Close Out Report
SO 3 (Women’s Empowerment Program)
prepared for the General Development Office
USAID/Nepal
by Melissa Kassovic, Gender and Governance Advisor USAID/Nepal
February 2003
Introduction
The following document is the close out report for Strategic Objective 367-003 (SO 3), usually
referred to as the Women’s Empowerment Program, or WEP. WEP was successfully completed in 
September 2001. As described in ADS 203.3.7, a brief close out report must be prepared when an SO 
is completed; the report is intended to help staff of USAID and partner organizations to learn from the 
challenges and achievements of completed programs when planning or assessing other development 
activities. The body of this report includes the following eight chapters:
 I A Brief History and Description of the Women’s Empowerment Program
 II Evolution of the Results Framework
III Summary of the Overall Impact at the Strategic Objective Level and at the
 Intermediate Level [in Terms of What Was Originally Planned]
IV Major Activities and Outputs
V Evaluations of SO 3, Awards and Critical Appraisals
VI Sustainability – Prospects and Threats
VII Links between SO 3 and Other SOs
VIII Promising Practices and Lessons Learned
Additional information can be found in the annexes, which include details on the cost of the project 
(Annex A), a bibliography containing evaluations prepared during the SO and other sources consulted 
in the preparation of this report (Annex B), and a list of contact persons with additional information 
about WEP (Annex C).
1
I. A Brief History and Description of the Women’s Empowerment 
Program
In its entirety, the Women’s Empowerment Program (WEP) was a six-year effort by 
USAID/Nepal to increase empowerment, defined by the Mission as “the ability of 
women to make choices to improve their well-being and that of their families and 
communities”. The decision that such a program was needed was made in recognition of 
both the plight of rural women in Nepal and their importance in the nation’s 
development. According to Save the Children’s State of the World’s Mothers report for 
the year 2000, Nepal falls in the bottom ten of 106 nations in the status of its women, 
based on maternal mortality, use of contraception, births attended by trained personnel, 
anemia, literacy and role in national government. The traditional patriarchal culture 
dictates that women should be submissive, with little role in household or community 
decision making. Yet women are the backbone of the rural economy, responsible for 70 
percent of agricultural production in addition to their household chores. Outmigration of 
males in response to poverty and local insurgency has intensified the feminization of 
agricultural labor without a corresponding increase in the authority or status of women. 
A program was needed that addressed all these issues. 
 WEP occurred in two distinct phases, 1995-1997 (“first generation”) and 1998-2001 
(“second generation”). Most of this report is concerned with the second generation of 
activities, which included the distinctive features of the WEP program now being 
examined for their sustainability and replicability. However, a thorough consideration of 
the program must begin with the first generation activities, in which the themes of the 
program are already evident. (For another slant on the project’s history, see Chapter II, 
Changes in the Results Framework.)
The “first generation” of WEP represents action by the Mission to take existing programs 
which targeted women and incorporate them into a coherent program with a theme of 
empowering women at the local level. These ongoing interventions were implemented 
by nine partner organizations in the areas of literacy (six-month basic literacy classes), 
legal rights (three-month legal literacy classes) and economic participation (formation of 
savings and credit groups and training in income-generating skills). Over 400,000 
women were helped to become literate through these interventions; 87,000 women 
received basic legal literacy training; and 23,800 women were active members of savings 
and credit and development banks. Although none of these activities had been designed 
specifically to foster women’s empowerment, a 1997 study found that women who had 
participated in all three interventions initiated eight times more actions for social change 
than women who had participated in none, and participated 30% more in independent 
household decision making.
2
These results informed the design of the “second generation” of WEP. In particular, the 
interaction among all three interventions in the achievement of empowerment convinced 
the team that it was necessary to focus the project geographically (in 21 districts, 
primarily in the terai) to make it feasible to provide all interventions to all participants. It 
is easier to reach large numbers in a short time with literacy projects, but the decision was 
made to link all three interventions and commit to the longer time required to work with 
savings and credit and microenterprise projects.
Thus the “second generation” of WEP, which began with the signing of a Strategic 
Objective Grant Agreement (SOAG) with the Government of Nepal on September 16, 
1997, was designed as a fully integrated program. It was to be administered by two 
principal partners, Pact and The Asia Foundation, with the Ministry of Women, Children 
and Social Welfare as the line ministry. The decision was made to enroll women in 
existing economic groups with a minimum of twelve members. The goal was to reach 
120,000 women in three years. Most of the direct contact with WEP groups was to be 
carried out by 245 indigenous organizations, primarily local partner NGOs at the district 
level but including cooperatives, the Grameen Bank, Nirdhan (a Grameen bank 
replicator) and the UNDP-funded Parks and People. These local partners in turn hired 
over 800 Empowerment Workers to provide training and technical support to the groups, 
visiting each group at least twice a month.
The new integrated program had the explicit objective of Increased Women’s 
Empowerment, which was to be measured by increases in influence over household 
decision-making, spending on family well-being and collective actions for social change 
on the part of targeted women. The areas of intervention remained the same as in the 
“first generation”, but their integration was now deliberate, and the mode of 
implementation was designed to foster empowerment. Special literacy and post-literacy 
materials were created to foster group formation, legal literacy and economic 
participation.
Each member of an economic group was required to purchase (for approximately one 
third of its actual value) the basic literacy module in the Women in Business series; the 
monies thus collected became part of the group fund. In addition, group members were 
required to pay for additional instructional costs (such as lanterns and kerosene for 
classes meeting at night) and to identify a “literacy volunteer” from among the more 
literate members of the group or the community to act as an unpaid facilitator for the 
classes. These investments gave the group “ownership” of this portion of the project and 
may account in part for the extremely low drop-out rate from the classes and the high 
pass rate on the literacy exam given after the course was completed. The basic literacy 
text also contained information about group formation and messages about empowerment 
and group solidarity. The module was designed to be studied over six months, with the 
women meeting three times a week, but could be completed in as little as three months if 
classes met more often.
Some time after completing the basic literacy module groups were introduced to the 
rights, responsibilities and advocacy (RR&A) curriculum. This was a 24-week series, led 
3
by a trained facilitator; again, the group members purchased their own books at a 
subsidized rate. The first 14 weeks concerned women’s legal rights, while the last 10 
focused on advocacy techniques. The RR&A component thus provided relevant post￾literacy materials as well as giving the women the information necessary to conduct 
successful advocacy campaigns. These included social collective actions relating to 
issues affecting social and economic relations within the family or community (such as 
alcohol abuse, child marriage, polygamy or property rights) and physical collective 
actions relating to the installation, construction, repair or maintenance of physical 
structures (such as a water system, bridge or school). 
All participants belonged to existing economic groups. Throughout the program they 
made mandatory weekly savings contributions at a rate determined by the group. They 
also began to study the post-literacy texts in the Women in Business series, reinforcing 
their literacy and numeracy skills while learning about saving, borrowing and 
microenterprise. Those groups associated with existing cooperatives and Grameen banks 
went on to read about entrepreneurship and to save and borrow according to the rules of 
those organizations. The remaining groups also studied materials on village banking, a 
savings-based system developed under WEP in which the group extends loans to its 
members without recourse to outside sources of credit. The groups used their literacy 
skills to keep their own records of group financial activity.
Start-up time for the “second generation” was about a year. This is not excessive, given 
the size and complexity of the project and the decision to put into place a large 
Management Information System capable of monitoring WEP interventions in all 21 
districts. However, it meant that actual work in the field did not begin until 1999; the 
original duration of the project was only until 2000. Termination at that time would have 
meant inadequate support for fledgling groups and, due to the way the activities were 
sequenced, many groups would not have received the three interventions deemed 
necessary to achieve the project’s objectives. Determined lobbying secured an additional 
year for WEP. While three years is still a short time to effect fundamental changes in 
attitudes and associated behavior, WEP was able to meet its targets in terms of the 
numbers of women functionally literate, legally literate and actively participating in 
saving, borrowing and microenterprise. It was also able to document small but positive 
changes in household decision-making and spending on household well-being by targeted 
women, as well as an impressive increase in the number of collective actions for social 
change. 
SO 3 included separate but related activities to strengthen the microfinance sector in the 
country. A grant was awarded to Save the Children/US to extend women’s access to 
microfinance services and to promote women owned microenterprises by strengthening 
the delivery capability of Nirdhan (a Grameen bank replicator) and establishing 30 
Community Based Financial organizations (CBFOs) which could provide access to 
external sources of credit. Under a separate grant, the Canadian Centre for International 
Studies and Cooperation (CECI) worked to identify best practices and create training 
materials related to community based savings and credit organizations (SCOs). This 
4
work was later extended, under CECI’s newly formed Centre for Micro-Finance (CMF), 
to include work with all forms of micro-finance institutions, including creation of a 
supportive legal and regulatory framework. 
II. Evolution of the Results Framework
Definition of the Strategic Objective and its Indicators
A glance at the changes in the results framework over time demonstrates the evolution of 
thinking within the program about women’s empowerment and how it can be assessed. 
When it was formally created as an SO in June 1995, SO3 was defined as Empowerment 
of Women. A single indicator, Representation of Women in Leadership Positions, was 
proposed, with the suggestion that this might include leadership in user groups, VDCs 
and the private sector. However, in the March 1996 Results Review and Resource 
Request for USAID (R4), it was already noted that this might not be the best indicator. 
When the second generation of the project began with the September 1997 Strategic 
Objective Grant Agreement, the name had been changed slightly, to Increased Women’s 
Empowerment, and use of the following two indicators was anticipated:
1. an increase in the number of collective actions for social change initiated by 
women in target areas; and
2. an increase in the degree of women’s influence over household decision 
making in target areas (measured by the degree of women’s control over their 
own and household income and/or income producing assets, and the degree of 
women’s control over sending their daughters to school.)
When the FY 2000 R4 was written in February 1998, a third indicator had been added 
and the indicators were reordered. The final list of SO3 indicators was as follows:
3.1 Influence over household decision making
3.2 Households spending more on family well-being
3.3 Collective actions for social change initiated by targeted women
A case study of the Women’s Empowerment Program (Thomas and Shrestha, 1998), 
includes a discussion of how the group arrived at the three new indicators for SO3. The 
indicators were reordered to better reflect the fact that they were to measure impacts at 
three levels: for participating women as individuals, for their households and for their 
communities. In terms of the women, it was decided to document three levels of 
participation in decision-making: none, limited and joint. (In later analyses this was 
changed to four levels, with a final level of independent decision-making.) Two broad 
areas of decision-making were identified: spending of household cash (on items ranging 
in cost from Rs. 100 to Rs. 500, a moderate level of expenditure) and selected major non￾cash decisions. As mentioned above, it was originally proposed to look at women’s 
control over the decision to send their daughters to school. This marker was dropped for 
two reasons. Many households were already sending their daughters to school following 
extensive GON social marketing campaigns, making it difficult to attribute this activity to 
WEP. Furthermore, surveys of the first generation of SO3 women showed that the 
decision to send daughters to school was most often a joint household decision, reducing 
5
the possibility of discerning an SO3 program impact. In addition, enrolling daughters in 
school and then withdrawing them when their help was needed at home was an extremely 
common pattern, and researchers found it too difficult to distinguish between this stop￾and-start pattern and meaningful attendance. 
In terms of the household level, it was decided to look at spending on direct family well￾being, since studies have shown that if women have control over money, they are more 
likely than men to spend it on their families. Ultimately the program looked for an 
increase in both direct well-being expenditures (e.g. food, clothing, education, health) and 
indirect well-being expenditures (e.g. ornaments, saving, investment). An increase in 
spending on family well being also gave some sense that the beneficiaries of the program 
went beyond the 120,000 women participants, without making inflated benefit claims by 
simply multiplying the number of women participants by the average family size.
In terms of the community, the SO team decided to look at the increase in the number of 
collective actions initiated by the women for social and socioeconomic change. Data 
from the first generation of WEP (1995-1997) showed that women were already initiating 
collective actions across a wide variety of issues. The team acknowledged that simply 
counting the number of social actions, without reference to the nature of the action or the 
issue addressed, did not fully address impact issues. Nevertheless, they felt that it was a 
good indicator of behavioral change. They proposed to collect information in such a way 
that collective actions could be categorized according to the types of change they aim to 
produce. Campaigns/collective actions were eventually reported under two broad 
categories: social and physical, infrastructure and environment. 
Definition of the Intermediate Results
The anticipated Intermediate Results have remained remarkably constant over the life of 
the project. In the FY 1995-1997 Country Program Strategic Plan & Action Plan, 
USAID vowed to “support the empowerment of women through increased literacy, 
improved legal rights, and extended business services and credit” (p. 2). Pursuant to this 
vision, the three Program Outcomes (as Intermediate Results were called at that time) 
were identified as PO3.1 Increased Women’s Literacy; PO3.2 Improved Legal 
Environment for Women; and PO3.3 Strengthened Women’s Economic Participation.
The Strategic Objective Agreement with the Government (September 1997) specified the 
same outcomes, now called Intermediate Results. Changes in the program’s focus in the 
area of legal rights led to a restating of the relevant indicator, and the final Intermediate 
Indicators were as follows:
IR3.1 Increased Women’s Literacy
IR3.2 Increased Women’s Legal Rights Awareness and Advocacy
IR3.3 Increased Women’s Economic Participation
What have changed over time are the indicators for these IRs. The changes in these 
indicators reflect the evolution of the Women’s Empowerment Program from a collection 
of discrete programs with the common theme of women’s empowerment to a unified 
6
intervention with three basic components. IR3.1, Increased Women’s Literacy, has seen 
the least change. During the first generation of the program, this was to be a combination 
of women who are literate at a basic level; women completing a basic business literacy 
program; and women participating in legal literacy fora. In the SO3 SOAG, it was 
proposed to simply measure the number of adult women passing a literacy test following 
completion of a six-month basic literacy course. This remained the criterion, expressed 
as Indicator 3.1.1 Women who are literate at a basic level. 
The evolution of IR 3.2, Increased Women’s Legal Rights Awareness and Advocacy, was 
more complicated. Originally conceived of as Improved Legal Environment for Women, 
the IR focused on policy reform with the following indicators: recision of the law which 
prohibits women from inheriting property; number of women seeking legal redress from 
legal aid offices; and number of women-advocacy NGOs. At this point USAID 
envisaged working with NGOs attempting to change discriminatory laws, funding rural 
legal services, and (through the Local Government Strengthening LOGOS project) 
offering legal literacy training. Although the name of the indicator remains the same in 
the SO3 SOAG, a significant shift in focus is already apparent, with the indicators now 
identified as the number of adult women who are legally literate at a basic level; and the 
number of adult women who are formed into advocacy groups. The results framework as 
of March 1997 also included “Women who run for elective office at the local level” as an 
indicator. In the FY 2000 R4 (February 1998), it was proposed to drop two of these 
indicators. IR3.2.2, Advocacy groups formed by women, was to be dropped because the 
new WEP strategy focused on training women in economic groups in advocacy 
techniques rather than independently establishing advocacy groups. IR 3.2.3, Women 
who run for elective office at the local level, had been designed for the 1997 local 
elections. As the next elections were not scheduled until 2002, this indicator was 
dropped after completion of follow-up training for the newly elected women. IR 3.2 was 
then recast as Increased Women’s Legal Literacy and Advocacy with a single indicator, 
Women who are legally literate at a basic level. In the 2001 Performance Monitoring 
Plan this was restated as Indicator 3.2.1 Women Who Know their Basic Legal Rights.
Strengthened (later changed to “Increased”) Women’s Economic Participation has 
remained the third IR from the inception of the project. However, exactly how stronger 
participation is to be measured has undergone considerable change. Two indicators were 
proposed during the first phase of the project: loans to women from Grameen bank 
groups and people employed by women-owned business in the project area. At this time 
the project team was also looking at a pilot project modeled after the World Bank 
supported WEMTOP in India, which would strengthen the capacity of intermediary 
NGOs to deliver management training to grassroots women entrepreneurs. In the SO3 
SOAG these indicators had been substantially revised; now the project proposed to 
measure 1) the number of women in economic groups, six months after receiving credit, 
who report contributions of at least Rs. 100 per month to the household income: and 2) 
the percentage of total microfinance organizations/groups being supported under this 
Agreement whose level of financial self-sufficiency will reach 75% within three years or 
less.
7
The continuing importance of Grameens at this stage can be seen in the indicators in the 
March 1997 Results Framework for IR 3.3:
 3.3.1 Active loans to women
 3.3.2 Women savings and credit group members who begin and/or expand micro-
 enterprise activities 
 3.3.3 Active members of women’s savings and credit groups
 3.3.4 Operational self-sufficiency for NGO Grameens
 3.3.5 Action plan for phased reduction of interest subsidies and divestiture of
 GON-owned Grameen Bikas Banks
Indicator 3.3.5 was dropped by the next year, and the remaining indicators were reduced 
to three:
 3.3.1 Women becoming active members of savings and credit groups
 3.3.2 Women savings and credit group members who begin/expand 
 microenterprises
 3.3.3 Operational self-sufficiency of microfinance intermediaries
In the 2001 Performance Monitoring Plan the second of these indicators had been 
changed slightly and the last had been dropped. In this final version the indicators were 
as follows:
3.3.1 Women Becoming Active Members of Savings and Credit Groups
3.3.2 Women Who Have a Micro-enterprise
The last of these was variously reported in subsequent R4s and in Pact’s Progress 
Reports. Pact’s Second Progress Report includes as the third IR Indicator, Development 
of sustainable micro-finance institutions serving participants. Pact indicates in the 
executive summary that they had found a national shortage of financial intermediaries 
with which women’s economic groups might affiliate, and called for investigation of the 
feasibility of developing village banking among women participants. They envisaged a 
demand-driven, bottom-up program of women’s village banking to replace the 
development and strengthening of financial intermediaries as originally planned. (This 
was in part a response to the discovery that the existing cooperative groups with which 
they had expected to work were almost all male-dominated.) Thus in subsequent 
Progress Reports Pact reported on these indicators: number of village banks managing an 
internal account (July-December 1999); and number of village banks using the village 
bank accounting system, having an elected, trained management committee, and using 
safe money handling practices (January-March 2001).
Pact reported on “Women becoming active members of savings and credit groups” in 
successive R4s, although in their records this was broken down into “Number of women 
saving at least once a month” and “Number of women currently holding a loan”. 
However, it was pointed out that, as monthly saving was a condition of group 
membership, the number of savers was essentially the number of participants in the 
program, so there was no reason to continue to report the number of women saving.
Pact also continued to report in the R4s on “Women savings and credit group members 
who begin or expand microenterprises”. In Pact’s own indicators (as approved 
September 29, 2000), this is reported as “Number of targeted women who have a micro-
8
enterprise”. There is an additional related indicator “Number of women who report gross 
sales from their micro-enterprises of at least Rs. 300 in any MIS period”. 
It should be noted that, while a concern with strengthening the micro-finance sector as a 
whole is not obvious in later indicators, it remained a part of SO 3. PRIME grants funded 
research and dissemination of information on micro-finance best practices (CECI) and 
training of personnel and strengthening the micro-finance capability of the Grameen￾clone Nirdhan (SC/US). 
III. Summary of Overall Impact at the Strategic Objective Level 
and at the Intermediate Result Level [in Terms of What Was 
Originally Planned]
The overall impact of WEP can be examined by looking at the strategic framework for 
the second generation of the project (1997 – 2000). At this stage there were a clear set of 
indicators for the strategic objective and the intermediate results, numerical targets for 
these indicators and, beginning in 1998, a Management Information System (MIS) which 
was capable of tracking complex information throughout the project. The information in 
the MIS was supplemented by data collected for the baseline, midterm and final 
evaluation studies.
The first two indicators of increased women’s empowerment were “influence over 
household-decision making by targeted women” and “targeted households spending more 
on family well-being”. Data on these indicators were collected through surveys at the 
beginning, middle and end of the project. Women and men were asked to rate a woman’s 
decision making power on a scale of one to four, ranging from no power (Level 1) to the 
ability to make decisions jointly (Level 3) or on her own (Level 4). The results are 
complex, due to the number of variables, but between the baseline survey and the final 
survey 7% of women increased their influence in household decision making by at least 
one level. 
For the second indicator, the surveys looked at the percentage of household income going 
toward direct well-being expenditures (food, clothing, education, health etc.), indirect 
well-being expenditures (savings, investments) and expenditures not related to well-being 
(festivals, alcohol, cigarettes etc.). The assumption behind the indicator, based on 
repeated observations world-wide, is that if women have a say in how household income 
is spent, they will increase the amount that goes toward family well-being. Comparison 
of data from the final evaluation survey and the baseline survey show a small but positive 
shift in the direction of spending on family well-being. 
The third indicator for increased women’s empowerment was “collective actions for
social change initiated by targeted women”. In the data gathering these were divided into 
two types. Collective actions were defined as separate steps taken by two or more 
9
members of a group in order to achieve the goal of an advocacy campaign. An advocacy 
campaign, in turn was defined as a group working together to bring about a change or 
improvement in their lives and the lives of other community members. In both categories 
the numbers were significantly higher than projected. The overall target for collective 
actions from 1999 to 2000 was 244,200, and the actual total was 380,883. The target for 
advocacy campaigns during the same period was 20,000; the actual figure was more than 
twice that (44,972). Such quantitative indicators cannot fully address the impacts of the 
project, but they do represent important behavioral changes which are highly visible at 
the community level.
Intermediate result 3.1, “Increased women’s literacy”, had a single indicator, “Women 
who are literate at a basic level”. This impact was measured by the number of women 
who passed a basic literacy test by the end of the project (including those found to be 
literate at the beginning of the project, approximately 39,000). The project target was 
120,000, while the actual total was 122,852.
Intermediate result 3.2, “Increased women’s legal rights awareness and advocacy”, had a 
single indicator, “Women who know their basic legal rights”. All women who completed 
the Rights, Responsibilities & Advocacy portion of the program were tested on their 
understanding and retention of the RR&A curriculum. The cumulative target for legal 
literacy test passers was 108,000; in fact 109,306 women passed the test. This 
achievement is tied directly to the impressive number of collective actions for social 
change initiated by the women. The 1999 SO 3 Review found that groups studying the 
RR&A curriculum took more and different types of social actions than either groups 
studying business literacy or control groups.
Intermediate result 3.3, “Strengthened women’s economic participation”, had a variety of 
different indicators over the life of the project (see Chapter II, Evolution of the Results 
Framework). In 2001, Pact was tracking five indicators for IR 3.3, although some of 
these were combined in the mission’s R4 reporting to Washington. The first was the 
number of women saving at least once a month (which was cumulative, including women 
who were savers at the beginning of the project). The target for savers was 120,000, 
while the actual total was 121,404. Not reported under these indicators was the fact that 
from 1998-2001 women in WEP more than doubled their savings from $720,000 to 
$1,800,000. The second indicator was the number of women borrowers, i.e. women who 
had taken a loan within the six months before the survey. The Year 4 target was 70,500, 
while the actual total was 68, 613. This represents the only indicator for which the target 
was not met. 
The third indicator for IR 3.3 was “number of women who report gross sales from their 
micro-enterprises of at least Rs. 300 in any MIS period”. The target was 81,000 women, 
while the actual figure was 102,116. The fourth indicator was “number of targeted 
women who have a micro-enterprise”. Again the target (81,000) was exceeded by the 
actual figure (86,883). The last indicator for this IR was "number of village banks using 
the village bank accounting system, having an elected trained management committee 
and using safe money handling practices”. It was projected that 1500 of the strongest 
10
savings and credit groups would meet these criteria; in fact 1536 had done so by the end 
of the project. 
The micro-finance strengthening initiatives implemented by Save the Children/US and 
the Canadian Centre for International Studies and Cooperation (CECI) were also highly 
successful. As of September 2000, SC/US’s project had reached 28,429 poor women with 
microfinance services. The original goal was that Nirdhan would have 12 fully 
operational branches with 22,636 clients, 16,800 of them added during the project period. 
The goal of 12 branches was achieved, and they were serving 23,459 clients, 17,623 of 
them new. SC/US formed 33 Community Based Financial Organizations (against a 
target of 30), and these CBFOs were extending credit to 4,970 women (vs. the target of 
4,800). Nirdhan had achieved 86% self-sufficiency (the project goal was 100%), and the 
CBFOs had access to external capital through linkages with Nepal Rastra Bank and the 
Rural Self-Reliance Fund. CECI reached all its goals in terms of providing training and 
technical assistance to microfinance practitioners; it also produced and disseminated a 
video entitled “Tomatoes Can Turn into Meat” which brought the microfinance message 
to 50,000 rural women.
The indicators for SO 3 document many of the impressive accomplishments of the 
project. Of necessity, they are best at capturing the most quantifiable results. In dealing 
with the issue of empowerment, some notion of qualitative results is equally important, if 
more difficult to document. In its final report to USAID, TAF summarized the 
qualitative assessments of the project impacts made by TAF, Pact and evaluation 
consultants, based on interaction with WEP participants, NGO staff and government 
representatives in project areas. The following is a summary of the broad impacts which 
they identified:
1. Patriarchal norms challenged (with both individual acts and collective actions 
challenging norms within families and communities)
2. Attitudinal changes (especially among village men as a result of advocacy 
efforts supported by the local community. Initial blocking of women’s 
activities changed to support. Villagers came to respect the women’s groups 
for their role in solving social problems.)
3. Enhanced sense of social responsibility (with women actively articulating and 
advocating concerns in the public sphere) 
4. Women’s space in public affairs (carved out by the women at the community 
level when they organized against legal discrimination against women)
5. Increased women’s confidence (shown when women take action that 
emphasizes their confidence, such as registering marriages and obtaining 
citizenship certificates; also reported by women as enhanced bargaining 
power within the family)
6. Local development role (translating their new knowledge, and sometimes their 
groups savings, into practical actions for community benefit)
7. Engagement with local authorities (claiming resources from the VDC for 
public development works and becoming high-profile “watch dogs” for their 
communities)
11
8. Linkages established (between WEP women and line agencies, elected 
officials and other concerned authorities)
9. Networks formed (of advocacy groups at the VDC and district level, 
beginning to expand their linkages to the national level). 
This discussion of indicators and impacts addresses the situation in 2001, at the end of 
WEP interventions. Chapter VI, Sustainability – Prospects and Threats, looks at whether 
the positive changes noted above can be expected to persist. 
IV. Major Activities and Outputs
The major activities under WEP were focused on the facilitation of literacy, legal literacy 
and savings and credit activities among the women in 6,265 groups who were ultimately 
involved in the project. 
· Literacy The literacy curriculum was designed with the idea that women 
would complete the introductory literacy module in six months of group study 
facilitated by “literacy volunteers”. The six months of basic literacy and 
numeracy was reinforced by post-literacy materials on both savings and credit 
and legal literacy. 122,852 women passed a literacy test following completion 
of the course. 
· Legal Literacy Groups which had completed the basic literacy module were 
introduced to the legal literacy curriculum. This involved 24 weeks of study. 
Groups met with a trained facilitator 1-2 hours a day, six days a week for 14 
weeks on legal rights and civic responsibilities and three days a week for ten 
weeks on advocacy skills. Groups later engaged in advocacy campaigns both 
to address social issues and to improve local infrastructure. 109,306 women 
completed the course and passed a test of their knowledge of basic legal 
rights. These women went onto engage in 380,883 collective actions. 
· Savings and Credit Activities Group members deposited compulsory 
weekly savings, with the minimum amount determined by the group. The 
groups kept records of mandatory and voluntary savings and loaned money to 
group members for microenterprise projects. All participants in the program 
were regular savers, and in total the groups had $1,800,000 in savings by the 
end of the project. 68,613 had taken a loan in the six months before the final 
MIS survey, and 86,883 women had active microenterprises. The annual 
income from these enterprises was estimated at $10 million.
The most important output of the Women’s Empowerment Program is the thousands of 
women who finished the program with the self-confidence and the skills to change their 
lives and their communities. Some of these women have already begun to seek political 
office; WEP groups have begun to band together to form coalitions which can advocate 
more effectively for social and political change. With the $10 million dollars generated 
annually by their microenterprises, and their $1.8 million in savings, they are an 
economic force in their communities. Other significant outputs of the project include 
12
capacity building for local implementing partners, models for literacy and savings and 
credit programs, and the effective materials developed to teach literacy and legal literacy, 
combat trafficking and explain WEP to a larger audience.
· NGO Capacity Building Trainings were organized for local implementing 
partners on issues related to empowerment and microfinance/microenterprise, 
and NGO staff gained the skills necessary to continue to act as facilitators for 
women’s savings and credit groups. A small number of interested NGOs also 
received training on microfinance theory and practice and business planning 
and management which would enable them to become licensed microfinance 
institutions. In addition, regional workshops on maintaining women’s 
advocacy initiatives after WEP were conducted for NGO staff. 
· Self-study Literacy Model While the basic literacy materials adopted the 
“key word” approach which has been standard in Nepal for many years, they 
differ from their predecessors in that they are designed to be used without a 
trained facilitator. They could in fact be used as self-study materials, although 
the expectation in WEP was that they would be used for group study with a 
“literacy volunteer” recruited from the group or the larger community rather 
than a paid facilitator. Groups were able to find women who successfully 
assumed this role without financial compensation. They often met at night 
after the women’s daily work was finished, studying by the light of lanterns 
which they purchased themselves. The women also purchased their own 
literacy materials (paying about one third of their actual value). Their literacy 
skills were reinforced during the life of the project by the post-literacy 
materials in the Women in Business series and the Rights, Responsibilities and 
Advocacy curriculum. WEP also produced four issues of a newsletter, Mahila 
Shakti (Women Power), which featured stories and photos of WEP activities 
contributed by the women themselves; reading the newsletter together was a 
highly popular activity and some women were even inspired to contribute 
original verse about empowerment. In addition, women could read four issues 
of a Pact’s comic book Tara, which followed the adventures of an empowered 
women as she and her fellow village women tackled such issues as illiteracy, 
unemployment, health and gender-based violence. The WEP literacy model 
is a low-cost approach because it does not utilize paid facilitators and an 
empowering approach which gives the women “ownership” of the process.
· Village Banking Model WEP incorporated a variety of micro-finance 
models; 2,000 of the 6,000 economic groups were linked to existing 
cooperatives or Grameen bank replicators. However, the remaining 4,000 
groups represented another model: savings groups meeting their credit needs 
through internally generated savings. These savings and credit groups can 
operate without external support after the program is over; the strongest will 
evolve into village banks with standardized bookkeeping which lend out 50% 
of their funds, collect loans successfully and make a profit and pay dividends 
to members. This innovative literacy model of village banking, in which 
groups keep their own financial records, has potential for further development 
and replication. 
13
Another major output of the project was the series of instructional materials which are 
potentially applicable to a variety of programs. In addition to Mahila Shakti and Tara, 
these include:
· Women in Business. This series, developed by Pact, can be used to teach or 
review basic literacy and numeracy as well as to introduce lessons about 
group formation, saving and lending and leadership. Self-esteem and 
empowerment messages are also woven through the text. The basic literacy 
module is followed by three post-literacy books. 
· Rights, Responsibilities and Advocacy. This workbook, and the 
accompanying facilitator’s handbook, were developed by TAF to teach 
women about their legal rights and the basic techniques of advocacy. These 
are post-literacy materials designed to be studied by a group with a trained 
facilitator. 
· Our Decision, Our Protection. A “comic book” on a serious topic, this was 
developed by TAF to illustrate the problem of girls trafficking. The comic 
was introduced as part of the RR&A curriculum, but it was designed to stand 
alone and to be attractive and accessible to vulnerable girls who might 
encounter it formally or informally. It has been distributed in all 75 districts 
of Nepal by the Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare and is 
incorporated into the anti-trafficking work under SO 5. 
· Our Commitment was a 30-minute video produced through the collaboration 
of the Social Welfare Council (Ministry of Women, Children and Social 
Welfare), Nepal Television, The Asia Foundation and Pact. It focused on a 
description of WEP from the viewpoint of participants and others in the 
program districts.
· CECI produced and disseminated the video Tomatoes Can Turn into Meat, 
which carries the message of women’s empowerment through community￾based savings and credit organizations. The video was shown to 50,000 rural 
women, 30,000 of whom were members of WEP groups, in sessions with 
trained facilitators who led discussions of the video’s theme.
V. Evaluations, Awards and Critical Assessments 
Evaluations
The evaluations to date of SO3 can be divided into two types. The first analyzes whether 
the program was successful in achieving its overall objective of increased women’s 
empowerment and the intermediate results of increased basic literacy, legal literacy and 
economic participation. The second looks at the organization and management of the 
project and its success as a cross-cutting strategic objective focusing on women.
In the first category, USAID/Nepal’s R4s for the period 1995-2000 represent self￾evaluation, providing a regular summary of the program’s results compared with target 
14
figures. The accompanying narrative discusses these key results and puts them in a 
Mission-wide and national context. The 2000-2005 Country Strategic Plan reviews the 
program in anticipation of its close-out in 2001 and so concentrates on lessons learned 
and implications for on-going projects. 
In addition to these in-house reviews, there are several major studies of all or parts of the 
project. The first of these, Breaking Barriers Building Bridges (Dhakal and Sheikh 
1997), looked at the first generation of SO3. It compared women who had received one 
or more interventions (basic literacy, legal literacy and economic participation) with a 
control population who had received no interventions, and concluded that women who 
received all three interventions were significantly more empowered in terms of 
participation in actions for social change and household decision-making. The 1999 SO3 
Review was conducted 10 months into the second generation of the project; it measured 
changes in collective actions, influence over household decision-making and spending on 
family well-being, and asked whether the project was successful, replicable and 
sustainable. The results were positive and helped inform the decision to extend the 
project for a year beyond its initial close-out date of 2000. Three large surveys of the 
Women’s Empowerment Program were conducted for Pact by Shrestha and Khatri￾Chhetri in 1999 (baseline), 2000 (midterm) and 2001 (final). These surveys collected 
data on collective actions and found positive changes in women’s influence over 
household decision-making and a shift toward direct and indirect expenditure on 
household well-being. A separate outside evaluation of WEP’s micro-finance strategy 
(Pact’s Women’s Empowerment Program in Nepal: A Savings and Literacy Led 
Alternative to Financial Institution Building) was conducted in 2001 by Jeffrey Ashe of 
Brandeis University and Lisa Parrott of Freedom from Hunger, and its findings were 
highly positive.
The organization and management of the project are discussed at some length in 
Breaking New Ground: A Case Study of Women’s Empowerment in Nepal (Thomas and 
Shrestha 1998). It provides a useful history of the first generation of the project but 
concentrates on its evolution post-1997 into a cross-cutting strategic objective focusing 
on women and the wider implications of such an approach. The details of project 
management since 1997 are also chronicled in the semi-annual progress reports which 
Pact and TAF submitted through 2001.
The concurrent projects conducted by CECI and SC/US to strengthen the micro-finance 
sector in Nepal are part of SO3 but are not discussed in the above evaluations. The best 
sources of information on these are the final reports submitted by the agencies: 
CECI/WEE Final Quarter Progress Report and Overall Achievements of the Project
(2000) and SU/US End of the Project Report (2000).
All evaluations conclude that WEP exceeded all of its targets for literacy, legal literacy 
and economic participation. It also achieved measurable positive changes in women’s 
control over household decision-making and spending on family well being. The major 
limitation of all these evaluations is that they were done while the project was ongoing; 
they predict sustainability but cannot document it. 
15
Awards
SO 3’s innovative features attracted a great deal of attention from microfinance and 
gender practitioners, as well as several international awards. The World Bank’s 
Development Market place recognized WEP twice for its innovation and potential 
contribution to development. UN Habitat, in partnership with the Municipality of Dubai, 
acknowledged the program for its outstanding contribution to “best practice” in 
improving the living environment of women. And the World Bank and the Government 
of Japan, through the Global Development Network, cited the program as one of the ten 
most innovative development projects in the world in 2000.
Critical Assessments 
To say that the Women’s Empowerment Program was successful is not to imply that it 
proceeded without problems or controversy. These difficulties are less apparent in 
written accounts than in conversations with present and former staff at USAID and 
partner organizations. From the beginning, questions were raised about the wisdom of a 
program exclusively for women at a time when the agency was moving from a “women 
in development “ model to a mainstreaming “gender and development” approach. 
Differences over this fundamental issue meant that there were individuals both at the 
Mission and at USAID/Washington who strongly opposed the program. In an era of 
scarce resources, this opposition added to the year to year uncertainty about funding for 
SO 3. A great deal of effort was required to maintain funding and to secure the extra year 
necessary to complete the planned interventions with the entire target group.
Supporters of the WEP concept had other concerns about it. Size was always an issue; 
some of those involved felt that the ambitious target of 100,000 women (subsequently 
raised to 120,00) was the result of pressure arising from the “managing for results” 
approach adopted as part of agency-wide reengineering in the mid-90s. The setting of 
such large targets was the principal factor behind the withdrawal of three of the originally 
planned implementing partners (World Education, Save the Children/US and CECI), who 
believed that the targets were unrealistic given the limited time frame of the project. In 
the end the targets were reached, but size remained a problem; working with 245 NGOs 
was an ongoing administrative nightmare, and plans to include all 6,500+ groups in the 
periodic statistical surveys were scaled back after the initial survey proved too expensive 
and time consuming.
Given the size of the program, the short time frame was also a serious problem. Size, 
organizational complexity, and disagreements among the original partners slowed down 
the start-up, so that while on paper the program began in 1997 and ended (after a one￾year extension) in 2001, interventions in the field only began in 1999. This left no time 
for piloting the program and little time for the phasing out of support, although the 
partners worked to implement an exit strategy during the final year. Jeffrey Ashe, in an 
otherwise extremely positive assessment of the program (Ashe and Parrott 2001) noted 
that in the final months of the program some of the smaller, weaker savings groups were 
16
not visited at all by program facilitators whose efforts were geared toward the groups 
with the potential to become village banks. (Again, this may reflect the pressures exerted 
by an ambitious target of 1,500 village banks.) TAF acknowledges that, while it 
emphasized coalition building and linkages with line agencies for the advocacy groups in 
the final year, these were still relatively weak at the end of the project. 
Another frequently raised criticism of the project is that it did not reach the neediest 
women. Proponents point out that the goal of the project was women’s empowerment, 
not poverty alleviation, and that better off and higher caste women are equally or even 
more subjugated in their homes and communities. Although the program did not target 
poor women, 45% of the participants were poor. However, critics say that the program 
excluded the poorest of the poor, both by the requirement that literacy learners purchase 
their own materials and supplies and by the setting of a mandatory minimum savings rate. 
(This was among the issues which led to the withdrawal of WE, SC/US and CECI from 
the program.) The better off were twice as likely as the poor to serve as group officers; 
this can be interpreted negatively to mean that the program offered greater opportunities 
to the better off, or positively to mean that the better off were enlisted to help the poor 
within the same group. 
VI. Sustainability –Prospects and Threats 
WEP can be considered sustainable if the women involved have developed the skills and 
the enthusiasm to continue reading, calculating, saving, borrowing, doing business and 
advocating for social change. A further sign of sustainability would be the replication of 
WEP groups, demonstrating the spread of desirable innovations beyond the target groups 
and the funded life of the project. Ideally, one would want to conduct a large scale 
survey in a few years’ time to be certain that women were maintaining or increasing their 
role in household decision making, their spending on household well-being and their 
participation in advocacy campaigns. Waiting to determine project outcomes until 3 –5 
years after donor involvement is complete would give a better picture of the sustainability 
of any project (CIDA 1997: 6), but this may not always be practical, and no such survey 
is planned for SO 3. However, it is possible to make informed predictions about the 
sustainability of the women’s gains in literacy, legal literacy and economic participation 
and to identify the principal threats to these achievements.
Literacy WEP anticipated sustainability issues in the design of the literacy component; 
the basic literacy module was followed up by post-literacy materials on legal literacy and 
economic participation. Literacy was thus a continuous part of the project for women 
who followed the entire curriculum.
Principal threats: The loss of newly-acquired literacy skills which are not 
reinforced is well-known and poses two problems for development work: women lose 
their hard-won skills through lack of use, and programs which seek to build on a literacy 
program by targeting the same groups may find that the women cannot read more 
advanced materials. With respect to WEP groups, Ashe noted that “in the first 18 months 
17
while members were learning to read, the groups met several days a week and the 
empowerment workers motivated the groups to meet regularly. Roughly half of the 
groups say they are studying the latest book . . . however, only 13% are continuing to 
meet as a group to do so. Some say that there is little need to study together since they 
can already read and write, while others find meeting several times a week too time 
consuming” (2001: 38). 
During the program women requested additional reading materials dealing with 
health and nutrition. Although discussed during the early planning stages, delivery of 
such materials was not part of the ultimate project design. With funding from the World 
Bank, Pact is developing a post-literacy module on HIV/AIDS awareness and advocacy 
which will be piloted with 2,500 women, and it hopes ultimately to bring this information 
to all women who were part of the WEP program (2002: 22). Any such delivery of 
information to WEP groups would have the added effect of reinforcing literacy.
Critics of WEP have sometimes questioned the sustainability for most neo￾literates of skills acquired through an unfacilitated self-study course. It was hoped at one 
time that this question would be answered through the Girls’ and Women’s Education
Activity (GWE III), a major study of women’s integrated literacy development programs 
in Nepal sponsored by USAID which was to compare WEP with the USAID-funded 
Health Education and Adult Literacy (HEAL) program and the government’s Basic and 
Primary Education Project (BPEP). However, WEP was unable to begin its literacy 
classes during the initial 1997/98 research cycle and thus could not be included in the 
data collection for the study (Rowe and Burchfield 2000: 20), a most regrettable missed 
opportunity.
Rights, Responsibilities and Advocacy The outcome can be considered sustainable if 
women continue to mount significant numbers of advocacy campaigns. Women were 
participating in such campaigns even before WEP began and the number of campaigns 
increased dramatically after groups received the RR&A intervention, which suggests that 
these activities will continue. Some WEP group members will be included in 
interventions under SO5 which seek to improve advocacy, especially around issues of 
democracy and governance. 
Principal threats: The greatest immediate problem is the continued State of 
Emergency in Nepal, under which all kinds of public demonstrations are banned. 
Women in the WEP groups visited for this report stated that they had not engaged in any 
advocacy campaigns since the imposition of the State of Emergency, since they 
understood such campaigns to be illegal. A protracted State of Emergency may do 
serious damage to the advocacy tradition; at the very least women are prevented from 
gaining the experience and confidence in planning and carrying out such campaigns that 
would ultimately lead to more sophisticated and more successful campaigns. If sufficient 
time elapses, it may be difficult to revive the momentum that carried so many women 
into the streets in pursuit of their rights.
Another potential problem is the lack of success in solving the social problems 
targeted by the women in their campaigns. In their Final Evaluation Survey, Shrestha 
and Khatri-Chhetri found that respondents felt that they were partially successful in that 
they had instilled awareness on issues such as domestic violence, alcoholism, gambling 
and polygamy; very few felt that they were successful or that they had managed to 
18
eradicate the problem. Women were using group pressure most commonly against 
everyday problems like these, for which they did not require other support, rather than 
undertaking actions that required technical skills and resources (2001: 21-22). There is 
little evidence that this lack of results discouraged the WEP women from campaigning, as 
public advocacy was empowering in and of itself. The advocacy training proposed under 
SO 5 will assist some women in choosing their issues and mounting more successful 
actions. 
Economic participation The best indicator of the sustainability of this component of the 
project would be if the number of savings and credit groups remains the same or 
increases. Since a certain number of groups are bound to disband over time, maintaining 
the same number of groups implies that in fact new groups are being formed. The final 
MIS survey for the project found that at that time the overall number of groups was 
growing as newly replicated groups outnumbered groups which were disbanding. The 
micro-enterprises engaged in by women in WEP groups are localized and therefore 
minimally subject to fluctuations in the larger economy. The women interviewed for this 
report stated that while the last year had been a terrible one for Nepal, events had not 
affected their businesses.
Principal Threats: External factors can threaten an internally sound system. A 
major threat to the sustainability of the savings and credit groups would be a rapid rise in 
the rate of inflation which would make saving fruitless. As members of savings groups 
become more active borrowers, many will need access to more money than the group can 
provide. At this point the health of the larger micro-finance sector becomes an issue; the 
Centre for Micro-Finance concluded in its final report to USAID/Nepal (2000) that “the 
stability and soundness of the micro-finance sector remains very much at risk in Nepal”. 
Some information on the sustainability of WEP groups can be found in research 
conducted this summer for a thesis at Swarthmore College; Ani Rudra Silwal found WEP 
village banks meeting regularly, increasing their rate of saving and suffering almost no 
defaults on loans. He did identify a few potential problems. Since village bank rules 
require that all loans be repaid at the end of the loan cycle, members who are caught short 
have taken to repaying from another source and then borrowing the same amount 
immediately from the village bank, an unhealthy practice in the long run. Groups tend to 
become less strict over time in enforcing penalties for delayed savings or repayment, 
which could raise the default rate. And the village banks’ very success is a challenge: 
Silwal estimates that within the next five years savings could reach Rs 1,000,000 for 
many groups, in which case record keeping would become dauntingly complex for banks 
with few educated members, and members would need to look for new places and ideas 
to invest in. That WEP groups may soon have a problem with excess funds is in itself a 
significant achievement of the project. On the whole, Silwal found the village banks 
sound, especially in comparison with large government owned banks (2002: 4 – 5).
This discussion does not address the viability of any particular savings and credit group. 
During the final year of the project WEP staff predicted that 15% of the groups would 
falter after support was withdrawn, another 30% would remain functional at the same 
level and the rest would continue to grow. Unfortunately, the groups most likely to fail 
19
were those in remote areas with the highest proportion of poor and illiterate members 
(Ashe, 2001: 59). Ashe suggested that such groups should have had more interventions 
during the last year of the project, when resources were focused on the stronger groups 
which were in the process of becoming village banks.
VII. Links Between SO 3 and Other SOs
Between the first and second generations of SO 3, the decision was made to concentrate 
activities in the terai, in large part to create geographical overlap with the mission’s other 
strategic objectives and thus promote synergy. Chapter VIII, Promising Practices and 
Lessons Learned, discusses the implications of geographical overlap. The following 
discussion looks at other links, past and potential, between SO 3 and other strategic 
objectives. 
Links with SO 5
The most obvious linkage is between SO3 and SO5, Strengthened governance of natural 
resources and selected institutions. In particular IR 5.3, Increased women’s participation, 
takes women’s empowerment one step further by preparing women to take a more active 
role in the nation’s political life. SO 5 answers one of the criticisms of SO 3: that 
because it was entirely grass-roots oriented, it was not tied to any policy-centered 
advocacy. Basanta Pokharel of TAF has stated that if he were to revise the RR&A 
curriculum today, he would add units on understanding power relationships and the 
concept of citizenship, including demanding good governance and making government 
institutions responsible (personal communication). As an implementing partner in SO 5, 
TAF has begun to convey this message to coalitions of women’s groups composed 
primarily of the original WEP groups.
The work of preparing candidates for the 2002 elections seemed to bring SO 3 full circle, 
as the original indicator for the first generation of the program was “Representation of 
women in leadership positions”. At that time SO 3 concentrated on encouraging women 
to run for office at the VDC level in the 1997 election and training the successful women 
on how to do their jobs. The 2002 elections seemed to present a similar opportunity at 
the beginning of activities under SO 5. The social and political turmoil which resulted in 
the indefinite postponement of these elections has meant that, at the time of writing, 
efforts to prepare women candidates for election to local office have been suspended. 
However, under SO 5 work has continued with the major political parties to provide 
training to potential women candidates. 
The anti-trafficking portions of SO 5 also builds on work begun under SO 3. The RR&A 
component of WEP featured a unit on trafficking in its discussion of violence against 
20
women; this topic was later expanded with the addition of an anti-trafficking comic book 
produced with WEP funding. (This comic book has now been distributed in all 75 
districts in Nepal and will be used in awareness-raising activities under SO 5.) It is worth 
noting that the first joint advocacy movement arose among WEP groups after the 
introduction of anti-trafficking materials, when linkages and coalitions formed 
spontaneously around the issue. TAF has provided the NGOs which are implementing 
the anti-trafficking portion of SO 5 with the names of local NGOs and women’s groups 
which participated in WEP; those groups which have remained strong will probably be 
involved in the new program. 
Links with SO 2 
Aspects of SO 2 represent an approach to women’s empowerment that is parallel to that 
of SO 3. One of its implicit aims is the empowerment of women, with a particular 
emphasis on equipping women to make decisions about their reproductive health. 
USAID/Nepal sponsors two programs under SO 2 (HEAL and GATE) in which girls’ 
and women’s health issues are presented through literacy and post-literacy materials. SO 
2 also provides training to improve the position of Nepal’s 40,000 Female Community 
Health Volunteers (FCHVs). FCHVs represent a body of empowered women throughout 
the country; 10% of them hold elected office in local government, and they chair health 
care committees and are leaders of economic groups and forestry groups. The Gender 
Assessment conducted for USAID/Nepal identified the FCHV program as an alternative 
model for women’s empowerment and urged that it be systematically compared with 
WEP. An evaluation of the FCHV program which could form the basis of such a 
comparison has been completed and will be available early in 2003.
It could be argued that a health component would have strengthened women’s 
empowerment under SO 3. Old memos show that in 1998 USAID/Nepal and the partner 
organizations endorsed the notion of including health in the literacy materials. And Pact 
reports that at the end of the program women were requesting additional reading 
materials specifically on maternal and child health (Usha Jha: personal communication). 
The HEAL and GATE programs use a more facilitated approach to literacy training, with 
FCHVs often acting as facilitators. Still it seems a missed opportunity for the two SOs to 
have worked together to meet the grassroots demand for health information by women in 
the WEP groups. It should also be said that economic participation would be a useful 
addition to health-based interventions. The 2001 Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 
found that “[w]omen who are employed and earn cash have more say in household 
decision making than women who do not work and women who work but do not earn 
cash income” (p. 47); this included decisions about their own health care. 
Links with SpO 8 
SpO 8, “Promoting Peace Through Improved Governance and Incomes in Targeted 
Areas” is still in the formative stage, so it is too soon to say exactly what parts of SO 3 
might prove useful in any of its activities. Initial activities under SpO 8 focus on job 
generation through infrastructure projects in targeted areas; it is anticipated that these 
21
could be followed by microfinance and microenterprise activities based on the WEP 
model. SpO 8 staff have been considering the Women in Business series for adaptation to 
this program. Another proposed activity under SpO 8 deals with the re-integration of 
returned combatants, and this would also involve microfinance and microenterprise. SO 
3 materials and experience might prove particularly relevant since a significant 
percentage of Maoist recruits are young women.
Links with SO 1
In the planning stages of SO 3, there was an expectation of synergy between SO3 and 
SO1; some of the SO 1 interventions were in the terai, and some of the forestry user 
groups were all-women. At a minimum, it was anticipated that the SO 3 literacy and 
post-literacy materials could be used in the non-formal education classes for women 
which were a part of the SO 1 program. However, the linkages were not made, which 
must be seen as a missed opportunity.
Promising Practices and Lessons Learned
A successful program with innovative features is a rich source of ideas which might be 
profitably applied to other USAID/Nepal Strategic Objectives and to programs elsewhere 
with a theme of empowerment. The following are some of the things which WEP did 
well, together with suggestions on how they might have been done better. They arise 
from conversations with representatives of Pact and TAF as well as a reading of 
descriptions and analyses of the project. 
Consider expanding the package while retaining project integration. Analyses of 
WEP agree that its three-pronged, integrated approach was necessary to achieve project 
goals. However, there are other interventions which might be considered as part of an
empowerment package, a few of which are suggested below:
· Skills training: As part of its empowerment strategy, WEP encouraged women to 
recognize and build on their existing knowledge and skills when creating 
microenterprises. In this, it was deliberately different from many microenterprise 
programs which offer women training in new skills. The literacy materials 
offered many examples of microenterprises which rural women might be prepared 
to undertake. However, the majority of WEP women chose activities such as 
small livestock and vegetable farming; while using the women’s existing skills, 
these did not provide the quick returns which would make weekly loan repayment 
possible. The women themselves have asked for training in innovative 
microenterprise development and marketing. This will become especially 
important if the WEP model is applied to Nepal’s hill districts, where the 
scattered settlements preclude some of the small businesses that are possible in 
the more densely populated terai.
22
· Infrastructure development: WEP women devoted impressive amounts of time to 
meeting, studying course materials, campaigning on social issues and running 
their microenterprises. A concern frequently raised in the literature of 
development is that programs for women require them to make time for new 
activities when they are already overworked. Some projects (such as the USAID 
funded Women’s Economic Empowerment Program) have included local 
infrastructure improvements to free up women’s time: piped water, for example, 
to cut down on the amount of time women spend carrying water. In particular a 
program which targets very poor women in isolated areas should consider 
incorporating such features.
· Health education: WEP women expressed a desire for materials about health and 
nutrition. WEP groups constituted a forum in which women could comfortably 
express ideas and share information; such groups seem an ideal place for 
materials dealing with health issues. Such materials have already been developed 
in Nepal (as, for example the materials used in the USAID-funded HEAL 
program) and could be adapted at low cost, satisfying the women’s need for 
knowledge and reinforcing their literacy skills. 
Build on existing groups, but be aware of their make-up WEP targeted existing 
women’s savings groups. This was a factor in the rapid scale-up of the project, since 
women who have joined a group have already demonstrated a degree of empowerment 
and worked out problematical group dynamics. Cohesive groups are more likely to 
benefit early from interventions and thus to stimulate increased membership and 
replication. However, caution should be exercised in relying on existing groups if a 
project is targeting poor women or women from disadvantaged groups. We do not know 
enough about the women who tend not to join groups. “Success Stories” from WEP 
often feature lower-caste women who have achieved respect and leadership positions in 
WEP groups. We do not know how usual this was, and to what extent women from the 
upper castes dominated membership and/or leadership of some groups. A program with 
the specific goal of poverty alleviation (as opposed to empowerment) might need to 
recruit poor women actively rather than rely on existing group membership. 
Keep track of groups to capture synergy. The geographic concentration in the terai 
was one feature which distinguished the second generation of WEP activities from its 
predecessor. This was done deliberately in order to maximize local level synergy with 
the activities of Strategic Objectives 1 and 2, which were already concentrated in the terai 
and mid-Western regions. From data collected for WEP’s Management Information 
System we know that there was overlap in group membership; in July 2001 11.5% of 
WEP women were participating in community forest user groups, 4% in health groups, 
3% in irrigation/water user groups, 11% in mothers’ groups, and 5% in 
agriculture/farmers’ groups. However, USAID/Nepal does not have a data base which 
would allow it to know exactly which groups have received which interventions under 
various SOs. Thus, while there is a great deal of discussion of synergy among SOs in the 
same districts, there has been to date no documentation of this process. New 
interventions may in fact be built on the foundations laid by SO 3, but this cannot 
23
currently be documented. Consultants who made recommendations on achieving 
program synergy in 1997 (Bloom and Paolisso) suggested maximizing synergy in 
districts where SO activities overlap by mapping overlapping areas and using them 
strategically to coordinate; this recommendation was repeated in the Gender Action Plan 
(Clarke 2002). The Economic Growth and Democracy and Governance Teams which 
visited USAID/Nepal in September 2002 also noted that “[WEP] has left a residue 
resource of more capable and motivated women (individually and in groups) in rural 
areas across the Terai. Other programs which the mission is launching or considering 
should attempt to stay in contact with these groups and to build on their literacy, internal 
organization and advocacy skills”. (2002: 53) The current report echoes these 
recommendations. 
Keep track of individuals. Anecdotal evidence suggests that WEP women go on to 
take positions of increasing responsibility in their communities. This needs to be 
documented by systematically interviewing, for example, women candidates in WEP 
districts who are targeted for interventions under SO 5 to see if they were participants and 
perhaps leaders in the program. There is currently no mechanism to capture this 
important "halo effect". 
Involve men. Family Days, during which men were educated about WEP, were 
important in countering potential opposition from male family members and enlisting 
their support. These efforts could have been more focused and organized, involving 
village men, VDC chairpersons and local government officials in gender sensitization 
activities. These activities are important enough that they should be mainstreamed into 
any such project. In addition, the possibility of modifying the WEP materials for use 
with men should be explored. Women were empowered by a knowledge of their rights, 
but male family members and government representatives must also understand women’s 
legal rights, as well as their own civic and human rights.
Anticipate demand for innovative materials. Both Pact and TAF have reported a 
continuing interest in WEP materials from a variety of organizations. This demand was 
anticipated at the time of the SO 3 Review, which offered some guidelines as to the status 
of the Women in Business and legal literacy materials. However, some confusion 
apparently remains about control of the materials and whether, for example, books that 
were sold to WEP participants (albeit at subsidized rates) can be made available to 
another agency which plans to distribute them free of charge. The Mission should 
anticipate that successful, innovative materials will be sought after and should ensure that 
the rules governing their ownership, reproduction and distribution are understood by all 
parties. 
Expect that women will buy into a good program. WEP women were prepared to pay 
a modest fee for course materials and to provide their own pens, paper and lanterns. 
Groups were able to find more literate women to act as facilitators for the literacy classes, 
and group representatives attended trainings without recompense. There is anecdotal 
evidence that some women initially opposed these costs, especially when they had 
received similar goods or services for free under past programs, but came to endorse the 
24
notion that “dependency is not empowering”. The lesson is that women are willing to 
invest scarce resources beyond time in activities which they perceive as beneficial. The 
“ownership” which they then feel is expressed in various ways. WEP group members 
have sold or rented materials to other women who wanted to start savings and credit 
groups. Since WEP ended, a number of former program participants have been trained 
by Pact to provide technical support to new village banks. Although it goes against 
cultural and social norms, these women have begun to charge for their services as 
trainers, acknowledging that their skills and knowledge are valuable and are theirs to sell. 
This approach must be flexible, especially when targeting very poor women. Under 
WEP, some women who were unable to contribute even a modest amount received the 
RR&A materials free of charge. And at least one group, composed entirely of illiterate 
women and unable to find a “literacy volunteer”, pooled its resources to pay a facilitator 
to help them through the basic course. 
Establish linkages. Even the strongest group has a better chance of survival in a 
supportive environment. Local line agencies, VDCs and other stakeholders should 
ideally be consulted about the design of the project and must at least be informed about it. 
These linkages are important in the stage of project design, throughout the life of the 
project and as an exit strategy to enhance sustainability. It is also important to establish 
linkages among the women’s groups involved in the project. This was done under WEP 
through workshops which brought together group representatives to share concerns and 
promising practices around both advocacy and the savings and credit activities. These 
workshops occurred throughout the project but were particularly important in the final 
year as the participants themselves planned for sustainability. 
Facilitate literacy throughout the life of the project. The basic literacy component of 
the WEP program lasted from three to six months; classes were led by volunteers rather 
than trained facilitators. However, the basic course was reinforced by post-literacy 
materials for both the economic participation and the legal literacy components of the 
project. The high pass rates for the literacy exam suggest that this approach works to 
foster basic literacy as well as being a mechanism for disseminating information. 
Anecdotal information points to consistent requests from the women for additional 
materials, particularly related to health. Future literacy campaigns must take into account 
the demand and the need for post-literacy materials, a variety of which already exist in 
Nepal and could therefore be provided at low cost. 
Encourage social advocacy campaigns, but as a first step. The advocacy campaigns 
in which WEP women engaged may have been more important in terms of consciousness 
raising and sense of empowerment than in terms of results. They tended to target deep￾seated social ills such as gambling and alcoholism and were often able to drive them 
underground temporarily. However, the women themselves reported that their campaigns 
did not eradicate social ills and thus were only partially successful. The RR&A materials 
were a first step in raising awareness but they did not offer an understanding of how 
power works in Nepali society, how to demand good governance, how to choose your 
battles and how to neutralize opposition. A real understanding of the political process and 
how to use it requires another level of awareness. In part this is addressed in the 
25
advocacy interventions under SO 5, and many of the WEP women will be involved in 
these exercises.
Recognize that three years is a short time to effect fundamental changes. To say that 
it is “too short” a time would be to negate the very real achievements of the program. 
However, the poorer and more isolated groups in particular would have benefited from a 
longer period of support, and a period of monitoring and evaluation after project 
completion would have given more confidence in the sustainability of project elements. 
The extra expense of post-completion monitoring is justified if it enables the mission to 
identify promising practices with some confidence and to transfer only those practices to 
subsequent SOs.
 
i
Annex A Cost of the SO
The following figures, expressed in U.S. dollars, are for the “second generation” of SO 3 
(1997-2001).
Organization Duration of Contract Total Estimated Cost Counterpart Contribution
Pact 12/19/97-9/30/01 5,178,700 662,874 (12.8%)
TAF 12/19/97-9/30/01 2,630,044 722,736 (27.48%)
CECI 12/31/96-6/30/00 878,758 246,052 (28%)
SC/US 11/23/97-9/30/00 890,456 156,720 (17.6%)
USAID’s total estimated cost was $9,577,958; Implementation Support was $581,665, 
for a total of $10,159,623.
Annex B Sources Consulted
The following surveys and evaluations were conducted during the life of the 
program.
Ashe,Jeffrey and Lisa Parrott. 2001. Impact Evaluation: Pact’s Women’s Empowerment 
Program in Nepal: A Savings and Literacy Led Alternative to Financial Institution 
Building. Kathmandu, Nepal: Office of Microenterprise.
CRI Consult, Inc. (in collaboration with Center for Resources and Environmental Studies 
(CREST) and WIDSTRAT Project). 1999. USAID/Nepal SO3 Review. Kathmandu, 
Nepal: USAID. 
Dhakal, Rajju Malla and Misbah M. Sheikh. 1997. Breaking Barriers-Building Bridges￾A Case Study of USAID/Nepal’s SO3 Women’s Empowerment Program. Washington, 
D.C.: The Asia Foundation.
Shrestha, Ava Darshan and Janardan Khatri Chhetri. 1999. Baseline Survey of the 
Women’s Empowerment Program. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Shrestha, Ava Darshan and Janardan Khatri Chhetri. 2000. Mid-Term Survey of Women 
Empowerment Program (WEP.) Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Shrestha, Ava Darshan and Janardan Khatri Chhetri. 2001. Final Evaluation Survey of 
the Women’s Empowerment Program(WEP). Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact. 
Thomas, Gwen & Ava Shrestha. December 1998 Breaking New Ground A Case Study of 
Women’s Empowerment in Nepal Women’s Empowerment Program (WEP). Kathmandu, 
Nepal: USAID/Nepal.
ii
United States Agency for International Development. 2002. USAID/Nepal Performance 
Monitoring Plan (Updated). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 2002. USAID/Nepal Annual 
Report FY 2002. Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 2001. USAID/Nepal FY 2003 
Results Review and Resource Request (R4). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 2000. USAID/Nepal Country 
Strategic Plan FY 2001-FY 2005. Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 2000. USAID/Nepal FY 2002 
Results Review and Resource Request (R4). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 1999. USAID/Nepal FY 2001 
Results Review and Resource Request (R4). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 1998. USAID/Nepal FY 2000 
Results Review and Resource Request (R4). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 1997. USAID/Nepal FY 1999 
Results Review and Resource Request (R4). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. 1996. USAID/Nepal FY 1998 
Results Review and Resource Request (R4). Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID. 
In addition to the evaluations listed above, the following additional materials were 
consulted during the preparation of this report.
Canadian Center for International Studies and Co-operation (CECI), Nepal 
Canadian Centre for International Studies and Co-operation. 2000. “Women’s 
Economic Empowerment Project (WEE) Final Quarter Progress Report (April-July 2000) 
& Overall Achievements of the Project”. Kathmandu, Nepal: CECI Women’s Economic 
Empowerment Project.
Canadian Centre for International Studies and Co-operation. 1998. “In Search of Best 
Practices: A Study of Community-Based Savings & Credit Organizations in Nepal”. 
Kathmandu, Nepal: CECI National Savings and Credit Development Project. 
iii
Center for Micro-Finance (CMF), Nepal 
 
Centre for Micro-Finance. 2000a. “A Research on Women’s Savings and 
Empowerment”. Occasional Paper No. 7, Occasional Paper Series. Kathmandu, Nepal: 
CECI Nepal.
Centre for Micro-Finance. 2000b. “Research on Risk and Vulnerability of Rural Women 
in Nepal”. Kathmandu,Nepal: CECI Nepal. 
Centre for Micro-Finance. 1999a. “Micro-Finance and Women’s Control Over Savings 
and Loans in Nepal”. Occasional Paper No. 6, Occasional Paper Series. Kathmandu, 
Nepal: CECI Nepal. 
Centre for Micro-Finance. 1999b. “Empowering Women through Micro-Finance 
Interventions: The Stories of Thirty Nepali Women”. Occasional Paper No. 5, 
Occasional Paper Series. Kathmandu, Nepal: CECI Nepal.
Centre for Micro-Finance. 1999c. “Women’s Empowerment through Micro-Finance? 
The Case of the Micro-Credit Project for Women”. Occasional Paper No. 2, Occasional 
Paper Series. Kathmandu, Nepal: CECI Nepal.
Centre for Micro-Finance. 1999d. “National Seminar on Women’s Empowerment 
through Micro-Finance Seminar Proceedings and Papers”. Kathmandu, Nepal: CECI 
Nepal.
Centre for Micro-Finance. 1998. “Micro-Finance Activities of Forest User Groups in 
Nepal: Current Status and Future Prospects”. Occasional Paper No. 3, Occasional Paper 
Series. Kathmandu, Nepal: CECI Nepal. 
Pact, Nepal 
Pact. 2002. Pact Nepal Women’s Empowerment Program (pamphlet, 24 pp.). 
Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact. 
Pact. 2001a. “Women’s Empowerment Project Tenth and Final Progress Report for the 
Period July-September 2001”. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 2001b. “Women’s Empowerment Program (WEP) MIS Report, July 2001”. 
Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 2000a. “Women’s Empowerment Program: Literacy and Economic Participation 
Year Four Program Overview”. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact. 
Pact. 2000b. “Breaking the Mold: Women’s Empowerment and Village Banking A 
Model for Sustainable Expansion and Replication”. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
iv
Pact. 2000c. “Stories from the Field WEP: Women’s Empowerment Program1999-2000 
Collection”. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 2000d. Women in Business Fourth Installment: Village Bank Entrepreneurs (First 
English Edition). Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 2000e. Women in Business Third Installment: Village Bank Lending (First English 
Edition). Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 2000f. Women in Business: Selling Made Simple (First English Edition). 
Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 1999a. Women in Business Second Installment: Forming Our Village Bank (First 
English Edition). Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. 1999b. Women in Business First Installment: Our Group (First English Edition). 
Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. n.d. Our Village Bank: Steps to Forming a Village Bank. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Pact. n.d. “Accelerating Development in Nepal’s Maoist-affected Areas: A Literacy and 
Economic Approach The Women’s Empowerment Program – Pact Nepal”. Kathmandu, 
Nepal: Pact. 
Venture The Microfinance Newsletter of Pact/Nepal Volume 1 Issue 1 January 2000; 
Volume 1 Issue 2 May 2000. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact.
Women Power Newsletter from the Women’s Empowerment Program (English version). 
Year 1 Volume 1 January 2000, Year 1 Volume 2 May 2000, Year 2 Volume 3 February 
2001, Year 2 Volume 4 July 2001. Kathmandu, Nepal: Pact and The Asia Foundation. 
July 2001
Save the Children Federation US, Himalayan Field Office, Nepal Program
Save the Children US. 2000. State of the World’s Mothers 2000. Westport, CN: Save the 
Children.
Save the Children US. 2000. “Empowering Women through Sustainable Credit 
Delivery”. PRIME End of the project report September 2000 (Volume 1). Kathmandu, 
Nepal: SC/US Himalayan Field Office, Nepal Program.. 
The Asia Foundation (TAF)
The Asia Foundation. 2001. “Women’s Empowerment Program: Rights, 
Responsibilities, and Advocacy Award No. 367-A-00-98-00001-00 Final Report”. 
Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF. 
v
The Asia Foundation. 2000a. Our Decision, Our Protection (anti-trafficking comic 
book). Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF. 
The Asia Foundation. 2000b. “Women’s Empowerment Program(WEP) Rights, 
Responsibilities, and Advocacy Revised Workplan (October 1, 2000-September 30, 
2001)”. Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF. 
The Asia Foundation. 2000c. “Women’s Empowerment Program (WEP) Rights, 
Responsibilities, and Advocacy Completion Year Program Description (October 1, 
2000-September 30, 2001)”. Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF.
The Asia Foundation. 1999a. Women’s Empowerment Program Rights, Responsibilities 
and Advocacy Facilitator’s Handbook. Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF.
The Asia Foundation. 1999b. Women’s Empowerment Program Rights, Responsibilities 
and Advocacy Participant’s Workbook. Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF.
The Asia Foundation. 1999c. “Women’s Empowerment Program Rights, 
Responsibilities and Advocacy Program Case Studies and Success Stories”. Kathmandu, 
Nepal: TAF.
The Asia Foundation WEP: Rights, Responsibilities and Advocacy Award No. 367-A￾00-98-00001-00 Progress Reports, January-March 2001, October-December 2000, April￾September 2000, October 1999-March 2000, April-September 1999, October 1998-
March 1999, April-September 1998, October 1997-March 1998
The Asia Foundation. nd. ‘The Women’s Rights, Responsibilities, and Advocacy 
Program (WEP: RR&A) (1999-2000) USAID/Nepal Award No. 367-A-00-98-00001-00, 
Project Description”. Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF.
The Asia Foundation and Population Council/Horizons. 2001a. Prevention of Trafficking 
and the Care and Support of Trafficked Persons In the Context of an Emerging HIV/AIDS 
Epidemic in Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF and New Delhi, India: Horizons Project 
Populations Council.
The Asia Foundation and Population Council/Horizons. 2001b. Trafficking and Human 
Rights in Nepal: Community Perceptions and Policy and Program Responses (Research 
Summary). Kathmandu, Nepal: TAF and New Delhi, India: Horizons Project Populations 
Council.
 
USAID 
Clarke, Mari. 2002. “Gender Assessment & Gender Action Plan of USAID/Nepal”. 
Washington, D.C.: WIDTECH. 
vi
Rowe, Karen, Shirley Burchfield et al. 2000 “Girls’ and Women’s Education Policy 
Research Activity, Baseline Report: Year 1 Nepal”. Washington, D.C.: Girls’ and 
Women’s Education, Office of Women in Development, USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development Economic Growth/Democracy and 
Governance Team. 2002. “The Nepal Crisis and Existing USAID Programming: An 
Assessment with Recommendations for Further Development” (Draft Report). 
Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID.
United States Agency for International Development. 1998. “Promoting Education for 
Girls in Nepal”. CDIE Impact Evaluation (PN-ACA-917) Washington, D.C.: USAID. 
United States Agency for International Development. nd. “Village Banking List of 10 
FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)”. Kathmandu, Nepal: USAID/Nepal Women’s 
Empowerment Program. 
Other
Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). 1997. The Why and How of 
Gender-Sensitive Indicators: A Project-Level Handbook. Hull, Quebec: CIDA.
Ministry of Health (Nepal), New ERA and ORC Macro. 2002. Nepal Demographic and 
Health Survey 2001. Calverton, MD,USA: Family Health Division, Ministry of Health; 
New ERA and ORC Macro. 
Silwal, Ani Rudra. 2002. “Giving micro-credit where it’s due”. Nepali Times 30 August￾15 September: 4-5.
Annex V Contact Persons With Additional Information About SO 3 
Centre for Micro-Finance (formerly part of CECI)
Namrata Sharma
namratas@cmf.org.np
Pact
Usha Jha
promote@pactnepal.org.np
Save the Children US
Ramesh N. Gongal (now with Centre for Development and Governance)
cedg@wlink.com.np
vii
The Asia Foundation
Basanta Pokhrel (advocacy)
basanta@taf.org.np
Pankaja Bhattarai (anti-trafficking)
pankaja@taf.org.np
USAID/Nepal
Anita Mahat
amahat@usaid.gov
Jane Nandy
jnandy@usaid.gov
Melissa Kassovic
mkassovic@usaid.gov