NICARAGUA
ARAP
Agriculture Reconstruction Assistance 
Program
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY and RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT ASSESSMENT
Prepared by:
Frank Sullivan
James Bell
Dr. Donald Jackson
Reese Moyers
Darell McIntyre
Mayo Vega
Submitted by:
Chemonics I nternational Inc.
To:
United States Agency for International Development
Managua, Nicaragua
Under RAISE IQC Contract No. PCE-I-00-99-00003-00
Task Order No. 802
October, 2000
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………….… i
ACRONYMS …………………………………………………………………... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………….… iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………..…….1
2.0 METHODOLOGY ……………………………………………..……… 2
3.0 KEY CONCLUSION/ SUGGESTIONS BY PVO ……………….……4
3.1 ADRA ………………………………………………………….………. 4
3.2 CARE ………………………………………………………………….. 5
3.3 CLUSA …………………………………………………………………6
3.4 CRS ……………………………………………………………………. 7
3.5 PCI …………………………………………………………………….. 8
3.6 SAVE ………………………………………………………………….. 9
3.7 World Relief …………………………………………………………… 10
4.0 PROGR AM CONCLUSIONS …………………………..…………....11
5.0 PROGRAM SUGGESTIONS …………………………………….….12
APPENDICES
Appendix A Terms of Reference
Appendix B Interview guidelines
Appendix C Individual PVO Results
Appendix D Field Visit Schedule
Appendix E Interview List
Appendix F Bibliography
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 3
ACRONYMS
ADRA The Adventist Development and Relief Agency
Apante Winter (dry) planting season
CLUSA The Cooperative League of the U.S.
CRS Catholic Relief Services
CTO Cognizant Technical Officer (USAID/N staff)
Cordobas Nicaraguan currency. (September value $1.00 = C$ 12.85)
ERD Enterprise and Rural Development office – USAID/N
manzana measure of land; approximately 70% of one hectare
NGO (local) Non Governmental Organization
PCI Project Concern International
Primera Spring planting season (April/May)
Postrera Summer (rainy season) planting season (August/ September)
PVO Private Voluntary Organization (grant recipients, ADRA, CARE, etc.)
SAVE Save the Children-U.S.
TPM Team Planning Meeting
USAID/N The United States Agency for International Development in Nicaragua
WR World Relief Corporation
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At the end of October 1998, Hurricane Mitch struck Nicaragua, one of the deadliest natural 
disasters in the country’s history. The United States Government responded with substantial 
economic and humanitarian assistance, over $ 94 million. Of the total, $35.8 million was awarded 
to seven US private voluntary organizations (PVO). Two of the principle criteria for the grant 
award were on-the-ground presence of these PVOs in the country and an ability to mount a rapid 
disaster response. 
A year later, the Agricultural Recovery and Reconstruction Project is half way through its 
expected 24 month life and USAID Nicaragua is interested in an outside opinion how the project 
is proceeding. The purpose of the study was to provide suggestions to build on first-year results 
how the program is improving incomes, looking toward the second, final year of project activities. 
Longer-term suggestions could contribute to USAID’s strategic planning process. 
A six person team fielded by Chemonics International conducted the assessment from Sept. 18 to 
Oct. 11, 2000 including six days of field travel. Seventy-two villages were visited, and interviews 
were conducted with hundreds of farmers and dozens of field staff. The assessment team’s 
vision of itself was as “strategic programming advisor”: as colleague and counselor to PVOs 
rather than as “evaluator.” This vision guided all data collection and the writing process. The 
assessment team placed high importance on partner PVOs being kept informed throughout the 
assignment, and PVO comments on a draft version of this text have been incorporated into the 
final document.
Detailed Findings, Conclusions and Suggestions have been prepared for each PVO and focus on 
concrete, immediate suggestions how to improve project impact. These individual assessments 
were presented only to the individual PVO and to USAID. One-page summaries of key 
conclusions and suggesti ons from those documents are included in the master text suitable for 
general consumption.
Regarding Program Conclusions, the assessment team has been very impressed with the overall 
impact; this is a project that is meeting its targets and objectives. 
There are several reasons why this effective, rapid response has taken place. USAID was able to 
formulate major objectives and indicators quickly; PVOs were given resources and flexibility to 
start quickly; USAID also challenged the PVOs to disburse funds in an efficient and rapid manner. 
As the project enters its final year, it now seems time to strengthen elements that have proven 
most successful in improving food security and economic impact. One reason to implement some 
adjustments is to enable PVOs and USAID to begin to focus on the long-term sustainability of 
project successes. A shift toward an income generation focus rather than a disaster response 
one, can provide valuable experiences to identify sustainable activities for increasing farmer 
incomes over the long term.
Suggestions are broken into several categories. 
· Activities with demonstrable current impact on improved income suggest more work across 
most PVOs in solar drying, silos and irrigation, and continued emphasis on marketing of cash 
crops. Continuing the program’s activities in rural road repair will also provide substantial 
economic gains.
· Suggested activities with future impact are continued emphasis on soil conservation and 
agroforestry, continued emphasis on market information collection and dissemination, and 
more attention directed to women’s productive activities. 
· Activities with an important “social safety net” dimension are the distribution of certified seed 
and agricultural revolving fund loans. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 5
· Other general sugges tions are put forward: 
ÿ the desirability of improved coordination at the field level among PVOs; 
ÿ consideration of the issue of ownership of loan re-flows, 
ÿ high quality documentation of the program’s economic impact; 
ÿ technical assistance across PVOs in cost/benefit analysis, rural credit, rural women’s 
income generation, irrigation, and soil conservation
ÿ consideration of “savings” as an important element of improved income.
· Finally, USAID and the PVOs can begin to think of a post-Mitch phase in which project 
proposals will build on the gains the Mitch -funded program has achieved.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The assessment team wishes to express appreciation to Chemonics International for the services 
of Mayo Vega who, though assigned to other Chemonics responsibilities in Nicaragua, was made 
available to the team full-time for the duration of the field travel. 
The team also expresses gratitude to Mr. Vega for his wealth of historical background, depth of 
knowledge of the Nicaraguan agricultural sector and familiarity with Nicaraguan PVOs in 
particular. We are also appreciative of Mayo’s unflappable disposition and unfailing good humor.
The assessment team also acknowledges with appreciation backstopping logistical assistance 
from the Chemonics Agriculture Reconstruction Assistance Program (ARAP).
The team expresses appreciation to Mr. Ray Baum, Chief of the Office of Enterprise and Rural 
Development (ERD) for his support of the study. 
In much of its field travel, the team was accompanied by the Cognizant Technical Officers of 
ERD, Paul Crawford, Leonard Fagot and Roberto Berrios, as well as Lilliam Baez of the Office of 
Democratic Initiatives and Tomás Membreño, the Hurricane Mitch Coordinator. The contribution 
of these individuals to the team’s understanding of the issues of the Hurricane Mitch recovery 
effort was valuable and much appreciated.
The team also wishes to express particular appreciation to the many men and women of the PVO 
field staff who accompanied us with courtesy, punctuality and decorum on our travels to the many 
sites visited during the week of field travel. These individuals invariably demonstrated 
professionalism, dedication and hard work in all they did, and the team’s appreciation for their 
contribu tion to the recovery of thousands of poor Nicaraguan farmers is great.
As always, the opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily 
reflect the opinions of the PVOs visited or of USAID Nicaragua. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 7
1.0 INTRODUCTION
At the end of October 1998, Hurricane Mitch struck Nicaragua causing several thousand deaths, 
affecting over 800,000 people, and causing over a billion of dollars in economic damage-- one of 
the deadliest natural disasters in the his tory of the country. The United States Government was 
one international donor that responded with substantial economic and humanitarian assistance, 
both in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane and in long term economic reconstruction funds. 
Total funds awarded by the USG in support of Hurricane Mitch recovery is over $ 94 million.
Part of these funds were used to support agricultural and economic recovery activities, and one of 
the mechanism used to solicit proposals was an Annual Program Statement on January 22, 1999 
that requested proposals directed to hurricane reconstruction and agricultural recovery. 
Seventeen proposals were reviewed. 
Of the total amount of $59.5 million allocated to the agricultural sector, $35.8 million, sixty 
percent, was aw arded to seven US private voluntary organizations, (PVO), the Adventist 
Development and Reconstruction Agency, (ADRA), CARE, Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the 
Cooperative League of the USA (CLUSA), Project Concern International (PCI), Save the 
Children-USA and World Relief Corporation. One of the principle criteria for the grant award was 
long-term, on-the-ground presence of these PVOs in the country and an ability to mount a rapid 
disaster response. 
The first grants were awarded in October 1999. A year later, the Agricultural Recovery and 
Reconstruction project is half way through its expected 24 month life and USAID/N was interested 
in receiving an outside opinion how the project was proceeding. The Mission also indicated that 
results of the study could be used as one of several inputs into the process of formulating a new 
five-year strategic plan during the summer of 2001.
A Task Order was given to Chemonics International under the RAISE IQC to carry out the study. 
The task was conducted from September 18 to October 11, 2000 by a Chemonics team of six 
agricultural and financial experts. The Terms of Reference as well as early discussions with 
USAID/N indicated clearly that the team assignment was an “assessment” rather than an 
“evaluation,” the feeling being that the elapsed time from start of grant activities was far too short 
to conduct a true mid-term evaluation.
The purpose of the effort was to provide suggestions that would assess and build on first-year 
results, looking toward the second, final year of project activities. Longer-term suggestions would 
be directed to potential future USAID -funded activities that would place more emphasis on 
increasing farmers’ incomes and how PVOs could partner with USAID in this regard. (See TOR, 
Appendix A.)
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 8
2.0 METHODOLOGY
On its arrival, the assessment team met with the USAID Enterprise and Rural Development 
(ERD) team to review the Terms of Reference and develop an overall workplan. At this meeting, 
the team presented USAID with a calendar of activities and discussed the primary objectives, and 
expectations for the purpose, scope and deliverables of the assignment. A meeting was held in 
which each PVO made a brief general presentation on its project. 
A two-day Team Planning Meeting (TPM) was held to : 1) analyze and clarify the Terms of 
Reference; 2) develop a draft outline of the final report; 3) define how the team would work 
together and the roles and responsibilities of the team leader; 4) develop draft interview guides; 5) 
plan Managua interviews and complete logistical and administrative details.
On Sept. 20th, the team presented to USAID a draft outline of the final report, which was modified 
and approved.
The assessment team was spit into three pairs: Team 1, Frank Sullivan, Team Leader, and
James Bell to review World Relief and Catholic Relief Services activities; Team 2, Darell McIntyre 
and Mayo Vega, with technical backstopping from Luis Moreno, to review PCI, ADRA, and Save 
the Children; Team 3, Dr. Don Jackson and Reese Moyers to review CLUSA and CARE activities. 
Meetings were held between team pairs and respective PVOs to discuss the diagnostic and 
consultative role of the team in formulating recommendations. The PVOs also provided the 
teams with detailed project briefings and identifi ed particular concerns on which they wished the 
teams to investigate and develop commentary. These meeting also developed an itinerary for the 
field travel.
Six days of field travel took place from Sept 25 to 30. Seventy-two villages were visited and 
semi-structured interviews were conducted with hundreds of field staff and farmers. The interview 
guides are attached as Appendix B. The field travel report is attached as Appendix D. 
On October 2, a meeting was held with USAID to discuss preliminary findings, conclusions and 
suggestions. Team members wrote their respective sections from October 3- 5. A general 
meeting was held with USAID and the PVOs on Oct. 6 to discuss and get feedback on the draft 
document. The Team Leader incorporated PVO feedback into the revision and completion of the 
final report during the period of October 9th to 11th
.
To accomplish the task, the team reviewed written documentation (USAID and PVOs reports, 
cooperative agreements, baselines studies, progress reports, trip reports, technical reports, etc.) 
and other outside sources where appropriate. Interviews were held with USAID staff, PVO 
partners, project beneficiaries, and other key informants. The assessment team placed a high 
emphasis on keeping USAID and partner PVOs informed throughout the assignment to ensure 
that input, perspective and expectations were being taken into account in preparation of the final 
report.
The assessment team recognizes that implementation of the Mitch Recovery and Rehabilitation 
Project has been quite short: Cooperative Agreements with PVOs were signed between mid 
October 1999 to January 2000, less than twelve months ago. In many cases, project experience 
is not complete due to the cycle of agricultural production, harvest and marketing, as many 
activities span longer time horizons than nine to twelve months. Furthermore, in the spring of 
2000, project farmers faced a serious drought in many areas that had a substantially negative 
effect on production, harvest, marketing and credit. Thus the approach, investigative 
methodology and analysis of information used by the assessment team have had to take into 
account the short project time span, the length and variety of different agricultural cycles, and 
drought during the months of project implementation under review.
The assessment team’s vision of itself, developed in the TPM, is as “strategic programming 
advisors”: as colleagues and counselors to the PVOs rather than as judges and evaluators. This 
vision has guided the team during data collection and throughout the writing process. The team’s 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 9
hope is that the document will spur PVOs on to further efforts and to improve PVO program 
quality in both the short and mid-term.
Chapter Three discusses key finding broken down by PVO. Chapter Four discusses overall 
program conclusions based on the findings. Chapter Five discusses program suggestions. 
Detailed findings, conclusions and suggestions on each PVO’s program activities can be found in 
Appendix C. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 10
3.0 KEY CONCLUSIONS and SUGGESTIONS BY PVO
3.1 ADVENTIST DEVELOPMENT AND RELIEF AGENCY (ADRA)
The ADRA program has two components, an agricultural and environmental restoration 
component and a public infrastructure rehabilitation component. In the former category are 
activities promoting contour planting, live barriers, family gardens, nurseries, transplants, silos, 
micro irrigation and disaster awareness. In the latter are components of bridge and road building, 
and the construction of school and infant feeding centers.
The assessment team noted that many of ADRA’s agricultural and environmental restoration 
activities, e.g., contour planting, live fencing, nurseries and forestry transplants, do not contribute 
directly to income generation, but have an indirect effect on income. Most fam ily gardens visited 
showed significant farmer expenditure of time, labor and money; a major expense was fencing. 
One irrigation system was visited. Metal silos clearly have the potential to reduce losses that will 
positively impact on the availability of food for household consumption. 
Conclusions are that the program is moving forward largely as planned. The quality of the 
interventions is excellent, with the possible exception of road construction where there is a need 
to use heavy machinery rather than depend solely on manual labor. 
Key recommendations are for ADRA to develop a methodology that can identify activities that 
have the greatest income potential for beneficiaries. This should include an analysis of the target 
markets, and a strong cost/benefit analysis. 
ADRA could broaden crop interventions to include those which have the best potential for 
producing income. Examples include coffee and tropical fruits, and higher value options for family 
gardens, e.g., herbs, etc.
ADRA could raise the technical standards for road construction, and employ equipment where 
necessary. This may have the effect of reducing the program target for kilometers of road to be 
completed because of the higher investment required to raise technical standards.
ADRA could also broaden its agricultural interventions to include small domestic livestock, e.g., 
chickens, ducks and pigs. This would have the added effect of providing more benefits to female 
family members. The agency could also access the technical knowledge available in other 
agencies such as colleague PVOs, private sector companies and technical assistance consulting 
firms such as Chemonics and Winrock.
3.2 CARE
CARE/Nicaragua is implementing two separate activities under the Hurricane Mitch Program, 
reconstruction of rural roads through ‘cash for work’ employment, and agricultural rehabilitation in 
the municipality of Posoltega.
After a reduction in the original target in order to build better quality roads, three hundred and 
twenty one kilometers of roads have been completed as of the end of the fourth quarter. Income 
generating opportunities have been provided to approximately 6,000 households in the targeted 
area. On balance, this is quite satisfactory performance in meeting the Impact Goals, especially 
when the inclement weather caused by recent rains is taken into consideration. It appears that 
the roads are being constructed at required standards, and that at least thirty percent (30%) of the 
workers are women. 
To the assessment team, it app ears quite likely that the roads will have profound economic 
impacts. These include: 1) increased commercial activity through new local businesses, 2) 
significant decreases in transportation costs; 3) crop diversification especially into higher value 
crops; 4) lowered production costs due to lower transportation costs; 5) decreased post-harvest 
losses; 6) new land under cultivation; 7) land values increases up to 100 percent; 8) improved 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 11
community services; 9) and increased traffic that will provide greate r access to the outside. 
Maintenance of the roads after construction is an issue that has not been addressed.
The Agricultural Rehabilitation Program was designed to impact on 350 of families most affected 
by the Posoltega landslide and includes support for basic grain and horticultural production, crop 
diversification, fruit and forest trees, and the promotion of small-scale chicken and swine 
production. For these who lost their agricultural land, they will most likely remain in a state of 
extreme poverty for a long time and should be treated as welfare recipients until they can be 
provided with alternative agricultural lands or are otherwise absorbed into the economy. It is 
beyond CARE’s scope to provide for their long-term self-sufficiency.
This does not appear to be the case with farmers who lost a great deal in the hurricane but who 
retained their land and have the potential to improve their income. While activities with this 
segment of the Posoltega population have been well implemented as relief and rehabilitation, 
CARE could consider some changes. Crop selection could be based on a better analysis of 
marketing opportunities and income generating potential; adoption of higher value crops could be 
considered. CARE could also place emphasis on the development of marketing services 
including market identification, market information, and decreased marketing costs. 
Also, the use of agricultural production credit could be adjusted. While the current provision of 
credit and its repayment in kind have functioned well under relief and rehabilitation conditions, 
program beneficiaries could be prepared and redirected towards more conventional and 
commercial credit delivery mechanisms in the future.
3.3 Cooperative League of the United States of America 
(CLUSA)
CLUSA was granted $7.6 million under the Hurricane Mitch Supplemental Funding. These funds 
were designated to finance additional activities to be undertaken by CLUSA as an expansion of its 
core Development Assistance-funded Small Producer Program . The activities were oriented to 
economic reactivation and watershed restoration of areas affected by Hurricane Mitch. In order to 
move forward rapidly, CLUSA partnered through subcontracts with Development Associates, 
Thanksgiving Coffee, ATMA International, and Zamorano (the Pan American Agricultural 
College).
Recommendations for the Technical Assistance and Training Component-
· CLUSA needs to place more emphasis on the consistent and transparent use of data that 
track its progress as well as the data it uses to argue for the various crops and technologies it 
promotes. Data from DA-funded activity should be kept separate from Mitch data.
· CLUSA needs to coordinate its technical assistance and credit components better, and its 
coffee quality component in the case of that crop. As part of the ‘offering of options’ process, 
a complete package should be one option available to beneficiaries. There should also be 
more overlap between the areas where the Zamorano watershed component is working and 
the other CLUSA/Mitch components.
Recommendations for the Coffee Quality Component-
· CLUSA needs to identify a greater number of potential coffee buyers who are trustworthy, 
willing to deal with small producers, and who understand the implications of producing high 
quality coffee for export.
· This component needs to begin to work more closely with the Technical Assistance and 
Training Component and to select groups that can benefit from the services of both.
Recommendation for the Credit Component-
· Allow ATMA to administer the credit fund using the most cost-effective and market-oriented 
methodology.
· Conduct an impact study (during this production cycle) of producer loan utilization, repayment 
capability, and potential income generation.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 12
· Utilize the final two years of CLUSA’s Small Producer Program to continue technical 
assistance to Mitch -affected areas in order to continue to support credit operations.
Recommendations for the Watershed Component-
· The Watershed Component should accelerate its efforts to access loan funds from the Credit 
Fund for community projects, since the program only has one year left and no decision has 
been made on the final disposition of the fund. This will most likely require ATMA to assess 
the feasibility of community projects in much the same way they work with cooperatives and 
other producer groups. 
3.4 CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES (CRS)
The CRS project involves a number of production elements: basic grains, crop diversification, 
coffee production, vegetable and animal production, irrigati on, basic grain storage and soil 
conservation. It also has a credit and marketing component. 
The CRS project is well on track and has every indication of achieving substantial gains in farmer 
income over the near and mid term. 
The CRS project has reached almost 90% of its intended beneficiaries a third of the way through 
the project life. In order for early project gains to be sustainable, it is important that project staff 
and beneficiaries be given a year of consolidation. The project is making excellent progress in 
diversifying agricultural production. These activities should continue. Also, CRS has had 
dramatic and innovative success in grain storage, up to $437,000 per crop season alone, and in 
irrigation. The project should dedicate resources , time, and energy to maximize these gains.
Soil conservation activities bring long-term benefits rather than short term gains. Given CRS’ 
program successes, short-cycle production and infrastructure activities have the potential to 
satisfy farmers’ basic needs over the near-term while working to improve the sustainability of long 
term agricultural gains. 
The importance of the marketing component to complement and strengthen the overall objectives 
of the project can result in increasing farmer incomes through a variety of interventions such as 
training; credit; identifying new agricultural products; extending the growing season with new 
crops; irrigation; and increasing farmers’ knowledge, choices, and options when selling into the 
market place.
CRS could consider transferring funds that have not yet been spent or placed with community 
groups in the revolving fund loan program into the cash credit loan fund program. This would 
involve discussions with all of CRS’s counterpart organizations and community groups in the 
planning.
Experience worldwide suggests that infusing cash and “monetizing” materials into community 
revolving loan funds; supervising payments on principal, interest, and penalties held at the 
community level; and maintaining loan fund l iquidity on a long-term basis have not met with 
success. Charging an annual interest rate of 4% on three-year loans is also well below market 
interest rates for these types of loans. One may question whether continuing to infuse new credit 
into the revolving loan fund program should be continued.
CRS and counterpart organizations should be encouraged to monitor carefully and report the 
performance of the “Fondo Revolvente” to USAID in the Quarterly Reports. The revolving fund 
policy of lending long term at an annual interest rate of 4% should be reviewed. CRS and its 
counterpart organizations could consider eliminating this policy in favor of making the loan to 
beneficiaries directly in cash in a follow-on project.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 13
3.5 PROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL (PCI)
The PCI agricultural project includes basic grain production, storage, family gardens, improved 
agricultural practices, and agroforestry for firewood production. A chicken project will provide 
income generation to 1,000 families. It will also improve the nutrition of the family diet, and 
improve the genetics of the native varieties of poultry.
Improved agricultural practices encompass a variety of activities including organic fertilizer 
production, soil conservation techniques, reforestation for firewood, family gardens and fruit trees. 
The scale of activities indicated that the initiatives in this category were more of an income saving 
intervention, rather than having a significant income-generating outcome.
Beneficiaries of the poultry program seem aware that poultry production could improve household 
income and family health. They expressed recognition of the need to pay back the chickens so 
that others could benefit as well. Sales occur both in terms of eggs and of chickens. The main 
difficulty involved in marketing is due to the distance to markets. 
The program is moving forward as envisioned and the quality of the interventions visited is 
generally excellent. The program includes a wide gamut of implementation activities, and a 
varying beneficiary pool. 
The rotating fund based upon returning selected seeds as repayment for certified seeds is 
interesting, but contains several potential problems. First among them is the quality, including 
productivity, of the seed being returned.
Regarding suggestions, PCI could develop a methodology to identify activities that have the 
greatest income potential. This should include an analysis of the target market or markets, and a 
strong cost/benefit analysis of agricultural interventions. 
PCI could also broaden its crop interventions to include those which have the best potential for 
producing income. Examples include coffee and tropical fruits, and higher value options for family 
gardens, e.g., herbs, etc.
A review of the policy on supplying chicken feed concentrate for three months may be useful 
versus continuing some form of support until the chickens begin to lay. The idea to phase in a 
diet made from local ingredients is excellent, so perhaps some additional assistance with specific 
ingredients that are difficult to procure, e.g., maize, etc., might be an effective way to ensure that 
gains in income are not lost.
PCI could also provide hand grinders on a case-by-case basis to ensure that feed is not a 
constraint. Since other hand tools were supplied to crop producers, this change would not seem 
to represent a major change in program philosophy.
3.6. SAVE THE CHILDREN (SAVE)
The three main components of the SAVE grant are Economic Reactivation (ECOFAMI), Basic 
Infrastructure Rehabilitation (CAMINOS) and Disaster Preparedness & Mitigation (MITIPRE). 
ECOFAMI works in soil and water conservation, agroforestry, basic grains, household gardens, 
post harvest storage, and small-scale poultry and pork. CAMINOS builds roads and bridges 
through food-for-work. MITIPRE was not reviewed.
In terms of the agreement signed by SAVE and USAID, the program is moving forward as 
envisioned, and the quality of the interventions visited is generally excellent. The program 
includes a wide gamut of activities and a varying beneficiary pool. 
The rotating fund based upon returning selected seeds for certified seeds is interesting, but 
contains several potential problems. First among them is the quality, including productivity, of the 
seed being returned
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 14
Higher quality roads were evident than usually found with Food for Work or Cash for Work 
activities on roads that were visited. The benefit of using some heavy machinery is clearly 
demonstrated as an efficient application of resources. These roads will have a longer useful life 
and require less maintenance than roads constructed solely by hand.
Regarding recommendations, SAVE could develop and apply instruments that can identify 
geographical zones and beneficiaries who can respond to an income generation program.
SAVE could develop a methodology to identify activities that have the greatest income potential 
for the beneficiaries involved. This could include an analysis of the target market or markets, and 
a strong cost/benefit analysis of any intervention contemplated. Collecting cost of production and 
marketing data from a sample of beneficiaries to determine earnings potential should be 
considered.
SAVE could broaden its crop interventions to include those which have the best potential for 
producing income. Examples of this include coffee and higher value options for family gardens, 
e.g., herbs, yucca, papaya, pitahaya, etc.
SAVE could also analyze the capacity to prepare local concentrate, including the availability of 
hand grinders, on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that this is not a constraint which could inhibit 
the ultimate success of the poultry activity.
3.7 WORLD RELIEF
The World Relief project involves production activities: basic grains, crop diversification, coffee 
production, vegetable and animal production, irrigation, basic grain storage, soil conservation and 
agroforesty activities. An agricultural loan component is also involved, as is strengthening of a 
local NGO, the PAC.
The project is on track in providing relief and rehabilitation to thousands of farmers with a clear 
potential to improve farmer income. However some adjustments may be in order.
Regarding suggestions, a policy of ‘no fertilizer loans for basic grains’ should be promulgated 
immediately for dry zone cultivation. Also, there are a number of relatively easy ways in which 
more female beneficiaries could be reached to correct a somewhat low level of accomplishment in 
this area to-date. WR should continue its emphasis in post-harvest storage. Also, it is possible 
that irrigation activities could have a larger impact on a number of small farm families. 
WR can strengthen market mechanisms. A WR loan to fertilizer dealers could enable them to 
expand volume that would benefit WR farmers at the same time as improving the income of these 
merchants. In like fashion, WR could begin thinking of ‘devolving’ the growing of vegetative stock: 
instead of growing the materials on its own demonstration farms, it could buy from selected 
growers or suppliers. 
WR should continue with the integration of the marketing and commercialization component with 
those of agricultural extension and credit components. Marketing specialists should continue to 
engage outside technical expertise in marketing and commercialization available though CLUS A, 
the private sector, and other institutions.
The loan program is an important part of World Relief’s development approach and represents a 
significant resource to increase income. World Relief is initiating innovative farming activities in 
many areas: fruit trees, spices, drip irrigation, vegetable production, etc. and the credit program 
can support these activities. Ways to do so would be by establishing new supply mechanisms; 
strengthening existing free market supply systems; and increasing farmer’s profit margins in the 
storage, marketing, and selling of agricultural goods and products.
Due to the importance and volume of credit, WR could consider conducting a 
comprehensive review of the loan portfolio to review accomplishments and best 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 15
practices; this would help develop a strategic plan for the future direction, personnel and 
institutional needs, and emphasis of the credit program in strengthening the overall 
program. This review should include the long-term sustainability of the credit program 
and the feasibility of working with the banking sector through promoting farmer access to 
the banking system.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 16
4.0 PROGRAM CONCLUSIONS
The assessment team has been very impressed with the overall impact of the Agricultural 
Recovery and Rehabilitation Project and believes there are many examples of innovative best 
practices and positive results throughout the project. Field visits with PVO project staff and 
farmers provided countless visual examples of improved crop production, re-introduced animal 
stock, small farmer irrigation systems, new and high value cash crops, improved storage and post 
harvest handling, commercialization and marketing of farm commodities, improved roads, soil 
conservation, and greater farmer access to credit. This is a project that is meeting its targets and 
objectives.
It appears there are several reasons why this rapid response has been possible in the wake of a 
tremendously destructive natural event. USAID was able to formulate quickly the major 
objectives of the activity and prepare a set of Indicators that were clear, comprehensive and 
quantifiable. Through the Cooperative Agreements mechanism, PVOs were given resources and 
flexibility to build upon their past experiences and were quickly able to initiate rehabilitation 
activities in their respective areas. Thereafter, PVOs have been conscientious in monitoring and 
evaluation the project and reporting quarterly results. USAID also challenged PVOs to disburse 
funds in an efficient manner to ensure that the response to the project beneficiaries was quick and 
measurable.
During the first year of the project in some areas, farming was badly affected by drought or heavy 
rains that destroyed crops. In these areas, farmers once again face losses that will require 
special attention how best to allow them to recover and move forward.
As the project enters its second and final year, it now seems time to consolidate the 
accomplishments and strengthen elements that have proven most successful in improving food 
security and economic impact. It is hoped that adjustments in strategies suggested in the 
individual PVO narratives (Appendix C) and in the Suggestions section that follows will result in 
even more positive impact on Mitch-affected farmers. It is also recognized there may be some 
hesitancy on the PVOs’ part to make adjustments with only a year left in the project. For 
example, many PVOs had to take an active role in the first year in directly supplying farmers 
(buying, transporting and distributing inputs, materials, tools, animals, etc.) With roads out and 
economic devastation all around, materials and supplies were simply not available in the private 
sector. However, the private sector can now become more involved in farming economic 
activities. PVOs could facilitate this process by working with the private sector in identifying 
market opportunities and extending technical assistance and credit to both private commercial 
entities and to farmers.
One reason to implement some suggestions is to enable PVOs and USAID to begin to focus on 
post-Mitch programming, the long-term sustainability of project successes. A shift toward an 
“income generation paradigm” rather than a disaster response one, can hopefully provide 
valuable experiences to identify sustainable activities, in production, storage, marketing and 
natural resources, for increasing farmer incomes over the long term.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 17
5.0 PROGRAM SUGGESTIONS
It is quite likely that the Hurricane Mitch Agricultural Recovery and Reconstruction project will turn 
out to be a highly effective and efficient use of resources. Certainly the assessment conducted in 
these pages demonstrates a rich diversity of programming experience and unusual project 
dynamism. Potential ways to enhance impact are noted below, broken down by those with 
current impact, with future potential impact, “social safety net” activities, other suggestions and 
one mid-term suggestion.
5.1 Activities with demonstrable current impact on improved income
5.1.1 Silos and irrigation
PVOs working in silo and micro-irrigation have been seen to be achieving a substantial impact on 
increased income. Even the severe drought of the 2000 Primera season in some areas was not 
enough to offset the significant gains being achieved elsewhere—and likely to be achieved even 
in drought areas in the Postrera crop.
Potential farmer profits of over four hundred thousand dollars have been suggested in one PVO 
text. Those PVOs with current activities in basic grains should be encouraged to direct even 
more emphasis to solar grain dryers and silos. Those PVOs who until now have not had a 
significant component in solar dryers/silos should be encouraged to learn from their colleagues 
and implement these higher value activities in the second year. 
The same is true in mini-irrigation where several PVOs are engaged in an impressive array of 
experimentation and diffusion: in drip, sprinkler, micro-reservoir, hand pump and other low-cost, 
low-tech irrigation activities. All PVOs could learn more from colleague agencies and direct more 
attention to mini-irrigation that has demonstrated considerable potential for increasing income. 
Both silos and micro-irrigation should be pushed across the program.
5.1.2 Continued emphasis on marketing of cash crops
Substantial work in marketing should continue. For those PVOs who are working with higher 
income beneficiaries, the current foci should continue: improved market information, quality 
control, export promotion, etc. This is especially the case with the CLUSA beneficiaries, with 
some CRS loan recipients and some of the less-affected Posoltega group.
For those PVOs who are working with lower income farmers, the foci should continue to be crop 
diversification and de -emphasis on basic grains. Of course, alternative crops need to be selected 
that are compatible with agro -climatic conditions in the region. PVOs who have begun marketing 
efforts-- those who promote pineapple, black pepper, tomato, etc.-- should continue to invest 
program attention to help farmers figure out how to access markets better. This stratum of 
beneficiary is found widely in World Relief and CRS.
Some beneficiaries have such low incomes that program attention needs first to concentrate on 
family self-sufficiency before increased risks can be undertaken. Where basic grains are the most 
appropriate option, community solar dryers and family silos are a way to break the cycle of feast￾or-famine. On-farm basic grain storage increases food availability (less food lost) and has been 
shown in this project to lead to improved food access (better prices/more income.) When the 
poor farmer has adequate access to food for his family, he can begin to think about growing crops 
for marketing. It is likely that beneficiaries of ADRA, PCI and SAVE fall largely into a food-deficit 
category, fam ilies whose food availability needs have to be addressed prior to promoting higher 
risk economic development innovations.
Finally, there is the category of beneficiaries that requires continuous humanitarian assistance 
where there is little development potential, such as the 350 Posoltega families in the CARE 
project.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 18
It bears mention that World Relief has a well thought-out conceptual framework that addresses 
the needs of five distinct categories of beneficiaries ranging from the highest at-risk farmers, to 
farmers able to take risks. It is suggested that other PVOs use this formulation to “stratify” their 
beneficiaries. Project interventions may make more sense (and become better focused) when put 
in the context of which stratum a given PVO is addressing. Additionally, crop risk maps available 
from MAG -FOR should be used to determine the historical risk associated with various crops in 
specific geographic regions. These two elements might bring important new clarity to the subject 
of crop/beneficiary selection.
5.1.3 Continuing emphasis on rural roads
The narrative is clear that improved roads can have a dramatic impact on improved rural incomes. 
A CARE Bangladesh study referenced in Appendix C shows investment in rural roads can have a 
tremendous impact on improved income and this viewpoint was warmly endorsed by the 
assessment team regarding Mitch-supported roads.
The assessment team recognizes the inappropriateness of suggesting that PVOs who currently 
do not have a food- or cash-for-work activity implement a road component in the remaining few 
months of the program. Nevertheless, the relationship between improved agricultural production 
and improved rural roads seems too important to be missed. Where ever possible, this activity 
should be expanded in Year Two. It would seem desirable also, as USAID begins to formulate its 
strategic five year plan, that thought be given to how rural roads can be piggy-backed on to other 
rural income generation activities. 
As suggested in the text, urgent attention needs to be given to the maintenance issue.
5.2. Activities with future impact on improved income worth continued support
5.2.1 Continued emphasis in soil conservation and agroforestry
Several of the PVO projects are doing excellent work in soil conservation and agroforestry, and 
these should continue. Subsistence and near-subsistence farmers do not have the capacity to 
defer present consumption in favor of investment in the future unless some improvements are 
taking place in current production. It is appropriate to link current activities in crop production with 
soil conservation and agroforestry to achieve long term sustainable goals. The efforts of one 
PVO to use food-for-work to establish community nurseries, for the eventual sale of highe r-value 
tree seedling, is a good example of providing poor farmers an opportunity to enter the market 
economy and augment their income slowly.
Additionally, as evidenced by the efforts of two other PVOs, soil conservation and agroforestry 
should be combined with higher value fruit trees to provide a source of continuous income as an 
added incentive to protect the longer-term timber trees.
Several PVOs are doing good work in coffee promotion: in production, post harvest handling, 
quality control, and marketing. These activities should continue but should not dominate a PVO 
portfolio. The assessment team echoes the observation of one of the PVO directors: 
“Nicaraguan farmers know a lot about coffee and we don’t need to do much promotion; 
improvements in coffee cultivation are relatively self-sustaining.” Promoting coffee within the 
context of soil conservation and agroforestry might be a way to add value without losing program 
balance.
5.2.2 Continued emphasis on marketing
While demonstrating promise, some PVO marketing activities have not yet shown an impact on 
improved income. The hiring of new staff to monitor markets, and publishing market prices are 
two such items. Nevertheless these activities should continue. Eventual prosperity for a large 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 19
number of Nicaraguan farmers must come about through improved sales in the market place as 
well as improved production, and PVOs who have not had much experience in marketing should 
establish relations with colleague PVOs who understand how markets work.
 
5.2.3 More emphasis on women’s income generation
This document suggests that some PVOs are under-achieving in reaching their targets for women 
beneficiaries. Others are working in household gardens in “food availability” rather than “food 
access” on a scale that does not appear to bring much improved income. One suggestion has 
been to strengthen PVO promotion of small animal husbandry by women, especially chickens and 
cows. To others it has been suggested that they learn from their colleague PVOs, and/or open a 
“women’s credit window” to push higher female participation. Third, grain storage and marketing 
are areas where some women are already beginning to make real strides, and these gains should 
be exploited. Also, home processing and cottage industries for women could be undertaken 
experimentally and with care, so as not to “pigeon-hole” women into low-margin activities.
5.3. Activities with an important “social safety net” dimension
5.3.1 Distribution of certified seed
One activity that seems to be directed to social issues is the distribution of certified seed and 
recovering the loan in grain at a 2:1 or 1½:1. Though most PVOs call this a “revolving fund” and 
there is reportedly a second cycle of production with the repaid grain, it must be clearly 
admitted—and is noted in the discussion of several PVO projects— that this is a heavily 
subsidized activity. Not one farmer interviewed preferred to get two pounds of grain in the second 
cycle compared to getting one pound of certified seed in the first cycle. Significant increases in 
income accrue to the first beneficiary, much less to the second; also, the likelihood of a 
deterioration in seed quality in the second and subsequent generation plantings is noted in 
individual PVO narratives.
In terms of a hurricane recovery program, the distribution of high quality seed was completely 
appropriate. However, after Mitch funds have been exhausted and as PVOs move from relief to 
development, distribution of certified seed needs to be re-thought.1
 Distribution of certified seed 
as part of a program to contribute to social needs could well be an important project strategy but 
would be better targeted if channeled to the poorest farmers in the village. How to do so 
effectively will require PVO creativity. Distribution of such a heavily subsidized input to more 
prosperous farmers would seem to require a much harder look. 
5.3.2 Revolving funds
The other PVO program component that appears to be oriented to social goals more than to 
improved income is the revolving loan funds. As detailed in various PVO narratives, a host of 
agricultural inputs has been distributed under this concept: vegetable seedlings, agroforestry 
plants, vegetative materials, etc. Almost every PVO is engaging in the activity and the inputs 
have been distributed in kind; in most cases the value of the input is to be repaid in cash or in kind 
to a village committee. 
This strategy has had a quite healthy effect as a disaster response in that it has permitted a more 
rapid “horizontal” transfer of improved vegetative materials to a wide number of farmers in the 
same village. It is suggested that such a mechanism will have little long-term effect, however. 
When the value of the in-kind loan is the repaid in cash, it stays in the hands o f the community 
where experience in rural credit worldwide suggests that it will disappear in a short period of time 
in the absence of good books of account, good supervision, adequate interest to cover defaults, 
etc. When the loan is repaid in kind, there is no mechanism that the assessment team was aware 
of whereby the person who receives the second-generation plant material will pass it on to a third 
generation recipient.
 
1
 These comments should not be construed to reflect the assessment team’s opinion on the USAID -
supported Improved Seed project that has a different, national and macro, focus.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 20
A more commercial approach would be to receive grain as payment, then retain the grain until 
peak prices warrant the sale of the commodity, and use the proceeds for the purchase of 
improved seed for the next crop season.
Another suggestion, as mentioned in several PVO narratives is that either the in-kind input be 
given with no attempt to recoup the value—with a social goal rather than an economic one— or
that a true agricultural credit system be established and the value of the input be loaned in cash 
or coupons to the farmer for the farmer’s purchase of it from a project-supported ve nder. 
Distribution of improved vegetative stock can play an essential role in improved income, as in the 
case of vetiver and other grasses, pigeon pea, etc. for soil conservation and agroforestry seedling 
for long -term programs. Distribution of such materials should not be confused with the 
establishment of a viable rural credit system however.
To improve the availability of essential agricultural commodities such as fertilizer and seeds, 
agricultural credit could be provided to small shops, pulperias, within the community to promote 
the direct sale of these commodities. Understandably, the owners of these small stores should 
receive training on the appropriate use of the commodities.
Given the complexity of this issue, the assessment team does not sug gest that a complete 
program change be effected during the remaining twelve months of the project. However, some 
experimentation would be a good idea. This is an issue that USAID and the PVOs will likely want 
to refine in follow-on programs and there is a year to acquire experience in the subject.
5.4 Other Suggestions
5.4.1 Improved coordination at the implementation level
Important coordination between PVOs at the local level is not yet taking place in many areas. It is 
suggested that in each major town, PVOs working in Mitch activities establish a local committee 
to meet once a month to discuss coordination, overlap, and shared learning. The participation 
USAID CTOs in this forum would add extra importance to the meetings.
5.4.2 Ownership of loan re-flows
It was reported by several PVOs that one condition of Mitch funding was a prohibition that loan 
re-flows return to the counterpart agency. Per USAID regulations, the disposition of all property, 
including credit reflows, is determined by USAID and the host government at the conclusion of 
the project. NGOs who have received support from Mitch activities and continue to work toward 
similar project goals are likely to be a logical choice of manager for these funds.
5.4.3 Document economic impact
It was noted in several PVO reports that some projects have achieved considerable economic 
impact—perhaps as much as half the rural per capita agricultural income in some places. Yet it 
will be difficult for a PVO to make such a claim. It is suggested that USAID hire a U.S. university 
agricultural economist to conduct a rigorous, random sample, cost-benefit evaluation of selected 
PVO interventions in grain storage and mini-irrigation for presentation to the U.S. Congress as a 
dramatic success of the Mitch response.
5.4.4 Technical assistance across PVOs
It is suggested that USAID determine with USDA what kind of technical assistance can be 
provided to Nicaragua under the terms of the Hurricane Mitch account and how PVOs can 
access such technical assistan ce. Among the subjects highlighted in this report where a cross￾visit to various PVOs could be valuable are:
ÿ cost/benefit analysis of agricultural crops/ agro -business
ÿ rural credit 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 21
ÿ rural women’s income generation
ÿ low technology micro and mini irrigation systems.
5.4.5 “Savings” as an element of improved income
A number of PVOs are working in activities that are complementary to “improved 
income.” The assessment team was hoping to be able to address the issue of 
improved health as a contributing factor to improved income (e.g. reduced 
expenditures on medicine, improved labor productivity or reduced time spent in 
water collection) but was unable to do so in the time available. Particularly in 
health and water, USAID could hire an economist to put a dollar value on 
improved health and emphasize the linkage between these sectors and improved 
rural incomes.
5.5 Long term sustainable income generation
It is suggested that USAID and the PVOs begin to think of a post-Mitch stage that builds new 
project proposals on the gains that Mitch-funded projects have achieved. At the same time, in 
several PVO narratives in this report, mention was made of the link between short-term gains 
and long-term soil conservation, watershed management and agricultural infrastruc ture including 
irrigation. It is recommended that USAID develop post-Mitch funding guidelines that draws on 
the expertise and learning curve in long-term soil conservation and agroforestry already gained 
by US PVOs.
APPENDIX A
TERMS OF REFERENCE
APPENDIC B
INTERVIEW GUIDES
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR PVO MANAGERS
PHILOSOPHY
How well does the USAID focus on “income generation” fit with your organization’s preferred 
programming stance?
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY
What is your programming thinking regarding reliance on traditional crops vs. diversification of 
crops and export crops?
What were some of the factors that went into your choice of your ag. interventions?
Why did you select this implementation methodology? What is it?
What are some of the gender issues you take into account in your ag. programming?
What were key anticipated vs. actual results?
Describe some of the major constraints you faced that influenced these results?
Think forward to some future potential impact results. What would they be?
What issues should we be looking at to help you improve your programming? [a.k.a: 
recommendations]
POST HARVEST HANDLING AND STORAGE
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 22
What are your broad assumptions regarding the importance of post harvest handling and storage; 
what programming are you doing to reflect that?
What were some of the factors that went into your choice of post harvest technology?
What is your understanding of current losses in post harvest handling?
How much is that worth in dollar/ Cordoba terms?
What factors that went into your choice of the choice of technology for crop storage, i.e. why did 
you chose to intervene on-farm?/farmgate?/centro de acopio?
How do your post harvest activities function?
What are some gender considerations you take into account in post harvest issues?
What were key anticipated vs. actual results?
Describe some of the major constraints you faced in crop storage?
What issues should we be looking at to help you improve your programming? 
PROCESSING
What are your assumptions regarding processing; how does your programming reflect that?
What is your understanding of key issues in processing? What are your interventions?
Are there gender considerations you take into account in your processing intervention?
What were key anticipated vs. actual results? Describe some key constraints in processing?
MARKETING
What are your broad assumptions regarding the role of marketing; what programming are you 
doing to reflect that thinking?
Describe the current seasonal price fluctuations of key crops.
What were some factors that went into your work in marketing information, finance, gender?
What are marketing activities? How do you participate in getting commodity to market? [the 
“doing” vs facilitating issue]
What is your understanding of the roles and profit margins of intermediaries?
What were key anticipated vs. actual results?
Describe some of the major constraints you faced in addressing marketing issues?
What issues should we be looking at to help you improve your marketing efforts? 
ROADS
What are your broad assumptions regarding a roads component; how does your programming 
reflect that thinking? What is your rationale for selecting the roads?
What factors went into your choice of high/mid/ or low technology?
How does your roads component work?
What are some of the gender issues that you take into account in roads?
What are you thinking about Dependency on road wages in these communities?
What are key anticipated vs. actual results in roads?
Describe some of the major constraints you faced.
What issues should we be looking at to help you improve your roads programming? 
CREDIT
What are your broad assumptions regarding a credit; what programming are you doing to reflect 
that thinking? What is your rationale?
What is your lending methodology (best practices)?
What rate of interest are you charging; how does that compare with the other PVOs?
What rates of interest are being paid in the formal and non-formal credit markets?
What are issues you thinking to foster future loan portfolio sustainability when the project leaves? 
Who owns the money when you leave?
What is your timetable for leaving the sector?
What are some of the gender issues that you take into account in credit? How much of the loan 
portfolio is directed to women? Why?
What are key anticipated vs. actual results in credit?
Describe some of the major constraints you faced.
What issues should we be looking at to help you improve your credit program? 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 23
OTHER ISSUES WITH INCOME POTENTIAL
What other issues of income generating potential are you undertaking?
Are there any income stream benefits you see in water systems, and in health? If so, how much 
and how are you planning to measure them?
How has the project’s need to achieve a good “burn rate” affected your programming?
What labor saving technology—with indirect income benefits—is the project doing?
INCOME GENERATING SUSTAINABILITY
What are your post-Mitch plans to maintain your portfolio and programming impact?
What processes are you undertaking to think about post-Mitch? 
INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR BENEFICIARIES
General
-How did hurricane “Mitch” affect you and your family?
-What services are you receiving from the NGO that is working in your community?
Agricultural Productivity
-Which crops are you growing now? Are they the same crops you grew before the hurricane? If 
not, which ones are you growing now?
-What were your yields before the hurricane? What yields do you expect this season?
-What changes have you made in the technology that you are using?
-What constraints do you face in increasing yields?
Post Harvest Handling, Storage, and Processing
-Do you loose some of your production between the time of harvest and the time you sell, or 
consume, your crops? What are the causes?
-Do you store any of your crops past the harvest? How?
-Do you get a better price if you store your crop? Does storage allow you to reduce post-harvest 
losses?
-Do you process any of your crops before they are sold? How?
Marketing
-How do you sell your crops? 
-Does the price you receive cover your costs of production?
-Is the price you receive higher, or lower, now compared to before Mitch?
-Has your income improved since before Mitch? (Yield x Price)
Roads
-How has the new road affected your life? (Emphasis on economic impact.)
-Have you changed the crops you grow because of the road?
-Has the road decreased your transportation costs?
-Has the road increased the services available to you?
-Did you, or any of your family members work on the road? Was the money you/they earned 
significant to your livelihood?
Credit
-Under what terms do you receive credit? Do you feel that the terms are fair?
-Will you be able to pay back your credit?
Other
-What other services are being provided by the NGO working in your community?
-Do they help you to earn more income?
-Do they help you to reduce your costs of production/marketing?
-How might the NGO working in your community increase/improve the services it provides?
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 24
APPENDIC C
INDIVIDUAL PVO FINDINGS, 
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
ADVENTIST DEVELOPMENT AND RELIEF AGENCY (ADRA)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On December 9, 1999, USAID signed a grant award with ADRA to provide US$945,027 to 
implement a program entitled “Reconstruction & Rehabilitation of Mitch Affected Areas in Las 
Segovias.” The two main components of the grant are agriculture and environment restoration, 
and public infrastructure rehabilitation. An expected 12,000 rural Nicaraguans will directly benefit 
from this program. The Agriculture & Environment Restoration component includes: terracing 
(4,000 acres), living fences (50 km), family gardens (980), nurseries (100), transplants (210,000), 
silos (600), micro-irrigation (10), and disaster awareness. The Infrastructure component includes: 
bridges (25), roads (200 km), schools (10), and infant feeding centers (5). In additi on, 
ADRA/Nicaragua signed a PL 480 Title II Agreement to receive 8,800 MT of food aid valued at 
US$1.4 million, to provide logistic, financial and food support to both grants as well as to a 
broader program which goes under the acronym of “TAP”. The Titl e II commodities have 3,000 
MT programmed for direct distribution and 5,800 MT for monetization.
The TAP adds components in Health (US$2.2 million) and Water & Sanitation (US$1.5 million). 
The Health component is targeted at 17,000 children and includes: nutrition, acute respiratory 
infection, acute diarrheal infection, immunizations, prenatal monitoring, mother’s health, and 
growth monitoring. The Water & Sanitation component will reach 30,000 Nicaraguans, and 
includes: hand dug wells (90), drilled wells (30), gravity flow water systems (11), wells with tanks 
and pumps (9), latrines (1,650), and health education.
Although the Health and Water & Sanitation components are extremely important in the context of 
overall rural socioeconomic well-being, for the purposes of this report, only the Agriculture & 
Environment Restoration and the Public Infrastructure Rehabilitation components were analyzed. 
The reason is that while the former two have a strong indirect impact on rural income generation, 
the latter two more directly result in change in income generation.
2.0 FINDINGS
2.1 Agriculture & Environment Restoration
2.1.1 Terracing (Curvas de Nivel)
Although the word “terracing” is used in ADRA program documents, what is being done is not 
terracing in the traditional sense, i.e., land leveling. What is actually happening is that planting is 
done in contour along the slope of the land, with the use of drainage ditches and vegetation at 
regular intervals (also following the field’s contour) to provide drainage for excessive rainfall while 
reducing soil erosion.
Contour planting was being implemented on lands which were often characterized by steep 
slopes. Some of the plots had been severely altered by erosion from the heavy rains 
accompanying Mitch, while others were being used for agricultural purposes for the first time. In 
all cases, the purpose of the contour work was to maintain the productivity of the land, thereby 
increasing its income-generating value.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 25
A variety of crops were being used as erosion barriers, including grass, pineapple, sugar cane 
and coffee. These crops have the potential for both home consumption and commercial sale. In 
the case of grass, it was seen as a source of animal feed.
The use of coffee was an interesting choice, in that the program did not originally envision its use. 
However, another institution was promoting coffee, but had no means for including soil 
conservation measures in its program. Combining the two solved the problem, i.e., ADRA could 
implement terracing o n the land, providing food for work and tree species for shade, and the other 
institution could supply the coffee trees and technical assistance for growing the crop.
Assessing terracing in the context of income generation, while it is not a direct incom e generating 
activity, it is an essential element of an agricultural program designed to increase income because 
it contributes to the sustainability of those increases.
2.1.2 Living Fences
Living fences were seen as a low-cost alternative to the increased deforestation that would have 
occurred had traditional fence posts been used. The concept appeared to be working as the 
survival rate looked adequate to provide the support necessary for the barbed wire fencing 
surrounding the agricultural fields.
As with terracing, the use of living fences is not a direct contributor to income generation, but it 
does have an indirect effect by preserving trees for more valuable uses, including firewood, 
building materials, soil and wildlife conservation, etc.
2.1.3 Family Gardens
Family gardens were conceived as having an important role in improving the availability of food 
for the family, as well as having a healthful effect due to the vitamins, etc., which would be 
provided by the selected crops. This was the basic rationale for selecting such things as 
tomatoes, green peppers, onions, cucumbers, squash, etc.
Most family gardens visited showed a significant expenditure of time, labor, and money had been 
invested in their construction. A major expense was the fencing required to keep roving 
household livestock such as chickens and pigs out since these animals have the potential for 
destroying the garden as they scavenge
2.1.4 Nurseries
Nurseries were seen as essential in the design of the project as there were few commercial 
sources available for the various planting stock which the project had planned to distribute. The 
planting stock which was available carried a relatively high price tag. Seeds for the forest tree 
species were purchased from the Forest S eed Bank, maintained by MAG -FOR. 
As with other activities in the program, this was not seen in an income generating context. The 
system employed used food for work for the labor involved, thereby reducing the need for actual 
cash to produce the nursery stock.
2.1.5 Transplants
Fruit trees including, banana, plantain, papaya, orange, etc., were obtained from nurseries 
established by CARE. The plantings which were observed appeared to be quite healthy and 
growing well. Certainly the beneficiaries seemed well satisfied.
The purpose of these fruit trees was similar to that of the family gardens, i.e., improve food 
availability and enhance and diversify the diet. Several beneficiaries were planning to sell some 
of the production whenever possible.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 26
The purpose of the forestry species was more oriented toward reforestation and for providing 
necessary shade for the coffee trees.
2.1.6 Silos
Producers often reported losses of up to 50% of their production when the crop was stored in the 
traditional manner. The major pest indicated was rats. Losing one-half of one’s production 
represents a horrendous loss in both food for household consumption, and potential income from 
sales. No significant storage of basic grains was observed, as a drought in the Primera planting 
season resulted in losses which ranged from significant to total.
Metal silos clearly have the potential to reduce losses to a negligible level. This will have an 
impact on the availability of food for household consumption. Its impact on income generation is 
not as clear, however, because some interviewees indicated that they sell their basic grain 
production immediately after harvest because they are afraid that prices will go down if they wait.
2.1.7 Micro-irrigation
Several of the interviewees noted that the lack of water was of great concern and a real constraint 
on their ability to diversify into other crops. One example of micro-irrigation which was observed 
was on a small area of horticultural crops. An ingenious, low-tech device was used for “sprinkle” 
irrigation. An empty one-liter soft drink bottle was connected to the end of the hose which brought 
water from the source to the area to be irrigated. The bottle had numerous holes extending from 
the top to the bottom over one-half of its circumference. The entering water caused pressure, and 
forced the water out of the small holes, thereby creating a sprinkler irrigation effect. It is generally 
recognized that sprinkler irrigation has a much higher efficiency of water use than traditional flood 
irrigation. It also produces less erosion on sloping soils. An alternate source of water was being 
analyzed, which involved tapping into a neighbor’s system which was functioning using a 
hydraulic ram to pump the water from the source to his field.
2.1.8 Disaster Awareness
This element of ADRA’s program was not analyzed in depth because it was not seen as directly 
improving household income. It did seem to be aimed at selecting home sites which were less 
vulnerable to natural disasters, particularly floods and landslides.
2.2 Public Infrastructure Rehabilitation
2.2.1 Bridges
One bridge was visited that had been destroyed by the flood waters associated with Hurricane 
Mitch. The major damage had been to the supporting structures, which had been undercut by the 
water. A temporary structure had been erected, but it was doubtful that it would continue to 
support vehicular traffic for very long. The replacement bridge was very well constructed, and 
would mean that once again the communities served by the road would have unhindered access.
2.2.2 Roads
One road was visited where food for work was being utilized to the road. Beneficiaries were not 
interviewed.
2.2.3 Schools (Not observed)
2.2.4 Infant Feeding Centers (Not observed)
2.3 Other Findings
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 27
The choice of interventions, e.g., the decision to concentrate on crops rather than small domestic 
livestock, was based upon the belief that Mitch’s damage to crops was greater, and recuperation 
would be quicker.
There is some misunderstanding between ADRA/Nicaragua and USAID/Nicaragua over the 
framework within which ADRA implements the project. ADRA understands that the USG auditors 
(USAID, GAO, etc.) take a strict interpretation of the program agreement, i.e., anything which is 
not expressly written in the agreement is not allowed. The example ADRA cited was its inability 
to buy coffee seeds to produce coffee plants because it is not included in the agreement. USAID 
ERD office maintains that ADRA has the latitude to make th ese changes, and that no second 
“strict” interpretation of the agreement exists. What appears to have happened is that the ERD 
office maintains that Section 1.4 BUDGET of Attachment 1 is the controlling factor, while ADRA/N 
is using Annex E Budget, Attachment 2 as the guiding factor.
3.0 CONCLUSIONS
In terms of the agreement, as signed by ADRA and USAID, the program is moving forward pretty 
much as envisioned, with the exception of roads which are behind anticipated targets.
The quality of the interven tions is excellent, with the possible exception of road construction. 
There is a pressing need to use machinery to prepare the roadbeds, rather than depending solely 
on manual hand labor.
The program includes wide gamut of implementation activities, and a varying beneficiary pool. 
What the beneficiaries have most in common is that they are all poor. 
4.0 SUGGESTIONS
4.1 Short Term
1. Develop and apply diagnostic instruments that can identify those geographical zones and 
beneficiaries who can respond to an income generation program to the extent that they will be 
moved significantly toward, and preferably above, the poverty line, aside from those beneficiaries 
who are in a survival situation who need different interventions. 
2. Develop and appl y a methodology which can identify activities that have the greatest 
income potential for the beneficiaries involved. This must include an analysis of the target market 
or markets, and a strong cost/benefit analysis of agricultural intervention. This could be done in 
coordination with other technical assistance agencies like Winrock, or with Chemonics. ADRA 
could collect cost of production and marketing data from a sample of beneficiaries to determine 
earnings potential. 
3. Broaden crop interventions to include those which have the best potential for increasing 
income. Examples of this include coffee and tropical fruits in other areas, and higher value 
options for family gardens, e.g., herbs, etc.
4. Raise the technical standards for road rehabilitation and employ equipment where 
necessary. This may have the effect of reducing the program target for kilometers of road to be 
completed because of the higher investment per kilometer required to raise technical standards. 
Focus food-for-work on the ancillary works that are necessary to maintain the road and minimize 
maintenance costs, e.g., drainage works, culverts, bridges, etc.
4.2 Longer Term
1. Broaden agricultural interventions to include small domestic livestock, e.g., chickens, 
ducks, pigs, etc. This will have the added effect of providing more benefits to female family 
members. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 28
2. Because the best information at this time indicates that less financing will be available for 
follow-on programs, ADRA needs to focus on those activities with the greatest income generating 
potential in their next effort.
3. ADRA should review its in -house expertise vis -a-vis an income generating program, and 
make decisions regarding what staffing changes are required. They also need to include the 
technical knowledge which is already available in other agencies such as GON agencies, private 
sector companies, and other sources, e.g., Chemonics and Winrock, etc., as well as the 
experiences gained by other ADRA programs throughout the world.
CARE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
CARE/Nicaragua is currently implementing two separate activities under the Hurricane Mitch 
Recovery and Rehabilitation Program, the reconstruction of rural infrastructure, principally roads, 
through ‘cash for work’ employment generation, and agricultural rehabilitation in the municipality 
of Posoltega. While both activities are extensions of already ongoing CARE activities in other 
parts of Nicaragua, they are being implemented as discreet programs with separate staff and 
funding sources. The agricultural activity began in June 1999 and the rural infrastructure activity 
in October. Both are scheduled to terminate in December of 2001. USAID resources are 
$8,292,683 for the rural infrastructure activity and $742,000 for the agricultural rehabilitation 
activity.
These activities were originally conceived of as relief and rehabilitation activities and neither was 
designed to be sustainable nor to generate beneficiary income over the long run. Nevertheless, 
as implementation has evolved, the staff of both are seeking ways to emphasize sustainability as 
well as to generate long-term income for beneficiaries. Additional emphasis is also being placed 
on documenting the generation of income, both actual and potential.
2.0 FINDINGS
2.1 Road Rehabilitation Program
2.1.1 Overview
The original goal of the Road Rehabilitation Program was to construct 1,440 kilometers of rural 
roads, several environmental mitigation activities, two drainage systems, one containment wall, 
three irrigation canals, and tw o bridges. Based on Mission concerns related to the quality of the 
roads being rehabilitated, the target number of kilometers under the activity was subsequently 
lowered to 850; two international road engineers were contracted; and some road building 
machinery was purchased. The program operates in 17 municipalities in the Departments of 
Estelí, Matagalpa, and Jinotega. A cash-for-work (CFW) methodology is being employed which 
includes the use of manual labor to the greatest extent possible so as to provide immediate cash 
payments to the families affected by Mitch. The program also focuses on strategic alliances 
among CARE, the local municipality and intended beneficiaries, and coordination with other public 
and private organizations operating in the program areas. In order to formalize these alliances, 
contracts are signed between the community and the respective municipality and CARE. These 
agreements specify the contributions that will be made by each, which are usually in-kind in the 
case of the com munities and the municipalities. Workers are paid every two weeks by the 
municipalities with CARE-provided resources and under the supervision of a CARE technician.
Upgrading the quality of roads increased the cost per kilometer from approximately $3,000 to 
$6,000. The number of participants in CFW households correspondingly decreased from the 
original 24,000 goal to the current 11,800 (20 percent of which are women) due to the decrease in 
kilometers and the agreed -to use of some heavy equipment to meet revised quality specifications. 
Consequently, the revised Impact Goals of the two-year program are:
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 29
· To provide short-term income generating opportunities for 11,800 households (approximately 
70,800 people) in the departments mentioned above, and
· To repair primary infrastructure, including 850 kilometers of roads, damaged by Hurricane 
Mitch. This will include approximately 100 projects affecting 17 municipalities and 500 
communities.
The determination of which roads to rehabilitate is done by the municipalities based on the 
following CARE criteria and under CARE supervision. These include:
· Those affected by Mitch.
· That they connect more than two communities.
· A potential to increase agricultural production exists in the area.
· High levels of unemployment in the area.
· Community willingness to participate in a cash-for-work program.
· That the geographic conditions of the area permit the use of hand labor.
Worker selection is based on the following criteria:
· One worker per family for up to 90 days of paid la bor. (The daily wage is normally 90 
percent of the prevailing local minimum wage so as to not compete directly with other 
gainful employment opportunities.)
· Residence in the area affected by the road.
· Workers must be a minimum of 16 years old.
· The level o f poverty and/or food insecurity.
· Priority for women, especially women-headed households.
There are also seventeen indicators including several concerning economic impact that are 
tracked to support the achievement of the two Impact Goals. The CARE/Estelí office is also in the 
process of contracting with the University of Nicaragua to allow Master’s level graduate students 
to conduct thesis research in the communities benefiting from road building. The emphasis of 
these thesis will be the socioeconomic impact of the roads on the target populations. This is 
important to point out since the only economic indicator mentioned in the CARE Cooperative 
Agreement concerns the short-term income benefits stemming from the CFW program.
An additional element in the CARE methodology is the use of social workers whose job is to 
organize the various communities along the roads being rehabilitated, select the workers based 
on the criteria mentioned above, and assist in the collection of data for the 17 performance 
indicators. This community liaison function is seen by the consultants as being critical to the 
involvement of the local populations in the CFW program, assisting the community in making 
decisions as to where the roads will pass, where drainage channels will empty out, gaining right￾of-way permission in some cases, and in the possible long-term maintenance of the roads. 
During the assessment team’s field visit, the question of economic impact was continuously 
discussed. Even though no impact statistics are available, it was obvious to the team, USAID and 
CARE representatives that the roads will bring numerous economic benefits although some will 
not be immediate. These include:
· Increased commercial activity through the establishment of local businesses.
· Significant decreases in transportation costs. (Along one of the yet-to-be- completed roads 
visited, it currently costs C$/ 30 to 40 to transport one cwt. of produce to market by horse. 
Once the road is complete and bus service becomes available, this will drop to C$/ 5/cwt.).
· Crop diversification will expand, especially into higher value crops
· Production costs will drop due to lower transportation costs for inputs.
· Post-harvest losses incurred during transport to market will decrease.
· More land will be brought under cultivation.
· Land values will increase by an estimated average of 100 percent.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 30
· Community services will improve/expand.
· Increased vehicle traffic will provide greater access to the outside world. (In the case of both 
roads visited by the assessment team, bus operators had already requested permission from 
their respective municipalities to establish bus routes along the roads.)
The consultants traversed two roads, one of which was about 95 percent complete (Trinidad to 
Las Limas, a horseshoe shaped route of about 14 kilometers beginning and ending at the Estelí￾Managua highway) and the other about 75 percent complete (the San Nicolas -Santa Clara road 
of about 8 kilometers). Work crews including many women were carrying out the work under the 
supervision of a crew boss in such a manner that a compacted, surface-filled road with good 
drainage was the result. In conversations with people living along both roads, the roads’ potential 
economic benefits was the main topic brought up by those interviewed. As an example of 
increased commercial activity, on the Trinidad to Las Limas road, the consultants encountered a 
commercial truck carrying soft drinks bringing commercial products via vehicle to the area for the 
first time.
To further confirm our observations, the assessment team interviewed a councilman for the 
municipality of San Nicolas at the end of one of the roads visited. He said the road would be the 
most important development that has ever happened to the town. Nevertheless, he expressed 
concern how it can be maintained in the future. The CARE Cooperative Agreement does not 
address the issue of maintenance or the long -term sustainability of the road. Cognizant of this 
omission, CARE leaves a road maintenance plan with the community, as well as some hand tools 
and wheelbarrows once a road is completed. However, no further financial or technical help is 
available to implement the plan. The possibility of setting up tollbooths to raise revenue for future 
maintenance of the roads was also discussed, but this concept so far has no basis in Nicaraguan 
law.
Regarding potential economic impact, in a recent study of Food-for-Work road in Bangladesh 
(also a CARE project), the Internal Rate of Return on a well maintained rural road was more than 
double accepted international norms, indicating that investment in rural infrastructure is not only 
good for farm family beneficiaries, but also it is good national investment.2
 
2.1.2 Road Conclusions
Current information from CARE confirms that 321 kilometers of roads were completed as of the 
end of the third quarter of road rehabilitation activity. Also, income generating opportunities had 
been provided to approximately 6,000 households in the targeted departments. On balance, 
there is very satisfactor y performance in meeting the Impact Goals, especially when the inclement 
weather caused by recent rains is taken into consideration.
From the consultants’ brief site visits, it appears that the roads are being constructed at required 
standards.
At least 20 percent of the workers are women, with this figure rising to 50 percent in some cases.
Of greatest concern is the question of future road maintenance. The roads are considered to 
have a useful life of two to four years depending on vehicular traffic and rain. If economic impact 
and income generation are to be sustained, maintenance will be an important issue to address. 
With information provided by CARE technicians, the consultants calculated a rough maintenance 
cost per kilometer of about $250 per year. A team of ten people could provide maintenance work 
on an average of 16 kilometers of road two months before the rainy season (March and April) and 
two months after the rainy season (October and November) for a total cost of $4,000 per team per 
16 kilometers. The communities and municipalities are disposed to maintain the roads, but do not 
have the resources to do so.
 
2
Final Evaluation: Integrated Food For Development Project for CARE/ Bangladesh and USAID/ 
Bangladesh; Associates in Rural Development; Burlington, Vermont; December, 1999.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 31
2.1.3 Road Suggestions
Immediate action should be taken to devise a program to provide for the long-term maintenance 
plans CARE develops after road construction. Perhaps a 50-50 split between Food-for-Work 
programs and a cash contribution from the respective municipalities could be implemented. 
However, the feasibility of this and other potential financing arrangements need to be studied 
between the food aid donors and the local municipalities. The total yearly cash cost (not using 
FFW) for 850 kilometers of CARE-supported roads would be approximately $213,000, which 
appears reasonable considering the importance of the roads to future income generation in the 
areas affected.
The process of conducting case study research on the socioeconomic impact of the roads using 
graduate students should be accelerated and put into place as soon as possible. The economic 
impact of the roads being built should not be the only indicator used in these studies. Rather, 
other social indicators should be included as well.
2.2 Agricultural Rehabilitation Program
2.2.1 Overview
The Agricultural Rehabilitation Program was originally designed to impact on 350 of the families 
most affected by the Posoltega landslide that covered two towns and caused 2,500 deaths. The 
project includes support for basic grain and horticultural production, crop diversification including 
cassava and plantain, the planting of fruit and forest trees, and the promotion of small-scale 
chicken and swine production. At present, approximately 30 percent of the available funding is 
directed at the original 350 families who have been relocated to housing plots on a small farm 
provided by the Posoltega municipality, while 70 percent is directed at farm families in the same 
municipality who were able to remain on their farms. The inclusion of farm families who were able 
to remain on their farms raised the number of intended beneficiaries to 1,200 families. 
Implementation includes the strengthening of community organizations, training, support for 
women, and the promotion of beneficiary-controlled revolving credit funds.
In the case of the 350 families that were relocated, many still have access to their agricultural 
lands surrounding the landslide area. However, while many of them are willing to return to work 
these fields during the day, most are not willing to take the risk of moving back permanently. This 
often means traveling as much as two to three hours each day on foot, bicycle or on horseback. 
Part of the CARE program provides credit for these people to purchase the bicycles and horses.
CARE currently implements this activity with one project director, one supervisor, and eight 
extension agents. This results in an extension agent to beneficiary ratio of 1:125 and a 
community ratio of 1:3 or 4 which is thought to be high.
2.2.1.1 Agricultural Production and Productivity
The Posoltega activity is currently reaching 995 families of which 757 are headed by men (76 
percent) and 238 by women (24 percent). Total income generated from the various agricultural 
activities promoted by CARE (from one to six depending on the family) is currently estimated at 
$326,484, or an average of $328 per family in the first year of the program. The vast majority of 
this income comes from grains and pulses including corn, sorghum, soybeans and red beans, 
with lesser amounts coming from tomatoes, green peppers and squash. These particular crops 
have been chosen on the basis of food security and income potential, especially in the case of 
horticultural crops. Yields either approximate, or have the potential to approximate, regional 
averages.
Of the 995 families currently included in the program, 711 are planting grains and pulses (71 
percent), and 284 are planting horticultural crops (29 percent), although some families are 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 32
involved in both. Seventy families have joined the poultry program and 27 are participating in the 
swine program.
2.2.1.2 Credit
CARE uses an approach to credit that provides in-kind loans under the supervision of local 
councils whose members are elected by community beneficiaries. These councils sign a contract 
with CARE in which they agree to make sure that their members repay their loans. Repayments 
of seed and planting material are made in kind and are sold by the councils with the proceeds 
being deposited into a revolving fund. (For example, in the case of soybeans, for each cwt. lent, 
one cwt. must be paid back, or at least stored for use the next season. In the case of cassava, for 
each cwt. lent, four cwt. must be paid back, to be distributed to other farmers during the next 
season.) In the case of fertilizer or other inputs, their cost is repaid in kind, converted into cash by 
the councils and also deposited into the revolving accounts. Surpluses over and above the 
amount received on credit are kept by the beneficiaries for home consumption or for sale in the 
marketplace. This program is relatively. As such, no information is available on repayment rates 
or actual sales by the councils. Interest or maintenance of value charges are not collected at 
present although CARE is planning to implement one or the other, or both in the near future. 
CARE provides no direct marketing services to beneficiaries.
2.2.2 Agricultural Rehabilitation Conclusions
The 350 families who were relocated, and who lost their agricultural land, will most likely remain in 
a state of extreme poverty for a long time to come. These peopl e should most likely be treated as 
welfare recipients until they can be provided with alternative agricultural lands or otherwise 
absorbed into the economy. It is therefore beyond the scope of CARE to provide for their long￾term self-sufficiency.
This, however, does not appear to be the case with the farmers who no doubt lost a great deal 
due to the hurricane, but who remained in possession of their land and who have the potential to 
improve their income generating capability. While CARE activities with this segment of the 
Posoltega population have been well implemented as a relief and rehabilitation program, in the 
future there may have to be some changes to the current methodology. 
2.2.4 Agricultural Rehabilitation Suggestions
First and foremost, crop selection should be reconsidered based on a careful analysis of 
marketing opportunities and the income generating potential of those opportunities. Once food 
security issues have been addressed, which is believed to be the case with many farmers in this 
group, the adoption of higher- value crops can be considered. Parallel to this, CARE could place 
increased emphasis on the development of marketing services, including market identification, 
information, and decreasing marketing costs.
Second, the provision and use of agricultural production credit will also have to be adjusted. 
While the current provision of credit and its repayment in kind have functioned well under relief 
and rehabilitation conditions, program beneficiaries will need to be prepared and redirected 
towards more conventional and commercial credit delivery mechanisms.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 33
Cooperative League of the United States of America (CLUSA)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
CLUSA was granted $7.6 million under the Hurricane Mitch Supplemental Funding from USAID. 
These additional funds were designated to finance activities to be undertaken by CLUSA as an 
extension and expansion of its core Development Assistance-funded Small Producer Program. 
The activities were oriented to the economic reactivation and watershed restoration of areas 
affected by Hurricane Mitch. In order to rapidly move forward, CLUSA partnered through 
subcontracts with Development Associates, Thanksgiving Coffee, ATMA International, and 
Zamorano (the Pan American Agricultural College). The program components and total budget 
breakdown are:
· Incremental CLUSA Technical Assistance and Training for commodity production, processing 
and marketing (includes the Development Associates subcontract for oversight and 
coordination). $1,653,853.
· Quality Coffee: Technical assistance and training in coffee quality improvement 
(includes Thanksgiving Coffee subcontract and long -term CLUSA expatriate services). 
$841,936.
· Supervised Credit Fund: ATMA subcontract to provide technical assistance and funds to 
implement the credit activities. $3,487,510. 
· Watershed Restoration and Management: Zamorano subcontract to provide technical 
assistance and commodities to implement the watershed component. $1,616,701.
The goal of CLUSA’s three-year old Small Producers Program is to increase farmer income, and 
the Mitch add-on was designed with that same goal and incorporates its Small Producer Program 
methodology in order to achieve it. The Small Producer Program LOP continues until 2003.
2.0 FINDINGS 
2.1 Incremental CLUSA Technical Assistance and Training
2.1.1 Overview
As a result of the Hurricane Mitch supplemental funding CLUSA was able to expand its ongoing 
technical assistance and training activities in terms of both the number of beneficiaries, as well as 
its geographic coverage. In the case of the former, this included soybean and sesame growers in 
the departments of Chinandega and Jinotega in the municipalities of Somotillo, Rancheria, San 
Lucas, Tonala, El Congo, and Monterosa. In the case of the later, it included an expansion into 
the department of Jinotega to assist small coffee growers and to a certain extent some cocoa 
growers as well.
The methodology used by CLUSA in these new areas and crops continues to be the same as that 
used under its Small Farmer Income and Employment Generation Activity and according to their 
Cooperative Agreement includes:
· A core focus on increased income as the driving force behind all activities;
· Selecting farmers who already have access to land and a minimum level of resources, 
technological knowledge, and production experience;
· Providing farmers with a range of options and allowing them to choose the options which 
they feel most comfortable with including the level of technology, the use of credit, and 
marketing channels;
· Democratic group management through transparency; and political neutrality.
Based on field data collection by the consultants, who visited three organizations of coffee 
producers and four organizations of soybean and sesame producers, there is no doubt that the 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 34
farmers are pleased with the technical support, training, and, in most cases, marketing services 
being provided by CLUSA. 
When attempting to extrapolate to the total Mitch Activity level through an analysis of the targets 
specified in the Cooperative Agreement, the First Annual Work Plan, and the Quarterly Reports, 
the assessment team encountered certain confusing data. The following tables were prepared by 
CLUSA to clarify the subject.
TABLE ONE: Year One Implementation Plan
(Results and Indicators taken directly for the USAID Results Framework)
Indicator Measurement LOP 
Target
Total Yr. 1 
Targets
IR 2.1 Farmers in Mitch - affected 
areas adopting environmentally 
friendly agricultural practices
Farmers with verified adoption of 
USAID specified sustainable 
practices
Total 
10,850
6,000
IR 2.3 Surface areas of watersheds 
that are protected by watershed 
stabilization
Hectares benefited by tangible 
improvements
Total 
2,500
1,200
IR 2.5 Number of small producers 
assisted with USAID-financed credit
Farmers receiving loans Total 
5,000
2,000
TABLE TWO: Revised Table by Component 
Component Original Grant 
Adopters (LOP)
Yr. 1
planned
Yr. 1 
est. Actuals
Planned
/ Actual
IR
I. Technology Transfer 1,000 (a) 1,000 (a) +/- 900 90% IR 2 .1
II. Coffee Quality 2,500 1,880 1,308 70%
III. A Watershed/ Hillside Agriculture 7,350 3,000 +/- 3,600 120%
Total Farmer Adopters 10,850 5,880 (c)
III B. Watershed/ Hillside 
Agriculture
Hectares 
restored/ 
stabilized: 
2,500
1,200 +/- 800 67% IR 2.3
IV. Credit Funds Farmers w/ 
credit
5, 000 (b) 
2,000 (b) 1,635 82% IR 2.4
(a.) 1,000 was both the LOP and First Year project in the Revised Work plan. May need 
adjustment.
(b.) Original grant plan that will require adjusting after reduction in loan fund.
(c.) Year One Work plan in TABLE ONE calls for 6,000; document text say 5,800
The consultants base the following comments on the information received during field visits to 
seven of the CLUSA-supported farmer groups.
In the case of the three groups visited that are growing coffee, all had adopted the CLUSA￾recommended environmentally sustainable technological packages designed to lower production 
costs, maintain yields comparable to conventional coffee technology, and, once certified as 
‘organic’, receive a premium in the marketplace. This technology also has an added benefit in 
that not only are overall costs of production reduced, but the relative proportion of labor costs 
compared to other inputs is greatly increased, resulting in increased returns to labor be it the 
farmer and his/her family or hired outside labor. According to very conservative estimates 
provided by CLUSA, the average reduction in yield per manzana of environmentally sustainable 
coffee compared to conventional coffee is 20 percent. However, this is more than made up for 
through a reduction in average production costs of 58 percent and an increase in price per cwt. of 
18 percent. (Price premiums for environmentally sustainable coffee of between 40 and 60 
percent have been obtained in other countries.) The net result of this is a 208 percent increase in 
profitability per cwt.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 35
CLUSA provides ‘on the job’ training in environmentally sustainable coffee cultivation as well as in 
the economic rational for switching from conventional production methods. CLUSA technicians 
also visit each farmer between one and three times per week.
In terms of financing, described more in detail below, two of the groups visited received credit for 
labor payments from a local cooperative (Flor de Pino), and one was receiving credit from the 
CLUSA/Mitch activity. Marketing services were also being provided to one of the groups by the 
same cooperative that, in turn, plans to sell in bulk to local coffee buyers. The second group sells 
directly to local buyers based on which one offers the least deductions. (Or rather, which one 
cheats the least in the weighing process, according to several members interviewed, since the 
price offered is the same for all buyers.) CLUSA is arranging for the marketing of the coffee of the 
third group. None of the three groups are involved in the CLUSA-supported coffee quality 
program described below.
Turning to the soybean/sesame producer groups in Chinandega, all were severely affected by 
Mitch, recent droughts, and a marketing arrangement last year with a local company that 
accepted the harvests of all four groups (and many other small producers, as well) and then 
declared bankruptcy without paying the farmers in spite of signed contracts. One of the four 
groups has received CLUSA technical assistance in production technology since 1996, and the 
other three since 1997 (pre-Mitch). The ‘Mitch’ supplemental funding allowed CLUSA to expand 
the services it provides to these groups into credit and marketing. According to the groups 
interviewed, income from soybeans was seen as good in 1996 and 1997, Mitch devastated their 
crop in 1998, and all lost everything in 1999 due to the bankruptcy fraud experienced in the 
marketing process. It was reported that the 1999 yields were the best ever experienced by those 
interviewed.
Farmers in all four groups are familiar with both soybeans and sesame, all well as corn. As was 
stated above, part of the CLUSA methodology is to provide farmers with several options and allow 
them to choose the one that they feel the most comfortable with. These four groups have done 
so. Two of the groups have been planting environmentally sustainable soybeans for several 
years, one since 1996 and the other since 1997. In the case of the third, some members plant 
soybeans while others plant sesame, while in the case of the fourth group all members planted 
soybeans in 1997, 1998 and 1999. However, this year all members of this group decided to plant 
sesame. Several factors appear to be critical to their decision making process; 1) the stability of 
the market (since many small producers were ‘burned’ by the bankruptcy of the local company 
mentioned above, some are reluctant to accept the risk of an unsure market this year); 2) 
producti on costs are lower for sesame than for soybeans requiring less credit and therefore less 
risk in paying back the credit; and 3) lower risk in the case of sesame since it is more drought￾resistant than soybeans. Finally, all groups that have planted soybeans have used the CLUSA￾promoted environmentally sustainable technology that, like coffee, represents lower overall 
production costs and higher returns to labor. Nevertheless, little attempt has been made to 
identify and exploit the market ‘niche’ that is available for soybeans produced under 
environmentally sustainable technology. Based on the actual experience of these four groups, 
profitability between crops and technologies varies as follows:
· Corn- C/.100 -200/manzana
· Conventional Soybeans - C/. 500-800/manzana
· Environmentally Sustainable Soybeans- C/. 1,200-2,000/manzana
· Environmentally Sustainable Sesame- C/. 1,500/manzana
In order to obtain credit through CLUSA all four groups are required sign purchase agreements 
with known buyers. In the case of soybeans, CLUSA assisted the groups in obtaining purchase 
agreements with the del Campo Cooperative at the government fixed price of $10.50 per cwt. In 
the case of sesame, CLUSA arranged for a tentative agreement with the same buyer. In this 
case, however, the agreement establishes a floor price of $30 per cwt. that might, or might not, 
increase depending on the prevailing export price at the time of harvest.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 36
2.1.2 Technical Assistance and Training Conclusions
· The CLUSA methodology appears to be well suited to the targeted beneficiaries.
· The CLUSA data information system portrays inconsistent and unconvincing data to the 
outside observer. Proper data most likely exists, but it is at times confusing with possible 
overlaps between the CLUSA Small Farmer program and the CLUSA/Mitch program.
· There does not appear to be as much coordination between the four activity components 
as there should be.
· The international price differentials for soybeans produced under environmentally 
sustainable technologies are not being exploited.
2.1.3 Technical Assistance and Training Suggestions
· CLUSA may need to place more emphasis on the consistent and transparent use of data 
that tracks its progress as well as the data it uses to argue its case for the various crops 
and technologies that it promotes. Data from their DA-funded activity should be kept 
separate from ‘Mitch” related data.
· CLUSA needs to better coordinate its technical assistance and credit components, and its 
coffee quality component in the case of that crop. As part of the ‘offering of options’ 
process, a complete package should be one of the options available to beneficiaries. 
There should also be more overlap between the areas where the Zamorano watershed 
component is working and the other CLUSA/Mitch components.
· The fields used to produce environmentally sustainable soybeans should be certified as 
such and the market for that type of soybeans exploited.
2.2 Coffee Quality Component
2.2.1 Overview
Like the Technical Assistance and Training Component described above, this component is an 
outgrowth of CLUSA’s DA-funded program that was already under implementation prior to ‘Mitch’. 
As such it is difficult to separate the two programs based on funding sources other than to state 
that the number of direct beneficiaries increased from 1,900 to 2,500. Of this number 1,800 were 
projected to adopt the CLUSA-recommended technologies that would lead to higher quality coffee 
for the export market. The principal activity in this regard is the training of farmers in the taste 
preferences of the international market and in the subtleties of how different processing methods 
can impact on the taste of the final product. Additionally, 10 tasting/quality control ‘cupping’ 
laboratories were proposed to be established, “ to provide tangible evidence to long-term buyers 
that Nicaragua is serious about improving its coffee flavor quality,” five in the first year and five in 
the second.
This component is well ahead of its proposed target, and two important additional activities have 
been added that will add substantially to its potential for success. As of September 30, 2000, 
1,308 farmers had received technical assistance and practical training in coffee quality 
improvement, well above the 1,200 target for the first year of implementation. Three hundred 
additional farmers are expected to be trained before the end of the year. While no cupping 
laboratories have yet been established, this is by design since they will not be needed until this 
year’s coffee harvest begins in December. Additionally, 30 to 40 mini-labs have been added to 
the work plan in order to bring these facilities closer to the farmers, and a regional and national 
laboratory are also planned for next year.
Since CLUSA’s Cooperative Agreement was signed, two additional activities have been added to 
this component making it more complete. These include the establishment of 5 centralized ‘wet’ 
processing mills for the 2000/2001 crop year in Yalí (Jinotega), San Juan del Rio Coco (Madriz), 
Las Sabanas (Madriz), and two in El Cua (Jinotega), as well as assistance in putting assisted 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 37
farmers in contact with potential coffee buyers, both domestic and international. The Supervised 
Credit Fund Component explained below is providing funding for this activity.
At present most coffee farmers do the initial processing of their coffee (wet processing) 
individually on their own farms. This is probably the most critical step in the processing of quality 
coffee and in assuring consistency in the quality of coffee. Currently, there is wide variation in the 
practices that farmers use in this process, leading to great variations in the quality that is 
produced. When bad quality beans are mixed with low quality beans entire shipments can be 
affected resulting in highly disco unted prices for all producers. By concentrating the wet 
processing in centralized locations, CLUSA hopes to be better able to assist farmers in controlling 
quality and thereby reduce or eliminate the heavy discounts that Nicaraguan coffee currently 
receives in the international marketplace. As the process is further fine-tuned, CLUSA predicts 
that rather than discounts farmers can expect to earn premiums over prevailing international 
prices.
CLUSA is also attempting to identify domestic dry processors and exporters, as well as 
international buyers of premium coffee, thereby providing farmer groups with alternative markets 
to traditional local buyers. Nevertheless, while the consultants applaud CLUSA’s attempts at 
increasing competition in the marketplace, only one domestic buyer/processor (La Esperanza) 
and one international buyer (CBI) have so far been identified.
One issue was identified that deserves further study and analysis. This component tends to work 
with the better-established organizations o f coffee producers that are not, in the majority of cases, 
the same groups of coffee producers as those assisted by the Technical Assistance and Training 
Component described above. While the selection criteria for both groups appears to be the same 
(i.e., development potential, group cohesion, access to land, etc.), there is almost no overlap 
between the two components. 
2.2.2 Coffee Quality Conclusions
· In general terms, this component is well conceived and over the course of implementation 
has been adjusted to meet the perceived needs of targeted beneficiaries as well as the 
demands of the international market.
· The identification of domestic buyers and processors, and international buyers of coffee 
has not developed very far as of the writing of this document.
· There is almost no overlap in terms of beneficiaries between this component and the 
technical assistance and training component.
2.2.3 Coffee Quality Recommendations
· CLUSA needs to identify a greater number of potential buyers of coffee who are
trustworthy, willing to deal with small producers, and who understand the implications of 
producing high quality coffee for export. The following methodology is suggested. 
CLUSA should first establish specific selection criteria for potential coffee buyers. A 
public request should be published in the principal newspapers of the country seeking 
buyers/processors interested in purchasing coffee produced by CLUSA-assisted farmers 
and/or their organizations. Based on the response to this request, buyers/processors 
would be selected according to their reputations and pre -established selection criteria. 
Lastly, these pre-selected buyers/processors should be put in contact with the CLUSA￾assisted farmer groups and allowed to present the terms under which they would be 
willing to purchase their coffee. Each group would then be able to select the buyer that 
best appeals to them.
· This component needs to begin to work more closely with the Technical Assistance and 
Training Component and to select groups that can benefit from the services of both. That 
component seeks to improve farmer income through a reduction in production costs, 
while this component seeks to improve farmer income through a reduction in quality 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 38
discounts, or the achievement of price premiums b ased on higher quality coffee as a 
result of improved processing technology. One is the logical extension of the other and 
both components need to work together.
2.3 Supervised Credit Fund Component
2.3.1 Overview
The fund is designed to provide small farmer production and post-harvest financing in the Mitch￾affected areas. According to the CLUSA Year One Workplan, November 1999 -October 2000 “the 
primary activities to be financed include production, post-harvest processing, buying and 
marketing of certified organic and conventional products, and other designated agricultural crops 
and activities of small producers, farmer organizations, solidarity groups and farmer-owned 
businesses.” Over the two year LOP, ATMA International would achieve the following indicators:
· Disbursing US$ 2.15 million in loans.
· Reaching 5,000 farmers.
CLUSA/ATMA agreed with USAID to retain control of the funds for an extended period of time, 
and ATMA currently acts as executor of the funds and operates under the name of Financiera 
Agricola (FINAG). FINAG disburses loans through a partnership arrangement with two 
commercial banks (Banco del Cafe and BANPRO) that have branches in the Mitch-affected 
areas. 
ATMA initially carried out numerous operational activities including the selection and training of 
credit officers, identifying and pre-qualifying potential clients (producers and groups), and
working with NGO and PVO technicians, who would be providing services to farmer beneficiaries. 
This intense work resulted in $865 ,700 in loans being booked during the first quarter of program 
implementation. These loans were primarily for coffee processing and export commercialization, 
input commercialization, a nursery business, and the financing of organic certification for 
producers. Emphasis was on procedures and keeping credit risks low, since producers sign for 
each other and are not required to offer other collateral. By the end of the first quarter $91,627 
had been disbursed.
During the next two quarters, the total amount of loans disbursed increased to $375,471, or about 
35 percent of the first year’s target of $1.1 million, mostly to cooperatives and producers. The 
number of producers assisted with USAID-financed credit during the first three quarters was 
1,150. Repaym ent problems have been negligible.
Approximately $850,000 in new disbursements were anticipated in the final quarter of the year, of 
which $556,000 are estimated to have been made (the fourth quarter Quarterly Report has not yet 
been finalized). Nevertheless, this amount is expected to increase dramatically by the end of the 
calendar year since the coffee season is just beginning. It is expected that loan disbursements 
will total over $1.0 million by that time, which will include over $210,000 in financing for wet 
processing mills, and several large intermediary loans will also be made. ATMA estimates that an 
additional 935 producers were assisted in the fourth quarter for a year one total of 2,085.
The Fund: At the end of the fourth quarter, the fund has outstanding loans of approximately 
$138,000 and reflows of $ 466,000 plus $11,000 in interest. On September 29th USAID notified 
CLUSA that $1.0 million would be de -obligated from the fund, leaving an estimated $ 485,000 
available for future drawdowns. Therefore, the credit fund amount currently totals about $ 
1,100,000.
Interest Rates: The subject of interest rates has been discussed at length between the 
consultants and ATMA. The effective annual interest rate paid by FINAG clients varies between 
10.5 percent and 18 percent, depending on the loan recipient. The lower rate is normally 
approved for intermediaries, such cooperatives since guarantees are required in the form of 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 39
physical custody of the product (mostly coffee) and the sales proceeds are paid directly to the 
intermediary. This reduces the risk considerably for FINAG as compared to production credit to 
producers, and, because of this, ATMA feels the reduced rate is justifiable. Eighteen percent is 
the normal rate charged to producers on dollar denominated loans. With only co-signing as 
collateral, FINAG charges the higher rate.
FINAG Loans: FINAG loans are made in U.S. dollars and must be repaid in dollars. 
Consequently, the official government devaluation index of 8 percent (although actual inflation is 
estimated at 14.5 percent) must be added in as part of the effective rate, bringing the nominal 
total to 26 percent for producers. No additional fees are added for technical assistance, 
supervision, or legal fees.
Other Lenders: Other donor-financed NGOs operating as financieras are also in the market 
(small producers do not have access to commercial banking resources). For example, these 
include FAMA, Nitlapan and Acodep. Although two producer groups stated that they were 
borrowing at 27 and 30 percent respectively, FAMA’s presently charges a base rate to producers 
of 24 percent, and adds the devaluation index of 6 percent (according to local information this 
percentage is destined to increase to 8-9 percent), plus 3 percent for supervision and 1 percent 
for legal fees, for a total of 34 percent. The other two lend at 21 percent, plus the same 
percentage increases.
Subsidy: Based on this comparison, it would appear that USAID is supporting subsidies in the 
credit market, although ATMA insists that it is only lending at the lower end of the market. It must 
also be kept in mind that this is an emergency program to assist in the recovery of Mitch-affected 
areas and lower rates may be justified until a semblance of recovery has taken place. 
Nevertheless, conversations with producers in the field confirm that they, obviously, much prefer 
ATMA rates versus the competition. 
Unfortunately, not enough time was available to interview other lenders to ascertain their 
repayment rates and the health of their operations. Additionally, and more importantly for this 
assessment, no information was uncovered that analyzes the capacity of producers to actually 
repay at a 34 percent rate, and, if they can, if there is any potential for them to subsequently 
increase their incomes.
Sustainablity of the Fund: ATMA firmly states, and the consultants agree, that with available 
financial resources and as currently structured, the fund is not self-sustainable. 
Total available funds (approximately $ 1.1 million) are simply not sufficient to allow for a multiplier 
effect to take place. A much larger fund (perhaps $6.0 to 8.0 million) would be needed to lower 
margins and produce a higher gross income. The problem of fixed costs would also have to be 
addressed. Currently, CLUSA/ATMA technical assistance, training, and credit supervision are 
free. When these costs are factored in, interest rates would probably at least reach those of other 
lenders in the market, i.e. 31-34 percent.
2.3.2 Supervised Credit Conclusions
· ATMA designed and implements the Supervised Credit Fund in a quite professional 
manner. The goal of its lending methodology is to assure repayment while providing 
borrowers with the potential to increase incomes, and it appears this is being 
achieved. For example, soybean producers are required to sign buyer contracts 
before a loan is approved, and ATMA assists in identifying such buyers so that the 
producers are assured payment.
· Program indicators are being satisfactorily reached: 
1. Total disbursements as of the end of the fourth quarter were approximately $565,000 versus 
an anticipated $1,050,000. The shortfall can be attributed to the agricultural production cycle, 
particularly with coffee production. The current estimate for total disbursements is $1.0 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 40
million by the end of the calendar year, which, based on real world agricultural credit needs 
and prudent credit management, is acceptable.
2. Two thousand small producers were to be assisted with USAID -financed credit. The current 
estimate is that 2,085 will be assisted.
· The original CLUSA request for the credit fund was $5.5 million. At this level it was 
projected that financial viability could be achieved over the longer term. The fund 
level was approved at $ 2.1 million, and it has subsequently been reduced by $1.0 
million. At this level, long-term sustainablilty is not viewed as possible. This brings 
up several questions, such as:
1. Is the credit fund to be viewed as an “economic recovery fund” or a vehicle for longer term 
credit assistance to the Mitch-affected areas?
2. Who will be the ultimate owner of the credit funds?
3. Will sustainability require the creation of a new entity to institutionalize FINAG?
4. Can loan funds from other sources be leveraged to help generate sufficient income to cover 
expenses?
2.3.3 Supervised Credit Recommendations
· Allow ATMA to administer the fund using the most cost-effective and market-oriented 
methodology. For example, this might include more intermediary loans, which could 
help fulfill the longer-term developmental needs of the market and result in lower 
transaction costs for the fund compared to small production loans.
· Conduct an impact study (during this production cycle) of producer loan utilization, 
repayment capability, and potential income generation. This should include loans 
disbursed at FINAG rates and those at other similar institutional rates, i.e. FAMA. 
· Based upon the results of the impact study, make a decision as to the viability for 
institutionalizing the credit fund. If the decision is negative, decide final ownership of 
the credit funds.
· If the decision is positive, conduct a feasibility study to determine the best institutional 
model to implement, including the creation of a larger capital base.
· Utilize the final two years of CLUSA’s Small Producer Program to continue technical 
assistance to Mitch -affected areas in order to continue to support credit operations.
2.4 Watershed Restoration and Management
2.4.1 Overview
The CLUSA Mitch Year One Workplan designates Zamorano to “provide on-farm, demonstration￾based training to small producers and local technicians in soil conservation and stabilization, 
reforestation, ecological pest management, sustainable organic production practices, tree 
planting, crop rotation, and other topics designed to recover damaged watersheds and hillside 
farms” in the Mitch-affected areas. Activities are implemented under three modules: the 
Sustainable Production Technique Module, the Sustainable Hillside Farming Module, and the 
Practical Watershed Recovery and Management Module.
Indicators established to track the achievement of this work over the two year LOP are:
1. 7,350 adopters of improved watershed management techniques,
2. 2,500 hectares under improved watershed management, and
3. 2.0 million trees planted.
CLUSA/Zamorano further defined these indicators to target 25 micro-watersheds, with income 
generation activities established in each one. Although not part of the original project, this goal 
came as an extension of CLUSA’s already functioning methodology under the Small Producer 
Program to assist small-scale farmers to earn more income. It was reinforced by Zamarano’s 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 41
desire to provide Mitch-affected beneficiaries with opportunities that would encourage them to 
remain on their land, rather than move to nearby towns. Zamorano coordinates with CLUSA 
agribusiness technicians to develop business plans, budgets and marketing strategies with farmer 
participants through technical assistance and training. 
For example, during the consultants’ field trip we visited a small community where perennial 
plants such as mango, avocado and other fruit trees had already been distributed by Zamorano, 
and were in the process of being planted using environmentally sustainable practices. 
Vegetables seeds will also be provided to those who survived with nothing after Mitch. An 
abandoned chicken/egg production facility is also being studied for reactivation, and the 
community well was repaired. Longer-term the community/producers will need credit and 
perhaps can qualify under the Supervised Credit Fund.
Additionally, in the same watershed area, Zamorano is assisting the owner of a nursery in the 
production and marketing of perennial plants and fruit trees as a commercial venture. The owner 
already received a loan from the credit fund and has hundreds of maturing plants. Both of these 
activities are representative of those carried out under the Sustainable Production Techniques 
Module.
Also observed on the trip were hedgerows being planted on hillsides to help prevent erosion. 
Scientific surveys show that soil damage from Mitch was significantly less in areas planted in 
perennial crops such as coffee, in comparison to annual crops and degraded pasture. Therefore 
the planting of perennials is being undertaken to help prevent tree cutting and the resulting 
erosion that occurs. These activities are carried out under the Sustainable Hillside Farming 
Module.
Practical watershed recovery and management is the overarching thrust of Zamorano’s work. 
This module is carried out via technical assistance and training to impart the importance of the 
watershed to farmers and to carry out a community action plan to protect it. A learn -by-doing 
training concept is used to teach measures required for an area to become stable and protected. 
In the longer-term, Zamorano expects to establish this concept in at least 50 communities.
As of the end of the fourth quarter (estimate), approximately 3,600 adopters have been trained, 
800 hectares are under improved management, and 1.1 million trees have been planted. 
2.4.2 Watershed Management Conclusions
· Zamorano management of the Watershed Component is most impressive. The 
personnel are extremely dedicated to not only meeting the objectives of the program, 
but also going the extra mile. CLUSA/Zamorano staff are dedicated to watershed 
restoration and management, and the economic reactivation of flooded farms.
· Program indicators are being met or surpassed, except for hectares under improved 
watershed management. The year one projection for this activity was 1,200 hectares 
restored or improved in key micro-watersheds. This number was projected at 800 
just two weeks ago; however, we understand that recent torrential rains may further 
reduce that number. 
2.4.3 Watershed Management Recommendations
· The Watershed Component should accelerate its efforts to access loan funds from 
the Credit Fund for community projects, since the program only has one year left and 
no decision has been made on the final disposition of the fund. This will most likely 
require ATMA to assess the feasibility of community projects in much the same way 
they work with cooperatives and other producer groups. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 42
· CLUSA/Zamorano should take immediate action to overcome the loss in momentum 
in the hectares restored, or alter the target indicator to fall more in line with actual 
conditions caused by the recent unexpected flooding. 
CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
CRS is implementing its Agricultural Rehabilitation and Credit project through six national 
counterparts, three regional Caritas organizations and three local NGOs. This project builds on 
previous CRS USAID and non-USAID projects in agriculture and credit. It is a three year effort, 
two years and $6.33 million of USAID Mitch funds complemented by $3.326 million from CRS 
funds for Year Three.
The goal of the project is to contribute to post-Mitch rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts by 
improving resources conservation and food security for poor farm families. It has two principle 
compon ents, an agricultural productivity/crop diversification component and a credit component. 
The agricultural productivity/crop diversification component is working in 248 communities with 
11,000 families. According to CRS reports and field observations, it appears this target will be 
fully met within the next month or so.
Production activities involve a number of sub-components. To be discussed in production are: 1) 
basic grains, 2) crop diversification, 3) coffee production, 4) vegetable production, 5 ) animal 
production and 6) irrigation. Storage of basic grains will be discussed, as will soil conservation 
and agroforesty activities. 
The cross-cutting methodology in all CRS agricultural production activities is community 
organization and will not be discussed, though this activity frequently takes a great deal of 
extension agent time. It should be recognized that the success or failure of a given activity 
frequently depends on this activity as much as on any other single factor. 
Most if not all of these activities are meant to be repaid in kind or in cash into a revolving fund. 
Given its importance, this subject will be addressed in its own section.
2.0 FINDINGS
2.1 Basic grain production
The CRS basic grain component is an important but not overwhelming project priority.
Project staff have recognized that basic grain production is a high-risk activity in rural Nicaragua 
and promotion of basic grains only takes place in microclimate zones that are favorable to its 
cultivation. At the same time, CRS has taken a strong stance regarding organic cultivation and 
has placed emphasis on growing basic grains without the addition of chemical fertilizer.
Where basic gains are cultivated, the methodology has been to work via a revolving fund 
mechanism, providing an in-kind loan of certified seed and recouping the loan in the form of a 
two-for-one repayment in grain (rather than seed.) Since the revolving fund does not require that 
the farmer assume financial obligation for any cash outlay (for fertilizer, for instance), in the case 
of significant losses as those which occurred during the Spring 2000 Primera season, the project 
is able to write off the loss of the in-kind loan without prejudicing the farmers 
2.2 Crop diversification including vegeta ble cultivation
The CRS program is promoting a tremendous variety of crops as substitutes for basic grains. 
Among the crops being promoted are: pineapple, plantain, fruit trees, coffee, cassava, a wide 
varieties of vegetables, mung bean, soybean (for green manure) pitahaya, sweet potatoes, and 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 43
others. Project staff have a broad vision of the importance of moving farmers out of basic grain 
production and into higher value, more productive crops whenever possible. 
 CRS programming is working vigorously on the issues of peasant farmer over-reliance on 
traditional crops vs. diversification of crops and export crops and as above, the project has a wide 
“menu” of agricultural interventions. The idea is that the choice of intervention will be decided 
between technical staff and farmers depending on the agro-ecological conditions of each 
community. Some cases were observed during the field travel where program interventions were 
“assigned from the top” --based on budget or annual programming targets, without an appropriate 
diagnosis of the environment. This resulted in sometimes inappropriate technologies or crops 
being promoted on ill-suited land. 
The plots visited showed some successes and some failures. It may be that the wide selection of 
cropping possibilities has exceeded extension agents’ abilities to be knowledgeable about each of 
the crops being promoted. Alternatively, there may have been so many things going on, one or 
other crop received less than adequate follow -up. In any case, the wide variety of potential crops 
at the project’s disposal is impressive.
2.3 Coffee production
Project documents report that coffee forms a part of project activities, but the assessment team 
did not have the opportunity to visit any plots and no comments will be ventured. 
2.4 Animal production
Animal production does not seem a high project priority. Field data suggest that about five-to￾seven cows or oxen were distributed per village. This number seems to have been assigned on 
the basis of a budget availability or some other pre -established number—rather than responding 
to farmer demand, for instance. In the case of cattle or bull purchases, the project established a 
time-consuming but quite effective practice of each animal being vetted by a committee of a CRS 
staff person, a counterpart staff person, a veterinarian and the prospective buyer. Though the 
process was slow, it does seem to have resulted in the purchase of a number of healthy, good￾looking animals. Paying back the loan cost of a cow or bull is proving difficult, however. A quick 
‘cost-benefit stream’ was developed during the field travel which indicated that almost every liter 
of milk produced by the cow over three years would have to be sold in order for the three-year 
loan to be paid within the stipulated time period from milk alone.
The distribution of a package of ten pure-bred chickens has proven popular but there are a 
number of reports of losses, due to theft and accidents as much as to disease. This year the 
project will provide vaccination possibilities at the same time as the chickens are distributed to try 
to reduce the number of chickens who do not live to the egg-laying stage. The majority of chicken 
loans were for six months and have been paid off promptly, indicating that there is a reasonable 
profit in farmstead poultry raising. 
2.5 Irrigation
The CRS project is engaging in a tremendous variety of experiences in irrigation. Among the 
technologies being promoted are the pulley rope pump (mecate), the direct hollow piston pump 
(EMAS in Nicaragua/ also called the ‘Yakku’ in Bolivia and ‘Tara’ in Bangladesh), simplified drip 
irrigation, barrel storage/drip irrigation, small reservoir construction, dug well excavation with drip 
irrigation, and a number of others. Showing a serious commitment to the theme, CRS has 
contracted the services of an irrigation consultant whose report was finished on September 29 
2000. The cost of most of these system is less than $100 per half- manzana, one of the lowest 
costs the assessment team has every seen. A wide number of cash crops are being produced 
with this water, and the potential for future income generation is tremendous, potentially one of 
the project’s most dramatic successes.
The target for CRS by December 2000 is 500 parcels under irrigation, of which 125 have been 
accomplished to date. Achieving that target would be an enormous project accomplishment. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 44
2.6 Grain storage 
Though activities in grain storage have been going on in Nicaragua for several years, and this 
component is n ot exclusively a CRS activity, it appears to be another of the project’s dramatic 
successes. The activity involves the project’s providing a corrugated tin grain silo in various sizes 
with loan financing. Excepting farmers who lost their Primera harvest, the silos have produced 
significant economic return. There was a multitude of reports that price gains of over one 
hundred Cordobas or more were realized between maize that was kept off the market at harvest 
time when the price was C$/ 60 and sold several months later for C$/ 200 per hundredweight. 
Farmers are unanimous that with appropriate drying and care of the silo-stored grain, crop losses 
have been reduced from up to fifty percent (50%) per crop to almost zero. In Cordobas, many 
farmers report several hundred percent gains in price per hundredweight stored, more than half
the estimated annual income of (1998) C$/ 3876 for rural peasant farmers in one crop alone. 
Thus a quadruple gain is realized: twice the amount of grain available for sale and in many cases 
more than double the sales price. This is a terrific achievement in improved family income and 
food security.
The CRS project has distributed a total of 3,805 silos to farmers with an average storage capacity 
of 13 cwt, 2,475 tons of improved small-farm storage. Calculations of the economic benefit of 
this output using data provided by these interviewees suggest the potential economic impact of 
this intervention in a non-drought agricultural season could be $ 437,000, or $140 per silo per 
crop season.
3
2.7 Soil conservation and agroforestry activities
Significant soil conservation structures are visible throughout the project area, including live and 
dead barriers planted along the contour; water run-off ditches; sedimentation traps; pineapple, 
grasses and pigeon pea used for soil retention; agro-forestry species and others. A number of 
soil conservation plots were visited during the field travel and discussions held with farmers who 
were enthusiastic, knowledgeable and articulate about the benefits that conservation brings to 
their field. In some cases, the ability of farmers to understand the fundamental concepts behind 
the physical structures was seen to be weak. These weaknesses were discussed with field staff 
who commented that during the first year or two of activities, a number of lessons would not be 
learned in their full complexity (correctly configured contour lines, for instance) and subsequent 
years would be required to solidify the learning. Nevertheless, substantial gains are taking place.
2.8 Revolving Fund recovery
Almost every project input is provided to the farmer under the concept of a revolving fund. How 
the fund operates is quite varied however. In the case of beans, the farmer receives twenty 
pounds of certified seed and should return forty pounds of harvested grain. In the case of 
pineapples, the farmer receives the parent plant and is meant to return several second generation 
“sons.” In the case of chickens, the farmer returns the purchase price of the chicke ns loan in 
cash to be deposited in the community bank account. In other cases, the community assigns an 
in-kind cost to the articles (e.g. insecticide sprayer equals twenty five pounds of maize) While 
farmers and project staff seem completely familiar with how it all works, it certainly is confusing to 
an outsider. 
There is wide variation in management quality of the loan reflows. In the cases where the loan is 
paid back in cash in Caritas counterpart areas, there was evidence of a well designed community 
loan register system, with individual loan register cards, a receipt system, bank vouchers, etc. In 
non-Caritas areas, the assessment team saw a case where loan re -flows are going to be handled 
by a community group whose European -funded cooperative h ad just gone bankrupt three months 
previously.
 
3
 13 cwt. X C$ 140 net increase in sales price X 3085 silos/ $12.85:1C$.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 45
It was explained that the creation of these community-run funds grew out of an USAID prohibition 
against loan re-flows benefiting the counterpart organization. If true, this seems to be a 
cumbersome and unwise decision, leading to the funds disappearing under poor village 
management.
2.9 Other Production Issues (see Appendix B, Interview Guide, for format)
· Regarding program philosophy , the Hurricane Mitch project was an add -on to a CRS 
agricultural producti on project that was in the process of being approved as Mitch hit, thus 
USAID’s focus on “income generation” fits with well CRS’ preferred programming stance.
· CRS’s implementation methodology is exclusively through counterpart organizations and the 
projec t finances a large corps of extension workers on the counterparts’ payroll. Also, 
technical assistance takes the form of monthly technical committee meetings, as well as 
frequent accompanying field visits. CRS staff are fully sensitized to the “devolved” nature of 
this relationship. This methodology sometimes seems to bring a more hands -off relationship 
between the highly qualified CRS agronomists and the CARITAS counterpart staff with less 
academic formation. However, the gains in the potential sustainability of interventions 
through counterpart organizations appears to offsets this operational “distance” quite well. 
· CRS programming is attuned to gender issues. The project target is that thirty percent (30%) 
of project beneficiaries will be female and that 30% of field staff will be also. These targets 
have been reached. A number of strong female staff could be encouraged to keep this issue 
in the forefront.
· Regarding key anticipated vs. actual results , the project appears to be well on track. The
number of beneficiaries reached with one or other intervention has already reached nearly the 
total projected for the entire life of the project. Farmers (male and female) report 
enthusiastically how the project has improved their lives. Some activities are behind, 
including the number and dollar value of loans to females, but these should not distract from 
the fact that the project is achieving a large measure of planned outputs.
· One project constraint mentioned by many interviewees was the drought during the 2000 
Primera season where most of basic grains planted under project auspices were completely 
destroyed. Promotion of mini-irrigation as well as non-traditional crops are meant to address 
this constraint. In the assessment team’s view, a second constraint may be that project staff 
are performing a number of input-supply/bulk purchase functions that take them away from 
pure agricultural extension.
· It would appear the project has considerable future potential impact. The first year of 
activities has been spent in addressing production diversification issues, basic grain storage, 
wide-spread promotion of irrigation technology and long-term resource generation. With the 
project’s moving more into marketing (see discussion in a Section 5.0), the next two years 
can be used to build on this synergism, strengthening the quality of the activities and 
deepening the economic gains.
· Until now, the project has focused on crop storage at the individual level, rather than in 
community-owned centers of acopio. This was an appropriate choice of intervention and, it is 
suggested, the focus should continue at this level for the next year or two—with a small 
number of experiments in community storage. (See Marketing below.)
· Regarding gender issues in crop storage, the project may be in a position to be more 
influential in targeting women’s involvement in grain storage than it has so far.
3.0 AGRICULTURAL CONCLUSIONS
The CRS project is well on track and has every indication of achieving substantial gains in farm er 
income over the near and mid term. It is fomenting a powerful mix of new and higher value crops 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 46
as substitute for basic grains and doing so from an organic farming perspective, thus not falling 
into the trap of financing uneconomic fertilizer loans for basic grains. It is successfully promoting 
low-cost irrigation technology in an innovative and dynamic way. It is energetically promoting on￾farm grain storage with excellent results.
4.0 AGRICULTURAL SUGGESTIONS
4.1 Work with the same beneficiaries—do not expand
The CRS project has reached almost 90% of its intended beneficiaries only a third of the way 
through the project life. The temptation to expand the number of beneficiaries next year should 
be resisted, and the same beneficiaries whom the project worked with this year should continue to 
be worked with next year. In order for the early gains of the project to be sustainable, it is 
important that project staff and beneficiaries be given a year of “consolidation.”
4.2 Continued emphasis in crop diversification
The project is making excellent progress in diversifying agricultural production. These activities 
should continue in the second year (and beyond.)
4.3 Continued emphasis in irrigation
4.4 Continued emphasis in grain storage
The CRS project has had dramatic and innovative success in irrigation and in grain storage. The 
economic benefits of these two technologies on farmers’ lives is almost incalculable and further 
work should continue. The project should dedicate more resources and more time and energy 
into maximizing these gains.
At the same time, it would be useful for the sake of publicity and to demonstrate the impact of the 
project that CRS hire an agricultural economist to do a professionally done cost-benefit analysis 
on a randomly selected number of these irrigation systems and silos. The results of such a study 
could be used to demonstrate to the donor how effectively the Mitch resource has been used to 
improve farmers’ livelihoods.
4.5 Maintain current emphasis on animal production
The impact of improved cows on the lives of selected beneficiaries will be significant, even if the 
economic cash-flow of milk production means that net gains to income will not begin to accrue 
until approximately the fourth year. Thus, the animal husbandry component is worth continuing 
but, it is suggested, at not much more intensity than at the present. Since the beneficiaries of last 
year’s cows in some measure seem to have been selected by the community based on their 
ability to care for the animal —i.e., those in the village who already had a least half a dozen 
animals before the program arrived (thus the more prosperous) —when the project plans a given 
number of cows per village, it is proposed that criteria be developed to give the animals to needier 
farmers (and women) rather than the better-off.
4.6 Evolution of project design and activities into short-term/long term focus
Soil conservation activities bring long-term benefits rather than producing short term gains in 
income. Given CRS’ program successes, short -cycle production and infrastructure activities 
have the potential to satisfy farmers’ basic needs over the short term while the project works to 
improve the sustainability of long term agricultural gains. A clearer articulation of CRS’ 
programming philosophy in terms of “strategic plan”—e.g. 2 to 3 years focused on short-cycle 
crops and soil conservation followed by 3 to 6 years involvement in long term gains — might help 
field and counterpart staff conceptualize their roles , interventions and impact better. A do -able 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 47
goal in this scenario could be to convert these project areas into prosperous small farmers over 
the course of the next decade
4.7 Begin to distribute inputs and interventions on a cost-recovery basis
As part of working toward a longer term focus, it may be appropriate for CRS and counterpart 
staff to get out of the business of acting as the farmers’ supplier of seed and agricultural supplies. 
It is suggested that CRS and the counterpart organizations give consideration to moving out of 
the ag. commodities logistic business to concentrate on more important roles and functions 
(improved ag. extension and conservation, for instance.) One way to do this would be to 
distribute all loans to project beneficiaries in the form of cash—and for CRS and counterparts to 
stimulate market mechanism to satisfy the demand for these agricultural supplies.
5.0 AGRICULTURAL MARKETING 
5.1 Agricultural Marketing Findings
From the beginning of the USAID-funded Mitch activity, CRS had a market analyst on staff. This 
individual trained counterpart promoters in data collection and product analysis appropriate to the 
agricultural production and marketing systems in each zone, and this early initiative has been 
instrumental in developing marketing models particular to each zone. As a part of CRS’ strategy 
in emphasizing the importance of market analysis as an integral component of the project, 
counterpart organizations have been encouraged to hire market analysts to assist the project field 
staff and beneficiaries with marketing activities. In general, the marketing analysts perform the 
following functions:
· Complete strategic marketing plans;
· Conduct marketing studies;
· Compile information on agriculture commodity prices;
· Develop and maintain agriculture marketing information;
· Facilitate the creation of communications between beneficiaries and intermediaries;
· Organize and facilitate training activities for farmers and the project’s promoters on 
quality control, product pricing, and identify and negotiate with buyers;
· Evaluate the marketing system of farmers for selling farm commodities; and 
· Prepare and disseminate bi -weekly commodity price bulletins.
The market analyst with Caritas Matagalpa, for example, goes to the market every Tuesday to 
collect agriculture commodity price information. With the information, she prepares a bi-weekly 
price report and distributes it to the promoters for dissemination to beneficiaries in their respective 
zones. Since January 2000, the market analys t has also conducted 7 training activities with 252 
farmers on marketing and pricing commodities, etc. The following studies are an example of 
reports produced by the marketing analysts: “ Sistema de Informacion Sobre Precios en la 
Comercializacion de los Productos Agropecuarios”; “Criterios Para la Compra de Bovinos 
Destinados a Bueyes”; and “Proyectos de Vinculos de Mercados”.
In the municipality of San Dionisio, the marketing analyst and other Caritas Matagalpa staff are 
engaging in a new activity with a commercial storage house, Ecograno, by organizing farmers to 
collectively process, classify, dry, store, and fumigate grains. The credit department of Caritas 
Matagalpa is arranging financing to allow farmers to sell when prices are higher some months 
after the harvest. According to the CRS Annual Operating Plan for the period September 2000 -
2001, it is planned that the marketing units will work with the Post Harvest Program of INTA and 
Zamorano University.
5.2 Agricultural Marketing Conclusions
The integration of a marketing component to complement and strengthen the overall objectives of 
the project can result in increasing farmer incomes through a variety of interventions such as: 
training; extending credit; identifying new agricultural products; extending the growing season with 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 48
new and different crops and irrigation systems; and increasing farmer’s knowledge, choices, and 
options when selling into the market place.
5.3 Agricultural Marketing Suggestions
· CRS should continue the integration of the marketing and commercialization 
component with the agricultural extension and credit component;
· The marketing analyst could:
¸ Develop an annual training plan (including the type of training events, duration, 
and number of participants), and the training plan could be budgeted into the 
project’s overall training plan activities each year;
¸ Seek to engage outside technical expertise in marketing and commercialization 
expertise available though the Chemonics, CLUSA, the private sector, and other 
institutions for the purpose of providing training and technical expertise;
¸ Arrange for exchange visits between producers within the project zone and areas 
where similar crops and farm products are being grown and sold;
¸ Place a priority on identifying, implementing, and managing economic and 
income generating strategies and activities for women;
¸ Conduct studies and identify opportunities for the private and commercial sectors 
to buy and sell goods and services with individual farmers and farmer groups;
· The project could invest in training activities for the marketing analyst to continue to 
develop his/her expertise.
6.0 CREDIT PROGRAM
6.1 Credit Program Findings
USAID and CRS have been working cooperatively on credit activities since April 1995 when the 
first Cooperative Agreement was signed. This initial activity had as their objective to form 240 
communal banks with 6,000 clients as beneficiaries, primarily in urban areas. As a follow -on to 
this activity that ended in 1998, CRS financed a “bridge project” between 1998 - 1999. Under 
Mitch funds, there are essentially two types of lending programs: credit and revolving fund. 
CRS counterpart organizations in the credit and revolving fund programs follows.4
CRS Counterpart Agency $ Credit Revolving 
Funds
Caritas Matagalpa yes yes
CARITAS Jinotega yes yes
CARITAS Esteli yes no
FUNDECAP yes no
ADDAC/Esteli no yes
Sociedad Garmendia Jijon/Chinandega no yes
FIDER/Esteli, no yes
INPRHU no yes
The lending policies for the credit cash loans and the revolving fund loans are different. 
· The credit cash loan portfolio loans are for up to six months with an interest rate of 
2.5% per month.
· The revolving fund loan program can lend up to periods as long as three years with 
interest rates at 4% per year, plus indexing payments to the Central Bank exchange 
rate for the US dollar to maintain the value of the loan in Cordobas. 
 
4
 The assessment team visited the INPRHU and Caritas Matagalpa field operations and project staff during 
the period of September 28 to 30, 2000. It was not possible to make field visits to CRS’ other counterparts.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 49
Both the cash credit loan program and the revolving loan fund program sometimes 
operate in the same communitie s at the same time. Both loan programs charge interest 
penalties if payments are made late.
CRS has developed comprehensive credit policy manuals for the credit and the revolving fund 
programs as outlined in the documents: “Politica para el Manejo de los Recursos de 
Recapitalizacion’; and Diagnostico Comunitaria, Capacitacion Pre-Credito; Formacion de grupos 
Solidarios; Manual de Entrega y Formalizacion de Credito; y Monitorea y Seguimiento de Credito; 
Cierre de Cyclos; y Auditoria.
A. Credit
USAID is providing $816,668 for credit, and CRS is providing $169,411 for a total of $986,079 for 
the credit fund. The credit activity has11,000 families as its goal with an average loan of 
approximately $236/family for up to six months. In the first year of the cash credit loan program, 
all of the funds, $986,079, projected to be loaned over the life of the project were loaned out. In 
Caritas Matagalpa, the credit cash loan program has developed a good system of tracking loan 
performance and prepares a report every two weeks for each credit agent on all loans the agent 
is supervising. The report includes amounts loaned, due dates, interest rate, delinquency 
payments, name of the person who borrowed the money, and the overall portfolio delinquency 
rate expressed as a percentage. The counterpart organizations employ 22 promoters (of which 
approximately 33% are women) to manage the credit activities that loan in cash.
According to targets vs. actual figures contained in the project 3rd Quarterly Report, the project
has loaned the following amounts:
Results Framework Indictors
Project Reporting Period: April to June 2000
Indicator Planned Targets
Name
Unit
1999 2000 2001
Prior 
Total
This 
Quarter
New 
Total
Number of # of Males 760 1,498 1,255 2,295 1,271 3,566
small 
producers 
assisted with 
USAID credit
# of Females 1,744 3,495 2,929 2,079 1,040 3,119
# loans to 
Males
Number of 527 3,038 7,519 3,170 1,934 5,104
loans 
disbursed to 
agricultural 
producers
# loans to 
Females
2,105 7,089 20,157 2,837 1,582 4,419
$ value of 
loans to 
males
$117,45
3
$508,436 $1,542,84
3
$496,51
9
$275,05
3
Dollar value of $771,572
loans 
disbursed to 
agricultural 
producers
$ value of 
loans to 
Females
$274,05
6
$1,186,35
1
$3,599,96
8
$436,70
4
$225,04
3
$661,747
From the table, it is worth noting that the projections indicate that between the years 2000 and 
2001, it is planned that the number of loans (including re -flows) will essentially triple. The 
emphasis in the loan portfolio in term of the number of loans and the dollar value of the loans to 
women is impressive.
In reviewing the projected cash flow in the worksheet “Flujo deCaja Proyectado—Fondo De 
Credito” provided by the CRS Credit Director, the information concerning the repayments on 
loans is as follows:
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 50
Repayments as a %age of planned recuperation
Institution % Executed
Caritas Matagalpa 136%
Caritas Jinotega 156%
Caritas Estelí 38%
FUNDECAP 79%
The assessment team is cognizant that the Caritas Estelí credit programs is relatively new, 
and is still in a “learning curve” that impacts on current performance. FUNDECAP is a 
more experienced lender and reasons for the shortfall require further study.
B. Revolving Fund
USAID is financing $2,569,065 for the revolving loan fund. The revolving fund loan program is 
new. The first loans were made in February 2000. Eleven promoters are responsible from 
managing the revolving fund activities.
The fund has three components:
· Fomento
· Fondo Revolvente en Especies
· Fondo Revolvente en Efectivo
To date, the revolving fund has expended $1,422,009 to capitalize beneficiary agriculture 
activities. $1,147,056 remains in this fund to be disbursed. Of this amount, approximately 30% 
($344,117) is programmed for the “Fomento” component, essentially sunk costs that do not have 
to be repaid. There remains $802,939 in the “Fondo Revolvente en Especies” and the “Fondo 
Revolvente en Efectivo” to be disbursed. 
The “Fondo Revolvente” pays out in corn, bean and sorghum seeds and the farmers have to 
return 1.5 seeds for every seed borrowed. The first cycle in the “Fondo Revolvente” is lent in 
materials or animals and the farmer has to pay back the “monetized” value in Cordobas. The 
repayments (“reflows”) are supposed to become available for further lending at the community 
level. For example, in the community of Molino Sur, Matagalpa, loans were made for chickens 
and agricultural fumigation sprayers at the same time. The loan for chickens was for a period of 
six months whereas the loan for the sprayers was for one year. The repayment on the chicken 
loans has a delinquency rate of 8% at the present time. 
Reviewing the performance of the majority of the loans that have been made in the revolving fund 
loan program (Fondo Revolvente) is not possible at this time as the loan periods are not yet due. 
Below are the loan periods according to the type of loan.
Category Loan Period
Chickens 6 mos.
Silos, water pumps, fumigation pumps, piping 1 yr.
Cows, oxen, & productive infrastructure 3 yrs.
The quarterly reports submitted to AID do not report on the performance (return of principal, 
payment of interest and penalties, maintenance of value, number of borrowers, etc.) of the “Fondo 
Revolvente”. The reports provide AID with information on the types and number of materials, 
animals, and farm inputs that were “loaned” in the first cycle.
6.2 Credit Program Conclusions
The entire credit program, both the cash credit program and the revolving loan fund, is an 
important part of CRS’ and counterparts’ development activities. The dollar amount, $3,385,733, 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 51
of these activities represent 53% of the total USAID funding ($6,333,020) for the project. The 
revolving fund program loan portfolio, $2,569,065, represents 41% of the total of USAID financing 
for the project. The revolving loan fund is not directly managed and supervised by the CRS Credit 
program. Rather, this activity is under the agriculture department within CRS. The revolving loan 
fund is intended to be managed by the communities and the repayments will not re-enter as cash 
flows into CRS or its counterpart credit programs but will remain in the community and be re￾loaned, ostensibly maintaining value and covering operating costs with interest.
In most parts of the world, programs like the CRS one have not bee n successful for a number of 
reasons. Managing credit requires a level of sophistication and technical knowledge that is most 
often not available at the community level. Requiring community members to make loan 
decisions, charge penalties and interest, r ecuperate the value of the loan in the time period 
agreed upon among neighbors, friends, and family members can be fraught with conflicts among 
the community and susceptible to charges of personal gain. Boards of Directors also change and 
internal supervision that was initially envisioned can easily erode. Once the Mitch Rehabilitation 
and Reactivation project ends, promoters who are presently supervising the revolving fund activity 
at the community will no longer have their salaries directly paid out of project funds and there is 
no clarity how their future salaries will be paid? Charging an annual interest rate of four percent 
(4%) on three-year is also well below market interest rates for such loans.
There are relatively few performance results so far due to the revolving loan fund having recently 
been initiated, and it is too early to study repayment rates and thus make definite conclusions. 
However, continuing to infuse new credit into the revolving loan fund program should be re￾thought. 
CRS and its counterpart organizations are also managing a cash credit program that has 
developed loan policies, methodologies, and repayment procedures over a longer period of time. 
Would it be beneficial, practical, or advisable to transfer funds that have not yet been committed 
from the revolving loan fund into the cash credit program? If the revolving loan fund is not 
successful, it will negatively impact on CRS and its counterpart organizations in the regular credit 
program?
6.3 Credit Program Suggestions
CRS should consider transferring funds that have not yet been spent in the revolving fund loan 
program into the cash credit loan fund program. The process would involve all CRS’s counterpart 
organizations and community groups in the deliberations. The process of transferring the funds 
could be initiated on a gradual basis. In the deliberations, it would have to be made clear to the 
project beneficiaries that transfers would be made into the cash credit program which the 
beneficiaries would have access to . It must be noted, however, that in certain cases, some CRS 
counterpart organizations (ADDAC, Sociedad Garmendia Jijon, FIDER/Esteli, and INPRHU) are 
not managing cash credit program activities under Mitch auspices (though they are under other 
CRS programs in the amount of approximately $280,000.) If funds were transferred into the credit 
fund, this would essentially provide additional capital to the credit fund which has presently has its 
entire portfolio out in loans ahead of schedule.
If the above is not possible, CRS should give thought to stopping the “revolving” fund idea and 
simply deliver the inputs as “fomento,” that is, sunk costs. 
If CRS were to decide to transfer unspent money from the revolving loan fund program into the 
cash credit program, this would also require modifying credit policy manuals as present credit 
policies do not cover longer time periods nor certain credit activities such as financing the 
purchase of cows, oxen, etc. Transfer of funds would also require placing the revolving loan fund 
promoters within the cash credit loan activities.
CRS and its counterpart organizations should be encouraged to monitor more carefully and report 
the performance of the “Fondo Revolvente” to USAID in the Quarterly Reports concerning the 
number of loans made, return of principal and interest, delinquency rate, and maintenance of the 
value of the portfolio.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 52
The “Fondo Revolvente” policy of lending long term (up to three years) and at an annual interest 
rate of 4% should be reviewed.
At presen t, the first cycle loan that goes out in the “Fondo Revolvente” is in materials or animals. 
CRS and its counterpart organizations should consider eliminating this policy and making the loan 
to the beneficiaries directly in cash.
Caritas Estelí is relatively new in terms of managing credit activities and its repayment rates are 
presently lower than they should be. FUNDECAP, an experienced lender, is in the same situation 
for reasons which are less clear. CRS should monitor the performance of these loan p ortfolios 
carefully and provide the organizations with additional supervision and technical assistance to 
ensure that the operations do not fail.
Community solidarity groups have bank accounts and are making payments into these accounts. 
CRS should carefully monitor the financial solvency of the banking system and bank where the 
beneficiaries have established their accounts to ensure (as much as is possible in Nicaragua) that 
the banks are solid and the beneficiaries’ money will remain safe. The absence of banking sub￾offices in the smaller towns is another obstacle in this regard.
In many credit programs, the credit agents receive part of their compensation based on the 
performance of the loan portfolio. CRS could consider initiating such a compensation system 
whereby certain standards of the agent’s portfolio are identified (repayment rates, low 
delinquency rates, etc.) and the agent’s performance and partial compensation are based on 
meeting “results”. The assessment team recognizes that personnel policies of counterpart 
organization would likely have to be changed, and that could take some time.
The cash credit program has lent the full $986,079 originally allocated to the cash credit program. 
Other Indictor goals have yet to be met. For example, Caritas Matagalpa has lent its full portfolio 
yet still has as an objective to reach an additional new 1,000 clients which will more than likely not 
be a realistic goal. It is suggested that CRS discuss with its counterpart organizations and review 
goals to see if they are realistic and attainable. If not, CRS should work with USAID in re -
formulating the goals.
In reviewing the Caritas Matagalpa operation where there are both cash credit and revolving fund 
loans, it appears that coordination and communication between the agricultural department and 
the credit department could be improved. It is difficult to measure performance if one department 
does not have the necessary financial projections against which to do so.
PROJECT CONCERN INTERNATIONAL (PCI)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On December 21, 1999, USAID signed a grant award with PCI to provide US$760,519 to 
implement a program entitled “Rapid Reconstruction & Sustainable Recovery”. The three main 
components of the grant are the Agricultural project, the Chicken project, and a Road 
Rehabilitation Project. This latter activity is being financed in combination with a PL 480 Title II 
grant, which provides for food-for-work and most administrative costs. The “Mitch Project” covers 
the cost of implements and tools needed for infrastructure repair. An expected 18,200 rural 
Nicaraguans (2,600 families) will directly benefit from this program. The Agricultural project 
(US$517,276) includes: basic grain production (800 families), grain storage (800 families), family 
gardens (800 families), and improved agricultural practices, including agroforestry for firewood 
production.
The Chicken Project will provide income generation to 1,000 families. It will also improve the 
nutrition of the family, and improve the genetics of the native varieties of poultry. PCI distributes 
the chickens to various Community Councils who in turn distribute them to selected families. 
Each final beneficiary, almost exclusively women, receives nine hens and one rooster along with 
three months of food concentrate. It is anticipated that chickens will begin egg production after 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 53
the fifth month. The month prior to initiation of egg -laying, the chickens are to be fed a 
concentrate made from locally available materials to ensure their adaptation to a native or local 
diet. Vaccinations are done prior to distributing the poultry, and the beneficiaries are responsible 
for continuing the scheduled vaccinations. The operation is financed via a revolving fund whereby 
the recipients are required to re turn ten eight-week-old chickens (nine hens and one rooster) to 
the Community Councils for distribution to other program beneficiaries.
Nine hundred kilometers of roads and paths, along with 50 bridges are to be constructed or 
repaired.
2.0 FINDINGS
2.1 Agriculture
2.1.1 Basic Grain Production
Basic grain production was chosen because maize and beans constitute the major crops 
beneficiaries grow. Most of the production is consumed in the household, although some is sold 
to purchase other items such as clothing, soap, sugar, etc. Basic grain production was also 
selected because there could be a rapid recovery cycle. Unfortunately, there was a drought 
during the Primera planting. Overall, about 35% of the bean crop and about 15% of maize was 
lost. However, a significant number of producers in the most affected areas lost their entire 
production.
The system used to finance the seeds is that for every unit of certified seeds a beneficiary 
receives, he or she returns two units of selected seeds to the program. These are then given to 
other beneficiaries, and the number of beneficiaries thereby expands. It is a rotating fund using 
seeds instead of cash. Several beneficiaries interviewed said that the crop failure made it difficult 
to repay the seeds. However, the rains for the Postrera have been good thus far (in fact 
excessive is some areas), and beneficiaries interviewed were optimistic that given a normal-to￾good harvest, they could meet the payback requirements.
2.1.2 Basic Grain Storage
Benefi ciaries reported significant post-harvest losses -- up to 50% using traditional storage 
methods. To reduce this, metal silos are being provided. While the failure of the crop in Primera
precluded actually observing basic grains in storage, the beneficiaries manifested their confidence 
that post-harvest storage losses would be reduced to a minimal level.
2.1.3 Family Gardens
The principal role of the family gardens was to improve the family diet in terms of variety and 
nutrition. Secondarily, it provided some income for purchasing other household items. From the 
gardens observed, it appears that certain vegetable species are more adapted to agro -climatic 
conditions than others. 
2.1.4 Improved Agricultural Practices
Improved Agricultural Practices encompass a variety of activities, including organic fertilizer 
production, soil conservation techniques, reforestation for firewood, family gardens and fruit trees. 
The thrust seemed oriented at diversifying and improving the family diet through the consumption 
of foods having higher vitamin and nutritional value. The rationale for the trees-for-firewood 
seemed to be more understood by the beneficiaries as a source of fuelwood, and less so as a soil 
conservation measure. The scale of the activities observed indicated that the initiatives in this 
category were more of an income saving intervention, rather than having a significant income 
generating theme.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 54
2.2 Chickens
Beneficiaries of the poultry program seemed well aware that poultry production could improve 
household income and family health. They also expressed a strong recognition of the need to 
pay back the ten chickens so that others could benefit. Sales occur both in terms of eggs and of 
chickens. The main difficulty involved in marketing is due to the distance to markets. The closer 
the proximity to markets, the higher percentage of eggs or hens that can be sold. Several 
beneficiaries mentioned that one attractive element of the poultry program was the improved 
health benefits it would provide to their families, especially children.
Several beneficiaries expressed the need for PCI to continue providing the concentrate ration until 
the chickens actually begin to produce eggs. They stated that the drought which had severely 
affected Primera production had also affected their ability to provide adequate alternative 
concentrate. That alternative includes maize or sorghum, which is in limited supply due to the 
earlier crop failure. They also requested that PCI supply them with small hand grinders that could 
be used to prepare the ration.
2.3 Infrastructure
One road was visited that was being rehabilitated using Food for Work. The main activity 
observed was the enlarging of drainage ditches along side of the road bed.
A second road was seen, however neither the beneficiaries of the Food for Work activity nor the 
potential beneficiaries of the road were interviewed, because we were unable to reach the 
community. A tree had fallen across the road, making it impassable.
2.4 Other Findings
Several of the beneficiaries interviewed had no land, and were working land they rented, usually 
on a share-cropping basis.
The marketing system is very restrictive. Buyers are reported to act in collusion to hold down 
prices using a system whereby a producer may be visited by several buyers, but the first buyer 
always offers the highest price. Subsequent buyers always offer progressively lower prices, 
therefore the producer is under tremendous pressure to accept the first offer.
No financing for agricultural activities exists – not from formal sources like coops, etc., nor via the 
marketing chain. Several beneficiaries, when asked what they would do if a source of financing 
were available, chose coffee as their highest priority for applying for loan funds. Others would 
use it to expand basic grain production. Fertilizer purchase, pesticides, irrigation and potato were 
also mentioned.
3.0 CONCLUSIONS
In terms of the agreement, as signed by PCI and USAID, the program is moving forward pretty 
much as envisioned, and the quality of the interventions visited is generally excellent. The only 
possible exception would be ensuring that the roads are less susceptible to factors such as 
collapsing banks, etc., that could cause the road to become impassable.
The program includes a wide gamut of implementation activities, and a varying beneficiary pool. 
What the beneficiaries have most in common is that they are all poor. 
The rotating fund based upon returning selected seeds for certified improved seeds is interesting 
but contains potential problems. First among them is the quality, including productivity, of the 
seed being returned. For beans, this is less a problem because beans are a self-pollinating crop, 
therefore loss of productivity over time will be due p rimarily to a buildup of diseases within the 
seeds with each generation. Eventually production will begin to decrease and new certified seeds 
will need to be used.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 55
The problem with maize is similar because it is open pollinated. (Note: Although those 
interviewed said that the maize was a hybrid, it is really an improved open pollinated variety.) 
This means that it can lose its productivity with each successive generation. 
4.O SUGGESTIONS
4.1 Short Term
1. PCI could develop and apply a diagnostic instruments that can identify geographical 
zones and beneficiaries who can respond to an income generation program to the extent that they 
will move significantly toward, and preferably above, the poverty line, apart from beneficiaries who 
are in a survival situation who requires other types of interventions.
2. PCI could develop and apply a methodology that can identify the activities which have the 
greatest income potential for the beneficiaries involved. This should include an analysis of the 
target market or markets, and a strong cost/benefit analysis of any intervention contemplated. 
This activity could be carried out done in a cooperative way with other PVOs, or with other 
technical assistance agencies like Winrock or Chemonics. Costs of production and marketing 
data can also be taken from a sample of beneficiaries to determine earnings potential.
3. Broaden crop interventions to include those which have the best potential for producing 
income. Examples of this include coffee, and higher value options for family gardens, e.g., herbs, 
etc.
4. Review the policy on supplying concentrate for three months versus continuing some 
form of assistance until the chickens begin to generate income. The idea to phase in a diet made 
from local ingredients is excellent, so perhaps some additional assistance with ingredients which 
are difficult to procure, e.g., maize, etc., might be an effective way to ensure that gains are not 
lost.
5. Analyze the need to provide hand grinders on a case-by-case basis to ensure that this is 
not a constraint that could inhibit the ultimate success of the poultry activity. Since other hand 
tools were supplied to crop producers, this change would not seem to be represent a large 
change in program philosophy.
4.2 Long Term
1. Explore the possibility of expanding local commercial sources of agricultural inputs and 
equipment. One way would be to work with local merchants by supplying them with a list of items 
which the local beneficiaries will need. Thereafter, some form of coupon could be provided to the 
beneficiaries which they can use to purchase inputs and small hand tools including grinders from 
local merchants.
2. As noted in the Conclusions section above, there will be a periodic need to replace 
seeds, and PCI should not be in the business of attending to that need. The benefit/cost analysis 
should identify the actual cost of the certified seeds, and the beneficiaries should cover this cost 
from their production. Typically, improved seeds do not constitute a m ajor element in the cost of 
production, especially when the benefits of those seeds are factored in.
3. Because the best information at this time indicates that less financing will be available for 
follow-on programs, PCI needs to focus on those activities with the greatest income generating 
potential in their next effort.
4. PCI should review its in-house expertise vis-a-vis an income generating program, and 
make decisions regarding staffing changes. It also needs to take into account the technical 
knowledge that is already available in other agencies such as colleague PVOs, GON agencies, 
private sector companies, and other sources, as well as the experiences gained by other PCI 
programs throughout the world.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 56
SAVE THE CHILDREN -U.S. (SAVE)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On December 12, 1999, USAID signed a grant with SAVE to provide US$2.391 million to 
implement a program entitled “Basic Infrastructure, Economic Reactivation and Disaster 
Mitigation & Preparedness Program. The three main components of the grant are Economic 
Reactivation (ECOFAMI), Basic Infrastructure Rehabilitation (CAMINOS), and Disaster 
Preparedness & Mitigation (MITIPRE).
The activities of the ECOFAMI component are agricultural rehabilitation through: soil and water 
conservation, agroforestry, basic grain production, household gardens, improved post-harvest 
storage, and small-scale poultry and pork production. Approximately US$1.0 million has been 
budgeted for this and is directed to 12,650 beneficiaries (2,500 families).
The CAMINOS component will focus on repair and reconstruction of rural roads and bridges 
which will reopen access to markets and services such as health and education. This activity has 
a budget of US$1.1 million, and is expected to benefit up to 75,000 people (17,500 fam ilies).
The third component, MITIPRE, includes training of local residents in disaster preparedness, early 
warning systems, and coordination among the several GON and NGO organizations that would 
be called upon to provide assistance in an emergency situation. US$351,000 has been budgeted 
for this component.
A separate PL 480 Title II grant has been awarded to finance some administrative costs of 
REIMPRE and provide food for the Food for Work activities.
2.0 FINDINGS
2.1 ECOFAMI
2.1.1 Soil & Water C onservation
Soil and water conservation appear to have two interrelated actions. One is the removal of debris 
(rocks, trees, etc.) from land that can be restored to some level of productivity in a cost-effective 
manner. The second is a program of maintaining the productivity of the fields through soil 
conservation and water management techniques such as contour planting, live barriers, dike 
construction, etc. This gets at the need to sustain economic gains that are derived from 
agriculture, although this idea was not always apparent in conversations with beneficiaries. 
2.1.2 Agroforestry
Agroforestry had three functions in the SAVE program. First was reforestation that could lead to 
the production of trees for fuelwood or construction. The second was to provide some form of 
income from lands which were too damaged by erosion to be restored economically. An example 
of this would be the planting of trees between rocks and other debris. The third function involved 
planting fruit trees (banana, papaya, avocado, citrus, etc.) near the family home to provide a more 
varied an nutritious diet, as well as a potential source of income through the sale of the 
production. 
2.1.3 Basic Grain Production
Restoration of basic grain production centers on a program of providing certified seed of the most 
common basic grains (maize, sorghum, beans) through a revolving fund mechanism. Producers 
repay in seeds to a community-based seed bank. Although significant improvements in 
production were expected during the Primera , the drought drastically reduced the harvest. The 
current outlook is for a much-improved harvest of the Postrera, in light of the current rains and soil 
moisture. Seed germination and initial vegetative growth should be very good to excellent. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 57
2.1.4 Household Gardens
Like fruit tree production, household gardens often serve a dual purpose, i.e., improve household 
diet and improve household income. Several beneficiaries mentioned that the lack of water, 
either rainfall or irrigation limited the productivity of household gardens during the dry times of the 
year. 
2.1.5 Post Harvest Storage
Beneficiaries who used traditional storage techniques reported significant post-harvest losses in 
basic grains – estimates ranged up to 50%. Those inter viewed saw the metal silos as the best 
solution to the problem.
2.1.6 Small-Scale Poultry & Pork Production
The small-scale domestic animal production element was generated by a survey that indicated 
protein consumption in the targeted households had declined during the post-Mitch period. SAVE 
saw this element of the ECOFAMI project as providing both improved diets and incomes.
SAVE has implemented an implementation strategy that is different from those observed 
elsewhere. They only provide the poultry, but not any concentrate or other features. They 
believe that the only way to successfully achieve the continuing impact of improved diet and 
income begins with selecting appropriate beneficiaries. SAVE selects only those for whom the 
introduction of the animals will not result in competition for food with the family’s need. Therefore, 
the participants should be able to provide the necessary locally made concentrate from the outset.
Several beneficiaries mentioned that they would like to receive additional support with the food for 
the poultry until the birds become economically productive.
2.2 CAMINOS
2.2.1 Bridges
One site was visited where Food for Work was being utilized to improve a section of a road that 
was impassable during the rainy season, as well as construct a drainage culvert to allow drainage 
along a natural course. It was evident that the road reconstruction would be totally incomplete 
without this structure.
2.2.2 Roads
The site visited contained a drainage construction work and an improvement of about 2.5 km. of 
road surface. A key piece of the road improvement was the section just before the drainage 
culvert and the principal road. Beneficiaries said that this section, which turned into pure mud 
with the rain, cut off access to the community, as well as access by the community to health care 
and other services. The improvements being done would solve this problem.
This Food for Work activity involves two shifts: the first from 6:00 AM to 12:00 PM, the second 
from 1:00 to 7:0 0 PM.
A second access road was being opened on a much less technical level. Previously the 
community had only a footpath that wandered through neighboring fields and crops. The local 
producers had donated the land for a road on the condition that the program install fencing along 
its borders to avoid trespass by livestock.
2.3 MITIPRE
An overview of the MITIPRE element was given is the SAVE office in Leon. Because it is not an 
income generating activity, no follow-up discussions of it were held with beneficiaries in the field. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 58
2.4 Other Findings
Several beneficiaries interviewed had micro-enterprise activities in addition to their agricultural 
production and marketing. Some had oxen, which they rented out for plowing neighbors’ fields. 
Payment was often in work, i.e., two days labor for one day of plowing. A day’s labor with a team 
was six hours (5:00 AM - 11:00AM), as the oxen could not be worked for longer than that per day.
Several beneficiaries noted that low prices were inhibiting additional investment. One even felt 
that it would be hard to make much economic headway, given the resources and conditions in 
which they were living. This was in marked contrast with other beneficiaries interviewed who 
expressed optimism about the future.
Although not a direct income generating initiative per se, SAVE has estimated that 15-20 
workdays are lost per year due to illness. They estimate that it is probably higher for women, as 
they lose additional time as they must also care for sick family members.
3.0 CONCLUSIONS
In terms of the agreement as signed by SAVE and USAID, the program is moving forward pretty 
much as envisioned, and the quality of the interventions visited is generally excellent.
The program includes wide gamut of implementation activities, and a varying beneficiary pool. 
What the beneficiaries have most in common is that they are all poor. 
The rotating fund based upon returning selected seeds for certified seeds contains several 
potential problems. First is the quality, including productivity, of the seed being returned. Beans 
are less a problem because they are a self-pollinating crop and therefore loss of productivity over 
time will be due primarily to a buildup of diseases within the seeds with each generation. 
Eventually production will begin to decrease and new certified seeds will need to be used.
The problem with maize is similar, because it too is open -pollinated. This means that it can lose 
its productivity with each successive generation. Experience in other places has shown that new 
certified seed needs to be planted on a somewhat longer term, but periodic, basis. Sorghum may 
have similar constraints.
The quality of road construction observed in the field travel is much higher than that usually found 
with Food for Work or Cash for Work activities. The benefits of having some machinery (SAVE 
was using a mechanical compactor) is clearly demonstrated as an efficient application of 
resources. Better design will have a longer useful life and less maintenance costs per year than 
roads which are constructed solely by hand.
4.0 SUGGESTIONS
4.1 Short Term
1. SAVE could develop and apply a diagnostic instrument to identify geographical zones 
and beneficiaries who can respond to an income generation program to the extent that they will 
be moved significantly toward, and preferably above, the poverty line.
2. It could develop a methodology that can identify activities that have the greatest income 
potential for the beneficiaries involved. This should include an analysis of the target market or 
markets, and a strong cost/benefit analysis of any crop intervention contemplated. SAVE could 
collect cost of production and marketing data from a sample of beneficiaries to determine 
earnings potential. 
3. Broaden crop interventions to include those which have the best potential for producing 
income. Examples of this include coffee in other areas, and higher value options for family 
gardens, e.g., herbs, yucca, papaya, pitahaya etc.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 59
4.2 Long Term
1. SAVE could explore the possibility of expanding local commercial sources of agricultural 
inputs and equipment. One way would be to work with local merchants by supplying them with a 
list of items the beneficiaries will need. The project could then provide some form of coupon to 
the beneficiaries which they could use to purchase inputs and small hand tools, including 
grinders, from local merchants.
2. As noted in the Conclusions section above, there will be a periodic need to replace 
seeds, and SAVE should not be in the business of attending to that need. The benefit/cost 
analysis should identify the actual cost of the certified seeds, and the beneficiaries should cover 
this cost from their production. Typically, improved seed does not constitute a major element in 
the cost of production, especially when the benefits of those seeds are factored in. Then instead 
of a repayment to a community seed bank, the project could use the repayment as part of the 
ration for a safety net program, including Food for Work or Cash for Work activities.
3. Because the best information at this time indicates that less financing will be available for 
follow-on programs, SAVE needs to focus on those activities with the greatest income generating 
potential in their next effort.
4. SAVE should review its in-house expertise vis-a-vis an income generating program, and 
make decisions regarding what staffing changes are required. They also need to include the 
technical knowledge which is already available in other agencies such as colleague PVOs, GON 
agencies, private sector companies, and other sources, e.g., Winrock, Chemonics, etc., as well as 
the experiences gained by other SAVE programs throughout the world.
WORLD RELIEF
1.0 INTRODUCTION
World Relief (WR) is implementing its Hurricane Mitch Agricultural Reactivation Project in fourteen 
municipalities of the Departments of Las Segovias (Ocotal and Quilalí) and Wiwilí. The project 
builds on previous WR USAID and non-USAID projects in agriculture and credit. The project is a 
two year, $6.366 million activity, with some counterpart funds from WR.
The goal of the project is to enable small farm families to recover from the damage of Hurricane 
Mitch and prevent future damage by sustainably restoring farmland and production, post-harvest, 
and marketing capital. It has three components: 1) small farmer appropriate 
technology/demonstration/training and technical assistance; 2) recovery of crop collection and 
marketing services through the distribution of inputs and supplies and the provision of agricultural 
credit; and 3) the creation of agricultural collection and marketing centers ( centros de acopio). To 
make agricultural gains sustainable over the mid term, the project proposes to strengthen a local 
non-governmental organization called Pueblos in Acción Communitaria (PAC).
The project proposes to work with 5,600 men and 2,500 women heads-of-household. In its June 
quarterly report, the project reported reaching fifty eight percent (58%) of its target for men and 
forty three percent (43%) of its target for women.
Production activities involve a number of sub-components. To be discussed are: basic grain 
production, crop diversification, coffee production, vegetable production, animal production and 
irrigation. Storage of basic grains will be discussed, as will soil conservation and agroforesty 
activities. 
The cross-cutting methodology in all WR agricultural production activities is community 
organization and will not be discussed, though this activity frequently takes a great deal of
extension agent time. It should be recognized that the success or failure of a given activity 
frequently depends on this activity as much as on any other single factor. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 60
Most if not all of these activities are meant to be repaid in kind or in cash into WR credit system. 
Given its importance, this subject will be addressed in its own section.
2.0 AGRICULTURAL FINDINGS
2.1 Basic grain production
World Relief’s program does a lot of work with improved seed, primarily maize and beans. The 
methodology of the activity has been to finance the farmers with an in -kind loan of certified seed, 
and to recoup the grain at harvest at a ratio of 2:1 or 1:1. The improved seed frequently comes 
from the USAID improved seed program. 
Fertilizer loans to accompany th e planting are an important part of the activity. The value of the 
fertilizer is taken out as a loan and the commodity delivered to the farmers at farm gate at below￾market price. A price differential of C$/ 20 per hundredweight was reported by many farmers 
compared to market prices, perhaps reflecting WR’s bulk purchasing power. The value of the 
loan is to be repaid to WR upon harvest. During the field observations, it was noted that the 
demand for fertilizer to complement distributed seed was quite high. 
Results of the seed/fertilizer loan package have been problematic in some crop zones. 
Input/output crop analysis conducted by World Relief indicate that cultivation of basic grain with 
fertilizer in dry zones is not an economic proposition at small farm level: harvests are subject to 
too many environmental and climatic variables to be worth the risk. During the recent Primera
(spring) season, a substantial number of farmers interviewed indicated that they lost their entire 
basic grains crop and, thus, are now significantly in debt to World Relief because of the fertilizer 
debt. In areas that receive more rain, the relationship between input and output was reported by 
field staff more favorably but the data could not be confirmed during this trip.
World Relief/Managua had previously established guidelines that recommended that fertilizer not 
be distributed (loaned) to farmers for basic grains in dry zones, and field staff were cognizant of 
that recommendation. However, these guidelines were ignored in the case of farmers who had 
adequate collateral to cover the value of a fertilizer loan. One (well-off) farmer reported owing 
over C$/ 15,000, (US$ 1,170), considerably over the normal limit for a WR loan, because he had 
pledged household assets as security on the loan.
World Relief reports that it distributed the seed/fertilizer loans, (perhaps against its better 
judgement?) after receiving encouragement from USAID and the GON to respond to the Primera
drought in this fashion. It also reports that much of the inputs that went out for basic grains was 
through a program with the Ministry of agriculture including bonos (incentives) for planting, 
managed outside its regular credit portfolio.
2.2 Crop diversification and vegetable production
During the field visits, plants of cacao, fruit trees, pineapple, vegetables and tomato were seen 
growing in the field. In areas where the assessment team did not visit, WR reports that it also 
promotes other alternative high-value crops: apples, raspberries, blackberries, peaches and 
macadamia in the high areas as alternative to coffee; and plantain, cinnamon, allspice, black 
pepper, nutmeg, cloves and other fruits in the low areas. 
2.3 Coffee production
WR is working on a substantial scale in coffee. The bulk of the activity is in providing improved 
seedlings: on scale for coffee plantations, as garden cultivation, and as part of soil conservation 
activities. 
There are two loan packages for coffee, one for financing replacement of old trees and fertilizer 
(renovación) and cash financing to cover a farmer’s cash needs at harvest time for harvest labor 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 61
costs and others. Other coffee loans are provided for coffee de-pulpers, motors, pumps, etc. The 
value of credit in the World Relief portfolio dedicated to coffee is significant: approximately 
twenty-five percent (25%) of beneficiaries are coffee growers while the value of money loaned to 
coffee growers is approximately sixty-five percent (65%) of total money loaned.
2.4 Vegetative propagation
World Relief has three farm resources centers, one in Las Sabanas in Somoto, a highland area; 
one in Quilalí, an intermediate area; and one in Wiwilí, a humid lowland area. These centers 
serve as demonstration sites for training events and also as a source of much of the vegetative 
material that is distributed to farmers: vetiver plants, agroforestry seedling, improved coffee 
seedlings, pineapple rhizomes and others. 
2.5 Animal production
Animal production activities seem to be taking place here and there in WR areas. One women 
reported receiving a loan for four cows, another man reported receiving a loan for bull. The 
activity does not appear to be a significant part of the WR portfolio.
2.6 Irrigation
World Relief is experimenting with various irrigation technologies. One mechanized pump/drip 
irrigation system was visited where the farmer reported a C$/ 23,000 ($1,800) harvest of 
tomatoes on one-half manzana, more than enough to pay off the value of the irrigation system 
with one crop. The drip irrigation system was noteworthy in that it consisted of low-technology 
using easily available vinyl tubing with holes screwed in by hand.
WR is also constructing mini-irrigation systems to benefit quarter -manzana-or-less parcels of 
vegetable cultivation by women. It was unclear the extent of these interventions, and the one 
system inspected showed somewhat low -quality work in the captación , indicating the need for 
more WR supervision. WR also reports that it has experimented with other irrigation technologies 
and that costs ranged in the $1,500 per manzana range though none of these systems were 
visited. It appears that the WR experience in this sector should be encouraged.
2.7 Grain storage
Though activities in grain storage have been going on in Nicaragua for s everal years, and this 
component is not exclusively a WR activity, it appears to be one of the project’s dramatic 
successes. The activity involves the project’s providing a corrugated tin grain silo in various sizes 
with loan financing. Excepting farmers who lost the Primera harvest, the silos have produced 
significant economic return. There was a multitude of reports that price gains of over one 
hundred Cordobas were realized between maize that was kept off the market at harvest time 
when the price was C$/ 60 and sold several months later for C$/ 200 per hundredweight. World 
Relief included this finding in one of its quarterly reports and similar data were corroborated 
throughout the project area. In addition, farmers are unanimous that with appropriate drying and 
care of the silo-stored grain, crop losses have been reduced from up to fifty percent (50%) per 
crop to almost zero. Thus a quadruple gain is realized: twice the amount of grain available for 
sale and in many cases more than double the sales price. In addition to hundreds of farmers to 
whom silos have been sold, the assessment team interviewed several women who were 
successfully storing and selling grains and had received WR loans to begin the activity also. 
In addition, in several project areas WR took the innovative step of looking for an entrepreneurial 
artisan who had received training in silo manufacturing and loaned this man start-up capital so 
that he could produce more silos for WR farmers, thus contributing to the sustainability of the 
technology. A total of 695 silos have been distributed to farmers. 
Farmers who had a surplus last cropping season universally report reduction of post harvest loss 
going from forty or fifty percent to zero and gains in sales price of up to four hundred percent. 
Where the Primera drought erased any potential to store the harvest, such gains are still potential 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 62
rather than actual, but with any sort of favorable Postrera harvest, such gains will be achieved. In 
Cordobas, many farmers report several hundred percent gains in price per hundredweight stored, 
more than half the estimated annual income of (1998) C$/ 3876 of rural peasant farmers. This is 
a terrific achievement in improved family income and food security.
2.8 Soil conservation
Significant soil conservation structures are visible throughout the WR project area, including long 
stretches of vetiver and other grasses used as live barriers, live and dead barriers planted along 
the contour, water run-off ditches, sedimentation traps, pineapple used for soil retention, agro -
forestry species and others. A recently planted demonstration plot was visited in La Calera that 
was very well constructed and will prove a powerful learning site for farmers of the area. A similar 
demonstration site a little further up the road at Caliguate had been planted several years ago and 
had at least a dozen different soil conservation/ crop demonstration parcels under cultivation. Soil 
conservation is an activity with a long time frame, and the visible results of WR conservation 
activities dot the countryside and speak of long, careful work in this promotion. 
2.9 Other production issues/ (see Appendix B, Interview Guide, for format)
· Regarding programming philosophy , USAID’s focus on “income generation” fits World Relief’s 
preferred programming stance well. Senior WR staff report that it has proven slow for junior 
staff to break away completely from the “relief” syndrome and focus on farm profitability, an 
observation the assessment team tends to support.
· Regarding choice of agricultural interventions, approximately two-thirds of WR beneficiaries 
are focused on basic grain production via improved seed and fertilizer loans. This has proven 
a risk-filled choice of technology. Coffee producers form another quarter of the beneficiaries, 
and it appears that interventions in this crop are proving profitable. WR has a fifteen year 
programming horizon, and conceptualizes its role as working with farmers “where they are,” 
i.e., with farmers’ current cropping systems in the short term while engaging in promoting 
improved agricultural cropping systems and technology improvements over the mid and long 
term. 
· WR’s implementation methodology involves the organization in a number of direct service 
roles to beneficiary farmers: in the delivery of under-market priced inputs to the farmer; in 
provision of agricultural credit; in growing and distributing vegetative stock; and in the 
proposed processing (cleaning, drying, classifying, packing and storing) of coffee. Retention 
of coffee until prices rise is being considered as a future program component.
· In gender, because of its focus on basic grains World Relief’s program is substantially behind 
in reaching female beneficiaries. The loan portfolio, for instance, has distributed agricultural 
commodity loans of $ 248,000 to men, and only $ 21,600 to women, eight percent (8%). Its 
women’s beneficiary list is twelve percent (12%). This is a slow achievement compared to 
WR’s working with men. 
· One major constraint the project faced was the drought during the 2000 Primera season that 
wiped out almost all of the basic grain production in some WR project zones, though 
reportedly the mid and lower zones were not as much affected. A second constraint has 
been slowness of farmers t o adjust to a new and tougher credit policy. In the opinion of the 
assessment team, the new policy is an appropriate one, even if farmer acceptance remains 
slow for some months. 
· Until now, the project has focused on crop storage at the individual level, and not yet for 
centralized cleaning, drying, classifying, packaging and storing basic grains, cocoa and 
coffee. Given that a large centro de acopio is being built for these purposes at Murra, this 
focus will change over the next year. It will be suggested that collection and drying activities 
to take place at Murra be evaluated carefully for their cost/benefit before large scale activities 
are undertaken.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 63
· Regarding gender issues in crop storage, the project may be in a position to be more 
influential i n targeting women’s involvement in grain storage.
3.0 AGRICULTURAL CONCLUSIONS
The World Relief project is on track in providing hurricane relief and rehabilitation to thousands of 
farmers, with clear potential to improve farmer income. The assessment team believes that 
improved income will eventually be achieved but the agricultural component should be adjusted in 
light of past experience. WR/Managua recommendations on the non-use of fertilizer for basic 
grain production in dry areas needs to be reinforced and applied without exception. 
4.0 AGRICULTURAL SUGGESTIONS
4.1 Stop financing fertilizer for basic grains in dry areas
From discussions with thoughtful WR senior staff, it is clear that the institution is convinced that 
fertilizer loans in dry ar eas for basic grain production are not appropriate. In spite of Head-office 
recommendations, basic grain/fertilizer loans were placed and some farmers have lost a 
significant sums of money. A policy of no fertilizer loans for basic grains should be promulgated 
immediately for dry zone cultivation. For intermediate and humid zones, a careful cost-benefit 
analysis should be conducted to ensure that adequate gains are being achieved. In the fact of 
vigorous farmer pressure against this idea, implementation will require clear commitment and 
enforcement to ensure the policy is applied.
4.2 Adjust the program to reach women participants more effectively
It would appear that there are a number of relatively easy ways in which more female 
beneficiaries could be reached. One would be to hire a high-powered female Sub-Coordinator to 
bring a higher institutional profile to the subject. Another would be for the project to research 
cattle and small animal financing and expand current activities in this sector directly to women. A 
special “credit window” could be created for women’s activities. WR reports that a successful 
strategy in other countries is targeting women’s loans for small commerce, food-making and sale, 
etc. It also seems easy to add to each (male) extension agent’s annual planning, a target of ten 
or fifteen women clients. Finally, it would appear that a number of small farm women in the 
Quemazón area have been trying to pay off fertilizer/basic grain loans for several years, only to 
dig themselves deeper into debt. One suggestion would be that the project write off these loans 
when the loss is clearly due to crop failure.
4.3 Continue the emphasis in post-harvest storage and irrigation
The project is having significant success in the promotion of post-harvest grain storage, with 
substantial gains in farmer income accruing as a result. It does not appear to the assessment 
team, however, that project staff are fully appreciative of how much an impact they are having. It 
is appropriate that the organization do a random sample qualitative/quantitative evaluation that 
could documents these substantial gains. It also seem useful that an ambitious programming 
target could continue —perhaps with the slogan “a silo in every house?” — and maximize the 
gains this component has achieved.
In like fashion, it is possible that the irrigation activities, if strengthened, could have a larger 
impact on a number of farm families. The number of WR beneficiaries working in agricultural 
production (basic grains) is probably ten times those working in improved agricultural 
infrastructure, and a better balance might achieve quicker results. 
4.4 Bring a better balance to the credit directed to coffee production compared to 
other project components
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 64
Coffee credit is over-balanced compared to other program components. Implementation of some 
of the suggestions above would direct more project resources to non-coffee activities and to give 
non-coffee growing areas a better chance to access project financing.
4.5 Drop the attempt to finance agricultural extension services through credit 
recuperation
The World Relief document proposes that a portion of the interest generated on agricultural loans 
as well as charging for various agricultural services will be used to finance the agricultural 
extension and technical assistance functions provided by the project. The assessment team 
knows of no experience in the developing world where this has been achieved successfully and 
suggests that WR programming be allowed to move away from this laudable, but highly 
unrealistic goal. It seems quite appropriate to envisage that the WR program “subsidy” take the 
form of WR’s assuming financial responsibility for extension staff salaries, rather than trying pay 
for agricultural extension from low-margin, peasant farmer loans. It will be difficult enough for the 
loan portfolio to achieve sustainability without this added financial drain.
4.6 Establish a special credit window to finance free -market agricultural 
suppliers
It is possible for WR to strengthen market mechanisms. One fertilizer dealer has a limited 
working capital, reducing his ability to stockpile fertilizer; and a WR loan to enable him to expand 
his volume would benefit WR farmers at the same time as improving the income of this merchant. 
In like fashion, WR could begin thinking of “decentralizing” the growing of vegetative stock and 
buying from selected growers or suppliers rather than growing the materials on its own. 
4.7 Build more on project successes
The assessment team has the impression that project staff do not appreciate how much the 
project is achieving, and they may not know how to exploit the gains. Silos have been mentioned 
above. Several irrigation schemes have had dramatic success but have not been widely 
divulged. Also, extension workers seem to be directing their attention to the whole community 
rather than dedicating time to working with the most energetic and proactive farmers. Working 
with fewer but more energetic or forward-thinking farmers might allow the project to produce more 
economic impact faster.
4.8 Re-orient the project’s long-term goals and sustainable impact
Soil conservation activities bring long-term benefits rather than producing short term gains in 
income. Given WR’s fifteen year development horizon, short-term production and infrastructure 
activities have the potential to satisfy farmers’ basic needs over the short term while working to 
improve the sustainability of long term agricultural gains. A clear articulation of World Relief’s 
programming philosophy in terms of “strategic plan”—e.g. 2 to 3 years focused on short-cycle 
crops and soil conservation followed by 3 to 6 years involvement in long term gains -- might help 
field staff conceptualize their roles, interventions and impact better.
5.0 AGRICULTURAL MARKETING & COMMERCIALIZATION 
5.1 Findings
World Relief initiated a new project component in July 2000 by hiring two agricultural marketing 
and commercialization technicians for Ocotal and Quilalí. The project plans to hire a third 
marketing person for Wiwilí. The marketing component is complementing and strengthening 
advances being made in agricultural production and storage and seeks to work with both 
producers and project agricultural extensions to:
· Gather and disseminate marketing and product price information;
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 65
· Provide technical assistance and training to both producers and other project staff on 
marketing information;
· Work with intermediaries and wholesalers in gathering pricing information and market 
demand for agricultural products;
· Assist farmers in preparing credit applications in response to market demand and 
price fluctuations;
· Assist farmers on how to price and sell products;
· Improve quality control and presentation;
· Conduct diagnostic studies on potential new agricultural markets and products that 
could be introduced to the farmers, how to price and sell these new products, etc.; 
and 
· Respond to both farmers and project extension agents’ requests with specific 
technical assistance in matters concerning marketing and commercialization 
problems and interventions.
The marketing specialists are preparing and distributing “Boletines Agro Economicos” every two 
weeks that include price information (for both the producer and the buyer) on basic grains, 
vegetables, fruits, milk products, etc. The bulletin also includes market commentary, identifies 
markets where the demand exceeds supply, and the general movement of product into marketing 
centers. The project has also prepared studies in the “Market Analysis of Black Pepper, Nutmeg, 
Cinnamon, and Cloves in Nicaragua,” and a study on the “Profitability of Storing Basic Grains at 
the Small Farm Level”. The marketing specialists have organized and conducted training 
activities for farmer’s groups on pricing information and how to market farm products. Staff are 
presently completing the final statement of work for a market study on agricultural services.
During the visit of the assessment team, it was noted that project beneficiaries and extension 
agents identified the importance of marketing information and the need for the services of the 
marketing and commercialization specialists. The project is making a conscientious effort to 
engage the expertise of the CLUSA marketing component and other institutions on post harvest 
issues, marketing and commercialization. 
5.2 Agricultural Marketing and Commercialization Conclusions
The implementation of this new component is timely and should complement production, 
storage and marketing activities. The bulletins and diagnostic studies will serve to 
increase knowledge and understanding of market dynamics, pricing strategies and 
structures, opportunities and risks. Training activities being conducted and planned by 
the marketing team will provide useful and timely information to both producers and 
project agricultural extensionists.
5.3 Agricultural Marketing and Commercialization Suggestions 
· Continue the integration of the marketing and commercialization component with 
those of the agricultural extension and credit components ;
· The marketing and commercialization specialists have not seen a job descriptions 
and should be given a copy of this document;
· This component should develop an annual training plan and the training plan should 
be incorporated into the project’s overall training plan;
· Copies of the bi-weekly pricing and marketing bulletins should be distributed to 
farmers and community groups and reviewed by them with assistance from project 
extension agents;
· The marketing specialist should continue to engage outside technical expertise in 
marketing and commercialization available though the Chemonics ARAP project, 
CLUSA, the private sector and other institutions;
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 66
· The marketing specialist should arrange for exchange visits between producers within 
the project zone and other areas in the country where similar crops are being grown 
and sold;
· The marketing specialist should place a priority on identifying, implementing, and 
managing economic and income generating strategies and activities directed to 
women;
· The marketing specialist should conduct diagnostic studies and identify opportunities 
for the private and commercial sectors to conduct commerce and buy and sell goods 
and services with individual farmers and farmer’s groups;
· The project should provide the marketing staff with their own budget and also invest 
in training activities for the marketing staff to continue to develop their own expertise.
6.0 AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAM 
6.1 Credit Program Findings
According to the targets and actual figures contained in the Agricultural Reactivation Project 3rd
Quarterly Report of July 15, 2000 the project has loaned the following amounts.
Project Reporting Period: April 1, 2000 to June 30, 2000
Indicator Planned Targets
Name
Unit
19995
2000 2001
Prior 
Total
This 
Quarter
New 
Total
Number of # of Males 1500 2500 1459 591 2050
small 
producers 
assisted with 
USAID credit
# of Females 500 700 163 121 284
# loans to 
Males
Number of 2550 4080 1302 826 2128
loans 
disbursed to 
agricultural 
producers
# loans to 
Females
450 720 116 124 240
$ value of 
loans to 
males
$73,82
2
$511,631 $1,023,26
2
$148,10
9
$100,32
2
Dollar value of $248,431
loans 
disbursed to 
agricultural 
producers
$ value of 
loans to 
Females
$6,419 $44,489 $88,978 16,457 $5,144 $21,601
It is worth noting that World Relief is also using its own funds to finance credit activities in Ocotal, 
Quilalí, and Wiwilí with the dollar figure loaned up to August 30, 2000 as follows6
:
Description Amount $
· A.M # 634-1600 $103,487
· A.M # 740-2900 $135,297
Total $238,784
 
5
 The quarterly report did not include disaggregated information on the number of small producers with 
USAID financed credit or the number of loans disbursed to agricultural producers for the 1999 period up to 
the time of the report.
6
 Based on the World Relief Nicaragua financial report: “Indicadores de Cartera”, Creditos de Octubre 1999 
Cortados al 30 de Agosto 2000, and using an exchange rate of $1 US = C$/12.85 Cordobas
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 67
An analysis of the first table from data contained in the World Relief Third Quarterly Report 
concerning the number and amount of loans to women versus men from the last column “New 
Total” indicates that a relatively minor percentage of women 13.8% (284/2050) are being assisted 
with USAID financed credit. In addition, women only received 7.9% of the total loan portfolio 
disbursed in the column on “New Totals.” These percentages are generally congruent with the 
information contained in the “Planned Targets” column per the corresponding Indicators when 
disaggregated by gender.
Further, it is worth noting from the first table that a significant portion of the project total loan 
portfolio, 42% has been allocated as of June 30, 2000 based on total projections ($636,361) for 
the years 1999 and 2000 versus the “actuals”, $270,032, as found in the disaggregated column 
($248,431 + 21,601) New Total. Allowance has to be made, of course, as the reporting period 
was through June 2000 which essentially l eaves a significant portion of the year in which to make 
loans based on the agricultural calendar and credit demand. It is assumed that loans from the 
internal World Relief funded activities # 634-1600 and #740-2900 will also continue at roughly the 
same rate as reported above. Projections for loans, $1,112,240, in calendar year 2001 
essentially double from the $556,120 that is projected to be lent in 19997
. One can wonder if 
lending $1,112,240 in 2001 might be too ambitious an objective when one begins to take into 
account drought and other factors that could affect managing “reflows” and placing new credit. 
The financial information from the table does not include the monetized value of the “in-kind” 
loans that World Relief has made in this project.
From its reconstruction credit portfolio, World Relief is lending a considerable amount not in cash 
but in materials (fertilizers, pipe and hoses for irrigation, barbed wire, fumigation pumps, etc) that 
are stocked in its warehouses or bought wholesale and then loaned to farmers 8
. For example in 
Ocotal, a total of C$/1,627,025 Cordobas was lent. Of this amount, C$/ 807,077 Cordobas 
(49.6%) was lent in materials, and C$/ 819,948 Cordobas (50.4%) was lent in cash.
World Relief has also completed a credit m anual: “Reglamento Operative para Promocion y 
Administraction de los Servicios Financieros” as of June 2000. The manual is quite complete and 
serves as a good guide for the entire credit program. The project’s field promoters (includes 
hygiene/nutrition, irrigation, and agriculture extension agents in Ocotal, Wiwilí and Quilalí) are 
mostly men 80% (37 out of 46). Women promoters represent 20% (9 out of 46) of the total for 
this project activity. These promoters are also responsible for determining the credit needs in 
their respective communities and working with the farmers on credit issues. The job descriptions 
do not expressly identify agricultural promoters as supervising their respective credit portfolio to 
ensure high repayment rates, eliminate delinquency, etc.
The farmers often make their loan payments directly to the extension agents who give them a 
provisional receipt until the money is deposited with World Relief in the regional office. It is 
understood that World Relief presently serves as the banking institution for the credit program and 
that eventually PAC will assume responsibility for managing the credit program. There is no one 
responsible full time for managing the credit program in the Managua office—rather this 
responsibility is divided among individuals with other responsibilities. World Relief is in the 
process of transferring all loan portfolio information in Excel data bases to an Oracle data base 
which should have greater capability to provide financial data and analysis on loan performance, 
etc. The Quarterly reports do state the negative impact on the credit program from the drought 
that started last year Nov. and Dec. and extended into May/June 2000 and greatly affected basic 
grains in certain regions.
6.2 Credit Program Conclusions
The loan program is an important part of World Relief’s development approach and represents a 
significant resource for working with farmers to increase income. World Relief is initiating 
innovative farming activities in many areas: fruit trees, spices, drip irrigation, vegetable 
 
7
 It is assumed that these loan projections include “reflows” as well as new credit money.
8
 Based on information provided by the project’s credit official in Ocotal as of Sept. 27, 2000
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 68
production, increasing farmer’s choices in term of what to plant, etc. The credit program can 
support these activities at the farm level and beyond by:
· Establishing new supply mechanisms; 
· Strengthening existing free market supply systems; and
· Increasing farmer’s profit margins in the storage, marketing, and selling of agricultural goods 
and products.
6.3 Credit Program Suggestions
· Due to the importance and size of the credit portfolio, WR could consider conducting 
a comprehensive review of its loan portfolio to review accomplishments and develop 
a strategic plan for the future direction, personnel and institutional needs, and 
emphasis of the credit program in increasing farmer incomes. This review should 
include the long term sustainability of the credit program and the feasibility of 
working with the banking sector, promoting farmer access to the banking system9
;
· Increase the opportunities for rural women’s economic activities and dollar amounts 
loaned to them10
;
· Place a greater priority on the credit program by identifying someone with credit 
expertise full time at the national level to supervise and develop its full potential;
· Ensure that there is sufficient technical credit expertise on the national and regional 
level and credit committees;
· Continue to place emphasis on technical training in the area of credit (interest rates, 
pricing products, basic accounting, etc.) for farmers and the community level;
· Conduct a review of the role and functions of the Credit Officials at the regional 
office level to involve these persons more in supervising and ensuring good lending 
practices as outlined in the credit policy manual. Expand their role to ensure that the 
loan portfolio maintains a high re-payment rate;
· To maintain the value of the Cordoba in the credit portfolio, index the Cordoba 
against the dollar using the Central Bank’s official exchange rate figures;
· Weigh the alternatives of stopping lending materials in kind and make future loans in 
cash;
· Consider university qualified, (Business Administration, Accounting/Finance, or 
Economics) experienced credit extension agents to manage the credit11; and 
· Continue to closely monitor the credit portfolio, delinquency rates, re-flows, and the 
quarterly and yearly credit program credit objectives to meet Indicator targets. This 
will ensure that the highest lending standards are not lowered to meet projected 
lending targets, number of loans made, dollar amount of money lent, etc. If 
necessary, adjust the goals and targets of the Indicators to more accurately reflect 
 
9
 This suggestion for a comprehensive review is also linked to the following section on Pueblos en Accion 
Comunitaria (PAC) where the hiring of an Organizational Development specialist is proposed to assist 
World Relief and PAC sustainability. Ideally one person with both credit and organizational development 
skills could be contracted to perform both reviews.
10 The credit policy could be expanded so that loans be made to women in small commerce, food 
processing/transformation and selling, making clothing, and other cottage industries.
11 This would mean that that the current responsibilities whereby agricultural promoters are supervising the 
credit program would be transferred to credit specialists. Credit specialists also would need to become 
more active in working with the private and commercials sectors in encouraging and stimulating buying and 
selling of agricultural commodities, supplies, inputs, etc.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 69
cautious and prudent lending policies to ensure the highest quality loan portfolio 
possible by minimizing risks, delinquency, and default rates.
7.0 PUEBLOS EN ACCION COMUNITARIA (PAC) AND 
SERVICE/RESOURCE AND TRAINING CENTER 
7.1 PAC and Service Center Findings
An essential component of World Relief’s overall development strategy is to create a sustainable 
development organization. To this end, “Pueblos en Acción Comunitaria” was established in 
1996 as a counterpart organization to World Relief, with PAC eventually planned to be completely 
autonomous and self sustaining. PAC is intended to develop into regional and a national network 
of small producer rural women’s membership associations with a national directorship. World 
Relief has developed a long range strategy that covers a span of approximately 15 years in which 
to concentrate on the organizational development of PAC. 
Presently, World Relief is in the process of constructing several centros de servicio y acopio in 
Murra, Quilalí, and Wiwilí. Future plans are being made to construct other centers in Bocay, 
Condega, Plan de Gama, and Ocotal. World Relief is also building two centers for training 
activities: one for the high tropics in La Sabana; and, one for the low tropics in Wililí. It is 
estimated that each training center will be able to accommodate approximate 40 persons for 
training activities. The approximate total budget allocated to building and equipping these centers 
comes from three budget categories12
Investments Total AID Total World Relief
Infrastructure $889,271 $20,000
Productive Equipment $1,000,746 $285,978
Working Capital (Centers $988,804
& Farm Stores)
Land $130,500
Total $2,878,821 $436,478
The above figures do not represent actual costs but are illustrative in terms of the anticipated 
resource levels required for these and other important project investments. The amounts 
represent a significant commitment of project resources. The PAC is planned to eventually 
operate and mange the centros and the two training centers.
In interviews with farmers, World Relief field staff (administrators, supervisors, coordinators and 
extension agents) and the regional PAC Board of Directors, the assessment team b ecame aware 
how important it is that organizational development of PAC occur if future sustainability is to be 
achieved. It became clear that project staff and potential future beneficiaries were not fully aware 
of the potential operating costs of these centers, and the role and financial commitment of the 
PAC in operating them. The team felt that the depth of knowledge concerning the purpose and 
future of service centers planned and under construction will require greater promotion. 
Developing the PAC and transferring operations to such an organization is a long term process. 
7.2 PAC and Service/Resource and Training Center Conclusions
World Relief has placed a strong emphasis in this and its other USAID -funded activities to 
promote and assist with th e development of a local institution that will one day be fully 
 
12 “Summary Annual Operating Budget by Line Item, table N° VII 2.1 of December 31, 1999 from. Kevin 
Sanderson Country Director of World Relief to USAID. $300,000 was subtracted from the Infrastructure 
budget line item as this amount is expressly for improving roads. World Relief also intends to reduce the 
Productive Equipment budget line item by +/- $200,000 in its next budget presentation to USAID.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 70
sustainable. Requiring further study are the local demand for center services and PAC’s ability to 
manage the operating and fixed costs on a long term basis.
7.3 PAC and Service/Resource and Training Center Suggestions
WR could consider conducting a review by an Organizational Development consultant of the 
progress to date in establishing the PAC, and develop a strategic plan (with input from both World 
Relief and PAC) for the involvement o f the PAC in the operational and financial aspects of the 
service centers. This review could include a comprehensive assessment of the rural based 
demand and ability to pay for the range of services that the centers and farmer’s stores could 
potentially offer; and
WR could consider not constructing further centers beyond the three that are presently under 
construction in Murra, Quilalí, and Wililí until such time as the comprehensive study has been 
completed and analyzed within World Relief and PAC.
APPENDIX D
FIELD VISIT SCHEDULE
Team 1
World Relief 
Community Municipio Department
9/25 Guasuyuca Pueblo Nuevo Ocotal
Juan Alfaro Somoto Ocotal
WR Ocotal staff meeting Ocotal
9/26 Las Calabaceras Santa Maria
La Quemazón Santa Maria
La Calera Santa Maria
Caliguate Santa Maria
Dipilto Santa Maria
9/27 Murra Quilalí Estelí
Los Jabalíes Quilalí Estelí
Arenales Quilalí Estelí
WR Quilalí staff meeting Quilalí Estelí
Catholic Relief Services
9/28 Miramar Las Sabanas Somoto
Nueva Esperanza Las Sabanas Somoto
La Playa San Lucas Somoto
La Culebra San Lucas Somoto
9/29 Molino Sur Sébaco Matagalpa
El Rodeo Terrabono Matagalpaí
Apatú Terrabono Matagalpa
Carrizal San Isidro Matagalpa
El Corozo San Dionisio Matagalpa
Aguas Frias San Isidro Matagalpa
Soledad de la Cruz San Isidro Matagalpa
9/30 La Joya Jinotega Jinotega
El Cacao Jinotega Jinotega
TOTAL 25 site visits
Team 2
Project Concern International
Date Community Municipality Department
09/25 Quebrada Grande Yali Jinotega
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 71
Pavona Abajo Yali Jinotega
Gamalote Yali Jinotega
09/26 Las Calpules La Concordia Jinotega
La Esperanza La Concordia Jinotega
El Salto La Concordia Jinotega
Wiscanal La Concordia Jinotega
Adventist Development & Relief Agency
09/27 Muyuca Jicaro Nueva Segovia
Sandiego Jicaro Nueva Segovia
Carrizal Jicaro Nueva Segovia
El Arado Jicaro Nueva Segovia
El Calvario Murra Nueva Segovia
El Carmen Murra Nueva Segovia
El Doradito Murra Nueva Segovia
San Pablito Murra Nueva Segovia
Las Vitorias Murra Nueva Segovia
09/28 Los Arados Mozonte Nueva Segovia
Paso Hondo Pueblo Nuevo Esteli
El Carao Pueblo Nuevo Esteli
El Horno Pueblo Nuevo Esteli
Son Cuan Pueblo Nuevo Esteli
Save the Children
09/29 Sirama Sur Chichigalpa Chinandega
Los Zanjones Posoltega Chinandega
Cristo Rey Quezalguaque Leon
Las Marias Telica Leon
La Sirena Telica Leon
Los Patos Telica Leon
09/30 Tololar #2 Posoltega Chinandega
Tololar #3 Posoltega Chinandega
Pellizco Oriental Chichigalpa Chinandega
Pellizco Occidental Chichigalpa Chinandega
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 72
Cosmapa Chinandega Chinandega
TOTAL 32 site visits
Team 3
CLUSA
Date Community/Organization Municipality Department
9/25 Cigarera Jinotega
Las Segovias Jinotega
9/26 Yali San Rafael del 
Norte
Jinotega
La Esperanza Leon
9/27 Los Chaquitones Jinotega
Santa Isabel Jinotega
Paso Real Jinotega
9/29 La Grecia #2 Chinandega
La Grecia #1 Chinandega
Carlos Perez Lira Chinandega
Bayardo Chavez Chinandega
CARE
Date Community/Organization Municipality Department
9/28 Trinidad -Las Limas Los Toldos Esteli
San Nicolas-Santa Clara San Nicolas Esteli
9/30 Santa Marta Posoltega Chinandega
Las Lajas Posoltega Chinandega
Total 15 site visits
APPENDIX E 
Interview List
USAID/ Nicaragua
Mr. Ray Baum, Chief, Office of Economic & Rural Development
Ms. Lilliam Baez, Office of Democratic Initiatives
Mr. Roberto Berrios, Office of Economic & Rural Development
Mr. Paul Crawford, Office of Economic & Rural Development
Mr. Leonard Fagot, Office of Economic & Rural Development
Dr. Efrain Laureano, Office of Strategic Management & Assessment
Mr. Tomás Membreño, Mitch Coordinator
Adventist Development And Relief Agency
Mr. Anthony Stahl, Country Director
Mr. José María Briones, Director of Agricultural Programs
Mr. Cristian Chaverría, Infrastructure Projects Supervisor
Mr. Darcy de Leon, Director of Evaluation
Mr. Rodolfo Henriquez, Director of Programming
Ms. Ileana Torres, Administrative Assistant
Mr. Roberto Villegas, Agriculture Programs Supervisor
Mr. Domingo Henriquez, beneficiary in Muyuca
Ms. Silvia Lira, beneficiary in Muyuca
Mr. Eriberto Fuentes, beneficiary in Sandiego
Mr. Bernardo Fuentes, beneficiary in Sandiego
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 73
Mr. Patroinio Escalante, beneficiary in Sandiego
Ms. Guadalupe Rizo, beneficiary in Carrizal
Mr. Leonel Moncada, beneficiary in Carrizal
Mr. Francisco Salcedo, beneficiary in El Arado
Mr. Miguel Gomez, beneficiary in Los Arados
Mr. Juan Sanchez, beneficiary in Los Arados
Mr. Rafael Marin, beneficiary in Los Arados
Ms. Esperanza Ponce, beneficiary in Paso Hondo
Mr. Lucan Benavides, beneficiary in El Carao
Mr. Alejandro Zamora, beneficiary in El Carao
Mr. Juan Casco, beneficiary in El Horno
Mr. Jose Angel Lopez, beneficiary in Son Cuan
Mr. Jorge Cruz, beneficiary in El Calvario
Ms. Margarita Herrera, beneficiary in El Carmen
Mr. Baudulio Lagos, beneficiary in El Doradito
Mr. Porfirio Palma, beneficiary in San Pablito
CARE International
Mr. John Veerkamp-Deputy Director
Mr. Daniel Cortez-Manager, Posoltega Agricultural Program
Mr. Francisco Colorado-Technical Advisor
Ms. Lisetth Diaz-Community Liaison Officer
Mr. Porferio Herrera-Regional Director, Esteli
Mr. Felix Jimenez-Program Coordinator
Mr. Rainev Manolo Parales-Technician
Ing. Juan Ramon Villanueva-Road Technician
Mr. Juan Ramon Villareyna-Technician
Lic. Basilio Reyes Bendon-Councilman, San Nicolas
Road Crews
Trinidad-Las Limas-3 groups, 10 people
San Nicolas-Santa Clara -3 groups, 8 people
Farmers
Santa Marta, 1 farmer
Las Lajas, 2 farmers
Catholic Relief Services and Implementing Sub-Grantees
Mr. Lutful Gofur, Deputy Director, CRS
Ms. Martha Regina Borrell, Sub-D irector Credit Program CRS
Ms. Sixta Inez Garcia, Director Credit Program, CRS
Mr. Orlando Moncada, Director Agriculture Program, CRS
Mr. Santos Palma, Agriculture Director Zone I, CRS
Ms. Marla Tomino, Sub-Director Credit Program, CRS
Mr. Marco Zeledón, Agriculture Director Zone II, CRS
Ms. Bertha Lidia Baez, Técnico Agrónoma, CARITAS Matagalpa
Mr. Jacabo Casanova Fuentes, Coordinator CARITAS Matagalpa
Mr. José García, Ag. Extensionist, CARITAS Matagalpa
Ms. Elda Manna Gutierrez, Marketing Advisor, Rural Credit Program, CARITAS Matag.
Mr. Alejandro Hernandez, Supervisor Rural Credit Program, CARITAS Matagalpa
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 74
Mr. Arlen Jose Hernandez Perez, Supervisor Revolving Fund Loan Program, CARITAS 
Matagalpa
Ms. Maria Jose Valdivia, Director of Credit Loan program, CARITAS Matagalpa
Mr. Luis Molina, Loan Coordinator, CARITAS Jinotega
Ms. Amparo Pérez Baldivia, Loan Coordinator, CARITAS Jinotega
Mr. Ronmer Rivera, Agricultural Coordinator, CARITAS Jinotega
Mr. Roger Torres, Ag. Extentionist, CARITAS Jinotega
Ms. Janette Hernandez, Promotor Mira Mar, INPRHU
Mr. Edelberto Manadaga, Credit Promotor, INPRHU
9 women farmers from the community of Mira Mar
8 men and women farmers from the community of Nueva Esperanza
6 members of Board of DirectorsRevolving Fund Loan Progr. community of Molino Sur
6 members of Board of Directors of Credit Program from the community of Molino Sur
6 members of Board of Director of Ag. program from the community of El Rodeo
8 members of the community of Apatú
8 members of the community of Las Joyas
Mr. Selso Susa Hernández, Ag. Promoter, Apatú
Mr. José Luis Laguna, Ag. Promoter, Carrizal
Cooperative League of the USA
James Cawley-Vice-President for International Operations
Peter Fraser-Mitch Program Manager
Donald Richardson-Credit Component Manager
Carlos Sanchez Perez-Production Manager
Mike Schwartz-Coffee Quality Component Manager
Rob Walle-Zamorano Watershed Management Component
Julio Centeno-Production Technician, Jinotega
Danilo Daxila -Agro-business Technician, Jinotega
Edwin Fletes-Production Technician, Jinotega
Juan Francisco Martinez-Training Coordinator, Esteli
Esteban Ortega-Agro-business Technician, Chinandega
Luis Sonarriba-Training Coordinator, Chinandega
Guillermo Toruno-Agro-business Technician, Jinotega
Pedro Vargas-Production Technician, Chinandega
El Gorrion Multiple Service Cooperative-Yalí
Otoniel Rodriguez-President
Antonio Castillo-Vice-President
Ana Maria Castillanos-Treasurer
La Esperanza Coffee Processing Plant-La Esperanza
Javier Mejia-President
Roberto Mejia-Buying Agent
Alonso Mejia-Plant Manager
Cooperative Business International-Coffee Importers
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 75
Robert Badington-Smith-Regional Manager
Cooperatives/Farmer Organizations
Coffee
Los Chaguitones-10 members
Santa Isabel-5 members
Paso Real-5 members
Soy Beans/Sesame
La Grecia # 1-3 members
La Grecia # 2-3 members
Carlos Perez Lira-5 members
Bayardo Chavez-6 members
Project Concern International
Dr. Leonel Arguello, Country D irector
Dra. Elba Matamoros Montenegro, Monitoring & Evaluation Coordinator
Mr. Mario Quintana, Food Aid Director
Mr. Alejandro Rizo, President of Quebrada Grande Community Board and other 
community members
Mr. Arturo Canales, farmer in Pavona Abajo
Mr. Isidro Arauz, President of Gamalote Community Board and women beneficiaries of 
the poultry activity 
Mr. Doroteo Zeledon, President of Los Calpules Community Board and agricultural 
program beneficiaries
Meeting with the program beneficiaries in the community, La Esperanza
Ms. Maria Lourdes Blandon, President of the Wiscanal Community Board and women 
beneficiaries of the poultry activity
Save The Children USA
Mr. Swaleh Karanja, Country Director
Mr. Javier Lacayo Salaverry, REIMPRE & Food Security Program Manager
Mr. Winston Montiel, CAMINOS Project Manager
Mr. Eddy Ochoa, Finance Manager
Mr. Ronald Torres Prado, ECOFAMI Project Manager
Ms. Darling del Rosario, Director CENI in Sirama Sur
Mr. Juan Blandon, beneficiary in Sirama Sur
Mr. Jesus Munguia, beneficiary in Los Zanjones
Mr. Pedro Moran, beneficiary in Cristo Rey
Mr. Domingo Lopez Perez, beneficiary in Los Mangles
Ms. Luby Maltez, Supervisor of road project in La Sirena and group of beneficiaries 
working in a Food for Work program
Beneficiaries in Food for Work program repairing road in Los Patos
Ms. Erlinda Gonzalez, beneficiary in Tololar #2
Mr. Gerald Paredes, beneficiary in Pellizco Oriental
Mr. Angel Romero, beneficiary in Pellizco Oriental
Mr. Marcos Antonio Perez, supervisor of road project in Pellizco Occidental
Mr. Eufemio Baca, beneficiary in Pellizco Central
Ms. Guadalupe Baca, beneficiary in Pellizco Central
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 76
Mr. Juan Carlos Davila, beneficiary in Pellizco Central
World Relief
Mr. Kevin Sanderson, Director
Mr. Rafael Flores, Coordinator Region I
Mr. Pedro Gutierrez, Regional Coordinator for Ocotal, Wililí, Quilalí
Mr. Mario Perez, Sub-Director and Executive Director of Pueblos en Accion 
Communitaria (PAC)
Ms. Jamileth Alavarez, Agronomo, Sta. Maria
Mr. Oscar Danilo Cardoza, Agronomo, Jicar o
Mr. Eddy Espinosa, Director of Marketing and Commercialization— Quilalí
Mr. Jerry Casco Hernandez, Credit Official, Ocotal
Mr. Eugenio Lorento, Sub-Cordinator, O
Mr. Edwin Lazo, Director of Marketing and Commercialization, Ocotal
Mr. Julio Mendez Casco, Coordinator, Ocotal
Mr. Pedro Rodas Calero, Agronomo, Dipilto
Mr. Arles Perez, Agronomo, Murra
Mr. Pedo Pablo Ruas, Sub-Coordinator, Conodega
Ms. Leda Isabel Talavera, Administrator, Ocotal
Mr. Gregorio Martinez Rios, President, Ocotal Region PAC Board of Directors
Mr. Pedro Joaquin Perez, Treasurer, Ocotal Region PAC Board of Directors
Mr. Mauricio Lopez, Coffee Farmer, Dipilto
Ms. Sandra Ardon Sandoval, Credit Officer, Quilalí
Mr. Ernesto Rodriguez Rivera, Coordinator, Quilalí
Ms. Mercedes Moreno Zelaya, Administrator, Quilalí
10 men and women farmers from the community of Guasuyuca
6 women vegetable/ irrigation beneficiaries from the community of Las Calabaceras
6 men and women farmers from the community of Quemazón
1 soil conservation women in Caliguate
1 coffee farmer in Los Jabalíes
6 farmers from the community of Arenales
APPENDIX F
BIBLIOGRAPHY
USAID
· Results Framework and Indicators, Hurricane Mitch Reconstruction Results 
Framework (SpO2), September 16, 1999
· Terms of Reference; Support to USAID Nicaragua Partners in Implementation of 
Hurricane Mitch Funded Activities
· Office of Enterprise and Rural Development; Annual Program Statement (APS) ; 
January 22, 1999
· Overview and Factors Affecting Program Performance, Hurricane Mitch 
Reconstruction Program.
· USAID/Nicaragua, Small Producers Program, Briefing Paper.
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 77
· Programmed Budget; SpO Results 2 and 3; April 6, 2000
· Eighteen Field Trip Reports from AID CT0s
· Memorandum from AID CO and CT0s to World Relief and CRS regarding feedback 
on Quarterly Reports
World Relief
· Auxilio Mundial Nicaragua y Pueblos en Accion Comunitaria; Plan de Evaluacion y 
Monitoreo; Proyecto de Restauracion Agricola Huracan Mitch; undated
· Auxilio Mundial Nicaragua y Pueblos en Accion Comunitaria; Reglamento Operativo 
Para Promocion y Administracion de los Servicios Financieros; Managua, Junio 2000
· Pueblos en Accion Comunitaria (PAC); Market Analysis of Black Pepper, Nutmeg, 
Cinnamon, and Cloves in Nicaragua; July 4, 2000
· AID—World Relief Cooperative Agreement; Sustainable Small Farmer Agricultural 
Services Projectt; September 28, 1999
· Untitled report on Post Harvest Storage; undated
· Hurricane Mitch Reconstruction Project; Annual Implementation Plan 1999-2000; 
December 31, 1999
· Quarterly Report; Hurricane Mitch Agricultural Reactivation Project; Quarter I; 
January 17, 2000
· Quarterly Report; Hurricane Mitch Agricultural Reactivation Project; Quarter II; 
April 5, 2000
· Quarterly Report; Hurricane Mitch Agricultural Reactivation Project; Quarter III; July 
15, 2000
· Auxilio Mundial Nicaragua y Pueblos en Accion Comunitaria; Estudio de Base para 
la Ampliacion del Proyecto Restauracion Agricola Huracan Mitch, Zona Norte
Catholic Relief Services
· Convenio AID—Catholic Relief Services; October 26, 1999
· Proyecto de Rehabilitation Agricola y Credito; Plan Operative 1999—2000; Zona I 
and Zona II; Septiembre 1999
· Agriculture and Credit Rehabilitation Project; Annual Operative Plan; September 
2000—August 2001; Managua, August 2000
· Proyecto de Rehabilitation Agricola y Credito en los Departamentos de Jinotega, 
Matagalpa, Madriz, Esteli, Leon, y Chinandega; Evaluacion del Periodo Octubre 99—
Junio 2000
· Agriculture Rehabilitation & Credit; Trimester Narrative Report: September to 
December 1999
· Agriculture Rehabilitation & Credit; II Quarterly Performance Report: January to 
march 2000
· Agriculture Rehabilitation & Credit; 3rd. Quarterly Performance Report: April to June 
2000
· Proyecto de Mercados Rurales Financieros y de Productos; Informe # 3—Abril –
Junio 2000; Julio 2000
· Estudio Linea de Base del Proyecto de Rehabilitation Agricola y Credito en los 
Departamentos de Jinotega, Matagalpa, Madriz, Esteli, Leon, y Chinandega; 
Realizado por el Equipo Consultor CONFOREST; 29 diciembre 1999
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AGRICULTURAL RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ASSESSMENT 78
· Proyecto de Rehabilitation Agricola y Credito; Sistema de Informacion Sobre Precios 
en la Comercializacion de los Productos Agropecuarios; Lic. Alba l. Pérez y Lic. 
Eduardo Díaz; Junio 2000
· Caritas Diocesana de Matagalpa; Programa de Desarrollo de Mercados Rurales 
Financieros y de Productos; Proyecto de Vinculos de Mercados; Elda M. Gutierrez, 
Justo P. Torrez, Alejandro Hernandez; Matagalpa Junio del 2000
· Caritas Diocesana de Matagalpa; Estudio de Mercado de Servicios Financieros en las 
Zonas Rurales del Departamento de Matagalpa; junio y Julio de 1999
CLUSA
USAID/CLUSA Cooperative Agreement, Agricultural Restoration and Economic 
Reactivation - Post Mitch, October 28, 1999.
CLUSA/Mitch Year One Work Plan, December 27, 1999.
CLUSA Partnering Project, Quarterly Reports, October-December, 1999, January-March, 
2000, April-June, 2000.
CLUSA/ATMA Minutes of USAID meetings of August 28 and August 31, 2000 with 
attached financial projections.
CARE
USAID/CARE Cooperative Agreement, Rural Infrastructure Rehabilitation/Cash-for￾Work Project, October 15, 1999.
USAID/CARE Cooperative Agreement, Project for the Management of the Esteli River 
Watershed, December 22, 1999.
USAID Modification of the Cooperative Agreement, Casita Volcano Agricultural 
Rehabilitation and Food Security Project, Municipality of Posoltega, Chinandega, 
December 28, 1999.
Request for Modifications of Project Objectives and Budget, Rural Infrastructure/Cash￾for-Work Project, June 28, 2000.
Informe Trimestral, Abril-Junio, 2000, Proyecto de Seguridad Alimentaria y 
Rehabilitacion Agricola de Posoltega.
Informe Evaluativo, Segundo Trimestre, Abril/Mayo/Junio, Programa de Agricultura y 
Recursos Naturales, Proyecto de Manejo de la Sub Cuenca del Rio Esteli PN 91.
Miscellaneous
· ARAP/Chemonics Intl.; Planting-Harvest Dates
· Captacion de Agua de Lluvia en el Hogar Rural; Ricardo Radulovich, Roduel 
Rodriguez, y Orlando Moncado; Centro Agronomico Tropical de Investigacion y 
Ensenanza (CATIE); Turrialba, Costa Rica, 1994