STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE Ib ECUADOR NORTHERN BORDER DEVELOPMENTPROGRAf CLOSE-OUT REPORT December 21, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Background Funding Amounts and Sources 1 Overall Impact at the Strategic Objective (SO) and 2 Intermediate Objective (lR) Level: Results and Key Activities. SO 13 Spread ofthe Andean Regional Coca/Cocaine 3 Economy into Ecuador IR 1. Citizen Satisfaction with Performance ofLocal 3 Democratic Institutions Increased IR 2. Licit Income and Employment Opportunities 5 Increased. IR 3. More Effective Enforcement of Laws Related to 6 Counter-narcotics. IR 4. GOE Forces More Effectively defend the security 6 ofthe Northern Border IR 5. Ecuadorian Public Recognizes Coca/Cocaine Economy as a Problem. S ustainability Lessons learned Performance Indicators Summary Evaluations, Special Studies and Special Audit Findings Names of Key Individuals Involved and Contact Information Attachments Financial Information List ofInstruments Close-Out Reports 6 8 9 12 13 14 CLOSE-OUT REPORT FOR USAID ECUADOR'S STRATEGIq OBJECTIVE 13 Northern Border Development Backl!round Name s A roval Dates and Covera e ofthis Strate ic Ob'ective S SO 13 originated as a Special Objective, "The Ecuador Northern Bor .er Special Objective SpO 13", with approval by the LAC Bureau on October 13,2000. This was to be a 24 month program, covering some 365,000 beneficiaries in the Prpvinces of Sucumbios, Carchi and northern border municipalities of Esmeraldas Province. SpO 13 was amended in July 2002 to extend it for one year and increase the fi • ding level. In June 2003, SpO 13 was terminated and converted to a full Special Obj ctive 13, (with the same title), to finance activities during FY 2003-2006, and extending he geographic coverage to 1.2 million potential beneficiaries in the 6 provinces of S umbios, Carchi, Esmeraldas, Imbabura, Napo and Orellana. This program formally en ed in March 2007, with the initiation of a new Alternative Development Program under the Mission's Peace and Security Objective. Implementing Mechanisms and Partners. --International Organization for Migration, 10M. (Cooperative Agree ent) --CARE Ecuador (Sub-grant under 10M CA) --Associates for Rural Development, ARD (Contract-Task Order) --Constella- Futures Group (Contract-Task Order) --Imagcom (Subcontract under Constella-Futures) Funding Amounts and Sources SpO 13 was initially approved in the amount of $8,000,000 in USAIDi funds. The amendment in July 2002 added an additional $10,000,000. With the tProval of the full SO 13 in June 2003 an additional $60,000,000 was authorized. There re, the total amount approve was $78,000,000, but only $75.1 million was allowe to the Mission, $74.8 million from Andean Counterdrug Initiative (ACI) and $275,00 from Development Assistance (DA). . i No specific counterpart funds were required or included in any of the three Contracts and Cooperative Agreements utilized for executing the SO budgets. However, significant funds were leveraged from communities, farmer associations, munici alities, the media and other enterprises that worked with our grantee in implementation. In the case of the 10M Cooperative Agreement it is estimated that at least $1,000,000 i local government and community contributions were made each year. In the case ofthe ARD Contract for productive activities development, local organizations and grantees contributed an estimated $1,500,000 in labbr and materials, 1 although again, no fixed amount was required or carefully accounted. IThe Futures Group Contract included a successful effort to obtain free media time, especially from television, valued at over $500,000 which doesn't include the significnt value of GOE promoted public service announcements about the Juntos Alliance du ing World Cup soccer broadcasts. Overall 1m act at the Strate ic Ob'ective and Intermediate Ob'ec ive Level: Results and Key Activities to Accomplish Them. As noted in the Background section above, this SO originally began a~ a Special Objective. The SpO was stated as "Improved quality of life of the population living along the northern border-to be measured by the number of benefici~ries in the target region whose lives are improved by participation in access to social Id infrastructure services." Four IRs were defined: IRI. Health conditions improved; I Roads and related infrastructure improved; IR3. Civil society strengthened; and I 4 Meeting the needs of displaced persons. The full description of this SpO Framework and the indicators measur~d are found in Attachment I to this report. With the expansion of the SpO to a full SO in 2003, the new expanded Results Framework (see Attachment 2) was developed. In ~ffect, IRs 1,2 and 3 became part of a new IR 1, "Citizen Satisfaction with Performance of Local Government Institutions Increased" and three new IRs were develope : Increase Licit Income and Employment; More Effective Law Enforcement; More E fective Security on the Northern Border (NB); and Public Awareness of the Threat of a C ca/Cocaine Economy. Each of these are discussed below. It should be noted that while the results under SpO 13 for IRs 1, 2, and 3 can be combined with the discussion of the total SO, covering a 6-year period, a couple ofthe activities and indicators for c'vil society strengthening were completely dropped after 2003. One was a somewhat extraneous activity ofdrug prevention education in schools. Over 25,000 student~, teachers and parents were provided drug prevention education. This program was ¢onsidered more appropriate for Narcotics Affairs Section (NAS) funding under its mandate for drug interdiction and education, and was continued by their program after 003. Another activity which was included under civil society strengthenin until 2003 was land titling, Restricted to very small numbers of titles in Sucumbios rovince, the labor intensive and relatively expensive effort required to deal with the bur aucratic impediments to titling led to dropping this component pending resolu .'on ofmany these issues at ~ national level. Only 244 individual titles and 9 indigenou~ communal titles were obtamed by these efforts after a 2-year effort, but the target numper of families was met. ' l Finally, with regard to SpO results, there was a small activity related t support for displaced Colombians, which in 2002 was anticipated to be a major p oblem in the future due to the intensification of Plan Colombia efforts, While $100,000 as budgeted to assist in such an effort, only minimal amounts were actually required or a few timely interventions during outbreaks of violence, with the major activity bei g provision of 2 water and sanitation for two shelters for displaced persons. With the Government of Ecuador (GOE) and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) more active engagement in the problem by 2003, this activity was deemed r·ecessary and inappropriate to continue with a refocused SO. SO 13-Spread of the Andean Regional Coca/Cocaine Economy into Ecuador Constrained. The indicator of accomplishment ofthis objective was "No more than ~OO hectares of coca cultivated in Ecuador." The data for measuring this has come fro~ NAS and the Military Group (MILGP) reports, based on GOE data, observations in the field and intelligence reports. Consensus of the Country Team each year since 1002 when reporting began is that this target has been met. Continued vigilance 1Ythe Ecuadorian Armed Forces patrols in the north have eliminated small coca plots as hey have been uncovered, and no significant increase has occurred from the baseline stimated at less than 500 hectares in 2004. NAS officials interviewed concurred with his assessment. To further monitor on-going levels of violence, insecurity of the popu~.tion, performance of government institutions and their perception of the drug issues, ann al and monthly surveys of the population were carried out by 10M and the Center for 0pulation Studies and Social Development (CEPAR is the Spanish acronym). This provided valuable public opinion information about the changing perceptions regarding these is~ues, and was an independent source ofmonitoring their effects on the popUlation. IR 1. Citizen Satisfaction with Performance of Local Democratic nstitutions Increased; Major Activities and Results. This IR was implemented for USAID by 10M. It included the ProviSii· n of social and productive infrastructure, and strengthening of local governments and citizen participation (the latter included the strengthening of civil society org nizations as well). Chief among the results of these efforts were the construction of273 new or improved infrastructure projects in 6 provinces, benefiting 94,200 families. The ilargest numbers of such projects, 81, were in Esmeraldas Province with some 75,000 ben ·ficiaries. (Note that figures used reflect 10M calculation of4.5 persons per family-b ginning in 2008, this ratio was recalculated using 5 members per family). r The single largest component of this IR was the construction of potable water systems. The target of 123 systems with 264,879 beneficiaries was met (124I2 9,879). In addition, 46 sanitations systems were built, generally in these same c mmunities that reached 63,301 persons (target for the SO: 44/45,464). The producti te infrastructure component included the construction of 74 bridges serving 83,055 pe6ple (targets were 72/81,355); irrigation canals (10) and rural roads (12), again meeting targets established for the period 2001-2007. To take advantage ofa few targets OfOPP · unity, GOE priority projects were built as well, such as remodeling of a few scho Is, a hospital ward, three solid waste disposal sites and a retaining wall, all of which met teeds in the communities and contributed to the IR objective of building citizen sa;tisfaction. i 3 itizen While immediate satisfaction with new services is important, the long erm effective operation of these public works is equally important for maintaining c tizen confidence in their local governments. The program addressed this through a compr hensive sustainability strategy which included the creation, legalization and/or training of Community Water Boards (JAAPs), Municipal Technical Units in Wa er and Sanitation, and education of system users in the conservation of and payment for hese services and development of environmental and water quality control vigilance pI s that included protection ofwatersheds. Some 84 JAAPs were strengthened as wer 12 Municipal Units and 2000 students in 105 schools were organized in clubs to ed ate them about conservation of water, as well as its importance in health. Complimenting the infrastructure program, extensive assistance was atso directed at improving local governance by strengthening local governments and increasing the effective participation of civil society and individual citizens in their local governments, from strategic planning to citizen watchdog committees providing oversight to construction projects. These activities began in 2004 through an IOMlsubcontract to CARE Ecuador and a consortium of several local NGOs and associati'f'ns of local governments. A total of nine Northern Border (NB) municipalities an9. 20 Parochial Boards were prioritized for interventions. Local Government (LG) strengthening processes included strategic planning, budgeting, financial management, leadership training for mayors and council members, implementation of catastros, and installation of on-line management information systems. On the citizen participation front, efforts were concentrated on partici Iatory planning and budgeting processes, and citizen accountability of public officials. W tchdog committees were established in all the municipalities. These committees were pa icularly involved in monitoring the bidding processes for public works and budget disb rsements. The Mission's major tool for measuring the results of both the provisi infrastructure and services, as well as better governance practices and participation has been the Democratic Values Survey (DVS) under th direction of Mitch Seligson of Vanderbilt University and the local survey research firm, EDATOS (Gallup affiliate in Ecuador). A random, valid sample 1500 people in five oft e nine municipalities noted above was surveyed in 2004,2005 and 2007. Th re was a significant increase in citizen satisfaction and trust in their local gove ents between 2004 and 2005, which we believe was attributable to the significant e orts and expenditures made in these municipalities. The target was to increase by six points, from 44.9% to 50.9%, while the actual average increase was seven points, t 51.9% satisfaction. Unfortunately, the subsequent survey, conducted in 200~, did not find a uniform trend upward in citizen satisfaction, with the average among these five municipalities dropping to 49.8%, although this is not a statistically significant change, it does not represent an increase. However, two of the five increased substantially and two dropped substantially, demonstrating the need to do a city by city anal~sis of the causes. 4 IR.2. Licit Income and Employment Opportunities Increased: Major Activities and Results. The objective ofthis IR was to increase income and employment for small and medium farmers in Ecuador's northern border provinces, by strengthening the competitiveness of rural enterprises through improved farm-to-market linkages in selecte . sectors. The principal mechanism for implementation of this IR was the Pronorte P oject implemented by ARD for a total of$8,542,898. This was to be accomplished by tar eting a core group ofmarket-oriented value chain clusters with the greatest potential for alue-added production growth and profitability. An additional activity worth ove $700,000 of SO 13 funds was implemented through a 3-year Global Development Alii nce (GDA) Project with Yachana Gourmet to increase the incomes of small Am nian cacao farmers, by improving the sales of cacao-products, through exports. Both from a technical and programmatic point of view, Yachana Gourmet exceeded the intended targets ofthe USAID/GDA project, including cost-share. Yachana inqreased its cacao sales, opened and consolidated new marketing channels overseas, imptoved farm and post-harvest practices, and strengthened farmers organizations benefiting more than 2,000 families. The project also generated more than 500 full time job~ and raised farmers' revenues from an average baseline of $50 per lOO-weight ba • of cacao beans to $75. These results were not included in the Mission's Performance M agement Plan (PMP) Indicators for the SO; hence no further discussion of this activi y is included in this report. (Further information can be found in Yachana's Final Re ort cited below). The Pronorte approach was to identify sectors for which a market exi Ecuador had a competitive advantage. Ofthe 14 sectors assessed, the supported with funding, technical assistance and training were cacao, . offee, avocados and broccoli. The methodology for implementation was to train producers to increase yields through improved cultural practices and improved genetic material. Once production improvements were underway, USAID also helped producers associate to form or strengthen existing collection centers. More than 35 centers were supported of which four became more regional marketing centers, buying and selling farmers' products from a wider region. In these four sectors, by the end ofthe ·0, the approach and implementation methodology improved production sufficiently to raise the income of beneficiaries, had started or supported post-harvest improvements on arms and in the collection centers, and had established improved linkages to commerc' al markets. All targets were met and/or exceeded including increases in family in orne and jobs generated. The project generated over 13,000 full time jobs and more han tripled per family income relative to the baseline. The project assisted about 16,. 00 families exceeding the target of about 10,000, and more than 33,000 hectares, were converted to productive licit use, well over the 21,000 hectares set as the target. Du,ring the one-year extension, the project developed and strengthened eight farmers' entetprises, assuring their sustainability and promoting the creation of full time jobs and the increase of family ed and for which 5 l incomes. These enterprises are still operating and at least six have the rotential to keep doing business during the next five to ten years. Seven indicators were required for each sector supported: number of b neficiaries; annual sales; yield / hectare; new investments; gross annual income per family; net annual income per family; and employment generation. Broccoli was successful but for a limited number of 110 beneficiaries. Each beneficiary earned $2,714 per year,lup from the baseline estimate of $250 per year, but less than the target of $3'872 . r year. Avocado producers met their targets for sales, income and employment, but mis ed their targets on number of beneficiaries and the yield / hectare. The best results came from cacao and coffee, where the estimated nu 1. ber of producers trained by project end was 9,480 for cacao (131 % of the target) and 2~700 for coffee (113 % ofthe target). In addition, there is now enthusiasm among producers to implement the training they received to improve yields, to expand their areas of production, and to improve post-harvest handling. Increasing prices p id by buyers for improved product and increasing yields are bringing new income to p oducers. 1&3. More Effective Enforcement of Laws Related to Counter-N cotics This IR was not a responsibility of US AID, but NAS and its counterp~rts in the national police and judiciary. NAS financed training and equipping of narcotics police as well as prosecutors to better enforce drug laws. Annual reports of drug seizues and arrests have indicated on-going successful enforcement. IRA. GOE Forces More Effectivel Defend the Securi of the NB. This IR was the primarily the responsibility of the MILGP working with the Ecuadorian Armed Forces. In fact, several thousand Ecuadorian troops were relocated to the NB region during this period, and numerous new military outposts along t e border were constructed and/or reinforced. US assistance to this effort was extens ve. By all accounts, coca fields were destroyed, the Revolutionary Armed Force of Colombia (F ARC) bases were destroyed and frequencies of patrols as well as th increased military presence have been a deterrent to the deterioration of security on the .order. 1&5. Ecuadorian Public Recognizes Coca/cocaine Economy as a ~roblem. Major Activities and Results. • The premise ofthis IR was that public awareness of and support for ttiVities to deal with this problem was far from sufficient and that the United States G vernment (USAID, Public Affairs Section (PAS) and NAS) in coordination wit. the GOE, needed to launch a systematic, empirically based public affairs/communication strategy to educate the public about the threat of the coca economy and inform t~m of what the USG and GOE were doing to improve conditions in the region The main activities to achieve this result were through the mass media, public education an~outreach. During year one (2005), the media outreach aspect of the campaign had a dis I ibution across 6 urban and rural areas in the six NB provinces, and in the urban area of Quito. The Juntos media campaign included two major activities: mass media placement of commercials in radio, television and press; and a public relations (PR) effort at the reg~onallevel and in Quito. A series of four TV ads, and six radio commercials were broad last, in addition to three press announcements. In September 2005, a mass media placement of announcements began iring focused on the Juntos Alliance. In 2006, a series of 12 TV reports, 12 radio report, one TV commercial, and billboards were produced, as well as postcards throu direct mail to inform stakeholders and others about the program. Additionally, the 0 Ice of the President ofEcuador supported Juntos with TV and radio time and a s ecially produced TV commercial was shown in prime time to a huge audience in the co ntry during the two weeks of the World Cup soccer championship, while the Ecuador eam played with massive local TV audiences watching. Between July and September 2 06, 17 radio stations broadcasted 6,356 Juntos-related advertisements. A strategy w s chosen to use optimal radio broadcast locations and times (based on extensive audie ce data from earlier CEPAR NB Surveys) with the emphasis on the "Good News" a d "Together Building a Better Country" slogans. i In Year Two of project activities, increased attention was given to public education and outreach activities, utilizing mass media components and other means .• During the second year the Mission urged The Futures Group to rely mainly on local expertise. This course was followed, and the local PR firm Imagcom then developed an inte~ationally award￾winning campaign implemented in year two and three with less than $$00,000. Through radio talk shows, dramas, sponsored programs, and paid advertising, the program reached large groups of people in a way that was cost effective and influenced positive outcomes. Other activities that formed the Community Outreach and Education component focused on increasing the frequency of exposure to the "Good News" presented at multiple public inaugurations in communities receiving new bridges, roads and water ystems, where the press was always well represented. Coverage ofthese events and num rous other project events and press conferences, exposed the public to accurate informati n about the roles ofUSG and its partners in supporting these efforts. Quantitative research focusing on the NB provinces and major media enters was carried out over the life of the contract to: identify current opinions and behav ors of the different target audiences; measure progress from an established baseline of ind cators related to knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of key groups concerning k y NB issues; measure exposure to and impact ofNB focused communication activit es; and track changes in public perception of specific NB issues to evaluate success In January 2006, CEPAR gathered information on knowledge about the "Good News" ommunication Campaign and the changing views of the population in the NB region d in general about the social and economic situation in that area. At the beginning f2006, 3.5% of those interviewed in the NB area knew about the Juntos Alliance; ther . was a higher knowledge about it in the provinces ofSucumbios (7.5%) and Napo-Orellana (4.5%), and less knowledge in Imbabura and Carchi (between 1.5% and 2.0%). Among the 3.5% who knew about the Alliance, more than a third (36%) of those had heard about Juntos and 7 knew about or had seen its corporate identity and logo. When asked if1hey know which org~i.zations are part of.the Juntos Alliance, 19% answered positively with higher levels agam m the Amazon reglOn of the border. On the CEPAR survey, persons were also asked which country(ies) mdst helped Ecuador promote economic development. Some 41 percent ofthose interview~ from the NB area believed that the U.S. is the country that helps and has helped the most to promote development in Ecuador. Further evidence that the communication ca paign was working is found in the responses ofthe NB population to the questio, "have you heard of USAID's development projects." In the 2005 CEPAR survey 27% responded "yes", I while in 2006 the percentage jumped to 37% recognition. In year three' a study was funded to augment the general findings ofthe CEPAR survey. Those;·ho took part in focus group research noted that in previous years the only news comin from the NB region was bad news - of violence, crime, and poverty. Information c llected by the research team and their review of press and other media showed that smce the end of 2005, there was an increase of about 10 percent in good news compaf{~d to the negative news or reporting on violence and crime. The research thus showed th~t positive reporting was creating a sense of hope and happiness, and recognition fwhat these organiza~ion~ and muni:ipalities are doing in relation to both major 0 .ectives ofthe NB commumcatlons campaIgn. , Other qualitative and quantitative research studies, such as focus grou~ discussions, testing communications materials, and large scale community-based Of·inion surveys were not conducted. The lack of these studies did not diminish the effi ctiveness ofthe campaign although it could have improved the communications progr m. Although these were not done, it did not diminish the effectiveness ofthe program. • Sustainability. i Of particular concern to the Mission over the life ofthis SO has been Jhe long-term sustainability ofthe massive investments in social and productive infr~structure, particularly water and sanitation systems which accounted for the bul~ ofthese investments. From the outset, the primary implementer ofthese construction projects, 10M, developed a systematic approach to their sustainability. This ap~. roach first and foremost was based on the creation and/or strengthening of Communi y Water Boards to operate and maintain these systems. Evaluations of the key factors in ustainabilityof these projects throughout Latin America have concluded that these W. ter Boards are the most essential factor, as they are charged with getting community pol~tical and financial support for the whole endeavor. The success in this effort under SO 13 has been virtually unequivocal, with all the Boards operating their systems on a continui'g basis, collecting fees to cover costs of operation and maintenance. At the municipal c pitallevel, a complementary strategy was pursued to create or strengthen the mana ement of Municipal Technical Units within the municipal government structurd. A key component ofthis was securing autonomous budgets for water system operation clnd improving the quality control capabilities of these units. On-going evaluations and field visits have 8 verified that all the necessary elements from watershed protection to tr ining of operators in the nitty gritty of system maintenance are in place. Sustainability of the new licit jobs created and enhanced incomes for f: ers in the region, has been fomented by adopting the lessons learned under this SO regarding focus on value chains, demand/market driven decision-making and the use 0 the anchor firm approach. All these lessons are described in the "Lessons Learned" se tion below. Adopting these under the Mission's new Peace and Security Objective Alternative Development Program should further enhance their sustainability over the long run. Given the importance of reaching wide audiences with counternarcoti~s messages, a small follow-on contract was made with the local PR firm Imagcom in mid 2008. Even though this contract is under $100,000 the alliances established, methodologies proven successful and PR events have been continued. Major savings are realized by the elimination ofthe high cost overheads of a US-based contractor. Furth~r mileage is being obtained by continued good will of program participants, spokespersotis, and media contacts negotiated previously. What has become evident in 2008 is tHe difficulty in sustaining many of the gains made in establishing the Juntos brand-Together for a Better Life in the North, as communications concept under a new GOE Administration which wants to promote a new image of Plan Ecuador with a much higher GOE profile, to minimalize the other partners in the continuing endeavors to strengt I en the northern border. In the current confrontational environment ofthe Correa Adm nistration, continuing to pursue the original objective of informing the public abo t the positive contributions ofthe USG to Ecuador's development, and partnerships mong equals, will be much more of a challenge. Lessons Learned 1. Integrated approach is required to address problems in Northe Border. A large, comprehensive and integrated approach to deal with the multi Ie threats of a coca/cocaine economy should include infrastructure, local government strengthening, security, law enforcement and a supportive communications program i the original design and not added on in a piece meal manner afterwards. Because f the staggered approach with regard to the differing start-up times ofthe components, and multiple implementing organizations, Cognizant Technical Officers (CTOS), and Chiefs ofParty, it was difficult to achieve maximum synergy ofthe components. Alternative Development Programs should clearly contain all the necessary progratn elements to be comprehensive within one strategic planning framework. I 2. Broad definition of problem promoted coordination of activities !between USG agencies. Defining the SO in terms of a coca/cocaine problem was outside USAID manageable interests but did promote unprecedented coordination and ~ommunication with NAS, MILGP and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and kept the counter-narcotics issues high on the agenda of both US Embassy and ashington. 9 3. Demand of products should be taken into account before suppo to value-chains. This approach ofIntennediate Result 2 was initially designed to devel p and strengthen selected clusters. This "cluster approach" called for supporting produc rs within selected sub-sectors, without any geographic, value chain and/or associative co sideration, contradicting the very definition of cluster. A key assumption was that. hese products had an effective and stable demand and eventually a buyer would purchase them at profitable prices. However, despite the gains in increased productivity and imprqved quality at the fann and post-harvest stages ofthe value chain, it was difficult to alwaYs find the best market channel for products. USAID learned that T A to strengthen the forward linkages between fanners and processors with buyers and exporters is necessary. The market soon taught that neglecting its signals could be detrimental for businesses. T is lesson was fully incorporated into the follow-on NB local business development p ogram, PRODEL, currently being implemented. 4. Exposing farmers to how they link to macro business processes roved useful. Fanners were motivated to improve their business perfonnance by bei g shown the entire flow oftheir products, including tenninal markets and final consumers Iand, more importantly, teaching them simple business and financial management tools. The exposure to and practice of business and entrepreneurial skills proved ~o be a great motivational force and effective engine for growth and sustainability .. 5. Anchor firms are needed to speed up income growth. The bus in • ss and marketing deficiencies of poor fanners led the project to select an adequate finn ithin the value chain to anchor USAID assistance to the fanners. These anchor finns ave developed strong business relationships with a small number of providers (poor Dnners) and the approach to pivot USAID support on these finns offered the opportuni y to link more fanners and their families to these anchor finns, extending thus the be efits ofUS AID assistance and speeding income growth. 6. Construction of water projects should be linked with improved sanitation, and education in hygiene practices. Most health experts agree that to ac~ieve the maximum health improvement benefits from a water and sanitation program, there needs to be not only both interventions in the same community, but also the added cOqlponent ofsanitary education activities, particularly good hand-washing practices. With t ·is in mind, sanitation systems were given higher priority in the latter years ofthe 0, and a hand washing initiative was begun in the subsequent Alternative Developm nt Program initiated in late 2007. Still however, many ofthe border communities, where USAID implemented SO 13, have only improved water systems as opposed to these three pillars. It is therefore important that not only new communities targeted in the future have all three, but to the degree possible, missing components need to be addre sed in previously targeted communities . 7. Local water boards are key to sustainability ofwater and sanita~ion infrastructure. The most likely guarantor ofsustainability ofwater and sanitation infrastructure (assuming involvement ofthe community in establishin • this as a priority), 10 is the establishment and training of JAAPs in Ecuador. Their role is fuJ.lY discussed above under "Sustainability." 8. Political will and leadership is key to sustainability. Improveme ts in local government functioning and effective citizen participation depend on rhany factors, but perhaps most importantly political will and leadership at the localleve~-from mayors to community leaders. Ifthere is no leadership to instill transparency, co lect user fees, properly dispose of solid waste, etc. at best, there will be short-run suc esses, but a lack of sustain ability. At the same time, models of transparency in contrac'ng, leadership development and management skills supported by our funding are impprtant contributors to initiating these changes. • 9. Polls may not accurately measure impact on popular satisfactiot of local government performance. Using opinion polls, on a random basis ac oss entire municipalities does not accurately reflect project impact of citizen sati. faction because of constantly changing attitudes and believes. Polls can occur over a peri(j)d of euphoria over a new water system or during a period oftemporary dissatisfaction. F rthermore, attributing changes in citizen satisfaction with local government to on USAID program is a questionable undertaking. Using less costly and more direct meas rements of citizen participation and satisfaction at the local level, such as measuring citi n involvement in maintaining water systems, or payment rates, is a lesson worth applyi g in the future. ! 10. Local, low-cost, communications expertise is very effective at ~ighlighting USAID support. A multi-faceted, comprehensive communications ca paign (IR 5), covering large geographic areas, diverse populations and grounded in mpirical behavioral research is inherently expensive. The Mission's budget fo • year one was about three-quarters of a million dollars-perhaps an adequate amounl if mostly devoted to local costs, but much ofthis was absorbed by international contract9rs' technical assistance, travel and especially fees and overheads. While most obs~ers viewed the Phase I efforts as a success, it was really the result ofthe intense wor of local, low-cost expertise, donated media time and creative use of existing resources i . other elements of the Alternative Development (AD) program that allowed this to happen. If local expertise can be identified from the outset and the expertise in house to manage the activity exists, this would be more cost-effective. l· 11. Strong local alliances are key to encouraging ownership. Take he time and effort to create a strong core alliance. Public-private and public-public alli . ces were keys to achieving results. The Juntos Alliance was a model ofhow to be inclljlsive all the way from the community beneficiaries who gave testimonials, to the highest level decision￾makers in USAID and the GOE. Public events where all players on tI·e Northern Border development program participated created a whole that was greater th n the individual pieces, adding to the integrated approach to development so importan in the AD areas of the northern border. The Juntos Alliance actively engaged not only U . AID, PAS, the GOE's Northern Development Unit (UDENOR), 10M, ARD, Yachana Gourmet and CARE from the NB Strategic Objective funding, but other USAID prers working in 11 these same geographic areas, such as Chemonics (Caiman Project) and.ARD 3d's Municipal Development Program. . 12. Providing regular information to the press assists in highlighting USAID support. The importance of good will of the media, all types, national ~d local cannot be overestimated. The contractor, through its local subcontract, demo strated the importance of "selling" the Juntos Program objectives and messages t the media, who in tum granted extensive free media time as well as interviews and vario s news programs, which served as "advertisements" of our activities and their benefits to the people. Assisting the press with media rides to the border areas, providing the with slick, informative audiovisual materials and making sure they covered key h' gh profile project events and inaugurations, assured the massive coverage our program a tivities sited above. Performance Indicators Summa -see also Attached PMP Table The attached PMP Tables from FY 2004, 05, 06 and 07 include 16 res Its indicators that were measured during the life of the SO. Here suffice it to say that all ut one ofthe more than 12 indicator targets were met and surpassed. The only sho • all was in the indicator of citizen satisfaction with local government, measured by th¢ Seligson DVS in five municipalities in 2004 and these plus three more in 2005 and 2007. Based on very positive increases in public satisfaction between 2004 and 2005, a target of another 10% increase by 2007 was considered realistic. This proved not to be the case, with only three ofthe eight municipalities reaching the targeted increase, while in threty others there was a significant decline in satisfaction. I Evaluations, Special Studies and Special Audit Findings 1). Gersony Evaluation ofthe NB Program. The original design ofthe NB activities in 2000 was mainly the result of a field technical study of the entire bord • r area by Robert Gersony. Two years later, March 2002, Gersony was contracted to ev luate the initial implementation of activities under the SpO 13; and to propose new act vities for the broader SO 13 then under design. His report gave high marks to the p gram because it was achieving practical, visible and high impact sustainable results ba d on priorities in the NB region. Gersony was particularly positive about the performance of 10M, both technically and in terms of establishing effective coordination and working relationships ith communities as well as national ministry officials. 2). RIG Audit Report No. 1-518-04-010-P. As part of its routine annu I audit plan for FY 2004, USAID's Regional Inspector General's Office (RIG) in San alvador, completed a comprehensive program audit of all the activities finance under the NB Program, in particular the 10M-managed infrastructure program, from 'ts inception, 12 through December 2003. Findings were very positive, especially their I-onclusion that virtually all projects visited in their sample were declared sustainable, tuilt as planned and with no evidence of any financial issues. Eight often activities w~re fully on schedule to obtain sustainable results as planned. Only the smallland1· itling and drug education activities were less than 90% completed within schedule. B th of these were subsequently dropped from the program. Meanwhile, the only issue n eding correction was a concern for double counting of beneficiaries, since the same people receiving a new water system one year might be counted as new beneficiary of a sbnitation system the next year. A revised M & E system was developed that permitted re Mission to avoid this problem, while still counting beneficiaries by type ofbenefi . 3) Northern Border Income and Employment Project (Pronorte): Lessons Learned Assessment. This study was completed in September 2006, at the end bf the Pronorte contract, and funded by the contractor, ARD. The principal lessons lered are covered in section 6 above. Disapproved t\:7~jd~ lJUJiJJ.~ ---------------------~--- Daniel Sanchez-Bustamante Daniel Sanchez-Bustamante A. Mission Director A. Mission Dire'rr Attachment 1: Financial Information Attachment 2: SPO Framework and indicators Attachment 3: New Expanded Results Framework Attachment 4: Close Out Reports . --Constella Futures Task Order GHS-I-00-03-00035-00 Final Report )tled, "The Jutnos Alliance and the "Good News Campaign" ~ -- 10M Cooperative Agreement No.518-A-00-OI-0001O-00, Informe rinal de Program de Desarrollo de la Frontera Norte, 2001-2007" I --ARD Final Report of Task Order 823 under the RAISE IQC, "Northern Border Income and Employment Project (Pronorte)" . --ARD Pronorte Project, CTO's Final Report, December, 2008 --Memo to Files: Close Out of Cons tell a Futures Group Task Order, Kenneth Farr, November 21,2008 • I 13 --Yachana Gourmet Final Report "Amazon Cacao Development Allii'e (GDA), September 15,2006 Names of Key Individuals Involved and contact information. Kenneth Farr, former CTO, 10M and Futures Group instruments, USAID/E Edgar Guillen, former CTO, USAID IEcuador Sylvana Vasco, Program Assistant for SO 13, USAID/E Hugo Ramos, former CTO for the ARD Contract, USAID/E Lourdes Paez, Imagcom, Quito, Ecuador Pamela Pine, Constella Futures, Washington I Brian Doherty, former NAS Coordinator, currently State Dept. Washirgton John Haynes, NAS Coordinator, US Embassy Quito • Former UDENOR Directors Vinicio Jaramillo, Glauco Bustos and Patricio Zambrano (no known address) I Aaron Sherinian, former PAS Quito, currently MCC Public Affairs Ditector, Dept. of State, Washington . Clearances: Sergio Guzman, DGCP 4'Ldate 7123/09 /"lIZ I (tJ f Edgar Guillen, DGCP -rrr--date 4/24109 Hugo Ramos, DGCP ID date 5/6109 Maria Cristina Laso, FMO ID date 6/15/09 Paulyna Martinez, SDO ID date 6/29/09 14 ATTACHMENT 1 16 ATTACHMENT 2 17 IR I-Citizen Satisfaction with Perfonnance of Local Democratic Institutions Increased (USAID) IR 2-Ucit Income & Employment Opportunities Increased (USAID) Strategic Objective 13 Spread ofthe Andean Regional Coca/Cocaine Economy into Ecuador Constrained (USG COUNTRY TEAM) IR 5-Ecuadorian public recognizes that coca/cocaine economy is a national problem (PAS, NAS, USAID) 24 NORTHERN BORDER Jt­I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy in o Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATlON: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.0 - (a) Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy into I;cuador contained. INDICATOR: Annual gross income per family. UNIT OF MEASURE: US$ amount/per family/per year YEAR PL,ANNED ACTUAL 2003(B) I $446 SOURCE: ARD/ProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, July I-September 30, 2004 ~423* $428 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: 2004 Annual gross income is measured by the sales of cacao, i vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee. 2005 j$602 NA The project uses total sales as a proxi to estimate gross 1 income per family, per product (value chain or cluster). 2006 1$790 NA Total sales are recorded by individual farmers or I associations. 2007 r,ooo NA (Cumulative) 2008 ~ I ,300 NA Timing - Annually. COMMENTS: 2009 $1,650 NA TARGETS YEAR ORIGINAL REVISED I 2003 (B) 394 446 20 I O(T) ~2,000 NA 2004 595 423 ! 2005 704 602 2006 950 790 I ! Baseline and annual targets have been adjusted from a I calendar year to a fiscal year planning resulting in a reduction of numbers in the equivalent figures to three months of activities (Oct-Dec 04 to adjust to Sep 04). *The gross income target has been set up at lower level than the baseline reflecting the less than 12-months period of effective field work. I I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy i.1tO Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY IORGANIZA TION: USAlD/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.1 I increased. (d) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local de~ocratic institutions INDICATOR: Number of water boards created, legalized, trained and functioning by category A, B and C (Definition of category A, Band C outlined in comments below)* UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of water boards YEAR P""ANNED ACTUAL (CUMULATIVE) 2002 (B) 0 0 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July ~September, 2004 2003 22 24 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Timing Annually. 2004 I 40 37 COMMENTS: *A - Well functioning board and water system 2005 55 NA B - Water system functioning, but with minor administrative problems C - Water system needs repairs 2006 65 NA Number of water boards is not the same as number of water systems, because in some communities water boards are 2007 70 NA already functioning well. The Water Boards are elected within the communities 2008 75 2009 80 2010 85 5 OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy inlEcuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY,2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZ TION: USAlD/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO l3.\ (e) Citizen satisfaction with performance oflocal demfratic institutions increased. I INDICATOR: Number of Water Administration Units in municipalities created and(or strengthened UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of water administration YEAR PLANNED ACTUAL units 2003 I 5 (CUMULATIVE) I SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July - September, L 2004 I 8 8 2004 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Timing - Annually. COMMENTS: WATER UNITSTARGETS YEAR ORIGINAL REVISED 2005 8 9 2006 8 10 2005 -. 2006 2007 I I 9 I I 10 I I 11 NA NA NA TuJcan added in 2005 2008 I I I 12 Water Administration Units are part ofthe municipalities. 2009 2010 I 13 I L I 14 I I I OBJECTlVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy iQl0 Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATlON: USAlD/Ecuador RESUL T NAME: SO 13.0 (b) Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy into ~cuador contained. INDICA TOR: No more than 500 hectares of coca cultivated in Ecuador I UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of hectares YEAR P~ANNED ACTUAL SOURCE: NAS, DEA, MilGrp and Antinarcotics Police 2004 <500 <500 Reports INDICATOR DESCRIPTlON: U.S. and GOE sources use field surveillance and eradication reports to estimate trends 2005 i ! 1<500 NA in cultivation. 2006 ; <500 NA Timing - Annually COMMENTS: Only 5 hectares of mature coca plants found and destroyed in 2004. Sources view this a successful year, no change in cultivation. 2007 2008 2009 2010 ! <500 ! L I <500 NA NA I <500 NA i I <500 NA I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy intp Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATlON: USAID/Ecuador RESU L T NAME: SO 13.1 - (a) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local demo I,;ratic institutions increased. INDICATOR: Number of beneficiaries in the target region whose lives are improved by access to social and productive infrastructure. i UNIT Of MEASURE: (1) Number of beneficiaries YEAR PLf\NNED ACTUAL (individuals) 2004 4 ,635* (I) 25,550** (2) Number of families (CUMULATlVE) (2) 5,678 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July-September, 2004 2005 (1)110,000 NA INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: (2j 24,444 *In order to comply with the RlG's recommendation made 2006 (1)133,435 NA under the Northern Border Development Program Audit, (2 29,652 dated October 2, 2003, USAID/Ecuador and 10M have 2007 (I) 153,435 established procedures to ensure that beneficiaries are not double counted when reporting the overall number of (2) 34,097 beneficiaries of productive and social infrastructure of the 2008 (I )171,435 Northern Border Development Program. (2' 38,097 The number of beneficiaries corresponds to NEW beneficiaries for the whole 10M program for FY -04 (period 2009 (I) 186,435 October I, 2003 September 30, 2004). (2) 41,430 ! Timing - Annually. COMMENTS: 201O(T) (I) 196,435 NA **Target is not being met because planned water, sewerage systems, bridges and one irrigation canal were not completed (2 43,652 as of September 30,2004. Most ofthis social infrastructure has been terminated within 60 days after close of reporting period. OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy into Ecuador contained, APPROVED: FEBRUARY,2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATION: USAlD/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13,1 (b) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local democratic institutions increased, INDICATOR: Number of village potable water systems constructed/repaired/expand d in target areas, UNIT OF MEASURE: YEAR PLAN ~ED ACTUAL (a) Number of potable water systems - 2000(B) 0 0 (b) Number of beneficiaries i (CUMULATIVE) 2001 5 4 1 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July September, 2002 24 23 2004 2003 361 39 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: These systems include those repaired, replaced and totally new, I 2004 (a) (b) (a) (b) Timing - Annually i 58 ~3,225 52 13,350 COMMENTS: In order to comply with the RIG's I 2005 86 20,336 NA recommendation made under the Northern Border Development Program Audit, dated October 2,2003, i the number of beneficiaries under this indicator 2006 104 66,422 NA corresponds to NEW beneficiaries for this service for FY-04 (period October I, 2003 September 30, 2004). 2007 120 07,388 See details below: WATER SYSTEM BENEFICIARIES Pacayacu 1,500 2008 130 32,991 Chiritza 400 Bolivar MontUfar 7,285 2009 140 f58,594 Tobar Donoso 150 EI Carmelo 1,800 i San Jose Nispud 150 2010 150 f84,198 Chum ban Alto 250 San Nicolas de Car 135 i San Lorenzo 0* Palma Real 0* La Boca 580 Urbina 600 EI Progreso 500 i Five additional water systems were planned to be completed by September 30, 2004, but were not actually finished until the end of November, 2004, therefore, i these systems will not be counted on this reporting period. The water system in Parroquia Urbina was cancelled due to a lack of viable source of water. *Beneficiaries previously counted under first phase of the water system WATER SYSTEMS TARGETS YEAR ORIGINAL REVISED 2005 75 86 2006 96 104 I I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy into f cuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/0RGANIZA' .ION: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.1 (c) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local democr1tic institutions increased. INDICATOR: Number of sewerage systems constructed/repaired/expanded in target areas. UNIT OF MEASURE: YEAR PLA~NED ACTUAL (a) Number ofsewerage systems 2001(B) 0 (b) Number of beneficiaries (CUMULATIVE) 2002 i3 2 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July September, 2003 4 2004 2004 (a) I (b) (a) (b) INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Sewerage systems planned and executed include i 13 7,880 I 1 3,505 letrinization and piped sewage disposal. ,-' 2005 I 17 12,197 NA Timing Annually. L ! COMMENTS: In order to comply with the RIG's I 2006 27 /20,614 NA recommendation made under the Northern Border Development Program Audit, dated October 2,2003, the number of beneficiaries under this indicator corresponds to 2007 30 i 23,139 NEW beneficiaries for this service for FY -04 (October I, I 2003 - September 30, 2004). See details below: 2008 35 I 27,343 I SEWERAGE SYSTEM BENEFICIARIES i 2009 40 I 31,556 San Miguel 400 i 10 de Agosto 500 2010 45 35,764 Chilma Bajo 150 Puerto Libre 300 A velino Fuertes 1,000 Maldonado 355 / Chitacaspi 800 Sewerage system for Patria Nueva was terminated on I October, 2004, therefore, this system will be counted under the targets ofFY 05. Sewerage systems for Borbon ad San Lorenzo were II postponed due to community agreement that improving potable water systems were of higher priority in 2004. SEWERAGE SYSTEMS TARGETS I YEAR ORIGINAL REVISED ! I 2005 23 17 I 2006 30 27 I i ! The reduction in the targets is because the program needs the / completion of some studies and to ensure that beneficiaries ofnew water systems demonstrate willingness to pay for and operate these services. OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy i hto Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATION: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.1 (f) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local democratic institutions increased. I INDICATOR: Increased participation of citizens and community organizations i~llocal government management processes (e.g. planning, budgeting, and/or citizen oversight committel;:s in public meetings) UNIT OF MEASURE: Percentage of citizens I (CUMULATIVE) SOURCE: CARE's Workplan INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: *FY 2005 10% (l0 points increase from baseline) increase in citizen participation in 6 municipalities in level 2. **FY 2006 (a) 10% (10 additional points increase from FY 2005) additional increase in first 6 municipalities, and (b) 10% increase in 3 new municipalities Timing Annually. YEAR 2004(B) 2005 2006 2007 (T) P~ANNED ACTUAL 0% i 10%* NA I (~) 20%** I(b) 10% I TBD I NA NA i I I COMMENTS: I I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy int~ Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY /ORGANIZA. TlON: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.1 (g) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local demopratic institutions increased. INDICATOR: Number of local governments that have implemented or improved at ~east two services which have been chosen in a participatory manner. I UNIT OF MEASURE: Number oflocal governments I YEAR PL+NNED ACTUAL (CUMULATIVE) 2004(B) I 0 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report/CARE's workplan 2005 I I 5 NA INDICA TOR DESCRIPTION: I l Services are defined as: water and sanitation systems, solid 2006 I I 10 NA waste disposal, and/or irrigation systems I I Timing Annually. 2007 ;13 COMMENTS: I I 2008 15 I 2009 ; 16 l 2010 17 TBD I i i OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy ~~~ Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY,2003 COUNTRY/ORGANI ATION: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.1 - (h) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local dentocratic institutions increased. INDICATOR: Increased legitimacy of 5 northern border USAID-supported municipalities UNIT OF MEASURE: Percentage SOURCE: Democratic Values Survey (DVS) Pag. 55, Fig. 3.3 Measures satisfaction with services Pag. 60, Fig. 3.8 Measures trust in municipalities YEAR 2004(B) 2005 P ~ANNED ACTUAL (a) 44.9%* (b) 32.3% it) 50.9% NA INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Measured by two sets of benchmarks: Representative sample of citizens in 5 northern border USAID-assisted municipalities expressing: (a) satisfaction with improvements in municipal services, (b) trust in municipal government. Timing Annually. 2006 2007 (T) ( ) 37.3% (~) 54.9% NA (~) 42.3% TBD NA COMMENTS: *This is an unweighted average of satisfaction and trust for the 5 municipalities of the program. i i 1 1 ORTECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy into Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATlPN: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.2- (a) Licit income and employment opportunities increased. ! , INDICATOR: Number of pedestrian and vehicular bridges constructed-repaired. I UNIT OF MEASURE: YEAR PLAN~ED ACTUAL (a) Number of bridges 2000(B) ! 01 0 (b) Number of beneficiaries (CUMULATIVE) 2001 lOi 1 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July September, 2002 20 1 16 2004 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: 2003 22i i 17 (a) I (b) (a) (b) Timing - Annually. 2004 38 i 18,480 34 17,300 COMMENTS: In order to comply with the RIG's recommendation made 2005 55 1 52,017 NA NA under the Northern Border Development Program Audit, ! dated October 2,2003, the number of beneficiaries under 2006 65 1 63 ,461 NA NA this indicator corresponds to NEW beneficiaries for this service for FY-04 (October 1,2003 September 30, 2004). 2007 70 1 69,193 See details below: I BRIDGE BENEFICIARIES 2008 75 1 74,905 Nueva Esperanza, Coop. Los Orenses 400 Rio T ocachi, EI Recreo 200 1 80 Aguas Blancas y Rio Blanco (2) 550 ,627 2009 80 General Farfan-San Francisco (2) 900 Santa Marianita-Puerto Mestanza (2) 1,200 2010 85 1 86,349 EI Chota (pedestrian) 3,850 El Milagro (vehicular) 1,250 EI Guadual (pedestrian) 100 1 Kennedy San Lorenzo (pedestrian) 6,000 Kennedy San Lorenzo (vehicular) 0* I Colon Eloy (pedestrian) 200 1 Los Ajos (pedestrian) 300 Lagarto-Las Delicias 1,800 Unidos Venceremos 550 1 Construction of the following three bridges was not I completed on time due to provincial strikes. The following I bridges have been constructed by October, 2004 and will be I counted in the next reporting period: Juan Montalvo 1,000 Via San Carlos-Sevilla (2) 520 Two bridges in the Jambeli-Dobuno were cancelled and I replaced by bridge Unidos Venceremos, which is already finished. 1 *Beneficiaries previously counted under bridge built in I same community 11 I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy ~~~ Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANI ATION: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO J3.2 (b) Licit income and employment opportunities increased. INDICATOR: Direct on/off farm employment generated I UNIT OF MEASURE: YEAR P",ANNED ACTUAL (I) ARD Full time workers (8 hours/day, 5 days/week) 2003(B) 7,435 (2) OIM Full time workers (8 hours/day, 5 days/week) I (CUMULA TIVE) 2004 (~&2) 8,308 ( 1)7,770* I i (2) 400 SOURCE: ARD/ProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, i July I-September 30, 2004 l l 2005 ~l) 10,284 NA 10M's e-mail dated November 30, 2004 Report i I i(2) 800 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: 2006 ~I) 13,190 NA I (J) ARD Onlofffarm employment is measured within the (2) 1,100 cacao, vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee sub sectors; 2007 ~I) 15,000 NA (2) OIM Off farm employment is measured by construction ~2) 1,400 workers under OIM CA. 2008 ~ I) 16,500 (2) 1,700 Timing Annually. COMMENTS: 2009 ~1) 18,000 I 1(2) 2,000 adjusted from a calendar year to a fiscal year planning The following ARD baseline and annual targets have been (I) 19,500 resulting in a reduction of numbers in the equivalent figures 2010 j(2) 2,300 to three months ofactivities (Oct-Dec 04 to adjust to Sep 04). I i TARGETS YEAR ORIGINAL REVISED 2003 (B) 8,531 7,435 2004 9,297 8,308 i i i 2005 9,285 10,284 2006 10,167 13,190 i , I , *During I the implementation of the project, refinement of the number and work time of workers in the farms, processing I and transportation phases of the value chains -clusters￾resulted in a lower number than the target. FOR THIS INDICATOR. USAID/ECUADOR USES THE METHODOLOGY APPROVED FOR THE PART EXERCISE I i OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy i~~ Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATION: USAlD/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.2 - (c) Licit income and employment opportunities increa*d. INDICATOR: Number of beneficiary families from Northern Border Program proquctive activities UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of beneficiary families (CUMULATIVE) SOURCE: ARD/ProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, July I-September 30, 2004 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Families within the cacao, vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee subsectors receiving training, T A and/or financial assistance. Timing Annually. YEAR 2003(B) 2004 2005 2006 i ACTUAL 6,413 PL~NNED I 1 7,591 * 18,775 :7,667 NA 19,960 NA I COMMENTS: TARGETS YEAR ORIGINAL REVISED 2003 (B) 6,413 2004 8,026 7,667 2005 9,915 8,775 2006 11,823 9,960 Baseline and annual targets have been adjusted from a calendar year to a fiscal year planning resulting in a reduction of numbers in the equivalent figures to three months of activities (Oct-Dec 04 to adjust to Sep 04). *The number of actual beneficiaries is slightly less than the target because some farmers manifested their unwillingness to participate in the project and fulfill some minimum requirements, after thev have initially expressed interest. 2007 2008 2009 2010 ~2,000 NA ! 1 13 ,500 1 15,000 I 116,500 I I I ! I I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread of the Andean coca/cocaine economy i ~to Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATION: USAID/Ecuador I RESULT NAME: SO 13.2 ~ (d) Licit income and employment opportunities incre,sed. i INDICATOR: Number of hectares oflicit crops UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of hectares YEAR PLANNED ACTUAL (CUMULATIVE) 2003 (B) 16,209 SOURCE: ARD/ProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, 2004 16,421 14,534* July I-September 30,2004 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of hectares of 2005 1 2 ],991 NA new licit crops within the cacao, vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee subsectors supported by the I Program. 2006 i 27,620 NA I For this indicator the Program uses: 2007 1 30,000 NA (I) Records of beneficiaries, either individual farmers or assoc iations; i (2) Sampling of plots to verify size and crop. 2008 1 32,000 NA Timing Annually. 2009 34,000 COMMENTS: i TARGETS I BASELINE 2004 2005 2006 2010 /36,000 Cacao 13,692 14,237 17,519 20,904 Vegetables 0 84 272 416 i Coffee 2,517 2,100 4,200 6,300 *The number of hectares of licit crops is lower than the target due to inevitable adjustments: the target was set up I based on rapid estimations, while the achieved number on I actual measurements. I OBJECTIVE: Strategic Objective - Spread ofthe Andean coca/cocaine economy ~~~ Ecuador contained. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANI ATlON: USAID/EcuadoT RESULT NAME: SO 13.5 (a) Ecuadorian public recognizes that coca/cocaine eco/lomy is a national problem I INDICA TOR: Percentage of nationally representative sample of Ecuadorians who ~elieve coca and cocaine constitute a problem for Ecuador i UNIT OF MEASURE: Percentage of the population from YEAR PL~NNED ACTUAL selected areas 2004 (B) (a) 73% SOURCE: CEPAR's survey INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: (a) % of population surveyed saying "Yes" to the question: "is narcotrafficking a problem in Ecuador" (Dec, 2003, survey) 2005 I I I I (~) 78% (b) 23% NA (b) % ofpopulation in the survey who say "GOE is doing a (Jan, (h) 35% lot or something about it. 2005 survey) i I Timing - Annually. 2006 (b) 80% NA COMMENTS: ( ) 50% FY 2004 baseline data is based on the December 2003 CEPAR's survey. 2007(T) iTBD NA Target for FY 2005 will be measured by the January 2005 ITBD CEPAR's survey. I I I ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT P~OGRAM (January, 2008) I \. 50 13 ~rY 1118 I ~ OBJECTIVE: Peace and Security. APPROVED: JlIL Y 2007 COUNTRY/ORGANr~ATlON: USAID/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Cunter-Narcotics PROGRAM ELEM ENT: Alternative Development and Alternative Livelihoods INDICATOR: Annual gross income per family. UNIT OF MEASURE: US$ amounUper family/per year YEAR PLANNED ACTUAL 2003(8) ! $446 SOURCE: ARD/ProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, July I-September 30, 2006 $428 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: 2004 i$423* i Annual gross income is measured by the sales of cacao, i vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee. 2005 $602 $731 *Target for FY08 is lower than the actual in FY07 because in FY08 the Program will reach a new group of 2006 $790 $1,065 beneficiaries. The project uses total sales as a proxi to estimate gross I 2007 ~1,500 $1,627 income per fpmily, per product (value chain or cluster). Total sales are recorded by individual farmers or 20 1$900* NA associations. 2009 $2,000 NA (Cumulative) Timing ~ Annually. 2010(1') $2,200 NA COMMENTS: OBJECTIVE: Peace and Security. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANIZATION: USAID/Ecuador I RESULT NAME: SO 13. I - (a) Citizen satisfaction with performance of local de'11ocratic institutions increased. INDICATOR: Number of families benefited by alternative development or altern- tive livelihood activities in USG assisted areas UNIT OF MEASURE: (I) Number of beneficiaries YEAR PLANNED ACTUAL (individuals) 2001 i (2) Number offamilies (CUMULATIVE) 2002 (I) 63,561 SOURCE: 10M's Progress Report, July-September, 2007 (2) 14,125 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: 2003 I (I) 108,522 *In order to comply with the RIG's recommendation made (2) 24,116 under the Northern Border Development Program Audit, 2004 (I) 150,157 (I) 134,072 dated October 2, 2003, USAID/Ecuador and 10M have I established procedures to ensure that beneficiaries are not 2) 33,368 (2) 29,794 double counted when reporting the overall number of 2005 (I) 218,522 (I) 225,692 beneficiaries of productive and social infrastructure of the 2) 48,560 (2) 50,154 Northern Border Development Program. 2006 (') 268,522 (1)371,342 The number of beneficiaries corresponds to NEW 2) 59,672 (2) 82,521 beneficiaries for the whole 10M program for FY-07 (period 2007 (1) 417,922 (I) 423,922 October 1,2006 ­ September 30,2007). U) 92,871 (94,204) Timing Annually. 2008 ( ) 458,772* NA (12) 101,948 I) 464,566 NA 2009 (~) 103,237 COMMENTS: 20 10(T) ed. INDICATOR: Number of beneficiary families from Alternative Development Pr()fram productive activities UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of beneficiary families YEAR P~ANNED ACTUAL (CUMULA TIVE) 2003(8) 6,413 SOURCE: ARDlProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, July I-September 30, 2007 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: 2004 7,667 7,591 Families within the cacao, vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee subsectors receiving training, T A and/or 2005 18,775 7.706 financial assistance. 2006 \9,963 12,696 Timing - Annually. COMMENTS: 2007 112,700 15,785 I 2008 19,785 2009 f3,785 2010 tn,785 OBJECTIVE: Peace and Security. APPROVED: FEBRUARY, 2003 COUNTRY/ORGANI2ATION: USAID/Ecuador RESULT NAME: SO 13.2 - (d) Licit income and employment opportunities increa~ed. INDICATOR: Number of hectares oflicit crops UNIT OF MEASURE: Number of hectares YEAR PLf'\NNED ACTUAL (CUMULATIVE) I 2003 (B) 16,209 SOURCE: ARD/ProNorte's Quarterly Progress Report, 2004 ,6,421 14,534 July I-September 30,2007 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of hectares of 2005 1,991 14,598 new licit crops within the cacao, vegetables (potatoes, broccoli, etc.) and coffee subsectors supported by the 2006 1,322 26,643 Program. i For this indicator the Program uses: 2007 8,600 33,240 (1) Records of beneficiaries, either individual farmers or associations; 2008 5,240 NA (2) Sampling of plots to verifY size and crop. 2009 37,240 Timing Annually. ! COMMENTS: 2010 9,240 OBJECTIVE: Peace and Security APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANI ~ATJON: USAID/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Cunter-Narcotics PROGRAM ELEMENT: Alterna Altema ive Development and ive Livelihoods INDICATOR: Number of municipalities strengthened by USG programs I UNIT OF MEASURE: Number SOURCE: 10M Final Report INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of municipalities This corresponds to indicator # 3 in rOM's Workplan Timing Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: YEAR PLANNED ACTUAL 2007 12 (cumu lati ve) 14 2008 8 (~nnual) 2009 i I OBJECTIVE: Peace and Security APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/0RGANI21ATION: USAlD/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Counter-Narcotics PROGRAM ELEMENT: Alternativ( Alternative Development and /-,ivelihoods INDICATOR: Increase in citizen satisfaction with local government UNIT OF MEASURE: Percentage SOURCE: OlM Report YEAR PL~NNED ACTUAL i 2007 0%* -1% 2008 NA INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of municipalities Measured by: Representative sample of citizens in eight border USAID￾assisted municipalities expressing: (a) satisfaction with improvements in municipal services, Timing - Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: *Citizen satisfaction was measured in Eloy Alfaro, Lago Agrio, Putumayo, Cascales, J oya de los Sachas, Rio Verde, Shushufindi and Coca. In average in these municipalities satisfaction decreased from 51.6% to 50.1 %. Only in three municipalities (Cascales, Joya de los Sachas and Sushufindi) satisfaction increased by 10% or more. 2009 ----- ------- OBJECTIVE: Peace and Security APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANI ~ATION: USAID/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Cunter-Narcotics PROGRAM ELEMENT: Alternative Development and Alternative Livelihoods INDICATOR: Number of new/improved local government infrastructure projects! UNIT OF MEASURE: Number SOURCE: [OM's quarterly report July-September Report INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of productive and social infrastructure projects. This indicator reflects the total YEAR 2007 2008 PlANNED ACTUAL 255 270 (clmulative) i 300 I number for water and sanitation systems, bridges, roads, and any other infrastructure project financed by the Alternative Program. 2009 2010 323 353 Timing Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: OBJECTIVE: Investing in People APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANI2 ATION: USAlD/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Health PROGRAM ELEMENT: Maternal and Child H~alth INDICATOR: Number of people in target areas provided with hygiene and health ~ducation UNIT OF MEASURE: Number YEAR PL~NNED ACTUAL 2007 482,605 (cu[nulative) 488,510 SOURCE: 10M and CARE's reports dated July￾September and April-September, respectively. INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of beneficiaries Measured by: In 2007 by number of beneficiaries of the Northern and Southern Border Programs. In 2008 by number of beneficiaries of the Alternative Development Program. Timing- Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: *Target in the OP for this indicator was 22,450. Target in 10M's work plan is 19,280 2008 19,280* (~nnual) 2009 OBJECTIVE: Investing in People , APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANI~ATION: USAlD/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Health PROGRAM ELEMENT: Maternal and Child Health INDICATOR: Percentage reduction in parasitosis and diarrheal diseases I UNIT OF MEASURE: Percentage YEAR P~ANNED ACTUAL 2007(B) ITBD SOURCE: 2008 I 5% INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Percentage reduction of 2009 I diseases in the Alternative Development Program areas. i Timing Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: I i OBJECTIVE: Investing in People APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANI~ATION: USAID/Ecuador I PROGRAM AREA: Health PROGRAM ELEMENT: Maternal and Child Health INDICA TOR: Number of people in target areas with improved hand washing UNIT OF MEASURE: Number YEAR PL~NNED ACTUAL 2007 I 0 SOURCE: 2008 ~O.OOO INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of beneficiaries (mnual) 2009 Timing Annually by Fiscal Year i COMMENTS: OBJECTIVE: Investing in People APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANI ~ATION: USAID/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Health PROGRAM ELEMENT: Water Supply and Sahitation INDICATOR: Number of people in target areas with access to improved drinking ~ater supply as a result of USG assistance UNIT OF MEASURE: Number SOURCE: 10M and CARE's report, dated July￾September, April-September, respectively INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of beneficiaries of water systems Measured by: In 2007 by number of beneficiaries ofthe Northern and Southern Border Programs. In 2008 by number of beneficiaries ofthe Alternative Development Program. Timing - Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: *Target in the OP for this indicator was 17,780. Target in 10M's work plan is 17.98() YEAR 2007 2008 2009 PI ANNED ACTUAL 72,313 373,265 Women: Women: 180,614 183,113 'Men: Men: ~91 ,699 190,152 (c mulative) (cumulative) 17,980 I r Women: l4 M n: 9,566 ( nnual) i ---- -~~- OBJECTIVE: Investing in People APPROVED: July, 2006 COUNTRY/ORGANll ATION: USAID/Ecuador PROGRAM AREA: Health PROGRAM ELEMENT: Water Supply and Sanitation INDlCATOR: Number ofpeop\e in target areas with access to improved sanitation :facilities as a result ofUSG ! assistance UNIT OF MEASURE: Number YEAR PL~NNED ACTUAL 2007 1 1 10,292 115,245 SOURCE: 10M and CARE's reports dated, July­ ren Women: September and April-September, respectively. 3,903 57,286 INDICATOR DESCRIPTION: Number of beneficiaries Me : 56,388 Men: 57,959 ofsanitation systems (cumulative) I (cumulative) 2008 Measured by: 1::~: In 2007 by number of beneficiaries ofthe Northern and ,410 Southern Border Programs. Mer: 2,660 In 2008 by number of beneficiaries ofthe Alternative (~nnual) Development Program. 2009 Timing Annually by Fiscal Year COMMENTS: i *Target in the OP for this indicator was 4,670. Target in 10M's work plan is 5,070 ATTACHMENT 3 18 --- ---- ANNEX A - RESULTS FRAMEWORK SPECIAL OBJECTIVE 13: ECUADOR NORTHEKNBORDER DEVELOPMENT Special Objective: Improved quality of life ofthe population living along the northern border Timeframe: FY 2002 Partners: Ministry ofForeign Relations, International Organization for Migration (10M), Unidad Ejecutora de Desarrollo de la Region Norte, Ministry ofHealth, Fondo Ecuatoriano Popularum Progreso (FEPP), Catholic Church Office ofHuman Rights, Defensoria del Pueblo ofLago Agrio, Altropico Foundation, Awa, Chachi, Cofan, municipalities, NGOs, UNHCR, and other donors. Indicators: (a) No. ofbeneficiaries in the target region whose lives are improved by participation in access to social and infrastructure services. I I IR 1: Health conditions improved in vulnerable villages and towns. Timeframe: FY 2002 Partners: 10M, municipalities, Ministry ofHealth, indigenous and afro-Ecuadorian communities, and NGOs. Indicator: (a) # of village potable water systems _ cQnstructed/repaired/expanded in target areas, (b) # ofsewerage systems constructed/repaired/ expanded in target areas. IR 2: Roads and related infrastructure improved in vulnerable areas. Timeframe: FY 2002 Partners: 10M, municipalities, indigenous and afro-Ecuadorian communities, and NGOs Indicators: (a) # ofmiles ofroads conl'ltrnctedirepaired, (b) # ofpedestrian and vehicular bridges constructed/repaired. I I IR 3: Civil society strengthened to better respond to local needs and to the challenges of Plan Colombia. Timeframe: FY 2002 Partners: 10M, municipalities, indigenous and afro-Ecuadorian communities, FEPP, Altropico Foundation, Catholic Church, Defensoria del Pueblo. Indicator: (a) # of beneficiaries receiving land titles, (b) # of beneficiaries receiving . "'. tion on possible enviroll1R@ntal impacts ofPlan Colombia and productive activities; (c) # ofbeneficiaries receiving information and/or assistance on drug prevention. I IR 4: As appropriate, needs ofdisplaced persons met without destabilizing the local social infrastructure. Timeframe: FY Partners: 10M, GOE, municipalities, indigenous and afro-Ecuadorian communities, UNHCR. Indicators: (a) # of displaced persons assisted, 1'\..\ 4t .c. \VI H ~. -r communities with new/improved basic infrastructure and social services. I NOTE: IR4 activities will be implemented in the event that a large scale ofmigration occurs ,,_.~__ .,,_._ .•.J