STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE CLOSEOUT RJiCPORT Date: June 28,2002 I. SONAME&NLm/IBER: USADfferu Special Objective: "Reduce Illicit Coca Production in Target Areas in Peru". No.527-005. 2. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF SO: The SpO operated in specific watersheds along river valleys in five major coca-producing mas that account for a majority of illicit coca in Peru: Aguaytia River Valley Alto HuaIlaga (including Tocache, Uchiza, Tingo Maria, San Martin) Apurimac (including VRAE [Valie Rio Apurimac y Ene, or Apurimac River Valley and Ene Region -including the speciaI focus area of Palmapampa] Huallaga Central (including Ponaza, Biabo, and Sisa) . Pichis-Palcazu (including Pachitea, La Merced, Ftio PerenC, Puerto Bemudez, and Satipo) 3. CHANGES IN RESULTS FRAMEWORK DURING THE LIFE OF SO: The Results Framework included two intermediate results to achieve the special objective: IRTC1 "hereased commitment to reduce hectares devoted to coca production voluntarily" and IR2 "Law enforcement and interdiction". Only IRI was under the manageable interest of USAID, while IR2 was based on GoP efforts supported by other USG agencies. Producers' commitment to reduce coca areas required conditions reflected in several Sub-IRs: 1.1. "Increased growth of the Iicit economy in comparison to the illicit economy"; 1.2 "Increased availability and access to basic services by the target population in the program area"; 1.3. "Increased public participation in local decision making"; 1.4 "hcreased awareness of social and ecological damage caused by drug production and use". Additionally 'Tieduced price of coca leaf and paste" was included as 1.5., as a responsibility of the GoP with support from other USG agencies. A mid-tern evaluation of Alternative Development Program was carried out in CY 2000. As a result several changes were proposed in SpOS's strategy, taking into account results achieved and lessons learned. These changes were incorporated in the new Mission Strategy for FY 2002 to 2006 under Special Objective # 5 (Iater changed to # 13) "Sustained reduction of illicit drug crops in target areas of Peru". Changes in the SpO reflected progress in reduction in the number of hectares of illicit coca and the need to assure sustainability of results. Rl was changed to "Increased alternative development in target areas" as a basic condition to achieve sustained reduction of illicit crops. This reflected an improved definition of alternative development, which was understood to be the development of a licit economy, improved living conditions and a fully restored local authority based in a strengthened institutional framework. IR2, now defined as 'Law enforcement and interdiction" continue to rely on GoP and other USG agencies' efforts. 4. SO-LEVEL IMPACT (EXPECTED VS. ACTUAL): The main indicator that shows impact at SpO level is the number of hectares devoted to the coca crop. This value diminished from 115,000 hectares in 1995 (baseline) to 34,200 hectares in 2001. This total includes approximately 12,000 hectares required to meet licit coca production needs for traditional purposes and for licit coca products. Indicator Hectares devoted u, cm production in Peru Target Revised (1) Unit: Number of hectares 1 lS.MX1 Coca leaf production in Pen! Target Revised (I) I Unit: Metric tons Actual 1 183.600 (I) Revised because of early attainment of original targets 5. IR-LEWL IMPACT (EXPECTED VS. ACTUAL): At R level, relevant indicators were: Indicator Number of communities represend in signed coca reduction agreements in ADP target areas Unit: Cumulative number of cornmities Target Actual Ratio of licit agriculture prcduction to total coca prcduction Target Revised (4) Unit: Percentage Number of jobs generated in AD Program target areas. Acntal Target Unit: Number of full-time equivalent jobs Percent of households with unratisfid basic needs in Alternative Development Prow areas (5) Target Unit: percentage Percentage of households with aocess to basic services in ADP target areas (6) Ad Target Unit: percentage Percentage of public that recognizes hat drug production and conrumption guse environmental aFd social damages in ADP target areas Acttral Target Revised (7) Environ. Social Actual Environ. Social Unit: percentage (2) Baseline year 199.5 (3) Baseline year 1995 (4) Revised because of early at rain men^ of original rarsccl (5) Used up to 1997 to measure progress in 1R 5.1.2 (6) lJscd from 1998 to mcasurc progrcss in IR 5.1.2 (7) Kcvised to diffcrcntiatc perception on cnvimnmcntal md social dnmgc. and to rcflccl Program's a!tainmenn 6. LESSONS LEARNED IN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SpO: OVERALL STRATEGY AND PROGRAM SETTING An inteerated counter-narcotics effort is key for Alternative Development success. Experience shows critical influence of GOP-USG law enforcement efforts on AD activities supported by USAID. For instance, AD success depends on coca prices, which are kept under control with effective interdiction actions. At very high coca price levels, there are limited chances for success, since licit products cannot compete and Iabor costs are greatly increased. Eradication requires intensive interdiction to demonstrate the futility of coca economy. These interventions should be accompanied by a strong communication program. If not coordinated, eradication can contribute to increased coca prices and create conflicts, confrontation and increased militancy by coca growers. Security conditions that pennit long-term work in an area are required to effectively implement an economic development program. A safe environment allows permanence of project implementers, access of services to larger number of farmers, and promotes opportunities for the success of licit economic activities. Develovment amroach should not have a focus on coca issues. The AD development agenda has never focused on coca growers' organizations fcocaleros). The AD program is aimed at providing the conditions required to sustain coca reduction across the Peruvian high jungle. A relatively srnali part of the program could focus on specific coca-related interventions but this should not be confused with the long-term development strategy. A focus on coca and cocaleros stymies the development of democratic processes as it diverts attention to those who promote strikes and marches. Some GOP's agencies have centered their dialogue efforts on coca grower organizations that have restricted interaction with other players, and has put the GOP in an untenable position in the face of impossible demands Focus should be on integrated rural develovment in source zones ADP successes have been linked to a region-wide program approach that addresses the social and economic concerns of the region, promotes democratic processes and mechanisms and foster community-led development. When it has been possible to put in place an integrated approach including infrastructure, licit economy support and local governance interventions, conditions for sustained coca reduction and sustainability of impacts have been achieved. This approach should now be applied to coca source zones; a careful design of overall intervention and a close coordination with law enforcement efforts are required. LICIT ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES "Commodity approach" alone fails to address economic and social needs of farm families. Focus on promoting one or few licit crops in a coca-growing zone has not been effective. Proper market linkage and consideration of producers' families are ingredients for a sustainable licit regional economy. This approach reduces families' dependence on exogenous factors like international prices that may affect farmer incomes and attitudes towards alternative development actions. Alternative Development must be market oriented, and include identification of markets and efficient marketing channels as the first step in design and implementation of any actions to promote licit economic development activities. It also requires consideration of farm families' income-generation strategy, usually based on a diversification of income sources, both farm and non-farm related. Family interests and dynamics must be assessed before intervention, including differentiation of groups of farm families with different needs and production resources. Intervention design and implementation has ~articutar challen~es in AD areas. Economic and social distortions caused by coca production and trafficking affect opportunities for promotion of licii activities and raise obstacles to economic interventions. Initial assessments including participating family profiles and identification of bottlenecks are specially needed. Poorest families don't easily engage with traditional technical assistance programs. Because of competition from more profitable coca crops, direct assistance and other interventions must be integrated with law enforcement actions. Short-term interventions may include food crop production as a means to increase food security; however, the overall market orientation should be kept. Traditional credit approaches bave generally failed. Micro-finance interventions have proved successful in several cases, but still require intensive efforts to overcome probiems due to social unrest and distrust of institutions. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE Sustainability of infrastructure works should be defined as a DO~~CV preceut at besrinninz of intervention. Roads rehabilitation should be linked to a sustainable road maintenance pro,- Additionally, design for roads should incorporate construction of drainage sub-infrastructure - cuherts, ditches, gutters etc. This enhances sustainability of works, and lowers significantly maintenance costs. On the other hand, the scope of basic social infrastructure should not be rigid. At a first stage onIy minimum infrastructure is required, but as a community develops other needs appear, and additionai support may be key to sustain development efforts. A comprehensive approach that includes assessment of capacity to generate and manage local resources should be in place for implementing and phasing out this suppor& as local contributions progressively increase. INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AND POLICY ENVIRONMENT Communit~ ownership of the develo~ment process is a critical factor in achieving sustainable results. Mid-tern evaluation of AD Program concluded that the locaI government smn,&ening component created an environment that made narco-trafficking out of place in the community. Local communities continued to carry out activities, even where project activities had been completed, whether through the mothers' clubs, schooI or water system maintenance committees, or other activities. Community-level work provided a stabilizing anchor for other project activities in difficult times or situations. Community ownership requires population involvement in planning and prioritizing activities, as we11 as requiring their contribution to project cost Income generation for local governments is also an important goal; activities like cadastral development are necessary. Several factors are outside program control: local leadership is key to develop communities and institutions; and even population values and cultural attributes may constrain or enhance chances for success; medium and long-term frameworks are required, since results are limited and hardly sustainable for short-term interventions. A~prouriate institutions must be in place. Institutional weakness in counterparts has been in some cases a major obstacle to program implementation. Institutional strengthening may be necessary to ensure the administrative, technicaI or policy formation capacities needed. The AD counterpart, Contradrogas (now DEVIDA), has been unstabIe due to frequent change of leadership. Where possible, local capacity strengthening as opposed to relying mostly on external institutions has been key to achieve ownership, sustainability and lower program costs (including travel expenses, information gathering and less delays in implementation). National ~olicies are key to alternative development. While it is possible to address problems as they show up, it is better to have a structural approach and address policy constraints that cause some problems to be continuousIy present. Several policy issues need to be addressed, in order to have sustainable results and not just "plow the sea", since constraints at local level are in many cases linked to nationat policy issues. Policy improvements should resub in better decision-making processes thus enhancing government's efficiency and effectiveness. Some key policy issues to address are: o National policy for road maintenance o National policy for forest conservation o Legal framework on coca cultivation and eradication activities. o Decentralization o National budget resource allocation PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION Basic conditions must be in dace at program start. The ADP strategy was poorly defined initially and the program started by aggregating projects in the GOP portfolio that led, in some cases, to ineffective and disconnected interventions. Strategies and action plans are needed at start-up. A weak counterpart institution initiaily led to problems on strategic alignment with program objectives, slow implementation and huge pipeline. A11 related systems (offices, processes, etc.) must also be in place both within counterparts and Mission, with defined responsible staff. Irnulementation mechanisms are diverse and should involve consideration for implementins! acencw capabilities and strenethening needs. Several cases illustrate this point: o The infrastructure program worked initially with the original counterpart organization (NADE) but the centralized and inefficient agency was unable to meet implementation targets. By diversifying to involve several institutions with specific skills and geographic coverage. the program was abIe to dramatically increase capacity. It demanded extra work from USAD. including accounting and contracts efforts, but results warranted the effort. o USAID has not assumed a passive role as a traditional funding agency. It has had substantial invoIvement in projects, providing advice, sharing problem assessments and recommending solutions. This active attitude has also been evident in relations with international partners Iike the IDB and WB. Despite need to deIegate implementation issues to partners in the case of cooperators, USAD has looked for synergies and collaboration whenever possible. Counterparts have accepted and even asked for USAID involvement. This has contributed to a good image for USAID in the development community and with clients. o Despite usual skepticism on Host Country Contracts, AD decided to work with GOP, based on qualified experience and technical strength in infrastructure works of Peruvian Ministries of Transport (MTC) and EnergyMines (MEM). This required considerable effort at start, including redesign of cover agreements; modification of contracts to incorporate USAD mandatory clauses; and instructions on procedures for incremental USAID approvals. These HCC have provided excellent results and have strengthened host country capacity to implement infrastructure works with international support. 7. LIST OF EVALUATIONSISPECIAL STUDIES: Mid-Term Evaluation -Price Waterhouse Coopers - 2000/2001 8. ESTIMATED OTHER DONOR/PARTNIERfCOUNTElRPART CONTRI113UTIONS: 9. PEOPLE DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH THE SpO: I NAME f TITLE 1 DATES WORKINGON Andrew M. Maxey Stanley Stalla Hugh S. PIunkett Peter H. Deinken Marion Ford Allen Turner ~ffredo~arrabure Esau Hidalgo Connie Gutierrez Tommy Fairlie 10. LIFE OF SO (1997-2001) FIJIWING: Director ADP Rum1 Dev. Off./LEA Advisor Ruraf Dev. Officer Local Gov. Advisor LEA Advisor LEA Advisor Donato Peiia Teresa Mendez Lucy Hardmeir spo 1996 - 2002 1996 -1997/2001 -2002 1998 - 2002 1997 - 2002 1997 - 1999 2000 - 2001 Infrastructure Advisor Social Infrastructure Advisor LEA Advisor Environmental Protec. Coord. MIS Coordinator 1 1995 - 2002 Administrative Assistant 1 1995- 2000 Administrative Assistant 1995 - 2001 1995 - 2002 1995 - 2002 1998-2002 1995 - 2002 -- - Note: This SO is carrying forward a pipeline of $30,909,661 of Economic Support funds to support the continuation of some activities under the new Strategic Objective No. 13, Reduced Illicit Coca Production in Target Areas of Peru INL USAID TOTAL I 140,128,917 140,405,9 17 GRAND TOTAL 1 140,405,917 11. SUMMARY LIST OF ACTIVITIES UNDER THE SO: Activity TitIelShort Description Alternative Development Program Joint effort of USG and GOP to achieve a significant, sustainable reduction of illic.it coca production in Peru, by providing farmers with alternative licit sources of income along with improved living conditions for their communities. It comprises the following components: Socid and Economic Infrastructure Licit Economic Activities InstitutionaI Support to Contradrogas 0 Program monitoring and I support FY 1997-2002 Funding Amount 140,405,917 Start and End Date 1995-2003 ImpIementing Organizations PESCS, AMRESm, CTARU, PEPP,PE.AH, PADCO, PEHCBM, APENAC, AMUVUE, WINROCK, MEkf, MTCIPCR PIUSMA, WINROCK, ADEX, CARE, PRA CONTRADROGAS (now DEVIDA) 8,435,636 1995-2003 Diverse Narcotics Awareness 277,000 1995-2003 CEDRO ANNEXES: Results Frameworks Completed FY 97-01 PMP with indicator table SO Team Clearances: Team Leader: ~dg Program Office Backstop: Sp05 Resiills Fri!mework for Strategy 2002 - 2006 L IR 5.1 Increased Alternative Development ............................................. in Target Areas i IR 5.2 Effective Law Enforcement i ! ..................., ........... ., ................................ ; .................................................. 4 4 I IR 5.1.1 Increased IIouschoId Incon~c from Licit Econamic Activif ies + Incrcascd Productivity of Licit Economic Activities (LEA) Ilrrrascd Access to f'rduclion Scrviccs (rcchnical assisluncr. credit 8; lilling scrviccs) Incrcosed Markc1 Acccss of LEA Incrcascd Acccss lo Deltcr Economic Infr;tslruclurc IR 5.1.2 In~provcd Social Conditions lncrcnscd Acccss to Basic Services I I I Incrcascd Emcrgcncy Assistance lo At-Risk Populalion Caused by Drug Produclion and Usc Ill 5.1.3 Improved Policy and .........., Institutional Framework 5.2.1 Reduced Price j of Coca Leaf I.,-.,-..-..-" -..-..-..-.. 1 ; ....................................................... i a Public Invcstrncnr and Policies . lmp~emcn~cd for Coca-Growing I Slrengthcncd C~pacily of Local I'rivalc and Public Instilr~lions lo Proniolc Development Critical Assumptlous: 1. Effcctivr inturdicdon will lowcr coca prices to unprofi~ahle Icvcls. 2. Sccuri~y rnainlainrd in targcl arcas 3. No I'all out from Plan Cololnbia 4. Posi~ivc cconornic growl11 USAID Performance Monitoring System for the Country Development Strategy for Peru FY 1997- FY 2001 September, 1997 ('Tracking Table updated to 2001) V. SPECIAL OBJECTIVE: REDUCED ILLICIT COCA PRODUCTION IN TARGET AREAS IN PERU A. Overview of the Results Framework Peru produces over half the world's coca leaf, supplying the raw material for 80 percent of the cocaine consumed in the U.S. USAID/PeruDs special objective to reduce illicit coca production addresses a major U.S. foreign and domestic policy goal and has broad-based international and Peruvian support. This Special Objective (SpOl is a specialized program with broad-based objectives, which includes all sectors involved in sustainable development. The Alternative Development Program is one of two major components of the U.S. counternarcotics strategy to achieve the SpO. The other component is interdiction to keep coca prices down to a level that coca production is no longer an attractive alternative to coca farmers. Without effective interdiction activities, alternative development activities, by themselves, cannot achieve the stated objective. The Alternative Development Program seeks to increase the commitment to reduce illicit co,ca production voluntarily. This change in behavior will depend on a combination of factors that is the basis of the results framework: I) lncrease in the growth of the licit economy in comparison to the illicit economy; 2) lncrease availability and access to basic services; 3) Increase public participation in local decision-making; and 41 lncrease awareness of social and ecological damage caused by drug production and use. The achievement of the above mentioned results engenders a participatory methodology and includes a broad range of socioeconomic initiatives to alleviate poverty, generate licit employment alternatives, and improve the well-being of people in coca-producing areas. Its results focus on activities to strengthen local governments, meet immediate subsistence needs, provide increased income and employment opportunities, improve infrastructure, protect natural resources and increase awareness of the harmful effects of coca cultivation and the benefits of development. Key USAIDIPeru activities contributing to the achievement of this SpO are the Alternative Development (ADP), the Local Government Development (LGD}, the Narcotics Awareness and Community initiatives (NECI) and now Micro and Small Business Producers (MSPI, Activities under the other four USAlDIPeru strategic objectives (SOI, 502, SO3 and SO41 also contribute to the achievement of the intended results. Because of the political nature of this objective, its success or failure will depend upon the continued support of both the Peruvian and U.S. governments and other donors to reduce coca production to minimally tolerable levels. RESULTS FRAMEWORK FOR THE SpO SPECIAL OBJECTIVE REDUCED ILLICIT COCA PRODUCTION IN TARGET AREAS IN PERU I Inter~ncdate Result 5.1.1 Incrtascd Growth of ~ht Licir Economy in Comparison to Ihe Illicil Economy PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: - Hectnres devored ro coca producrion 4 - Coca leaf production Indicators: - Pllblic lxrception of costs and knefits of coca producrion ancl trafficking - #of co~rrt~aulitics represerrred bl signed cocn re(lric~ioon qreemenls Indicators: - Value of lici~ producrion - .4 ofjobs gettercrted - Rnrio of licit q.pro(11rrrimr 10 ford coca prorlrrctiotr I .-------"--""---------- I Intcrmudiate Result 5.1.1.1 lniprovcd Licit Agriculturr Production in Coca Prducing Arm Indicators: - # of ha, devoted 10 licit ag, production - Protluc!ivity pr ha. nf licit crops I~ucrtntdi?te Rcsult 5.1.1.2 Ilnlxoved Markct Access Tor licit Ag. l'roduc~ion cxpdititrc for !he lroor ludici~tors: - Ibrra-giac prtxluccr price 2s 8 pcrccmp of ctxl price￾Key nctlvl[la: Intermediate Result 5.1 Increased Com~nitmcnto Reduce Hectares Devoted to Coca Production Voluntarily Intcrn~ediate Result 5.1.2 Intermediate Result 5.1.3 lncreascd Availability and Access to Basic Increased Public Panicipation in Local Decision-making Indicators: Indicators: - % of hotlseliolds wi~h ti~wtisyied bmic - District Municipalities with democratically nee&. chosen leadership - % of local govenrrrre~r~s 0ro11 /we foml plaw nnd blrdgers and lrave co~rrtilreci rlreir Key activities: conlerrt (114 priorities wirli rlte cor~~t~rru~ify ADP - District Municipalities wih opn, public LCD information on the municipal budget. SO2 SO3 Key activllles: ADP LAD SO1 I 1 Intermediate Result 5.2 I Indicators: I Effective Law Enforcement I - Average Price of Coca hf I I I I Increased Awareness of Social and Ecological Damage caused by Drug Production ad Use i .-------"""------------ I - Indicators: - % of public rluu recogrtizes tho! drug prod~tcriort untl roruunlprion cause er~viront~tet~rcrl mi social dcvrqes. Key octivitles: ADP LGD MECl SO1 So4 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN FOR THE SPECIAL OWECTIVE: Reduced Illicit Coca Production In Target Areas in Peru. "." -- I I I . . I I 1 I SPECIAL OBJECTIVE: WDUCED ILLICIT COCA PRODUCTION IN TARGET AREAS IN PERU CALCULATION SO 5 & PDP INDICATOR DEFINITION AND UNIT OF INDICATOR MEASUREMENT Definition: Hectares cultivated (not abandoned) . lncludcs illicit and licit production DATA SOURCE - - - . . . . -- NASIUSAIDIUN funded ANALYSIS & KEPORTING METHOD1 APPROACH OF DATA COLLECTION OR SQIEDULE! FREQUENCY Computer analysis of photo imagery by satellite or plane by USAIDINASI UN as part of annual certification exercise of the Embassy. DATA ACQUISlTION BY MISSION RESWNSlBLB TEAMICOSTS SCHEDULE BY REWRT Annual in January Annual in January RESPONSIBLE TWOFFICE 1. i.lecrares devoted to coca production in Peru (Disaggrzgated by valleys.) aerial photos and satellite images. CADNCORAH verification Unit: number hectares R4 reported On ground verification by CADAl CORAH Field survey of average yields and # Ilarvcsvj per geographic area times # Has from above computer analysis. USAIDINAS analysis. 2. Coca leaf in Peru INADE/AL)P-MIS SO5 & PDP (Disaggregarrd by valleys.) Dcfinilion: Productivity FH~. rimes number of Has. culh~ed times number harvests. Includes illicit and licit production CORAHINAS Unit: Metric tons - Intcrnlccliate Result 5.1: Incrcascd Conlmitnwul to Reducc Hcctarcs Devolcd to Coca Production Vohntarily -. Survey by INADTADP in population centers in AD Program target areas of adults 18 years and older. SO 5 & PDP SO 5 & PDP . .. 1. Public prccplion of costs and bcllvfils Of CWil pruduction ;uxl rraflicking in ppuhion renrcrs 111 AD I'rgrm wrgcr area Defldtlon: Paint spread betwcen absolure pints on tlrc same scale: one for the bcncfils on a positive sidc and mother for rhc cosu on a ncg:ttivr: side (mo nlidpoint). Point spread is bcnm less costs (in absolute numkrs). Biannual in June Semi￾annual SO-5 - Awaruness RP. E.stim;acd cost: S5O.DOO U~dt: +or. point spre:d I (A~rrlyzed by swio~emlomic variables) I/ --- 2. Nunikr of co~~~~~runitics rcprcscntud in bigncd reduction ;Igrccmelut.s in AD I'rograni titrget areas - r- - - - - -. - - - - - - Defl~dllon: Cumulative nu~nbrr of communities. INADEJADP-MIS Rcducliolr ngrecmcnLs arc signcd by lwil govcrlvnellt rcducllo~~ ugreenient nu~horitics with thcir communltics (cmrdi~ntrd by records. INADE) - - - ---- . Sum up d~c agrcernents in a given year, 111 .. -. growrh of thc licit cconomy in comparison ro thc illlcit coca hlsed economy, nlxl i~~lprovilg tl~&~ruilit~ oilire for Iormur ctra firnrcr Elrnilic~ i~d &mmu~dlics by nrcring ihcir \,ask ~mls i1t4 i~rr-c&shr~ tllcir K~lnici[;tion In lr~A dccisiun making. I/ S(xio.ccono11ric v:~rii~bks inclurlc: gender age, cducatiorr, urhn/nlrnl. ADl' zoncs Includc: I) ILio Apuri~nac-Ene, 2)lIrr;1llnga !,lentrnl.Altu find B;~lo Mayo, 3) Alto Ilu;3lir~, I) Aguaytia, 5) Pic~lis~~~c~r~~ik-~'crcr~~-P~~~~Ix,, 6) hi0 I$;~ll:i#ih-Yurirn~g~i~$, 7) 1~ Co~rvcncion~L~rcs, 8) DATA ACQUISlTlON ANALYSIS & BY MISSION PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Tambapata-lnan~bari, 9) Manilon. ADP target arcs (as per 1997) include the valleys of: Rio Apurirnac in zone 1, Ponaza-Biavo-Sisa in Zone 2, Tocache-Uchiza in zone 3, Pichis-Palcazu-Pachirea in Zone 4, and zone 5 Aguaytia. CALCULATION Intermediate Result 5.1.1: Increased Growth of the Licit &onorny in Comparison to the Illicit Economy. METHOD/ APPROACH OF DATA COLLECTION OR INDICATOR DEHMTION AND UW OF MEASUREMENT 1. Value of licit production in Alternative Devcloprnent Program target areas. DATA SOURCE (Analyzed by main product) SCHEDULE/ FREQUENCY . . . -. . . . - .. - - - . -- - . -- 2. Nunibr of jobs gcneratcd in AD Program area. RESPONSIBLE TEAMICOSTS SCHEDULE BY WRT R4 Reported RESPONSIBLE TWM/OFFlCE 3. Ratio of licit i~griculturc production to coca production in AD Program target mu, Definition: Volume of licit products leaving Alternative Development Program target areas on major routcs to markets times farm gate prices plus dollar volume of lofal consumption of hc same products. - - Dcfiitiou: Cumulative number of full time jobs (or cquivalcnt) gcncratcd in AD Program targel areas. Unit: Number of full-time equivalent jobs (by gendcr) " Dcfinitlon: Total value of licit arricultural production in AD Program target amas diviied by the &ulation of total value of production of coca leaf. INADEIADP- MIS . . INADEIADP Management Information System (MIS) ADBX MIS ADEX MIS U~rlt: Pcrccntage 1-. . COMMENTSINOTES: A full time job is cquivihr to 194 work days in agriculmre sector. Monlhly surveys of traffic on major market routes from AD Program target areas and annual surveys of local consumption within the same areas. Estimated from expansion of legal agriculure activities and non-farm activitics. Value will be estimated monthly applying the avcragc ~nonchly prices (MAG) of the selected products to the volume reportcd by INADE ADP-MIS, ADEX. Semi￾annual in March, October February Serni￾annual SO5 Economic growth RP SO5 Economic growth RP SO5 Econmic Growth RP SO & PDP - - SO5 & PDP Intermediate Result 5.1.1 .l: lnlproved licit agriculture production in coca producing areas 1. Nuniber of hecrares Definition: FIectares cultivated in a geographic area prduction in AD Program Uiut: Number llec(ares 2. Productivity per liectare of Def.: Average change in yields per iia.of seven licit agricutturat production in major products in areas selected by ADP (Rice, AD Program areas. yellow corn, cacao, coffee, banana, papaya, cassava). (Analyzed by product and Unit: Percenlap valley) NASlUSAlDlUN funded aerial photos and satellite images. INADEIADP-MIS WINROCK, ADEX INADWADP- MIS WINROCK ADEX Computer analysis of photo imagery by satellite or plane by USA1DtNASI UN as part of annual certification exercise of the Embassy. On ground verification by INADWADP￾MIS, WINROCK, ADEX Winrock, ADEX annual field tests of prductivity of random sample of producers by product Annual in April. Annual in April. ";7" Growth RP SO 5& PDP SO 5% PDP Intermediate Result 5.1.1.2 Improved market access for licit agricultural production. I. Farm gate producer pricc as a pxntage of e~d price. (Disaggrcgated by product) Definition: Rrrn nlte ~ralucer price is defined as the ! MSPIINADW price paid lo smalifakcrs for tieir producls. End pricc is defined as the domestic wholesale pricc. Sclectcd products are: Rice, yellow corn, cacao, coffce, banana, papaya,cassava in a geographic arca defincd by the AD Program. WINROCK ADEX Quarterly surveys of farmgate prices by MSPlWi~ock. Scmi- SO 5& PDP annual in So-5 Economic R4 l~iterniediate Result 5.1.2: Incrcasetl Availability and Access to Basic Services to the Target Population in AD hogram areas. I. Percent of l~ouseholds with matisfied basic needs in 4lternalive Development 'rogram areas. Analyzed by malelfcmale wadship, location) R4 rcported Dcfi~lition: A household is defined as having unsatisfied basic needs if it demonstrates at least one of the following characteristics: - no sewage, drainage or toilet system; - more than three people per bcdroom; - temporary comtruction materials, i.e, dirt floors, straw mat walls, etc; - head of family with incomplete primary scl~ool; and more than d~ree dependents per income earner; - children bclwcen he ages of 6 and 12 that do not attend school. Mng Standards Surveys Living Standard Surveys of a representative sample per each target area. Sentinel community surveys umlenaken by INADE or contracted PVO. Annual in October $0-5 Basic I R4 Services RP Cost: $50,000 j0 5 & PDP lntermcdiate Resull 5.1.3: Increased Public Participation in Local Decision-making 1. District Municipalitics with lcrnocratically chosen cadcrship in the Alternative Development Program targct 3reas. 2. Disrrict Municipali~ics wid1 >pen, public infornxttion on tlw ~nunicipal budgct - 3. Percent of local govcrnnlrnts Ihar have fontnl pla~is ad h~dgcts 3rd have co~aulted on thc conten[ irnd priorities of thcsr pl;ua a~wl budguts with thc co~n~nunity. Dclinition: Either clccted by the public as a slate of candidares for an authority to select from, or elected directly with audioriry concurrence Unit: Number Definition: Open, pblic informarion mcm published a~xl distrih~tctl or ptcd in a public tocation. Budget informalinn mcaa anttcipted revenues, operuing plan, arld its global budget . UII~ Nurnlxr Defillillot~:A local government is defined as having formal plar~s and budgeis in place if tlwy have: a program of activitirs with objectives and largeis; m iaplcttwnnkm scl~edule: rt~c cornn~iunent of organizatio~a rcsponsiblc for Implemntarion; :eul the necessary t~uman, financial ad mawid resources. Consulti~tion wiU~ the communily is defined :uj dtr level of involvement of grassrtroE conlnlullily orgimiutio~a ml citize~ls in prclaring a~vl prlori!izing he municip:~ plans ad budgets, iiS dctcrmincd by citizen's opinion (on ;I sul,jrctive SC~I~C r;~nging fron~ 'A lot" to "Nothing".) Consultation nrec~tnnism~ include pupular asscmblirs, opn co~~ncil scsrions, f~ritldehte~ itnd coordimt ion working group nwtinp. Unit: l'crcentnge INADEI Municipalities INADU Municipalities iD Program monitoring of Municipality :leaions 4D Program monitoring of Municipality mlravior 4D Program Monitoring of Municipal ,ccords ~nnual' in February Annual in kbruary AMU~~ in Rbrunry 50-5 Basic Services RP SO- 5 Basic Scrvica RP SO-5 Basic Services RP j05 & PDP SO 5 & PDP SO 5 & PDP [ntcrrnediate Result 5.1.4: Increased Awareness of Social and EcoG&al ~ilmage eked by Drug Production and Use. ud consumplion cause production, drug trafficking and consumption. :nvironmencal and social Analyzed by socio-economic ad geographic Jamages. variables. R4 reported 1 Unit: percentage CONTRADROCASl Knowledge sample survey designed by CEDRO survey COMRADROGASIUSAID, and CEDRO on people living in AD Program zones -- over 18 years. Annual in July. r SO-5 Awareness RP NOTES: The targets for reduced price of coca leaf will be level at the estimated rate necessary to make legal alternatives compcririve for farmer investmenr of resources. - COMMENTSINOTES: Intermediate Result 5.2: Effective Law Ellforcement and Interdiction R4 SO 5 & PDP ---a￾gate price of coca leaf averaged per month. Unit: $ per arroba (I nrroba = 11.5 Kilograms) Mid-point average elad of monlh prices SO 5 & PDP reported through INADE's field offices, averaged for d~e quarter by ADP MIS SO-5 MIS unit USAID/INADE/ADP￾MIS Quarterly in April, July, Octobcr, January. RJ B. Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) for the SpO The PMP for the SpO includes the indicators needed by activity managers and the SO team to manage for results. To facilitate the USAIDIW review, a selected number of indicators will be reported annually through the R4 to measure achievement of the strategy. These indicators are shown in bold. Special Objective Level: Reduced Illicit Coca Production in Target Areas in Peru Performance Indicators: Hectares devoted to coca production in Peru Coca leaf production in Peru. These indicators will demonstrate whether the development hypothesis is correct that alternative development in combination with successful interdictionllaw enforcement can reduce economic dependence on illicit coca. Although USAID activities will be focused in target areas, the data available are at a national level, showing also the effects of interdiction. It is expected that in target areas, reduction rates will be higher than the national average. lntermediate Result 5.1: lncreased Commitment to Reduce Hectares Devoted to Coca Production Voluntarily Indicators: Number of communities represented in signed reduction agreements in ADP target areas Public perception of costs and benefits of coca production and trafficking in population centers in ADP target areas. The IR implies a change in attitudes. The first indicator is a proxy for commitment to reduce coca production. It is intended to measure the "promise" of reduction of the communities, which is based on expectations generated by information on the results of activities under IRs 5.1 -1 - 5.1 -4 below. They also provide more concrete targets for the level of licit production needed to compensate (at least in part) the reduction in the local economy implied by the agreements. They also help set expectations for the number of hectares that may indeed be reduced. The second indicator is more directed to the change in attitudes towards coca cultivation. The commitment to reduce coca production will occur as increasing numbers of the local population believe that the benefits no longer outweigh the costs. The costs include social as well as economic, and whether the population perceives any real alternatives. This result is framed within target areas, as are the supporting results described below. lntermediate Result 5.1.1 : Increased Growth of the Licit Economy in Comparison to the Illicit Economy Indicators: Value of licit production in ADP target areas. Number of jobs generated in ADP target areas Ratio of illicit agriculture production to total coca production The first indicator will capture the growth of the overall licit economy in the ADP target areas. It will be measured by the licit products transported out of the coca growing areas on roads to major markets as a proxy. That doliar volume will be compared to the volume of illicit coca leaf production in metric tons (from the SO level) to obtain the third indicator. This indicator will measure the strength of the licit economy. The second indicator, number of jobs generated, captures the effect of the empioyment alternatives to coca farming. Two key lower level results have been identified to achieve this result: production and market access. intermediate Result 5.1 .I .I: lmproved licit agriculture production in coca producing areas Indicators: Number of hectares devoted to licit agricultural production in ADP areas Productivity per hectare of licit agricultural production in ADP ares. The number of hectares in licit production and productivity per hectare define "productive capacity." The indicators for this IR capture improvements in the key economic activity in coca growing areas. The licit agriculture production is referred to all licit crops. Productivity will be measured for selected crops but in randomly selected fields. Intermediate Result 5.1 .I .2: lmproved market access for licit agriculture production Indicator: Farm gate producer price as a percentage of end price This indicator will measure prices of major licit agricultural products in target coca growing areas. As market access increases, the farmers' percentage of the truckers' price will increase. Roads are a necessary input to achieve this result. International price fluctuations in commodities like coffee will affect the absolute amount the farmer receives, but not the percentage. A weighted average by wholesale volume encourages project implementers to focus on market access for high volume products. Intermediate Result 5.1.2: Increased Availability and Access to Basic Services to the Target Population in ADP areas. Indicator: Percent of households with unsatisfied basic needs in ADP target areas. This IR uses the same indicator and definition as used in SO 2. The indicator captures the availability and access of basic services such as sewerage and education. It reflects higher GOP investments in social infrastructure. This indicator will be revised to consider only the specific variables that could be influenced by USAlD activities. Intermediate Result 5.1.3: Increased PubIic Participation in Local Decision-making Indicators: District Municipalities with democratically chosen leadership in the ADP target areas. Percentage of local governments that have formal plans and budgets and have consulted on the content and priorities of these plans and budgets with the community. District Municipalities with open, public information on the municipal budget. These indicators attempt to capture citizens' participation in their local governance. The community will be willing to support the legal system and legal activities if allowed to participate in decision making on who decides, what it is, and what it costs. Intermediate Result 5.1.4: Increased Awareness of Social and Ecological Damage Caused by Drug Production and Use Indicator: Percentage of public that recognizes that drug production and consumption cause environmental and social damages. This indicator will track the extent and level of knowledge of people in target areas on the social and ecological costs of drug production and trafficking. This will in turn affect the commitment IIR 5.1 ) to reduce voluntarily coca production. lntermediate Result 5.2: Effective law enforcement Indicator: Average price of coca leaf. This result is managed and reported on by NAS. USAID will track coca prices to monitor opportunities for interventions. RESULTS TRACKING TABLE FOR SPECIAL OBJECTIVE: Reduced Illlclt Coca Production InTarget Areas In Peru Performance lndlcator Defin~tlon and Unit of Measurement 1. Heclares devotad lo coca production in Peru. (Analyzed by Valleys) Data Source Delnilion: Heclares cullivated (not abandoned). Includes licit and Ncit coca product~on. R4 reponod Unil: Motric Tons, Un~l: Number of Hectaros , Coca lcafproduclion ~n Pew. (Analyzed by Valleys) I RGET AREAS USG: CNC & N4S Reporls G0P:CORAH USG: CNC t. NAS Roports G0P:CORPN Baselme Data Oofinilion: Ploducl~ty por hoclare (Ha) limos numbor of heclares timo6 number of hawesls. Includes lrcil and illicit produclion. 4 PERU 1995 1993 (0 lotal PERU: :enIra1 Huallaga lpper Uuallaga r 4guaylia 3chis.Palcazu 9urimac (") lthor Areas0 1995 I= 0) total PERU: :enlral Huallaga Jpper Uuallaga (' 4guaylia Jichis.Palcazu Qurimac )") 3lhsr &eon r") Annual TargetslActual Performance Dala Year I value 1 1997 I 1998 1 1999 1 2000 1 2001 1 2002 1 2003 tlepao 5,5a) 33,700 19$00 7.100 21 ,m 27,100 183,EOl lotlm m7m 30m 14,m 37.m 30,100 D boon ogro I I COMMENTSJNOTES Slnce or~ginal MO1 lorgols woro alroody mtl in 1998, rovirod onnuol Iorgols for tho I oP. vmich includo coca oral I poriod 1999.1003 32,640 (r) 26.1 12 (r maO 1 60103 ssurnpl~ons lor ~chlovlng lorg& aro as foll& (a) ~roducl& Amrogo of1 88 Molrc Ions por hocloro (1997.XXll), and (b) lmoolrnonl~ $59 5 rnlll~on (1'335.19%). plus 133 m~lhon In 1999, $26 m~llron por yoor m2001) and rvporl Uppor liuoll~ga ~ncludos Iho followrng oroes a) TOCOC~D.UC~IID. [I) Loonclo Pfado. ond c) Monton; (") bcludoo Palmnpnmpb: ond (") Olhor areas lnclud~ a)Lowor Hualloga, b) Cucco, and c) olhors itermedlate Result 6.1 : Increased Comrnltment to Reduce Hectares Devoted to Coca Productton Voluntarlly Number of communities !presented in signed coca !duction agreements in ltornal~s Oovelopment rogram (ADP) areas A reported Definition: Cumulative number of communities. Reduclion agreements are signed by local govornmenl authorilies with their communities (coordinated by CONTRAOR?GAS. Ihe GoP counterpad and ADP implamentors). indicator is a proxy measurement for the lntermodiale Result. Unil: curnulalive number of communities ONTRADROGA oca reduction (ADP large1 areas pomenl records Central Huallaga Tocache.Uchiza Aguaylia Pichis-Pdcazu Apurimac 0 Sub.total Other Areas ; designed lo J L :OMMENTS/NOYES: Thc ADP is an integralod of service delivery inlerventih: ,the illictt coca.based economy: and improving tho qualily of life for former coca fa~mer families and communilies, by meeting their basic needs and increasing their parlicipation in local docision making. he AternalNo Davolopment Program is being implomenled in Iwe largel area8 and also in some other areas inside the ADP zones more precisely defined by CONTRAOROGAS in 1999. J(~o~zoqes) . QP zones includo: (1) Apurimsc RND~ Valley-Ene, Q) Central 1iuellaga.Upper and Lcwer Mayo; (3) Uppar Huallaga: (4) Aguaytin; (5) Pichis.Pachilea.Perene-Tambo; @) Lower Huallega~Yurirnaguas: 1) La Convcncion.Laros (Cusco), (0) Tambopala.lnambafi; and (9) Mararion. (as defined by CONTRADROGAS Ihe GOP counlerparl oflha AOP) OP target areas include. (a) Apurimac River Valloy in zone I, (b) Ponaza.8iavo.Sise.Sspbsoa (or Conlrol Huollaga) in zono 2. (c) Tocacho.Uchiza in zone 3, (Q Pichis.Palcozu-Pachirea in zone 5 nnd zono 4, and , a) Aguaytia in zone 4. (7 lncludoa tho oror of Polmapampa. mduce behab~oral changes in people, tmplementiog groMh ofthe licrl economy In comparison b Aprrl 1W. lhe or~gtnalargo! of cumulal~o numbor olcommunr~oswas adjusted dwmwaid lo 456. due lo reduced lund~ng during FY1997-FYI533 , -- - . . -- - 7- 226 239 122 33 1 17 239 0 455 1 TX 501 153 50 5 17 291 290 650 679 153 50 37 17 132 389 290 706 679 153 SO 37 AI-----.-. 17 132 389 m 1006 679 153 50 37 17 132 389 290 I150 Ilntermediate Result 5.1.2: Increased Avallablllty and Access to Basic Servlces to the Target Populatfon In AD Program areas. For Ihe 1998.2003 period, this indicator will change lo 'Percenlago of households with access lo basic soriices in ADP larget areas' (sewage, paiable water, schools, heallh & energy). This new indicalor rellecls belle1 what Iho AOP does in lerrns olbasic sonicas. wilh the communily and its local aulhor~les. Data will be gathered lhrough the annual AOP special suwey. fl Includes tho area olPalmapampa I I. Percenlage of local Dohilion: A local gwernment is defined as having ADP spocial governmenls that have formal plans and budgets in place if thely have: a Suwey formal plans and budgels program 01 aclivitios mlh objeelivos and Iargels; an and have consulted on Ihe implementation scheduls: the commitmenl of or~anizations I Percentage ofhousoholds mlh access lo basic selvices ~n ADP larget areas (Analyzed by Valleys) R4 reported I conlent and priorilies of these reapons~blo for impternenlalion; and financial and material plans and budgets wrlh Iha resource$. Con~utlalion wilh lhs community is dslnodl community. R4 roporlod COMMENTSiNOTf S The orrg~nal performance mdicator was 'Percenlaje ol householdswdh unsatisbrd basrc needs In ADP larget areas*, and used data from tho Nalional Lmng Standards Sruvery Delnmon A household IS defined as havlng access lo basic seNices if it demanslratos at least three of the foltmng, - sewage, san~tat~on systems - potable waler system . schools facdtl~es - health facrhlies - energy fac~lil~es Un~t Percentage I 2. Dislric Municiapl~lios w~~h apon, public informstion on Iho municipot budgot ADP specral Survey as Iho level of involvement of grassroo1 communiiy groups and cilirens in pteparing and prioritizing municipal plans and budgels, as delermined by cilizen's opinion (on a subjaclive ecolo ranging from 'A lol' lo 'Nolhing'.) Consul~ation mochanisms include popular assemblies. opon council sossiono, forn/dobolos and coordinolion working groups mootinge. U~arconlago Dohilion: Open. publtc inlormotion moons published ADP SPOC~D~ dislribulod or posted in o public locolion. Budgol Suwoy ~nformolion moono anticipalod rwonuon, oporaling plan and its global budgol. Unit Numbor of Municipolitio8 1995 199s (11 Priority areas: L ICOMMENTSNOTES: Tho oria~nal boco lor Iho Soocial Obioc\ivo was 500 municipnli~ior in oll Poru's coca orowinfl moo lo (ADP target aroas) Cenlrat Huallaga Tocahe.Vchrza Aguaylia Pichis.Palcazu Apurrmac 0 ty tho 84 8.6 10.0 6C yow MOB. 47.1 29.5 40 4 24 8 48 4 76 ram i iangod accordmqly. Tho rmicod ln~qolo oro morkod mlh It). 56.2 40 5 48 1 32 8 54 5 21.4 420(r) 160 70 39 61 7 43 6 39 3 29 0 56 6 o implomonlod in Lo IOlQOl oroao only, 28.6 47.0(r) XI 66 45 (r) 49.4 866 59 8 49 5 62 2 47 2 33 0 50O(r) 220 60 50 (0 51.2 33 0 540(1 X 54 55 (r) 66.1 0 (4 I (1 intermediate Result 6.1.4: Increased Awareness of Soclal and Ecological Damage Caused by Oyg Production and Us Env & Social Environmental Social Envlronmonta! damagas of coca I 1 Percentage of public lhal recognize that drug produclion and consumption cause enwronmenlal and $octal damages In AD? large1 areas (ADP target areas) Central Huallaga Tocahdchiza Aguaylia Pichis.Palcatu Apurimac Soclal damagos of drugs (ADP targot areas) Cenlral Huallaga TocztheUhira Aguaylia Pichis-Palcaru Apurimac OeCn~lion, Peopte suneyed that recognizes anv~ronmenlal damages caused by coca production. and soc~al damages caused by drug produclion, lrafickmg and consumplion. L I I I I COMMENTSNOTES To bellor reflocl ach~evomenl oflh~s IR, slatlmg In 1930 Ihs pubhc fecogn~llon of onvlronmenlal and social damages mll be also reparled separately S~nce Ihe orrgmal comblned largsl lor 2001 has been shady mel, lensed annual lnrgels for the per~od 1999.2001 have been lncluded These are marked wth (I) P \pdpd\S05 AD\Closeoul RoporlUrackmg tablosZOO1 071Mr02 C. Results Tracking Tables (RTT) for the SpO The targets for this SPO were mostly estimated using historical information from USAID's experience in Alternative Development activities. In addition, the targets were established assuming required and timely funding levels. Targets will be revised annually according to actual funding levels and performance. Strategic Objective Level: Reduced Illicit Coca Production in Target Areas in Peru Hectares devoted to coca production in Peru Coca leaf production in Peru. -- tlQ,DoO -- 1- -- rOPPQo -- OM00 -- m raioDa -- maw -- mm -- In 1995, 1 15,000 hectares of coca were in cultivation. The ADP seeks to reduce the total illicit coca (around 82,000 ha)' by the year 2008 at an investment of $25 million per year. Projected hectares for coca cultivation were estimated given NAS historical data, ADP experience, the extent of coca in ADP target areas, expected investments and agricultural cycles, and the level of funding. NAS historical data on coca leaf production and number of hectares cultivated provided the data for the baseline and projected targets for production. 'Chartltotals reflect the total licit and illicit coca; the difference is legally permitted by GOP. 1R 5.1: Increased Commitment to Reduce Hectares Devoted to Coca Production Voluntarily Number of communities represented in signed reduction agreements in AD? target areas During 1 996, 226 communities signed voluntary coca reduction agreements. Targets were estimated considering previous ADP experience in working with communities, future social communication activities and expected funding levels. Public perception of costs and benefits of coca production and trafficking in population centers in ADP tarqet areas. Targets will be established in late 1997 after completion of perception studies. IR 5.1 .I: Increased Growth of the Licit Economy in Comparison to the Illicit Economy. Value of licit production in ADP target areas Ratio of licit agriculture production to total coca production Number of jobs generated in ADP areas Targets for these indicators are based on the results projected in the lower level IRs below adjusted with historical data. The number of jobs generated (full-time equivalents) takes into account the increases in legal agriculture and the projected increases in off-farm activities, and other temporary jobs that will be generated due to public infrastructure construction. IR 5.1 .I. 1 : Improved licit agriculture production in coca producing areas Number of hectares devoted to licit agriculture production The baseline for the number of hectares for 1996 came from limited projections using the 1995 national agriculture census as a basis. The increases are based on the analysis of the availability of arable land, the type of products and expected provision of technicai assistance for the areas. Productivity per hectare of licit aqricultural production To be determined IR 5.1 .I -2: Improved Market Access for Licit Agriculture Production Farm gate producer price as a percentage of end price Historical data is the base for the projections, considering the estimated effect on prices of main products due to road improvements. 1R 5.1.2: Increased Availability and Access to Basic Services to the Target Population in ADP areas. Percentage of households with unsatisfied basic needs Achievements for this IR will depend largely on GOP social investments in this area, so targets were estimated using national projections to reduce poverty. Targets will be adjusted once the household survey for ADP areas is completed. IR 5.1.3: lncreased Public Participation in Local Decision-making District Municipalities with democratically chosen leadership in the ADP target areas. Percentage of local governments that have formal plans and budgets and have consulted on the content and priorities of these plans and budgets with the community. District Municipalities with open, public information on the municipal budget. Results obtained in the Local Government Development activity provided for information for the baseline and the basis to set the targets for these indicators. Historical data were adjusted by the expected funding levels for the projected years. IR 5.1.4: Increased Awareness of Social and Ecological Damage Caused by Drug Production and Use Percentage of public that recognizes that drug production and consumption cause environmental and social damages Targets for this IR wiH be revised once the survey for the ADP areas is completed. The preliminan/ targets were based on a limited survey in one area, projected with the results obtained from CEDRO in narcotics awareness activities during the last 15 years. IR 5.2: Effective law enforcement Average price of coca leaf USAID assumes a flat target coca leaf price that makes coca production no longer an attractive alternative to coca farmers.