase of implementation. The third phase is funded at a cost
of US$1.5 million, for a period of 30 months and began in June 2000. EAST works
closely with the Jamaica Hotel and Tourist Association (JHTA) and the Jamaica
Manufacturers Association (JMA). The target locations are Negril, Ocho Rios, Montego
Bay and Portland.
The Ridge to Reef Watershed (R2RW) Project
The R2RW Project, which started in August 2000, will focus heavily on mitigating upland
watershed management problems. It is a five-year bilateral initiative with the
Government of Jamaica (GOJ) funded at a level of US$6 million. The centerpiece of this
assistance will involve the establishment of environmental management programs in
selected geographical areas earmarked on the bases of value of resources, severity of
threats, local and national support, and institutional capabilities. The Great River and Rio
Grande Watersheds have been identified as target sites and the R2RW Team will be
working closely with the NEPA Watershed Unit, and the Ministry of Agriculture.
51
ATTACHMENT B
Evaluation Team Task Descriptions
As set forth in the Scope of Work the Evaluation Team was required to undertake the
following specific tasks:
Task 1. Interview Environment Office and USAID personnel as required.
Review background and historical information on the environmental program and
program activities.
Analyze the goals and objectives of the Environmental Strategic Objective Framework.
Task 2. Review program reports and other results for the environment office and
Strategic Objective 2 of the USAID Jamaica program, including:
Strategic Objective Agreement of USAID Jamaica signed 1998 as amended
Environmental Components of the Results Review and Resource Request
(R4) for USAID/Jamaica’s Bilateral Program
USAID/Jamaica’s Bilateral Assistance Strategy.
 Task 3. Review the major activities of the environmental program as detailed below:
Task 3.1 Coastal Water Quality Improvement Project (CWIP)
! Review technical reports and work plans for CWIP for information on the
design and operational activities of the project and the five contract
results and assess their continuing relevance to the project and the
Strategic Objective Framework.
! Interview key personnel at CWIP and their strategic partners the National
Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) and the National Water
Commission (NWC) and other key selected partners for feedback on the
role and impact of the project.
! Assess the work of the project on the basis of the Statement of Work,
USAID’s Environmental Strategic Objective Framework and the
indicators identified.
! Assess the relevance and applicability of indicators for the project.
! Identify lessons learned and recommendations for enhancement of the
project activities.
! Propose a practical means of fulfilling the request by the Government of
Jamaica to extend the timeframe for CWIP Contract Result 2 (the
wastewater component) which is scheduled to expire on January 31,
2001. This would entail reworking the Life of Project Plan and Statement
of Work to provide for funding for the Pollution Prevention Specialist and
activities of this component.
! Identify and propose priority program areas for concentration in the
remaining two years in the life of the project.
! Assess issues of program sustainability.
Task 3.2 Environmental Audits for Sustainable Tourism (EAST) Phase III
! Review the Statement of Work and Work Plan and comment on their
relevance and practicability.
! Interview key personnel at EAST and the Jamaica Hotel and Tourist
Association (JHTA) and other key selected partners for feedback on the
role and impact of the project.
52
! Assess the work of the project on the basis of the Scope of Work,
USAID’s Environmental Strategic Objective Framework and the
indicators identified
Task 3.3 Ridge to Reef Watershed (R2RW) Project
! Review the Statement of Work and Draft Work Plan and comment on
their relevance and practicability.
! Interview key personnel at R2RW and their strategic partner – the
National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) and other key
selected partners for feedback on the potential role of the project.
! Assess the relevance of the work proposed for the project on the basis of
the Statement of Work, USAID’s Environmental Strategic Objective
Framework and the indicators identified.
! Propose sustainability strategies to assure institutionalization of
programs.
Task 4. The team will use the information gathered above to assess:
! The impact of the SO2 Program Activities and lessons learned from these
exercises to inform the design, consolidation and modifications, if any, of the
Strategic Objective Framework and Activities.
! The financial and management resources required to adequately implement the
activities under the Strategic Objective Framework as per modifications
suggested by the consultant.
! The relevance of the program’s activities to the Strategic Objective Framework
within the context of environmental issues in Jamaica and the priorities of the
GOJ with due consideration of USAID’s comparative advantage.
! The relevance of the program’s activities to the Strategic Objective Framework
within the context of environmental issues in Jamaica and the priorities of the
GOJ with due consideration of USAID’s comparative advantage. Also review the
present Monitoring and Evaluation indicators used by projects and their
appropriateness to the R4.
! The relevance and appropriateness of indicators in the Strategic Objective
Framework. This should include a review of the indicators currently used to
reflect the work of the program in the Results Review and Resource Request
(R4) to determine if they are the most appropriate in review of the SO2 program.
! The impact of Program Activities on Jamaica’s Civil Society in terms of levels of
capacity, sustainability and participation, especially for Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs) and Community Based Organizations (CBOs).
Task 5. Based on the findings of the evaluation team, recommend improvements or
modifications to the Strategic Objective Framework or the method of implementation to
take the environmental portfolio into the new strategy period (2005-2009).
This should include recommendations of potential new activities for the Environmental
SO2 Team to consider replacing the CWIP in 2003 within the context of environmental
issues in Jamaica and the priorities of the GOJ.
53
ATTACHMENT C
Documents Reviewed
All team members were provided with key background reports that included the following:
USAID
• Strategic Objective Agreement of USAID Jamaica signed 1998 as amended (two
amendments).
• Environmental Components of the Results Review and Resource Request (R4) for
USAID/Jamaica’s Bilateral Program.
• USAID’s Bilateral Assistance Strategy.
CWIP
• Lessons Learned from the East Project, Dec. 1998.
• Life of Project Plan, April 1998.
• First Annual Work Plan, April, 1998.
• Second Annual Work Plan, Jan. 1999.
• Semi Annual Report, Feb. 1999.
• CWIP/EAST Consultative Seminar, July 1999.
• Semi Annual Report, Aug. 1999.
• Semi Annual Report, Aug. 2000.
EAST
• Statement of Work (n.d).
• Project Report, Nov. 1998.
• Phase II Institutional Plan, March 1999.
• Phase II Final Project Report, April 1999.
• Phase III Work Plan, Sept. 2000.
R2RW
• Statement of Work (n.d.).
54
ATTACHMENT D
Environment and Natural Resources Information
In order to strengthen the current program, SO2 program activities should incorporate
more environment and natural resources information and approaches. Below are
recommendations for how to include this information within the current program
approach of both CWIP and R2RW.
R2RW
At the earliest stages of program design, a threats analysis should be conducted.
To accomplish this, the “key natural resources … that are both environmentally and
economically significant” should first be identified for each program site. Targeted
resources should then undergo a ‘Rapid Environmental Assessment’ (similar to the
White River Rapid Assessment conducted recently under CWIP) to determine the most
significant threats affecting resource quality. Sources of threats then need to be
identified. The above work could be could be conducted by UWI faculty, NGOs, SO2
program staff, DBML staff, etc.
Target resources, threats and threat sources should be clearly relayed to
community members/stakeholders so that activity priorities are made with fully informed
participants. Interventions should be targeted toward abating sources of threats.
Discussions should include an assessment of which threats are possible to abate locally
and which require, for example, national policy intervention. Stakeholders may choose
not to address all of the most significant threats. Should this be the case, however, the
significance of the threat, the threat source, and the reasons for deciding not to intervene
should be acknowledged in program design documentation.
At the same time the initial community animation is taking place, a team of
experts (a ‘technical advisory team’) should be convened to help 1) guide the overall
process and 2) answer any technical questions the community/stakeholders may have.
Again, this team could be made up of UWI faculty, NGOs, SO2 program staff, DBML
staff, etc. and could be the same team convened for the threats analysis, above. The
tradeoffs between various approaches, including expected results and costs, should be
clearly relayed to stakeholders. This technical advisory team should be available to
analyze any environment/natural resource data for communities.
Finally, sampling protocols for baseline data, both temporal and spatial
considerations, should be conducted using a rigorous, scientific method. Communities
should be brought in to the process once the baseline has been established, to
determine future priorities for follow-up work.
CWIP
In CWIP programs, threats analyses should be conducted to ensure that current
interventions are targeted toward sources. A team of experts is needed to assist
communities in interpreting the water quality monitoring data and helping with the design
of follow-up action plans (see suggestion in the Water Quality Monitoring section). As
with the White River Rapid Assessment, results should be presented to stakeholders to
incorporate into their decision making process.
55
ATTACHMENT E
USAID/Jamaica Environmental Portfolio Evaluation: Findings and Recommendations
Natural Resources Management Specialist
I. Overall SO2 Observations/Recommendations
Biodiversity/Ecosystem Conservation
Findings
Jamaica has unusually high levels of both floral and faunal endemism and has been ranked
fifth among islands of the world in terms of endemic species. Vascular plants, alone, include
923 that are found no where else in the world. Jamaica also has the highest rate of
deforestation in the hemisphere. With greater than 10,000 ha of forest lost each year, less than
6% of Jamaica’s forests are undisturbed with the remainder considered ‘badly disturbed’
(NRCA, 1999).
Biodiversity/Ecosystem Conservation is a minor component of the current USAID/Jamaica
portfolio and is not only a priority of both the US and Jamaican governments, it is an
important component to the overall objective of improving quality of key natural resources.
Because biodiversity/ecosystem conservation is an important component of a comprehensive
strategy for improving quality of natural resources, its inclusion would greatly compliment
the current suite of SO2 activities.
Under the current SO2 Strategic Objective, a particularly compelling case can be made for
more work in marine protected areas. ‘No take’ and ‘low use’ zones have been shown to be a
critical component of an overall coastal marine management strategy, acting as core refugia
for reproductive individuals.
Recommendation(s)
In current project areas, USAID/Jamaica should consider supporting the Negril Area
Environmental Protection Trust’s (NEPT) efforts in the Royal Palm Reserve. Besides that
this area represents a unique ecosystem, proper management, restoration and protection of the
morass could have tremendous water quality, quantity and flow regulation benefits. The
water management benefits of wetlands, particularly those downstream from steep slopes and
agriculture, have been well documented and include flow regulation, sediment trapping, and
nutrient uptake, among others. Additional benefits include sustainability of the tourism
sector, alleviation of tourism pressure on the coastal marine system through provision of
alternatives, environmental education opportunities and NGO self-sufficiency. Because this
system has been degraded, for example through water flow channelization, research is needed
to determine benefits as well as costs of restoration.
In the R2RW, USAID/Jamaica has an interesting opportunity to examine the different roles
that protected areas might play in integrated watershed management and should capitalize on
opportunity. While the Blue and John Crow Mountain National Park is at the headwaters of
56
the Rio Grande watershed, Montego Bay Marine Park is the receiving waters for the Great
River Watershed – the two regions of focus for R2RW. Through the Parks in Peril program,
the Blue and John Crow Mountain National Park (BJCMNP) is currently the
biodiversity/ecosystem conservation component of USAID/Jamaica’s SO2 portfolio.
Continuing efforts in BJCMNP would complement currently planned activities for R2RW in
Portland. Similarly, work with the Montego Bay Marine Park would complement upland
R2RW activities in the Great River watershed and would fill the gap of marine protected area
work.
Outside of current project areas, the "Black River Lower Morass" should be considered by
USAID/Jamaica as a priority for biodiversity/ecosystem conservation work. Reasons for its
inclusion are compelling. The wetland has been designated by Jamaica for inclusion in
Ramsar’s (the intergovernmental Convention on Wetlands) list of wetlands of global
importance. This site is the largest freshwater wetland ecosystem in Jamaica and has an area
of approximately 5,700 hectares. The Black River Lowe Morass is a complex of shallow
brackish lagoons, limestone islands, tidal marshes mudflats and mangroves near the coast,
and extensive freshwater marshes with peat formations (Ramsar, 11/97). It also has the
highest concentration of both freshwater and marine fishes in Jamaica (TNC, pers. comm.)
Cockpit karst is another top priority for biodiversity/ecosystem conservation that should be
considered by USAID/Jamaica for inclusion in its SO2 portfolio. Several factors point to this
recommendation. Cockpit Country, the karst (porous limestone) and conical hills and valleys
in central Jamaica, is an island-within-an-island of specially-adapted biodiversity and
contains very high levels of endemism (Windsor Research Centre). The region is largely
uninhabited and as such, is one of the last remaining refuges for many of Jamaica’s globally
unique species. In recognition of its global importance, the area has been nominated as a
UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Gender Considerations
Findings
Gender refers to the ways in which culture defines the rights and responsibilities of men and
women and how these interact. Currently, gender considerations are slated for inclusion in
the R2RW component of USAID/Jamaica’s SO2 portfolio but are lacking in both CWIP and
EAST. Consideration of Gender is a mandate of USAID and a priority of the Government of
Jamaica. Under USAID’s ‘Managing for Results’ requirements,
“ Strategic plans must reflect attention to gender concerns. Unlike other technical
analyses described in this section, gender is not a separate topic to be analyzed and
reported on in isolation. Instead USAID’s gender mainstreaming approach requires that
appropriate gender analysis be applied to the range of technical issues that are considered
in the development of a given Strategic Plan.” (ADS 201.3.4.11)
Similarly, the Jamaica National Environmental Action Plan for 1999-2002 states that “The
Government will develop a Gender Equity Mechanism for analysis and assessment of all
projects including those addressing environmental issues.” (Action 1.23) (NRCA, 1999).
Gender analysis can help to effectively and efficiently target resource benefits and activities
according to economic, political, and cultural realities and helps to anticipate impacts that
projects may have on the people they are intended to serve.
57
Without a more thorough analysis, it is not possible to determine how significant the effect
might be on program effectiveness and efficiency, were gender included.
Recommendation(s)
As soon as is feasible, the role that gender plays in all of USAID/Jamaica’s SO2 activities
needs to be determined in order to identify strategic interventions for a more efficient and
effective program. USAID should consider gender training for SO2 partners. Contractors for
SO2 should ultimately involve local partners who have expertise in gender considerations.
USAID/WIDTECH and USAID/LAC/RSD could assist with this planning and development
process.
II. SO2 Programmatic Observations/Recommendations
Incorporating Environment and Natural Resources Information
Findings
Currently, the design of program activities, particularly for CWIP and R2RW, is largely
based on community interest. That is, general program parameters are brought to community
stakeholder meetings and members indicate priorities for interventions. This bottom-up,
participatory approach is a priority of USAID and the GOJ, and has been key to the successes
that SO2 program activities have enjoyed. Programs have also supported some very
interesting and policy/management related scientific studies, for example beach erosion and
the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRA) under CWIP’s CR5. On the other
hand, programs are not as effective as they could be in terms of integrating environment and
natural resources information in a comprehensive way, across the suite of activities. Rather
than replacing stakeholder participation, including more robust methodologies and
information into the planning and design of program activities can compliment and
strengthen the current bottom-up approach.
Recommendation(s)
In order to strengthen the current program, SO2 program activities should incorporate more
environment and natural resources information and approaches. Below are recommendations
for how to include this information within the current program approach of both CWIP and
R2RW.
1) R2RW
At the earliest stages of program design, a threats analysis should be conducted. To
accomplish this, the “key natural resources … that are both environmentally and
economically significant” should first be identified for each program site. Targeted resources
should then undergo a ‘Rapid Environmental Assessment’ (similar to the White River Rapid
Assessment conducted recently under CWIP) to determine the most significant threats
affecting resource quality. Sources of threats then need to be identified. The above work
could be could be conducted by UWI faculty, NGOs, SO2 program staff, DBML staff, etc.
58
Target resources, threats and threat sources should be clearly relayed to community
members/stakeholders so that activity priorities are made with fully informed participants.
Interventions should be targeted toward abating sources of threats. Discussions should
include an assessment of which threats are possible to abate locally and which require, for
example, national policy intervention. Stakeholders may choose not to address all of the
most significant threats. Should this be the case, however, the significance of the threat, the
threat source, and the reasons for deciding not to intervene should be acknowledged in
program design documentation.
At the same time the initial community animation is taking place, a team of experts (a
‘technical advisory team’) should be convened to help 1) guide the overall process and 2)
answer any technical questions the community/stakeholders may have. Again, this team
could be made up of UWI faculty, NGOs, SO2 program staff, DBML staff, etc. and could be
the same team convened for the threats analysis, above. The trade offs between various
approaches, including expected results and costs, should be clearly relayed to stakeholders.
This technical advisory team should be available to analyze any environment/natural resource
data for communities.
Finally, sampling protocols for baseline data, both temporal and spatial considerations,
should be conducted using a rigorous, scientific method. Communities should be brought in
to the process once the baseline has been established, to determine future priorities for
follow-up work.
CWIP
In CWIP programs, threats analyses should be conducted to ensure that current interventions
are targeted toward sources. A team of experts is needed to assist communities in
interpreting the water quality monitoring data and helping with the design of follow-up action
plans (see suggestion in the Water Quality Monitoring section). As with the White River
Rapid Assessment, results should be presented to stakeholders to incorporate into their
decision making process.
.
Water Quality Monitoring
a) Funding
Findings
Sustainability of funding for the Water Quality Monitoring Program is in question.
Recommendation(s)
Ensuring program sustainability by securing funding should be a priority over the next couple of
years. The tourist sector represents an opportunity, here, though a concerted education effort is
needed, particularly in Ocho Rios, to link the benefits of water quality and water quality
monitoring to tourism and recreational use.
Another avenue of funding to explore in greater detail is the return of a portion of the beach fee
revenues.
b) Anomalies
59
Findings
The current bimonthly, water quality sampling protocol has indicated some anomalies, for
example, elevated levels of bacteria (Sailor’s Hole and Dunn River) and nutrients. The current
sampling protocol is designed to set up a baseline for water quality and has not been designed to
indicate sources of anomalies, which is appropriate in this initial phase of data collection. Raising
awareness amongst program participants and community members, and providing rigorous,
scientifically defensible data are goals of the monitoring activity. Once anomalies are identified,
community members/NGOs, particularly in Ocho Rios, where not aware of a focused, action plan
for follow-up in order to seek a source.
Recommendation(s)
When water quality ‘anomalies’ are identified, an action plan is needed for community members
to follow-up, including targeted technical assistance with results interpretation and intervention.
c) Standards
Findings
The current water quality monitoring protocol is directed toward EPA standards for fecal
coliform that represent a human health standard. Current analyses do not disaggregate human
and animal sources. Other parameters, such as nutrient levels, are measured with ‘levels of
concern’ being utilized as a standard against which to evaluate the percentage of samples falling
within acceptable limits. Elevated levels of nutrients are known to compromise reef health. All
indications are that the health of the coastal marine environment off the north coast of Jamaica is
severely compromised. Results from a recent survey of live coral cover varied between 0 to 30%
with an average of 11.7%. Sixty percent of the reef was covered with fleshy algae. Using
nutrient concentrations as proxies for indicators of coral reef health is essential, but there is
opportunity here for improvement.
Recommendation(s)
Modify the analytical protocol to distinguish between fecal coliforms from human and animal
sources.
As suggested above (Use of Science), a team consisting of experts from DBML, UWI, CWIP
staff, NGO science officers, etc. should be convened to comprehensively examine the suite of
information currently available on north coast marine systems, including the water quality
monitoring data and recently obtained AGRA study data. This information should be analyzed
and recommendations made that are accessible and can be widely distributed to stakeholders. A
targeted set of bioindicators should also be considered for both the aquatic and marine
environment.
d) Modification of Sampling Regime
Findings
The current sampling regime is appropriate for generalized, baseline data collection. Beyond the
baseline period, however, several factors will need to be considered and the protocol redesigned.
60
Recommendations
After the first 12 months of baseline collection, several factors need to be taken into account for
future design of a water quality sampling protocol targeted toward community interests and
needs.
2) More intensive and focused sampling should be directed i) toward areas where anomalies
were detected in the baseline studies; ii) during the peak of the rainy season; iii) during the peak
of the dry season; iv) during the peak of tourist season.
1) A water quality monitoring plan should be developed with the assistance of technical experts,
that clearly states the program’s objectives and expected results.
3) In places of high bacteria counts, sampling should be conducted 5 times per month rather than
on a bimonthly basis.
4) In addition to parameter concentration, flow volume should be collected for river systems so
relative contribution to coastal waters can be determined.
5) The following parameters should be reviewed to determine their importance to the overall
sampling protocol:
Chlorophyll: in seawater, levels are not detectable
Total suspended solids: in seawater, not detectable
Total phosphorous: not significantly different from inorganic phosphorous
Ph: in seawater, fairly constant (8.2)
6) To ensure that sampling protocols are being properly followed, when a community enters into
a contract with a Lab for sample analysis, field work should be included. This could take the
form of a ‘train the trainer.’
e) Analysis
Finding
The current water quality analysis procedure is cumbersome, over duplicative and potentially
compromised through multiple transportation and handling procedures. Discovery Bay Marine
Lab (DBML) analyzes samples for nitrates (as total and inorganic nitrogen), phosphates (as total
and inorganic phosphorous), total suspended solids, chlorophyll, Ph and BOD. NRC analyzes
samples for fecal coliform bacteria and NWC analyses sample for BOD, suspended solids and
fecal coliform bacteria.
Recommendation
The program for analyzing water quality samples needs to be consolidated. The Discovery Bay
Marine Lab is well positioned to take on this responsibility for a number of reasons. DBML is a
renowned tropical marine research facility. Community members felt that DBML brought
integrity, credibility and objectivity to the water quality sampling process. Increasing DBML’s
capacity to analyze fecal coliform bacteria would increase their ability to conduct microbiological
analysis, in general. This not only gives the lab great ability to conduct potentially policy and
management relevant research, it also provides greater opportunities for Jamaican students.
Finally, there is evidence of an increasing need for microbial analysis from the private sector.
61
DBML could provide this service to the private sector while securing additional resources for
operations, students and research.
The current CWIP program is providing funds to NRCA for improving their microbiological
laboratory. This capacity will improve the quality of inter-laboratory calibration.
Consideration of the Marine Environment
A. Findings
Particularly in Negril, consideration of the marine environment is largely lacking from the
current program even though the Negril Environmental Protection Area, the area of interest
for CWIP in Negril, contains both terrestrial and marine components. While the Negril Coral
Reef Preservation Society (NCRPS) is developing a management plan for the Negril Marine
Park with funding from the European Union, management jurisdiction is not assigned to any
organization and is not part of the EU’s program. NCRPS currently acts in this capacity but
does not have authority. Because of the lack of coordination between CWIP and NCRPS’s
activities, opportunities are being missed. For example, NCRPS is gathering information on
fish catch per unit effort to develop some baseline fisheries data. They are utilizing video
transects to examine benthic trends in algal biomass and have a water quality monitoring
program for nitrates and phosphates that DBML was unaware of. They have also conducted
some work on the North Negril River.
It should be noted that since the team conducted its interviews, a memorandum of
understanding has been signed by Negril area Environmental Protection Trust (NEPT) and
NCRPS which clearly defines the roles and responsibilities with respect to management
authority for the Negril Environmental Protection Area. The broad division of responsibility
for the marine environment lies with NCRPS while NEPT is charged with an overall
coordination role as well as primary responsibility for the terrestrial environment. This is a
very encouraging development.
Recommendations
In Negril, stronger consideration is needed for the marine environment, particularly the
Negril Marine Park. This could be accomplished through better coordination with the Negril
Coral Reef Preservation Society.
Fisheries
Findings
A fisheries component is lacking in the current program and particularly in Ocho Rios,
fisherman and fisheries cooperatives are not engaged in the stakeholder process. Recent data
from the north coast of Jamaica, for example those collected in the AGRA study, indicate that
fish stocks are severely depleted and threatened. For example, at 6 transects per site over 52
sites, only 45 individual snapper were recorded. Those that were recorded were half the size
of snapper from similar habitat in less disturbed sites. Several fish types, such as angelfish
and grouper, were wholly absent.
Recommendations
62
Fisheries need to be included into the current program activities. Fishermen cooperatives and
associations from Negril and Ocho Rios should be included in current stakeholder activities.
Fisherman organizations for the entire north coast could be partnered with DBML, NEPA and
the Fisheries Division to develop a comprehensive strategy for fisheries protection.
Environmental and economic considerations should be given to aquaculture for both food and
ornamental fishes in order to take the pressure off of wild stocks.
This work should include some capacity building and organizational strategies for
cooperatives. Incentive programs such as the current model of mesh exchange in Discovery
Bay should be pursued. Targeted research programs should also be developed in order to
facilitate key policy and management issues.
Upper Watershed Management
Finding
There is some indication that the North and especially the South Negril rivers are major sources
of biological and chemical contaminants and are posing a significant threat to the marine
environment. Although there are some community activities in the upper watershed, for example
organic farming, these are pilot projects only. The upper watershed had not been evaluated for its
relative contribution of agro- and other chemicals, animal waste, soil and other sediments, etc. to
coastal waters.
The Portland Area represents a significant opportunity to develop a comprehensive, integrated
watershed management program with lessons learned from CWIP and EAST and integration of
the new R2RW. Because there are several other donors in the area, coordination will be key as
will sensitivity to capacity of local organizations.
Recommendation
Water quality in the North and South Negril rivers should be evaluated for their relative
contribution to coastal water quality degradation. Sources should be identified and targeted
interventions designed.
Product of Natural Resource Specialist
63
ATTACHMENT F
Performance Monitoring under USAID/Jamaica Strategic Objective 2
Improving Key Natural Resources
 November 18, 2000
Prepared by:
Albert L. Merkel
11116 E. 44th Ave.
Spokane WA 99206
509-926-6203
almerkel@yahoo.com
Executive Summary
The report is the deliverable resulting from a study of the monitoring and
evaluation system used in SO-2. It is a part of an effort of a four-person team.
The team report will include findings and other material from this report.
This report includes Findings, Recommendations, and expected results achieved
if the recommendations are followed. There are observations included that reflect
my feelings on subjects that I did not have sufficient time or information to
confirm. The report is directed to the SO Team. As such, some knowledge of
USAID operating procedures and policies is required to fully appreciate the
information provided.
There is discussion of the required elements of a monitoring and evaluation
system as well as guidance of the management use of such a system.
Findings
1. There is opportunity for the SO Team to optimize achievement of results by updating
and harmonizing activities included in the SO Results Packages
2. The primary reporting requirements in this SO focuses on assessment of impact or
progress analyzing the effectiveness of the measures of input/output completion.
The measures now used are mainly quantitative. There are few qualitative
measures of progress reported. There are few reportable targets to measure
effectiveness of inputs and outputs.
3. Achievement of the Goal of SO-2 could be improved if outputs accomplished and
results achieved were better communicated to important decision-makers and other
donors.
4. The strategic objective and the intermediate results are appropriate and represent
measures in achieving as defined in the ADS. The SO and IR indicators are
quantitative and measure specific achievements. There is scope to add an indicator
at the IR level that qualitatively measures effectiveness and acceptance of the
changes supported by the SO. An Indicator of long-term results could measure
results of improved quality of natural resources at the goal level of the SO.
5. The Strategic Objective Framework identifies a number of outputs that directly
contribute to achievement of the IRs. These appear to be reasonable targets.
Causal pathways leading to these outputs have not been updated to include the new
activities in R2RW or to coordinate and integrate all of the activities funded by SO-2.
This leads to sub-optimal management of the SO
6. There are a number of important outputs and measures of success that are
discussed in SO documents but are not tracked or reported in the monitoring and
evaluation systems used in SO-2.
64
65
Observations are:
• There is insufficient coordination and collaboration among the USAID TA Teams at
the working level. Better coordination by the SO Team could lead to better utilization
of resources and a more rational approach to achieving. This would also result in
less process workload imposed on the non-USAID partners. This could result in
fewer meetings, fewer training sessions, and better understanding of the work at the
local level. The SO should be managed as a program not as distinct projects.
• Special studies as described in ADS 203 should be used, as needed, to verify and
quantify achievement of results and learned. This would allow the SO Team greater
freedom of selecting what would be assessed than a formal action such as an
evaluation that is encumbered with a defined process and dictated objectives.
• Performance monitoring requirements should be planned and budgeted at all levels
of the SO. Each contract should have a line item budget for this cost. The SOAG
should have performance monitoring activities detailed and a budget identified. The
objectives supported by this funding should be easy to understand and should be
included in all work plans and performance requirements of contractors and other
partners where appropriate.
• The SO activities seem to address the SO objective to improve the environmental
conditions in Jamaica. All the people I met said that they supported and understood
the goals and the methods of the SO. The technical expertise provided was praised.
Many of the outputs were cited as examples of “good work.” As I was not able to
visit sites or discuss the activities with many customers, I cannot verify this
observation. I expect the rest of the team will address this point.
66
1. Introduction
1.1 Primary Responsibilities.
This report supports USAID/Jamaica’s analysis of Strategic Objective 2, Improving Key
Natural Resources (Ridge to Reef.) The general purpose of this review is to evaluate
the present program of activities and to suggest potential areas for future focus of the
environmental program. There is also a requirement for discussing the need for formal
evaluations and other kinds of special reviews of the program. The four principal tasks
required in the review are detailed in Attachment 1, Scope of Work (SOW).
A four-person team conducted the evaluation. The environmental program with
emphasis on the monitoring and evaluation plans and the SO 2 Framework including the
indicators were reviewed. In addition, the set of activities within the program framework
and their interaction relative to achievement of the stated results of the strategic
objective were assessed. A principal objective of this review was to identify and assess
the process that allows the SO Team to assess and learn from the program performance
as well as to be able to track progress toward achievement of results.
1.2 Approach to providing information required by the SOW
In order to gather information and understanding of the program and its activities, USAID
SO Team and a number of key partners were interviewed, other donor representatives
were interviewed, reports were analyzed, several stakeholder meetings were attended,
and a field trip to Port Antonio was accomplished. The Mission Bilateral Assistance
Strategy and the SO-2 Framework were reviewed.
The Automated Directive System6
 (ADS) provided both baseline standards and
objectives for this review. The ADS was used extensively to provide a rational
framework for the analysis of the Strategic Objective’s monitoring and evaluation system
.
1.3 Overview of Strategic Objective 2
The objective to be achieved is: Improved Quality of Key Natural Resources in
Selected Areas that are both Economically and Environmentally Significant.
The intermediate results are:
• Increased adoption of environmentally sound practices;
• Adoption of policies for improved environmental manage; and
• Improved effectiveness of wastewater management.
The objective is being achieved principally through three activities:
• Environmental Audits for Sustainable Tourism (EAST)
• Coastal Water Quality Improvement Project (CWIP)
• Ridge to Reef Watershed Activities (R2RW)
 
6
 The ADS is the official internal operating standards for USAID. The ADS is readily
available to anyone on the Internet at www.usaid.gov
67
The SO-2 Team routinely assesses and learns from the performance of these activities
through a number of mechanisms including routine and special reporting, field visits,
formal and informal discussions with stakeholders and partners, interaction with other
donors, and special assessments as required.
 In addition to the close participatory relations with the SO stakeholders and partners,
the SO Team also maintains interactive relations with other donors and GOJ officials.
These actions allow for interchange of achievements, coordination of activities, and for
obtaining feedback on results. The SO Team holds regular briefings, exchanges
reports, and has planning sessions resulting in collaborative efforts to achieve similar
results.
2. Performance Monitoring
2.1 ADS Requirements
ADS 200 Series sets standards and provides guidance to managing for results.
The core values, Managing for results, Customer Focus, Teamwork and Participation,
Empowerment and Accountability, and Valuing Diversity, are discussed in ADS 200.
ADS 201, Planning, and ADS 202, Achieving, are important sources when developing
and monitoring SO and their results.
ADS 203, Assessing and Learning, provides comprehensive guidance on the
responsibilities of the SO Team to assess activities in order to confirm and track results
of the SO. Using information learned during performance monitoring, implementation is
enhanced resulting in better management.
To properly monitor results, the SO Team is required to establish and critically assess
performance management tools used to collect and analyze data on performance.7
These tools help insure that all activities contribute to the results agreed upon in the
approved strategy. Other operating units in USAID/Jamaica and in AID/W also have
responsibility for supporting the SO Team in this effort. These units provide guidance
and direction to the SO Team in meeting the monitoring and reporting requirements.
Some of the ADS requirements result in formal actions. These include a Performance
Monitoring Plan (PMP), periodic portfolio reviews, assessment reports. annual inputs to
the Mission R-4 Report, and formal evaluations as required.
 
7
 See ADS 203.2, dated 08/31/00
68
2.2 Assessing and Learning8
SO Teams and others attempt to anticipate and measure impact on defined
objectives, make decisions that improve the chance of ultimate success, and learn
from the processes and activities that are managed. This process uses both
informal and structured methods of monitoring. The managers ask questions and
make personal observations of ongoing activities. There are formal processes to
do similar assessments. These usually are manifested in reports, evaluations,
work plans, inspections and other such data collection mechanisms.
USAID wants to measure progress in achieving results not to just measure inputs and
outputs. Measuring progress is difficult. The process of assessing and learning uses a
variety of tools to gather information about what is happening and why. These are
discussed in ASD 203.3.3.4.
2.3 Evaluations
Evaluations are structured, analytical studies of activities or Strategic Objectives taken in
order to answer specific questions on program management. There is a full discussion
of USAID’s policy with guidance on how to develop and conduct an evaluation in ADS
203.3.4 through 203.3.4.7.
The process of evaluation should be integrated into the performance monitoring of the
SO. More discussion of this will follow in the findings and recommendation sections of
this report.
2.4 Causal Pathway9
Causal pathways of the expected results should be defined during strategic planning and
modified as required based on assessment and learning during implementation. The
causal linkages between SO actions/activities allow identification of key points for
assessment in a monitoring and evaluation system that lead to measuring achievement
of results and setting of targets. This process provides a major tool for the management
of a SO.
The development of causal pathways allows better monitoring of the process of
providing inputs/outputs leading to achievement of intermediate results (IR) and
ultimately to the SO. Training people in new methodologies is not sufficient. The better
measure is whether these new methodologies are being used and if there is
improvement in the condition. This measure will be addressed and identified with a
causal pathway analysis.
Exhibit 1 provides an example of the difference between input-output stream and a
causal pathway using an illustrative activity.
 
8
 See ADS 203.3.2.2 and 203.3.2.3
9
 ADS 203.3.2.3
69
Exhibit 1
Expected Output
Improved water quality monitoring
Input/Output Stream Causal Pathway
Analyze conditions-detect needs to be
addressed to get better water quality
monitoring. This normally is a technical
review of the existing system water quality
testing.
Analyze conditions and contributing factors￾determine constraints and needs to be addressed.
Fully analyze all contributing factors causing “poor
“ water quality monitoring. This attempts to detect
technical as well as other contributing factors.
Discuss findings of analysis and determine
plan of action and inputs required.
Discuss potential input and output actions, support
required, organizational buy-in, commitment to
change, and analysis of ability to sustain system.
Develop a time-phased plan that indicates
when major activities are to be done.
Considerable effort is made to complete
actions as planned but little effort is made to
coordinate the actions.
Develop a time phased, input sequence plan that
insures activities and other inputs are scheduled to
be completed as required-not too early or too late in
the process. Considerable effort is made to insure
“jest in time” completion.
Monitor inputs and completion of outputs
and report achievement of targets. Claim
achievement at end of planed input/output
stream and initial use of new system.
Monitor water quality analysis to detect
problems.
Monitor inputs and completion of outputs and report
achievement of targets. Assess the effectiveness
and utility of the inputs provided. Assess the ability
of the partners to implement the new system.
Periodically review the sustainability of the new
system. Report key indicators of utilization of the
inputs and the required support provided by the
customer operating the new system. Answer the
question, “Has water quality monitoring improved.
3. Findings and Recommendations
These findings are presented from the most comprehensive to the most specific. In
other words, those pertaining to the SO first and those oriented to the activities
presented later. Each finding will be supported by discussion and followed by
recommendations related to the finding.
The recommendations are directed to the SO-2 Team. As such, understanding of
USAID procedures and policies is required.
70
3.1 General Findings
General Finding 1: There is opportunity for the SO Team to optimize achievement
of results by updating and harmonizing activities included in the SO results
Packages.
The TA support for the several activities that carry out the field operations were
contracted at different times and are in different stages of implementation. The GOJ
agencies principally charged in management of land and environment are now in
process of reorganization. The SO Team is analyzing future options for modifying
activities. The EAST activity has recently moved into its third phase of implementation
and some CWIP activities may be extended. The timing is good to update the
performance management system used in SO-2. Monitoring and evaluation
requirements should be a management system and should be detailed in a PMP. The
Mission is analyzing what is required to develop a Performance Monitoring Plan for SO-2
and other SOs. The regional program has just finished their PMP.
Discussions with field staff, representatives of the SO Team, GOJ officials, and other
donor representatives, indicate that the causal pathways of the SO are not clear and
may not identify causal linkages that lead to achievement of results. This results in
difficulty by all partners in assessing and reporting progress toward achievement of
results and objectives. The elements of causal pathways are in the plan and reports but
they are not clearly associated into proper sequencing that leads actions as well as
associating assessment of progress with planned actions.
Reports and other monitoring and evaluation documents may not provide sufficient data
to track whether the outputs lead to intermediate results and ultimately to the strategic
objective. Most do not use SO generated reports, e.g. contractors reports, R-4reports,
R-2 reports, progress reports to the contracting officer, etc., to analyze progress. The
principal use of these documents is to report inputs and outputs. There are few
requirements to discuss the adequateness of targets or to assess progress toward
change or achievement of results. For example, training is well reported but its effect on
the target problem is not analyzed. Sample questions could be:
Are the people receiving training using it?
Did the training result in changes expected?
Are others using the technology transferred during training?
USAID Strategic Objective Teams have the most management control over results
achievement at the activity level10. Inputs and outputs are planned by the SO Team and
achieved by their implementing partners who receive USAID funds. As such, targets set
during the planning process set priorities for the partners as well as for the evaluators
that monitor the progress of the SO and the management by the SO Team.
 The CWIP annual plans reflect causal pathways. The background for each output is
described including discussion of approaches, inputs, assessing for lessons learned,
participation, and priorities to be addressed. A development hypothesis is stated and
how analyses are used to test the hypothesis is clear. Assumptions are stated and
focus strategies are defined. This work plan contains most of the elements for building
 
10 See ADS 203.3.2.3: USAID Control over Results
71
the causal pathways required for performance monitoring. What is missing is better
integration with the other SO supported activities and detailing assessment of the
effectiveness of inputs and progress toward the overall results.
Information contained in existing work plans and reports and in the experience of the
partners is enough to successfully develop a SO management plan.
Recommendation on General Finding 1
The considerable new activity with the recent extension of EASTas well as the start-up
of the R2RW activity and consideration of extension of some elements of CWIP provides
reasons and opportunities for harmonizing the several contractor and partner activities
and insuring that all players have clearly defined requirements based on causal pathway
outlines. The SO Team can realign the inputs and outputs to the partner or partners that
can best achieve results that are rationalized and sequenced using causal pathways.
Allocation of scarce resources can be programmed for maximum effectiveness. Based
on assessment and learning from activities that have been underway, new activities and
extension of on-going activities can be verified and detailed. These actions must include
customer /partner perceptions and will entail very close collaboration among all partners.
The following series of actions are recommended:
1. A comprehensive portfolio review as described in ADS 203.3.3 completed.
2. Develop updated casual pathways for results in SO-2.
3. Harmonize inputs from all partners leading toward results
4. Identify benchmarks (targets) that monitor achievement identified in the causal
pathways.
5. Develop SO results packages, using the core concepts of teamwork and
participation, that clearly lays out the casual linkages for achieving results. Identify
indicators of results at the output level, and quantify activities and inputs provided.
All administrative environmental11 requirements should be included. Required
reports as well as systems of assessing and learning should be established as well.
6. Using the results packages, developed in 5. above, and the SO indicators, develop a
Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) for the SO following the guidelines in ADS 203.
7. Modify the SO budget to reflect funding for ADS12 performance monitoring, to include
cost of collecting and analyzing data, special studies, and evaluations.
8. Include the PMP in the Strategic Objective Agreement for SO-2.
9. Outline reporting requirements that support the new monitoring plan and other
requirements. Insure that reports provide analysis of progress as well as inputs and
outputs and are clearly tied to the PMP.
The process of completing the tasks above and developing a management system for
the SO is estimated to take two to three weeks to complete. Technical assistance will
probably be required to help plan, coach, and guide the process including the writing of
the work plan and the other required documents. It is unlikely that USAID employees
will be able to completely dedicate their effort for the two weeks that may be required to
 
11 ADS 204 provide information on the SO Team’s environmental monitoring requirements
and the Initial Environmental Evaluation.
12See ADS 203.3.2.1
72
fully undertake this process. In addition the process will be more efficient if a
knowledgeable expert in developing causal pathway leads the process, results driven
planning approaches. Should TA be provided, the partners, customers, and other
stakeholders and the bulk of the SO Team will be actively involved for only four to five
working days, four to analyze the causal pathways followed by one day to review the
new work plan.
Following the completion of the SO work plan, the different activity managers and
contractor chiefs of party should update their work plans and reporting systems to meet
the new requirements.
Expected results emulating from this recommendation:
1. New baseline for measuring results achieved in SO-2.
2. Clearly understood causal relationships in outputs.
3. New output level targets and analysis requirements to measure progress.
4. A SO work plan that harmonizes the inputs and outputs of three major activities
funded by the SO.
5. A PMP that sets targets and defines how data required for assessing and learning
will be collected and reported.
6. Better information for making the decision, “Where do we go from here.”
General Finding 2: The primary reporting requirements in this SO focuses on
assessment of impact or progress analyzing the effectiveness of the measures of
input/output completion. The measures now used are mainly quantitative. There
are few qualitative measures of progress reported. There are few reportable
targets to measure effectiveness of inputs and outputs.
Reports are the primary tool for regularly assessing progress by most of the
stakeholders of the SO. For many, reports are the only feedback received on activities
supported. Reports are also principal elements of the public awareness programs.
Preparing, writing and reviewing reports are major work requirements of a SO.
Enormous effort and considerable time is expended in this process. Reporting
requirements also set priorities of actions. If something requires regular reporting of an
input or output element, it becomes a priority, either deliberately or de facto.
In discussing the reporting requirements for SO-2, few were satisfied that the goal of
reporting progress was met. Most felt that the requirement to report counts of things
done were important but that this information did not provide sufficient information on
progress in achieving results.
For example, CWIP provides a system for analyzing capability of community-based
organizations and quantifying that capacity by assigning a score with a high score
appearing to indicate “better” and a low score “worse.” In reporting this score, not a lot
of analysis is provided as to the significance of groups moving up or down in the scoring.
It is also difficult to ascertain if a high score means that this group should be given
priority over another that has a lower score. It is hard to tell if the score meets the
requirements for a new level of assistance of it is a go/no go benchmark where only
certain actions can take place until a higher score is reached. These kinds of questions
73
should be asked when targets are set and should be answered in discussions in
reporting documents.
In assessing the quality and usefulness of reports, I often ask the question, “So what?”
It was difficult to get answers to that question from reading the reports. Technicians, TA
members, or SO Team members could answer the question but few answers were in the
reports. For example, when one questions the results of training, few had hard data to
show that the training was effective in improving “the way things are done” and no such
analysis was in the reports I reviewed
The R-4 and the R-2 Semiannual Reports (SAR) focus on discussion of the results and
indicators of the SO. The discussion is principally oriented toward the quantitative
targets in the data tables of the Results Framework. The narrative report section of
these reports should complement information in the data tables.
A better presentation could be achieved by providing information not contained in the
indicators and giving better understanding of the progress toward achieving the results
of the SO that have been observed. Highlighting cross cutting issues, instructive
success stories, and lessons learned are important elements of a valuable R-4 or R-2
(SAR).13
Reporting requirements by the several customers associated with the SO are different.
Because the requirements differ, each activity must prepare several reports regularly.
Contractors must prepare different periodic reports for the SO Team and the Contracting
Officer. The GOJ requires different reporting information. All reports suffer because
they report only “audit” counts of activities completed, i.e. training completed, number of
people trained, organizations certified, etc. There is little analysis of achieved results or
progress toward achievement of goals. There is little to tie these reports to a
performance monitoring plan. Even though there are lots of reports, they may not
provide sufficient information to make quality management decisions or to assess
progress.
Recommendation on General Finding 2
1. Information reported should be defined in the PMP. It is important to report the
“audit” counts of activities and inputs provided through the SO. The targets reporting
progress and the results of analyses of the effectiveness of the inputs must also to
be reported. All SO reports should be reporting achievement, effectiveness and
results. The reporting requirements should be clearly understood by all preparing
reports and by all receiving reports.
2. USAID should, to the extent possible, harmonize reporting formats and requirements
to so that maximum useful management information is sent in a minimum of reports.
These reports should also meet all requirements of the ADS and other directives as
appropriate.
3. The target audience and the use of the report will often dictate its content and format.
All report writers should be very aware of the target audience. The SO Team should
insure that this is discussed during the process of preparing the report.
 
13 See ADS 203.3.6.1
74
General Finding 3: Achievement of the Goal of SO-2 could be improved if outputs
accomplished and results achieved were better communicated to important
decision-makers and other donors.
A number of GOJ officials and representatives of other donors were interviewed. Most
only have very general knowledge about the outputs and results that have been
accomplished. Several requested additional information and felt that if they knew more,
it would be easier to support the activities.
For example, Ms. daCosta, Director General of the Ministry of Land & Environment,
requested success stories and short progress reports that she would sent to GOJ
Cabinet sub-committees for information and discussion. The CIDA representative gave
high praise to an EAST report that quantified economic returns to a hotel as the result of
participating in USAID supported activities.
There are number of success stories that have been noted in the SO-2 activities, but
they are often verbal stories told at local levels. Success stories and progress
assessment enrich the knowledge and understanding of an activity and are generally
more interesting than more general technical and descriptive verbiage usually found in
activity reports.
The SO Team participates in regular meetings with other donors to discuss development
approaches and to exchange useful information. This group is an appropriate target for
receiving information on success stories. As USAID’s resources are limited, leveraging
other donor resources is important. Receiving recognition for achievements could lead
to others copying the SOs development methodology.
Recommendation on General Finding 3
As reporting and monitoring begin to focus on achievements and progress to results,
success stories will be reported as part of the regular system of monitoring and
evaluation. With repackaging, these could become stand-alone short success stores.
Some of these stories will be told in newsletters.
Better impact on decision-makers can be made with single story presentations. These
presentations foster focused discussions. They are easy to interpret, result in pointed
questions, and can be tailored to the particular audience with some confidence.
Newsletters have to be targeted to a much wider audience. Newsletters are not as
effective when special groups, such as members of Parliament, the Chamber of
Commerce, or other donors, are the audience.
Attention to decision makers should be considered an activity objective of the public
awareness program.
Expected results emulating from this recommendation:
1. Three to five "success story" presentations each year.
2. Improved knowledge of the activities of the SO among decision-makers.
3. Increased support for the SO objective from indirect stakeholders.
4. Increased adoption of “best practices.”
75
3.2 Strategic Objective Findings
Strategic Objective Finding 1: The strategic objective and the intermediate results
are appropriate and represent measures in achieving as defined in the ADS. The
SO and IR indicators are quantitative and measure specific achievements. There
is scope to add an indicator at the IR level that qualitatively measures
effectiveness and acceptance of the changes supported by the SO. An Indicator
of long-term results could measure results of improved quality of natural
resources at the goal level of the SO.
The indicators in the SO reflect the status of the improved quality and support the
development hypothesis. There is still some feeling among those interviewed that these
indicators do not provide sufficient corroboration of accomplishment of the less
quantifiable indicators of the IR results.
It can be argued that “adoption of policies” is not fully measured by quantifying the
number of policies put in place. An attempt to assess the effectiveness of these policies
is indicated. This can be done through a variety of assessment mechanisms including
trend analysis, surveys, and special studies.
Recommendation on Strategic Objective Finding 1
Development of an indicator that measures adoption and capacity by qualitatively
measuring achievement could address several IRs. For example an indicator could
monitor changes in acceptance of the outputs associated with wastewater management
among the people in the target watersheds. Of special concern is the impact on civil
society in terms of capacity, sustainability, and participation in following and supporting
the changes that improved management and effectiveness imply.
.
Improved quality of key natural resources may not be fully realized for a number of years
after the output is delivered. ADS 202.3.2.1 discusses the concept of delayed impact.
USAID and other partners are engaged in bringing remote sensing into the management
and monitoring systems used in natural resource management. Considerable work has
been done on Jamaica14 supported by USAID. Developing a SO indicator with data
derived using remote sensing should be investigated.
Expected results emulating from this recommendation:
1. A performance indicator at the IR level that presents implementation of policies and
improved acceptance of wastewater management.
2. A performance indicator at the SO level that uses satellite imagery and associated
technologies to monitor “over time” changes in environmental quality of key natural
resources in select areas. This should be looked upon as a long-term effort that
should be continued past the planning period of the present SO.
3. A system for collecting and analyzing data to support assessment of the new
indicators.
 
14 See “Mapping Land Use and Natural Vegetation for the Islands of Jamaica, Puerto Rico,
and Dominica,” Sept. 2000. This Nature Conservancy publication is available art
USAID/Jamaica.
76
3.3 Output Level Findings
These findings address all outputs below the IR level. Included are sub-IR outputs,
activity outputs and inputs.
Output Level Finding 1: The Strategic Objective Framework identifies a number of
outputs that directly contribute to achievement of the IRs. These appear to be
reasonable targets. Causal pathways leading to these outputs have not been
updated to include the new activities in R2RW or to coordinate and integrate all of
the activities funded by SO-2. This leads to sub-optimal management of the SO.
There are elements of causal pathways in SO activity work plans. In most cases they
are incomplete and do not address the total problem that can be resolved in the SO.
Causal pathways must be developed that will better identify the chain of inputs and
outputs essential to achieve the sub-IR level outputs. As part of this exercise, inputs and
outputs of the different activities funded through the SO can be coordinated and
scheduled. This coordination and scheduling should result in better utilization of
resources and in increased effectiveness of the inputs and outputs and more assured
achievement of results. The Stakeholders will better understand the implementation
process and the relationship of the inputs and outputs provided by the SO.
Targets and assessments will be developed that better measure achievement. Better
management and improved decision making should result because better monitoring,
assessing and learning about the program are accomplished.
During the R-2 review held on November 15,2000, it was pointed out that in some cases
training targets were exceeded. Some discussion was made that indicated the
participants at the R-2 wanted to know the significance of this data.
Questions that the SO Team might consider when targets are not met or exceeded:
1) What is the significance when a target is exceeded or not met? Does this mean that
the measure was incorrect? Is the extra training excess to what is required to meet
the need identified? If not, was the target incorrect?
2) If the demand for training is customer driven and applicable to other non-USAID
supported need, will those wanting the training that exceeds targets pay for it?
3) Will the non-targeted extra training benefit the goal of the SO?
4) How will the non-targeted training be assessed for effectiveness?
Many of the outputs stated in Activity work plans, are not actually what is being
accomplished. In most instances, the activity level outputs are in fact a part of more
important activity level output that may not be stated. Often the targeted “outputs” are
actually inputs.
In discussions with the field staff, it is clear that they also understand that they are often
targeting and accomplishing something different. In most cases they feel powerless to
change the statement of output because they feel it is unalterable or that changing it is
not worth the effort. I heard the statement, “We all have to lie a little to get the work
done,” in several forms during my interviews. This never means that they aren’t doing
something, but that they are doing more relevant work as well but that they are not
required to report it.
77
One example of an imperfectly stated output from the EAST Activity work plan is:
Develop and implement a pilot plan for Port Antonio/Portland as a model for a
sustainable tourism destination program.15 In discussing this activity with the Chief of
Party (COP) it became clear that this was an intensive effort to bring together all the
players that were required to participate in developing a plan. In addition, considerable
local participation was included. Local grass root groups were assisted and became
empowered to guide the process.
The output as stated does not adequately capture this very important and extensive
effort.
I suggest that a better statement of this objective could be: Local community of Port
Antonio/Portland produces a comprehensive development plan that has been developed
with full participation from donors, government officials, and the people of the community
and that this plan has been presented to the appropriate agencies that have the
authority and resources required to implement the plan.
Illustrative improved targets may be:
• Analysis completed of potential interventions and plan of action developed.
• Seek public input on potential interventions using procedures.
• Engage other donors, government officials, NGO/PVO community.
• Develop a first draft of potential development plan.
• Present draft plan to public and other decision makers in public forums.
• Measure amount of support received from non-USAID sources.
• Identify USAID supported and partner supported resources required to complete the
plan.
In the CWIP activity support to community-based initiatives is identified as an output.
Actually, this is an input or series of inputs not an output. CWIP personnel perceived the
target output was actually to develop community-based organizations by improving their
capacity to manage environmental projects and to achieve targeted results by their work.
CWIP’s perceived output is to assess the community-based group’s actual management
of their activity. This output is being done but is not reported or tracked and is not a key
action in the work plan or the SO/IR framework. An associated observation finds that
the project framework16 indicates the CWIP grants program only supports community￾based initiatives when in fact it provides support to most of the activities addressed in
the Framework of the CWIP Work Plan.
There is opportunity to assess achievement and effectiveness of the inputs provided.
The question of sustainability would be answered by assessing the acceptability of the
plan by those that are required to implement it. Documenting the successful process
used would provide valuable lessons learned. If the objective better reflected what was
to be accomplished, better targets measuring progress could be set and inputs would be
better defined.
 
15 EAST Statement of Work, Section 3.1. 6
16 See CWIP Third Annual Work Plan, January 31,2000
78
Recommendation on Output Level Finding 1
Following the procedure in General Finding 1, evaluate the outputs below the IR level. If
they do not accurately describe the actions being undertaken or are not the output
sought, rewrite them. Use full participation of stakeholders in this process.
Expected results emulating from this recommendation:
1. Causal pathways defined for outputs.
2. Statement of Outputs better reflect the expected results
3. Performance targets include measures of achievement and effectiveness.
4. Responsibilities of partners better identified.
Output Level Finding 2: There are a number of important outputs and measures of
success that are discussed in SO documents but are not tracked or reported in
the monitoring and evaluation systems used in SO-2.
Activity work plans discuss economic gains resulting from adoption of new method or
implementing “best practices.” There are important processes that affect the SO, such
as passage of policies. The process requires considerable effort over extended periods
of time. USAID’s IEE requirements often require actions or studies that must be
completed before other work is permitted to proceed.
Economic returns resulting from EAST supported “greening” hotel operations have
resulted in considerable cost/benefit savings at the collaborating hotels. The economic
returns have been analyzed through the EAST project17. The results are not reported to
the SO above the first level output reports and have not been included in R-4 reports.
This information was quoted by CIDA during the Evaluation Team interview with their
representative. It was obvious that he considered the EAST activity to be both
environmentally sound and economically beneficial. CWIP has similar success stories
and economic data on hand.
During the SAR review for SO-2 held on November 15, 2000, questions on progress of
approving new policies was discussed. It was obvious that few present knew of the
status of several important policy actions even though all agreed that having these
policies was key to the success of the SO.
The IEE mandates specific actions to be completed at specific points in this SO. There
is no indication of these mandatory requirements in the work plans of the SO or the
contractors.
Recommendation on Output Level Finding 2
Using the process of causal pathway development, identify important processes and
results that need to be reported and tracked. These should be included in the PMP and
in the work plans of stakeholders, especially those that have direct control or interest in
the specific outcome.
 
17 See EAST prepared “From Audit to EMS, A Jamaican Case Study”
79
Expected results emulating from this recommendation:
1. All SO funded work plans and the PMP schedule, track, and report on progress and
results of priority actives and outputs that are identified in the SO documents.
2. Improved ability to assess and learn from SO supported activities and improved
decision making at all levels and with all stakeholders.
3. Superior targets, benchmarks, and milestones supported with quality data.
4. Observations
These observations are additional information that was received and observed but that I
cannot fully qualify but that I believe is important for the SO Team to consider.
• There is insufficient coordination and collaboration among the USAID TA Teams at
the working level. Better coordination by the SO Team could lead to better utilization
of resources and a more rational approach to achieving. This would also result in
less process workload imposed on the non-USAID partners. This could result in
fewer meetings, fewer training sessions, and better understanding of the work at the
local level. The SO should be managed as a program not as distinct projects.
• Special studies as described in ADS 203 should be used, as needed, to verify and
quantify achievement of results and learned. This would allow the SO Team greater
freedom of selecting what would be assessed than a formal
• action such as an evaluation that is encumbered with a defined process and dictated
objectives.
• Performance monitoring requirements should be planned and budgeted at all levels
of the SO. Each contract should have a line item budget for this cost. The SOAG
should have performance monitoring activities detailed and a budget identified. The
objectives supported by this funding should be easy to understand and should be
included in all work plans and performance requirements of contractors and other
partners where appropriate.
• The SO activities seem to address the SO objective to improve the environmental
conditions in Jamaica. All the people I met said that they supported and understood
the goals and the methods of the SO. The technical expertise provided was praised.
Many of the outputs were cited as examples of “good work.” As I was not able to
visit sites or discuss the activities with many customers, I cannot verify this
observation. I expect the rest of the team will address this point.