Summary Sheet for Result of Evaluation Study After the Project
1. Outline of the ProjectCountry: Islamic Republic of Afghanistan

Project title: JICA Support Programme for
Reintegration and Community Development in
Kandahar (JSPR) in Islamic Republic of AfghanistanIssue/Sector: Agricultural/ Rural
Development

Cooperation scheme: Technical cooperation project

Division in charge: Paddy Field Farming
Area Division II (South Asia), Rural
Development Department

Total cost (at the time of evaluation): 740 million yen

Period of
Cooperation

Partner Country’s Implementing Organization: Ministryof Rural Rehabilitation and Development(R/D): June 12, 2004
(Extension):(F/U):(E/N): (Grant Aid)

Supporting Organization in Japan:
Related Cooperation:

1-1 Background of the Project
Addressing peace-building assistance as one of the priority sectors and supporting a seamless transition
from emergency humanitarian assistance to sustainable regional comprehensive development as part of
the Ogata Initiative, the Japanese Government has been providing assistance to the Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan (hereafter referred to as Afghanistan) through various “Human Security” projects which
focus on the communities and residents including in Kandahar.
The project had originally intended internally displaced persons (IDP) and refugees to be the target
population. However, the result of JICA’s peace-building needs assessment in Afghanistan suggested thata well-balanced community livelihood improvement projects involving both the returnees and theneighboring community residents are required, in order to avoid unnecessary conflict in thereconstruction phase. In response, JICA formulated the project concept incorporating community
rehabilitation/reinforcement activities as the means to build the capacity of the communities to accept the
IDPs who were originally from Kandahar.
As the result of the Project Formulation Study and Ex-ante Evaluation conducted in 2003, it was
decided that the primary objective of the project would be to implement community development
activities (livelihood improvement and income generating activities) to produce rapid impact in thereconstruction stage. It was also decided to simultaneously develop human resource (for Provincial Rural
Rehabilitation and Development Department (PRRD), local NOGs, and national staff) in order to ensure
efficient and effective implementation of the project. The Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation andDevelopment (MRRD) was assigned as JICA’s counterpart in the Afghan Government and it was agreed
between the two governments to implement the project in 36 communities in Kandahar (approximately
10 urban districts and 26 rural villages), targeting a total of 45,000 population.
The project was implemented under the Proposal-Type Technical Cooperation (PROTECO) scheme. A
project implementation contract was concluded with Pacific Consultants International (current Oriental
Consultants Co. Ltd.) and the entire process from project formulation to project implementation was
carried out in collaboration with the company.

1-2 Project Overview
The Project aims to build the capacity of those engaged in community development programmes in
Kandahar and to ensure that the residents of the project areas can enjoy the benefits of the progress madethrough the community development activities.
(1) Overall Goal
Villagers including returnees in Kandahar enjoy their development through community development
projects implemented using locally available resources.
(2) Project Purpose
The capacities of those who are engaged in development programmes are developed to manage
sustainable community development activities.
(3) Outputs
Output 1:
Those who are engaged in community development acquire knowledge and mind-set required forcarrying out participatory community development projects through training programmes (Theory).
Output 2:
Those who are engaged in community development acquire skills and attitudes required for carrying out
participatory community development projects through implementation of projects for Community
Development (Practice).
Output 3:
Those who are engaged in community development are able to have better coordination and toeffectively collaborate among themselves.
Output 4:
A model of strengthening system of Community Development Councils (CDCs) by utilizing locallyavailable resources is developed.
(4) Inputs (at the time of evaluation)
1) Japanese side:
Long-term Expert: 0 person
Short-term Expert: 16 persons
Trainees received: 8 persons

Equipment: 14 million yen
Local cost: 310 million yen

2) Afghan side:
Counterpart: 55 persons
Land and Facilities:
Local cost:
II. Evaluation Team
Members of
Evaluation Team(Specialized field: name, title)(1) Leader: Mr. Kozo Ito, Division Director, Paddy Field Area Division III (SouthAsia, Rural Development Department, JICA
(2) Peace Building: Dr. Keiichi Hashimoto, Senior Advisor, JICA
(3) Project Management: Ms. Minako Yamamoto, Program Officer, Paddy Field Area
Division III (South Asia), Rural Development Department, JICA

(4) Evaluation and Analysis: Ms. Rie Kawahara, Consultant, R-Quest Corporation
Period of
Evaluation

January 13 – January 30, 2009

Type of Evaluation: Terminal

III. Results of Evaluation
3-1 Confirmation of Results
3-1-1 Achievement of the Project Purpose
Based on the following fact, it is foreseen that the Project Purpose will be achieved.
1) 33 members of the staff of the Department of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (RRD) in
Kandahar were trained and 10 members of the staff participated in exposure trips to facilitate andmonitor community development activities.
2) Various trainings and planning/implementation of community development projects have allowed
the development workers to learn the processes of community development and acquire
management skills.
3-1-2 Achievement of Programme Outputs
Output 1: More than 80% of the training participants replied that they were satisfied with the training
and that their knowledge and skills had improved. In total, 298 persons participated in the JSPR
trainings by January 2009. Therefore, Output 1 was achieved satisfactorily as planned.
Output 2: The experiences of implementation and coordination of community development projects
have allowed CDC members to increase their capacity to respond to the villagers’ needs and to
gain the trust of the villagers. Therefore, Output 2 was successfully achieved as planned.
Output 3: While the result of interview surveys of counterparts indicated that the members had foundthe weekly/monthly meetings to be very effective to facilitate mutual understanding of the projectprogress and to resolve problems, it was the project team that had taken the leading role in thecoordination of those meetings. It would have been preferable to hand over the coordination role tothe counterpart departments in order to enhance their sense of ownership. Their capacities for
coordination and partnership are still in the process of improvement.
Output 4: Since output 4 is to be implemented after this evaluation process, it is recommended toevaluate its achievement a certain period of time after the completion of the project.

3-2 Summary of Evaluation Results(1) RelevanceThe relevance of the project is very high. The project purpose, which includes “capacity development ofdevelopment workers” and “model formulation for community development”, is in line with one of
MRRD goals. It also meets the needs of the 10 target communities, in which the villagers are eager tocreate an enabling environment to improve their livelihood and living condition after the long-term civil
conflict in the country. Furthermore, the project is also coherent with Japan’s assistant policy, whichplaces importance on supporting a seamless transition from emergency humanitarian response tosustainable and comprehensive community development, based on the Ogata Initiative.
(2) EffectivenessThe project is highly effective and the project purpose is expected to be achieved. The level ofachievement of each output is also generally satisfactory, except for Output 4 which is due for completionin February 2009. In particular, Output 1 (Theory) and Output 2 (Practice) complements each other wellin terms of project coordination and implementation and are effectively contributing to the achievementof the project purpose. On the other hand, anti-governmental activities and local conflicts have hampered
the progress of the project and affected the impact of the project.
(3) Efficiency
Efficiency of the project is, in general, considered moderate. Inputs of both Afghan and Japanese sides
have been delivered as planned, and most of the inputs have been effectively utilized in order to produce
the outputs. However, some members of the counterpart organizations expressed concerns that the
number of project sites (10 villages) was reduced from the original plan and the volume of input as well.
Since the project focuses on human resource development through implementation of pilot projects andformulation of a model based on the experience of the project, the outcomes are expected to be realized in
medium to long-term period and it is not possible to measure the efficiency of community development
alone. Therefore, it is yet too soon to presume on the efficiency of the overall project at this point.
(4) Impact
Overall assessment of the impact is positive. Although it is difficult to evaluate the achievement of theOverall Goal at this stage, there is a possibility that the security and stability in Kandahar will improvewith the progress of community-level development activities and consequently contribute to increasing
the possibility of achieving the Overall Goal.
Human resources for community development in Kandahar (such as PRRD officials, Facilitation
Partners (FPs), and National staff of the JSPR Team) have been trained and their capacity has been
greatly strengthened for management of community development.
The combination of “theory and practices” in the capacity-building programme was useful andcontributing to better performance in their duties. Also the bottom-up approach for community
mobilization was new to Afghans and the counterparts were inspired and motivated by the approach. In
the 10 target villages, the CDC members gained new ideas and experiences of using local resources
instead of being dependent on external resources.
(5) Sustainability
Sustainability of the project is expected to be achievable, although some uncertain factors remain. There
are possibilities to sustain the effects of the project since the capacity of development workers has beenstrengthened. The Deputy Minister of MRRD has an idea to expand the development model proposed bythis project as a standard model for community development.

3-3 Factors that Promoted Realization of Effects(1) Factors Concerning Planning
Giving theoretical and practical training to the persons engaged in community development (Output 1
and Output 2) greatly enhanced their capacity. Moreover, combining Output 1 and Output 2 in acomplementary manner has contributed to the achievement of the effects.
(2) Factors Concerning the Implementation Process
Since the combination of “theory and practices” and the repetition of this concept in thecapacity-building programme were useful in their duties and the use of bottom-up approaches forcommunity mobilization were new to Afghanistan, these concepts inspired the development workers andencouraged their proactive participation in the project; thus promoting the realization of effects.

3-4 Factors that Impeded Realization of Effects(1) Factors Concerning Planning
Security in Kandahar rapidly deteriorated due to anti-governmental resistances, especially after the
Parliament election in September 2005. In June 2006, the Japanese exerts had to withdraw from
Kandahar and resettle in Kabul. This hampered the progress of the project and possibly affected therealization of effects. However, the impact of deteriorating security was minimized by the Japaneseexperts in Kabul and the national staff of the project in Kandahar by working in close contact with eachother.
(2) Factors Concerning the Implementation Process
The effects were also limited by the transfer of trained staff members due to personnel rotation of
government officials.

3-5 Conclusion
According to the analysis of the achievement of the project, process of project implementation, and 5
evaluation criteria, as of January 2009, activities have been in general implemented satisfactorily, and it isforeseen that the achievement of the project purpose will be ensured by the end of the project period
stipulated in R/D. Therefore, it is appropriate that the project terminates in June 2009, as planned.

3-6 Recommendations(1) During the remaining project period (to be taken care of by the project team and MRRD)· In order to ensure the sustainability and further expansion of the project outcomes, MRRD is
recommended to promote coordination for further development of JSPR models (which involves
the Guidelines for Human Resource Development in Community Development and the methods toapproach the communities). The models are expected to be adopted by other organizations,
including the Community-Led Development Department (CLDD) of MRDD and Afghanistan
Institute of Rural Development (AIRD).
· The development activities in the target CDCs of this project were relatively easy to achieve andthe experience of development of these communities is not necessarily applicable to othercommunities with ease. It will be necessary to improve the procedures and methods and makeadaptations for the development of CDCs facing some difficulties.
(2) After the project completion (recommendations to MRRD)· Capacity-building trainings for community development, especially practical trainings need to beprovided continuously to the MRRD officials. It is also recommended for MRRD to develop asystem to ensure that the impact of the trainings are maintained and accumulated in theorganization without losing acquired expertise at the time of personnel rotation.
· Also other technical Ministries (Agriculture, Health and Sanitation, and Education, etc.) could be
encouraged to make use of the training module developed by the project to train their officials. By
strengthening their capacity to engage in development, MRRD could play a role to facilitate more··dynamic development by coordinating technical ministries.
The FPs that are implementing the National Solidary Programme could perform more active role tobridge communities by providing them with training opportunities and giving certificates for their
proof of skill.
It will be necessary to develop a system to support the core activity of CDCs, which is the revisionof community development plans.

3-7 Lessons Learned····

JSPR is significant as a “Bridge Project” linking the two types of projects; between “quick impact
projects” and development projects with medium to long-term perspectives.
It is essential for community-based development projects to make use of locally available
resources at most.
Repetition of “theory and practice” trainings has been proved effective.
In-country trainings with participants from diverse ethnic groups are effective not only fortechnical transfer but also for consolidating peace among different ethnic groups.