Evaluation of the EU-funded housing reconstruction programmes in Sri Lanka : under the EU’s regional facility - aid to uprooted people (AUP) 2012 and 2014 : final report.
Date: 2017-06-07
Institutions: Delegation to Sri Lanka and the Maldives
Subjects: EU financing, Sri Lanka, aid programme, cooperation policy, development aid, forced migration, homelessness, household, housing, housing need, technical cooperation

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED 
HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES 
IN SRI LANKA 

Under the EU’s Regional Facility - Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) 2012 and 2014

Funded by the  
European Union

Evaluation performed by IBF International Consulting
in collaboration with STEM-VCR and BAa Consultors

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED 
HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES 
IN SRI LANKA
Under the EU’s Regional Facility - Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) 2012 and 2014

FINAL REPORT

By Reinhard SKINNER, Mano KUMARASURIYAR and Mario MARTELLI

Framework Contract (FWC COM) 2011: Lot 1–Studies and Technical Assistance in all Sectors

Letter of Contract 2013/330-201

Managed by the Delegation of the European Union to Sri Lanka and the Maldives

Programme Manager: Mr Jaime ROYO-OLID

Funded by the European Union’s  Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)

Evaluation performed by IBF International Consulting in collaboration with STEM-VCR and 
BAa Consultors

The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author/contractor/implementing partner and 
can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017

Paper 
PDF 

ISBN 978-92-9238-427-2 
ISBN 978-92-9238-426-5 

doi:10.2871/17485 
doi:10.2871/983749 

LK-06-16-009-EN-C 
LK-06-16-009-EN-N

© European Union, 2017
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

FOREWORD

Foreword

H.E. TUNG-LAÏ MARGUE
Ambassador of the European Union to Sri Lanka and the Maldives

The  devastation  of  three  decades  of  conflict 
added to the destruction caused by the 2004 
tsunami  leaving  hundreds  of  thousands  of  Sri 
Lankans  homeless.  As  a  response,  between 
2006 and 2016, the European Union (EU) has 
supported  more  than  80,000  internally  dis-
placed people (IDPs) reconstruct their houses in 
North and East Sri Lanka. This has been funded 
by the generous tax contributions of European 
Union citizens and channelled through the Eu-
ropean Commission’s regional facility for Asian countries called Aid to Uprooted People 
(AUP). I am pleased that this evaluation report will make important lessons learnt availa-
ble on-line via the European Union’s Publications Office. The aim is to help future similar 
programmes build on learnings, better address the identified shortcomings and satisfy 
the curiosity of tax payers who seek to understand how their money is spent in the con-
text of international development cooperation.

This evaluation reminds us again of how important it is to conceive ‘housing’ interven-
tions  as  processes  involving  people’s  empowerment,  something  that  is  more  than  the 
mere  reconstruction  of  ‘houses’  as  ‘brick  and  mortar’  only.  In  the  jargon  of  our  pro-
grammes, ‘housing’ reconstruction works best if complemented by an array of ‘flanking 
measures’ that help sustaining households’ livelihoods. Accordingly, the EU will have not 
only assisted in the reconstruction 20,000 houses (half in the East and half in the North) 
but also helped regularise the land tenure of at least 6,000 households, improved local 
capacity  of  villages  to  plan  their  development,  trained  beneficiaries  to  lead  the  recon-
struction process of their houses under the Home Owner Driven (HOD) approach and 
provided grants for basic community infrastructure such as water wells, schools, health 
centres, community centres and tertiary roads. Housing reconstruction that tries to pro-
mote a ‘habitat’ approach has been positively reported upon by beneficiaries, praised by 
independent evaluations, appreciated by Governments and, in Sri Lanka, it has grown 
into a model of successful conflict-sensitive international development cooperation.

Based on three decades of successful implementation in Sri Lana since the international-
ly acclaimed Million Houses Programme, the practice of assisted ‘Home Owner Driven’ 
(HOD) reconstruction will be continued. This evaluation recommendations include: giving 
even more voice to communities in the tough process of beneficiary selection; and allo-
cating more funds to these ‘flanking measures’, for instance through not only training 
beneficiaries in cost-effective technologies but by taking it a step further and supporting 
the local production of construction materials and low-cost housing services. Promoting 

3

entrepreneurial initiatives out of those accrued skills can contribute to the local economy 
and to self-reliance of the local construction supply chain. Also, advocating for house-
types that better accommodate the specific needs such as incremental growth, can allow 
for substantial increases in the utility and value of houses over time. Capacity building on 
the life-cycle management of houses and of scarce environmental resources is a proven 
driver of savings and of long-term livelihood viability. In addition, financial literacy needs 
to be provided to beneficiaries to sensitise them about the risks of excessive indebted-
ness. Accordingly, by investing a little more on ‘flanking measures’ it might be possible to 
build cheaper houses, more people could benefit from an improved construction supply 
chain and beneficiaries could benefit from additional developmental prospects.

On  behalf  of  the  European  Union  Delegation  to  Sri  Lanka  and  the  Maldives,  I  would 
like  to  thank  European  Union  citizens,  the  Sri  Lankan  beneficiaries  for  their  exemplary 
contributions to leading their own house reconstruction, the Sri Lankan Government for 
its unconditional support, the implementing agencies: UN-Habitat, the Swiss Agency for 
Development Cooperation (SDC), Habitat for Humanity and World Vision; as well as our 
co-donors involving the governments of Switzerland and Australia.

4

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Acknowledgements

The authors of this report were assisted by numerous individuals and organisations while 
they were carrying out the evaluation and baseline study. We would like to thank the 
AUP-2012 Implementing Partners, UN-Habitat (in Colombo, Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu and 
Batticaloa) and SDC (in Colombo and Jaffna) who explained so much to us about the AUP 
programmes and their own work in them as well as introducing us to other key contacts 
and organisations. A special word of gratitude should go to UN-Habitat, Kilinochchi. Staff 
numbers had been depleted since the mid-term evaluation in September 2014 because 
the  programme  was  closing  down  and  UN-Habitat  was  not  awarded  the  contract  for 
AUP-2014. However, its Manager, Mr. K. Pathmananthan, remained a generous source of 
information and an outstanding facilitator for the evaluation team. As eighteen months 
earlier, it was also a pleasure to be with him during the fieldwork period.

Habitat for Humanity International and World Vision Sri Lanka were still setting up their 
operations for AUP-2014 when the evaluation team arrived but extended all the support 
that  was  necessary  to  make  the  baseline  study  possible  in  Batticaloa,  Kilinochchi  and 
Mullaitivu.  Thanks  are  due  to  them  in  particular  because  they  marshalled  their  scarce 
and already committed staff resources to attend the Kilinochchi workshop on resistance 
to non-conventional building materials and make it a success despite having been given 
only a few days’ notice.

Communities and individual families patiently gave of their time, knowledge and opinions 
so that the evaluators could carry out focus group discussions, observations, case studies 
and the household survey. In this respect the field survey team, under Mr. Mohammed 
Jiffry,  is  also  acknowledged;  it  carried  out  its  work  under  unexpected  constraints  and 
reduced time, which did not prevent it from completing its task. The constraints were 
even greater this time than during the 2014 mission because the sample household list 
for AUP-2014 could not be drawn up until quite late, thereby delaying the start of the 
surveys, because the weather was unusually hot and the total number of households to 
be surveyed had risen from 600 to 700.

Finally, the team would like to thank the Delegation of the European Union to Sri Lanka & 
the Maldives based in Colombo, for its willingness to assist wherever possible and for its 
suggestions and ideas which demonstrated a commitment to the evaluation and baseline 
which is not to be found in all commissioning organisations.

5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

Foreword ........................................................................................................3

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................5

Abbreviations and Acronyms ........................................................................11

Executive Summary ......................................................................................15

PART I - FINAL EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAMME  

Improving Living Conditions in Returnee Areas of Sri Lanka through Housing

1  Introduction ............................................................................................22
1.1  EU’s Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) regional facility applied to Sri Lanka ........22
1.2  The present evaluation .................................................................................24
1.3  The structure of the report ...........................................................................25

2  Methods ..................................................................................................27
2.1  Documentary Analysis ..................................................................................27
2.2  Household Survey ........................................................................................27
2.3  Focus Group Discussions ..............................................................................28
2.4  Semi-Structured Interviews and Case Studies ................................................29
2.5  Non-Participant Observations .......................................................................30

3  Beneficiary Selection System (AUP – 2012) ..............................................32

4  Dependency.............................................................................................34
4.1  Recommendations .......................................................................................36

5  Sustainability ...........................................................................................38
Recommendations made by the MTE team: ...............................................................41

6  Livelihoods and Training (AUP –2012) .....................................................43
6.1  Starting Life from Scratch .............................................................................43
6.2  The AUP Programmes’ Approach to Livelihood and Training .........................44
6.3  Life Beyond the Construction Phase .............................................................45
6.4  Lack of Vocational Skills Training ..................................................................46
6.5  Post-training investments for livelihood development ...................................46
6.6  Recommendations .......................................................................................46

7

7  Indebtedness ...........................................................................................48
7.1  Extent of indebtedness .................................................................................48

8  The construction process .........................................................................51
8.1  Overall consideration: high quality of houses ................................................51
8.2  Supervision of construction ..........................................................................51
8.3  A future mezzanine option ...........................................................................53
8.4  Women and family members contributed to construction ............................56
8.5  Materials quality tests ...................................................................................56
8.6  Toilets ..........................................................................................................56
8.7  Verandas ......................................................................................................57
8.8  Sanitation facilities .......................................................................................58
8.9  Use of appropriate alternative technologies ..................................................59
8.10  Recommendations and Lessons Learnt .........................................................60

9  The Participatory Process ........................................................................62
9.1  Recommendations .......................................................................................63

10 Visibility ..................................................................................................64

11 Conclusions & Recommendations ............................................................65
11.1  Introduction .................................................................................................65
11.2  Positive Features of the AUP Programmes .....................................................65
11.3  Learning the Big Lessons ..............................................................................70

11.3.1 General Considerations of the AUP Approach .................................................70

PART I - ANNEXES

Annex 1 – Terms of Reference ...............................................................................78
Annex 2 – Itinerary ................................................................................................97
Annex 3 – List of persons met ...............................................................................99
Annex 4 – Evaluation Question Matrix: AUP-2012 Final Evaluation ......................102
Annex 5 –  Evaluation Question Matrix and Summary of Answers: AUP-2012 

Final Evaluation ...................................................................................115

Annex 6 –  Sample Selection: FGDs, SSIs, Observations and Case Studies for 

AUP-2012 & AUP-2014 .......................................................................127
Annex 7 – Survey Questionnaire – AUP-2012 Final Evaluation ..............................129
Annex 8 – Survey Questionnaire – AUP-2012 Final Survey ...................................147
Annex 9 – List of Semi-Structured Interviews .......................................................155
Annex 10 – List of Focus Group Discussions (AUP-2012 & AUP-2014) ..................157

8

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATABLE OF CONTENTS

Annex 11 – List of case studies – AUP-2012 & AUP-2014 ....................................158
Annex 12 – List of Observations (AUP-2012 & AUP-2014) ...................................160
Annex 13 – Presentation of Case Studies .............................................................163
Annex 14 – Presentation of observations AUP-2012 ............................................173
Annex 15 – New Proposed Type plans (from MTE evaluation) ..............................194
Annex 16 – The Beneficiary Selection & Payment Process ....................................200
Annex 17 – Bibliography .....................................................................................201
Annex 18 – Schedule of Questions for Observations (AUP-2012) .........................203
Annex 19 – Logical Framework and Achievement of Results (AUP-2012) .............206

PART II - BASELINE STUDY OF THE PROGRAMME  

Developmental Housing Reconstruction Support to Sri Lankan Internally 

Displaced Persons

1  Introduction ..........................................................................................210
Grants and the changing context of AUP-2014 .......................................... 210
Scope of the baseline study ........................................................................ 211
The monitoring and evaluation system ....................................................... 212

2  Methods used for the baseline study.....................................................213
2.1  Documentary analysis ................................................................................213
2.2  Semi-structured interviews .........................................................................213
2.3  Household Survey ......................................................................................213

The Sampling Frame ................................................................................................213

2.4  Focus Group Discussions ............................................................................215
2.5  Case studies ...............................................................................................216
2.6  Observations ..............................................................................................218

3  Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) System .............................................219
3.1  The M&E framework ..................................................................................219
3.2  The Logical Framework and Performance Tracking Matrix ...........................220
3.3  The Implementing Partners’ Baseline Survey ...............................................221

3.3.1  Comments on the implementing partners’ survey ..........................................221

3.3.2  Comments on the evaluation team’s survey: limitations of the data ...............221

4  Results of the baseline study .................................................................223
Beneficiary Selection (AUP-2014) ................................................................ 223
4.1  Community Based Organisations—CBOs ....................................................224
4.2  Needs Identified at Village Level .................................................................225

9

4.3  House Design .............................................................................................225
4.4  Sanitation ..................................................................................................230
4.5  Building standards ......................................................................................232
4.6  Building Materials ......................................................................................232

4.6.1  Public sand mining ........................................................................................232

4.6.2  Alternative Building Materials ........................................................................234

4.6.3  Workshop with implementing partners .........................................................235

4.7  The construction process ............................................................................237
4.8  Employment ..............................................................................................237
4.9  Borrowing and indebtedness ......................................................................238
4.10  Dependency ...............................................................................................238

5  Continuity between AUP-2012 and AUP-2014 ......................................239
5.1  Recommendations of the AUP-2012 Mid-Term Evaluation ..........................239
Institutional Memory ..................................................................................240
5.2 

PART II - ANNEXES

Annex 1 – AUP-2014-Household Survey Questionnaire – Format .........................242
Annex 2 – Household Survey AUP-2014: Report ..................................................252
Annex 3 – List of Participants at Building Materials Workshop .............................270
Annex 4 – Case Studies AUP-2014 .......................................................................272
Annex 5 –  Logical Framework by Habitat for Humanity as per original Grant 

Agreement - AUP-2014 .......................................................................279
Annex 6 – Presentation at buiding materials workshop, Kilinochchi .....................285
Annex 7 – House design option using sun-dried clay bricks .................................287
Annex 8 – Presentation of observations AUP-2014 ..............................................289

10

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ASB

AUP

AUP-2010

AUP-2012

AUP-2014

AusAID

BHs

BoQ

CBO

CEPA

CHPB

CEJ

CSEB

DAC

DAP

DEVCO

DFAT

Arbeiter Samariter Bund, German INGO responsible for implementing the  
AUP-2008 housing programme in Vavuniya District.

Aid to Uprooted People regional facility funded by the European Union’s 
Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) for Asia

Aid to Uprooted People-funded project in Sri Lanka entitled Support to Conflict 
Affected People through Housing (Contract No DCI-ASIE/2010/256-210) 
implemented mainly by UN-Habitat and partly by SDC from 2011 to 2013.  
Also called Housing Programme Phase-I

Aid to Uprooted People-funded project entitled Improving Living Conditions 
in Returnee Areas of Sri Lanka through Housing (Contract No DCI-
ASIE/2012/296-666) implemented mainly by UN-Habitat and partly by SDC from 
2013 to mid-2015. Also called Housing Programme Phase-II

Aid to Uprooted People-funded project expected to commence implementation 
during the summer of 2015 entitled Developmental Housing Support to  
Sri-Lankan IDPs

Australian Agency for International Development. (Note that around November 
2013 AusAID was integrated to DFAT ceasing AusAID’s operations as a single 
agency)

Beneficiary households

Bill of Quantity

Community based organisation (voluntary organisation of and for the 
community in which it is found, dedicated to community development activities)

Centre for Poverty Analysis (is an independent, Sri Lankan think-tank promoting 
a better understanding of poverty-related development issues)

Centre for Housing, Planning & Building

Centre for Environmental Justice

Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks (one of the many alternatives available for 
building low cost housing)

Development Assistance Committee. The section of the OECD (see below) 
concerned with development cooperation

Donor Assisted Programme

Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development  
(DG DEVCO)

Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as of 
November 2013. Formerly Australian Agency for International Development.

11

DRC

DRR

DS

EC

EUD

FGD

FH

FHE

FHH

FTE

GA

Danish Refugee Council (a humanitarian, non-governmental, non-profit 
organisation working in more than 30 countries throughout the world).

Disaster Risk Reduction

Divisional Secretariat

European Commission

European Union Delegation to Sri Lanka and the Maldives

Focus Group Discussion (meeting ideally held with 8-12 persons sharing an 
interest or specialised knowledge in order to engender discussion and analysis 
amongst them)

Full House (a newly built house)

Full house equivalent (means by which grants for repaired houses – which are 
smaller – are expressed in terms of a full house grant).

Female Headed Households (households where a female is the head or main 
breadwinner; usually means that there is no adult male in the household)

Full-Time Equivalent Employees

Government Agent

GMSL

Green Movement of Sri Lanka

GN Division

Grama Niladhari Division (A Grama Niladhari is a Sri Lankan public official 
appointed by the central government to carry out administrative duties in a 
Grama Niladhari Division, which is a subunit of a divisional secretariat)

GoSL

Government of the State of Sri Lanka

GS&MB

Geological Survey and Mining Bureau

HCI

HCs

HfH

High Commission of India (the diplomatic mission of India to the United 
Kingdom)

in Hosting Communities

Habitat for Humanity International

HfHIAP

Habitat for Humanity Independent Activities Period

Habitat for Humanity Sri Lanka

Home Owner Driven

Institute for Construction Training & Development, Sri Lanka

Internally Displaced Person

International Federation of the Red Cross

Indian Housing Project comprising the reconstruction of 50,000 units in Sri Lanka

Implementing Partners

HfHSL

HOD

ICTAD

IDP

IFRC

IHP

IPs

12

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

MTE

NAITA

NBHs

NBRO

NEHRP

NHCs

NRDC

NGO

NHDA

NPO

ODA

ODP

OECD

OVI

PTF

Mid-Term Evaluation

National Apprentice and Industrial Training Authority (Sri Lankan)

Non-Beneficiary Households

National Building Research Organisation (Sri Lankan)

North East Housing Reconstruction Programme

non Hosting Communities

National Engineering Research and Development Centre of Sri Lanka

Non-Governmental Organisation

National Housing Development Authority (Sri Lankan)

Non-Participant Observation (site visit and interview)

Official Development Assistance

Owner-Driven Programme

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

Objectively Verifiable Indicators

Presidential Task Force (Sri Lankan)

PTFND&SNP Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and Security for the 

Northern Province

RDS

RH

SMART

RVTC

SCB

SDC

SIP

SLRC

SPSS

SSI

TOs

Rural Development Society (almost universal CBO in Sri Lankan villages 
dedicated to village development activities)

Repair House (a house which has been repaired rather than newly built)

Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time-bound (performance 
indicators)

Rural Vocational Training Centre (public mobile training centres travelling to 
villages to provide vocational training)

Soil Cement Blocks

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation

Settlement Improvement Plan

Sri Lanka Red Cross

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (computer statistical programme)

Semi-Structured Interview (free-ranging individual interviews guided by a 
checklist of topics to be covered)

Technical Officers deployed in the field by the implementing partners, and 
responsible for providing direct technical assistance to home owners and to 
monitor the construction process.

13

ToR

UDA

Terms of Reference

Urban Development Authority, under the Ministry of Defence and Urban 
Development, Sri Lanka

UN-Habitat

United Nations Human Settlements Programme

VTC

VRC

WASH

WVL

WRDS

ZOA

Vocational Training Centre

Village Rehabilitation Committee (committee of programme beneficiaries 
established by UN-Habitat in communities in which they work in order to act 
as the community’s interlocutor and local coordinator of activities under the 
housing programme)

Water Supply Sanitation Hygiene

World Vision Sri Lanka

Women’s Rural Development Society (same as RDS except is run by and 
comprises women. Sometimes works together with RDS)

Dutch relief and development NGO (ZOA: Zuid Oost Azie, Dutch for “South-East 
Asia”, where the organisation began its work)

14

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAExECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary

This report is structured in two parts, each covering an owner driven housing reconstruc-
tion programme in Sri Lanka mainly funded by the European Union’s (EU) Aid to Uproot-
ed People (AUP) regional facility (1):

1.  Part I is the Final Evaluation of the Improving Living Conditions in Returnee Areas 
of Sri Lanka through Housing programme implemented from January 2013 until 
June  2015  (hereinafter  called  AUP-2012)  implemented  by  UN-Habitat  and  SDC.  It 
received EUR 11.8 million from the EU and a combined amount of EUR 5.86 from 
the Australian Government, through the Agency for International Development (Au-
sAid) (2), and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). It covered 
the  northern  districts  of  Kilinochchi,  Mullaitivu,  Mannar  and  the  eastern  district  of 
Batticaloa.

2.  Part  II  is  the  Baseline  Study  of  the  Homes  not  Houses:  Building  a  Sustainable 
Future  Together  programme  implemented  since  December  2015  and  due  to  be 
completed by December 2018 (hereinafter referred to as AUP-2014) is being jointly 
implemented  by  Habitat  for  Humanity  International  and  World  Vision  Lanka.  AUP-
2014 benefits from an EU contribution of EUR 14 million and EUR 0.7 million in co-fi-
nancing  from  Habitat  for  Humanity  International  (Nadacia).  AUP-2014  focuses  on 
Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu in the North and on Batticaloa in the East.

Since  2005,  the  EU-funded  housing  programmes  in  Sri  Lanka  under  the  AUP  regional 
facility have targeted war-displaced households to assist them rebuild permanent houses 
on  their  own  lands.  This  was  done  through  a  combination  individual  sub-grants  to 
households accompanied by technical assistance aimed at helping them manage 
the reconstruction process. Programme after programme, this approach to Home 
Owner  Driven  (HOD)  reconstruction  process  (also  termed  Owner  Driven  Recon-
struction—ODR) has increased its emphasis on the so-called ‘flanking measures’ 
(e.g. minor allocations to livelihood support ranging from securing land tenure, commu-
nity infrastructure to skills training for community building).

The evaluation team comprises Dr Reinhard Skinner (Team Leader and Sociologist/Hous-
ing Expert), Mr Mario Martelli (Architect) and Dr Mano Kumarasuriyar (Urban Planner/
Architect). The field study was conducted during March and April 2016. All stages of the 
evaluation have  been critically  assessed by Mr Jaime Royo Olid (Architect) programme 
manager from the EU-Delegation to Sri Lanka.

The methods adopted for the evaluation and study included documentary analysis, a 
household survey of 400 beneficiaries of the AUP-2012 and 300 potential bene-
ficiaries  of  the  AUP-2014,  11  focus  group  discussions,  20  semi-structured  inter-

(1) There were also a number of bi-lateral donor agencies and INGOs contributing to post-tsunami housing in Sri Lanka (e.g. 
JICA, GTZ, AusAID, SIDA, ICRC, IOM)

(2) In 2013 the Agency for International Development (AusAID) ceased to be an executive agency and was incorporated into 
the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).

15

views, 19 case studies of households and 30 non-participant observations as an 
audit of the design and construction processes.

The evaluation team concludes that the AUP-2012 programme has been successful. 
AUP-2014 had not started field implementation when the baseline study was being 
carried  out  so  no  conclusive  judgement  can  yet  be  made  at  this  stage.  However,  the 
programme design contains many features which are promising, including many of the 
recommendations  made  in  the  2015  report  on  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  AUP-2012 
carried out by this team.

UN-Habitat and SDC have performed impressively on several fronts. The evaluation 
revealed  that  the  AUP-2012  programme  has  had  a  significant  and  positive  impact  on 
17,436  direct  housing  beneficiaries.  From  an  outcomes  perspective,  according  to  the 
survey, 100% of AUP-2012 beneficiaries felt that the housing programme had im-
proved their standard of living. 90% of beneficiaries also felt that their relation-
ships with other community members had improved substantially as a result of the 
housing programme. This suggests that the programme has gone well beyond merely 
sheltering  the  homeless  and  has  contributed  to  building  cohesive  communities. 
These are important achievements with respect to the EU’s objective to ultimately con-
tribute  to  peace  and  reconciliation.  From  a  perspective  of  outputs,  the  programme 
has delivered many more full house equivalents (FHEs) than originally contracted: 
AUP-2012 delivered 4,251 which is 10% more than the target. This improved level of 
output can be attributed to foreign exchange rate gains, savings on operations costs and 
increased beneficiary contributions.

In agreement with the European Union Delegation (EUD) to Sri Lanka the  evaluation 
report focuses on areas of work where improvements can be most usefully made. 
This is intended to provide guidance for forthcoming housing programmes, housing re-
construction policy and development planning in rural Sri Lanka at large.

For instance, with regards to the intended improvement in social cohesion, certain as-
pects  of  the  beneficiary  selection  process  are  strongly  disputed  not  only  by  those  not 
selected  but  also  by  many  beneficiaries.  They  claim  some  criteria  disregard  prevalent 
cultural norms and values. The  evaluators  found this first during  the  mid-term  evalua-
tion in September 2014 and recommended in their report that the scoring system be 
reviewed with the participation of the target communities to improve its accept-
ance and to improve a sense of fairness. While this came rather late in the AUP-2012 
programme, and was not implemented, it was taken up in the design of the subsequent 
AUP-2014 programme.

Some other problems which have been confirmed by our field mission and surveys and 
addressed  in  this  report,  such  as  dependency  syndrome  and  indebtedness,  have 
not been caused by the implementing partners – though they may be unintentional 
contributors – but have been largely brought about by the historical context in which 
livelihood and housing assistance have been provided for separately. The implementing 
partners have been required to work sectorally to deliver housing reconstruction as a 

16

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAExECUTIVE SUMMARY

complement to livelihood support programmes that most often involved different 
beneficiaries and locations. Though often adjacent, their complementarity has not al-
ways materialised geographically.

The housing types and construction standards are somewhat rigid and beneficiary expec-
tations high as a result of two financially generous waves of post-emergency reconstruc-
tion assistance (i.e. post-tsunami and post-war). Technical specifications and expectations 
have not been sufficiently adapted to changes such as prohibitive inflation of construc-
tion costs (both labour and materials). Emerging developmental needs such as the need 
to  ensure  locally-sustained  livelihood  and  income  opportunities  beyond  reconstruction 
are becoming more pronounced and will need to be addressed in order for households 
to be viable in the long-term. Again, these are addressed in the design of the new AUP-
2014 programme. In trying to break away from assistance dependency syndrome 
among the beneficiary communities home owners have increasingly been required 
to provide in-kind contributions and unskilled labour. This has improved ownership 
of the housing process but has also tied them to the house construction often de-
nying them the opportunity to work to cover day-to-day expenses. In Chapter Six, it 
is argued that the combination of dependency, lack of financial literacy and interruptions 
in income generation through the reconstruction process undermines the otherwise sat-
isfactory sustainability of the programme.

Allocating either, a full house, a repair, or nothing, translates into either, huge gains for 
beneficiaries or nothing for those left out. Towards achieving a broader spread of ben-
efits,  three  alternatives  and  cheaper  incremental  housing  designs  were  recommended 
in this mid-term evaluation. These are to be understood as indicative house types to be 
further adapted to local norms, regulations, and cultural sensitivities through owner-driv-
en processes and not as blueprints. The designs proposed then were smaller than the 
current standard (1) full house equivalents (i.e. 550 sq. feet, lockable house with toilet, 
high-pitched roof) but are fully functional houses with potential for expansion. It was 
already recommended in the mid-term evaluation of AUP-2012 that an “incremen-
tal housing” approach be introduced in future programmes in which lifecycle de-
mands of house owners are anticipated. Providing completed houses, perhaps smaller 
than the current 550 sq. feet, but with clear potential for expansion could free up funds 
to include more beneficiaries and to provide more livelihood support and training activi-
ties. Gradually phasing in non-exploitative loans through sound financial mechanisms cre-
ating financial discipline among beneficiaries and other actions to mitigate dependency 
are presented in Chapters Five and Eleven. These mid-term evaluation recommendations 
have all been incorporated in the design of AUP-2014.

Managing the above is important for housing reconstruction not to add to the gener-
al  tendency  to  get  deeply  indebted.  Spending  on  the  house  far  above  what  the  AUP 
grant allowance must be proactively discouraged in order to sustain manageable levels 
of household debt. SDC’s study on indebtedness (Romeshun, K. V. Gunasekera and M. 

(1) Based on the North and East Housing Reconstruction Programme (NEHRP) specifications. Implemented by the GoSL with 
World Banks support and co-funded by the EU’s AUP-2006 and 2007 allocations. 

17

Munas,  2014)  and  housing  documents  the  importance  of  debt  for  completing  house 
reconstruction but underlines that no causality can be directly established between hous-
ing reconstruction and unsustainable debt which is mainly caused by structural factors 
(e.g. exploitative credit lending to up to 30% interest rate taking advantage of lack of 
financial literacy, alcoholism, drought and flooding, etc..). This evaluation confirms that 
93%  of  AUP-2012  beneficiaries  borrowed  to  complete  their  construction  and  that  in 
such circumstances 72% of them found debt was causing them problems. In order to 
address  unsustainable  indebtedness  it  was  recommended  in  the  mid-term  eval-
uation  of  AUP-2012  that  future  grants  build  in  stronger  livelihoods  and  training 
components. This was too late for the AUP-2012 programme to do but AUP-2014 
has done so.

A  particular  concern  in  the  construction  process  is  that,  while  the  overall  quality  of 
the houses in both programmes implemented by UN-Habitat (AUP-2010 and AUP-
2012) has been generally good, the duration taken for completion is considered 
too long. The need for households and their family members to carry out seasonal work 
(e.g. fishing and farming) and other occasional priorities, together with a serious short-
age of skilled labour and sometimes of construction materials in the districts, are the main 
causes. Proposals are made in Chapter Eight to reduce this time.

Those two AUP programmes incorporated beneficiary financial and physical participation 
as well as community participation in the collective/bulk procurement of building materi-
als through the specially created Village Reconstruction Committees (VRCs). However, the 
potential contribution of existing CBOs was found not to have been sufficiently exploited. 
The AUP-2014 should take this finding on board.

In the mid-term evaluation the team looked at the visibility of the programme and con-
cluded that, though some aspects are covered well enough, the then deliberate low-pro-
file approach could be considered as falling short of donors’ expectations. This has since 
been improved.

There remains over 100,000 very vulnerable households, who will struggle to ever afford 
a house and face a high risk of remaining in poverty. In our previous report and with 
regards to the donor’s exit strategy from a situation of donor-dependency in ad-
dressing the post-war housing reconstruction gap, an abrupt disengagement was 
discouraged and the facilitation of a smooth transition to a local non-exploitative 
housing market encouraged. Since then, the Government has changed and housing 
has become again a central social and economic objective. The current Government is 
committed to delivering subsidised housing for both war victims in the North and East, 
for most vulnerable communities in Central and Uva provinces and concessionary loans 
countrywide.

Amid these good intentions however, the tentative programme of 65,000 prefabricated 
houses which were to be built and imported by steel giant Arcelor Mittall at a cost of 
some USD 1 billion has raised many questions in various sectors. Civil society has alleged 
a lack of fair competition in procurement process and evaluation where the winner was 

18

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAExECUTIVE SUMMARY

said  to  have  been  pre-decided.  But  more  importantly,  given  the  availability  of  nation-
al  solutions,  this  shows  a  disappointing  disjuncture  between  thirty  years  of  successful 
owner-driven housing in Sri Lanka and the lack of appropriation of the same by the new 
Minister of Resettlement (1).

The present report argues that, since no affordable market mechanism is yet in place, the 
housing reconstruction gap must continue to be addressed through public intervention 
and policy which builds on lessons learnt such as the AUPs. The EU and other experienced 
implementing partners are today in a privileged position to facilitate key capacity build-
ing and knowledge transfer for a much needed ‘national housing policy’. While owner 
driven practices integrating livelihood support have become a best-practice there is still 
ample room for improvement such as by including incremental housing, non-exploitative 
finance, certified vocational training and the strengthening of CBOs. A Sri Lankan housing 
policy should include local value-added enterprise development in the North and the East 
that diversifies the construction supply chain and that provides for low-cost solutions. The 
extent to which the AUP-2014 programme, manages to illustrate the way forward will 
determine its success.

(1) Other criticisms are a) a lack of user input in the design and implementation of the programme; b) the high cost per unit, 
which most felt would be more than adequate for two units; c) a totally inappropriate technology for the target areas and d) 
a lack of post-construction maintenance arrangements.

19

PART I
FINAL EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAMME
Improving Living Conditions in Returnee Areas of 
Sri Lanka through Housing

Programme funded by the EU’s Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) 2012 

Implemented by UN-Habitat and the Swiss Agency  
for Development Cooperation

Contract No DCI-ASIE/2012/296-666

1 

Introduction

Sri  Lanka’s  two  decade  long  internal  conflict,  mainly  in  the  north  and  the  east  of  the 
country,  coupled  with  the  tsunami  disaster  of  December  2004,  which  had  the  sever-
est impact along the north-east and the eastern coastal belt of the country, left about 
365,000 houses fully or partially damaged.

The European Union’s support for the reconstruction of social infrastructure, livelihoods 
and damaged houses in the affected areas has involved over €674 million between the 
initial intervention in 2005 and 2015.

Loans
(European Inverstment Bank)
€ 250 million

Grant Aid to livelihoods 
(EuropeAid)
€ 240 million

Grant Aid Humanitarian Assistance
(ECHO)
€ 134 million

Grant Aid for IDPs 
through Housing reconstruction 
(EuropeAid)
€ 50 million 

Figure 1:  
EU aid to Sri Lanka  
from 2005-2015  
(Source EU-Delegation to 
Sri Lanka)

1.1  EU’s Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) regional facility applied 

to Sri Lanka

A regional facility of the EU – Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) – was employed to finance 
housing reconstruction complementing other EU-funded bilateral humanitarian aid, grant 
aid to livelihood rehabilitation programmes and soft loans in areas where internally dis-
placed persons from the civil war were to be found. In the first two AUP interventions in 
2005 and 2006, a total of €16 million was committed to the World Bank-led North East 
Housing Reconstruction Programme (NEHRP). It was followed by a third AUP contribution 
of  €12 million  in  2008  towards  emergency  housing  implemented  by  ASB  in  Vavuniya 
complemented by ZOA and Practical Action responsible for the so-called ‘flanking meas-
ures’ components (1).

(1) Flanking measures are small-scale supports to beneficiary communities in the areas of infrastructure and livelihoods.

22

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAINTRODUCTION

Figure 2:  
NEHRP permanent house next to transitional shelter, Ampara District, 2007

In 2010, as the internal conflict-related emergencies added on to the backlog of tsunami 
housing programmes, the EU responded through the AUP facility with a commitment of 
€12 million  towards  Support  to  Conflict  Affected  People  through  Housing  Programme, 
implemented by UN-Habitat and SDC. It is referred to by the EUD as AUP-2010 and by 
UN-Habitat as Phase I. An additional €4 million was sourced through AusAID/DFAT and 
SDC (the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation).

The global objective of AUP-2010 was “to contribute to a sustainable resettlement in the 
place of origin for the returnees and their host communities in North Sri Lanka” and its spe-
cific objective “to improve the living conditions and social cohesion of displaced people, re-
turnees and their host communities in the North through provision of permanent housing”.

The AUP-2012 or UN-Habitat Phase II was a replication of the AUP-2010 programme im-
plemented with the same partners – UN-Habitat, AusAID/DFAT and SDC, but adopting a 
theme of “Improving Living Conditions in Returnee Areas of Sri Lanka through Housing” 
by targeting 3,000 fully damaged houses for reconstruction and 1,000 repairs to those 
partially damaged. Its global objective was “to address medium term rehabilitation needs 
of returnees and their host communities in the North and East of Sri Lanka” and its specific 
objective  “to  improve  the  living  conditions  and  social  cohesion  of  displaced  people,  re-
turnees and their host communities in the North and East through provision of permanent 
housing”.

The  funding  breakdown  among  the  partners  remained  similar  to  the  AUP-2010  pro-
gramme  –  EU  providing  €11.8 million  and  the  combined  AusAID  (which  later  became 
DFAT)/SDC  contribution  being  approximately  €5.86 million.  The  programme  aimed  to 
reach 100 villages in the four targeted districts in the north – Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu and 
Mannar, as well as 1,000 households in the Batticaloa district in the east.

23

1.2  The present evaluation

By the end of the present evaluation in April 2016 the AUP-2010 and AUP-2012 pro-
grammes had produced 7,028 completely new, rebuilt houses (“full houses” in the pro-
gramme’s terminology) and 2,609 repaired houses. In addition there were other outputs 
such  as  community  infrastructure,  training  and  support  in  obtaining  land  titles  (all  of 
which are detailed in this report). Although the programmes have delivered substantial 
benefits, which are described in the present report, the EU’s intention through evaluation 
is to further improve ongoing programme performance for better and greater impact and 
to extract lessons learnt for future housing reconstruction actions.

Figure 3:  
Completed house under AUP-2012, Eravurpattu Village, Batticaloa District (23 March 2016)

When the present evaluation was commissioned in January 2014 the shortfall in housing 
in the north (houses destroyed during the war which needed to be reconstructed) was 
not openly known but estimated by UN-Habitat to be in the range of 30,000 – 60,000 
with an additional 5,000 – 12,000 for the eastern Batticaloa District. The new Govern-
ment under president Maitripala has reinstated housing as a priority and estimates the 
gap at above 100,000. Housing programmes would have to be scaled up significantly 
if  this  need  is  to  be  met.  Accordingly,  the  new  Government  has  committed  itself  to 
various housing schemes: grant-based for war-affected people and concessionary loans 
for other social housing. For war-affected people, the approaches diverge however: on 
the one hand a 10,000 owner-driven housing programme has been launched under the 
leadership  of  the  districts  building  on  lessons  learnt  from  previous  owner-driven  pro-
grammes. On the other, a 65,000 house project of prefabricated houses was awarded 
to international steel giant ArcelorMittal. The latter has caused dismay among potential 
beneficiaries, local contractors and the donor community (1). In addition, it was observed 

(1) The AUP beneficiaries felt that it was unfair that, while they were struggling to complete their houses within a budget of 
Rs.550,000, some new beneficiaries were to get houses and contents worth Rs.2.1 million. This was definitely going to cause 
a lot of friction between the two groups of beneficiaries if they happened live in the same village.

24

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAINTRODUCTION

or suspected that several problems were constraining home ownership or home improve-
ment. These included landlessness, inflation in building materials and labour costs and 
political intervention in beneficiary selection.

It is against this backdrop that the final evaluation of the AUP–2010 programme and mid-
term evaluation of the AUP–2012 programme were undertaken. The report delivered at 
the end of the two evaluations, it was hoped, would contribute substantially in helping 
the AUP-2012 programme make modifications to improve on its already impressive per-
formance and for future programmes to be designed and implemented to perform even 
better. In this way, they would be able to benefit the as yet unserved populations in the 
north and east of Sri Lanka.

The present evaluation, led by IBF International Consulting, was carried out in March and 
April 2016 and comprises the final evaluation of AUP-2012 and baseline study of the new 
AUP-2014. The latter was designed taking into account many of the recommendations of 
the mid-term evaluation of AUP-2012.

The global objective of the AUP-2012 final evaluation and baseline study is to:

Empower key stakeholders involved in EU-funded housing reconstruction programmes in 
Sri Lanka with knowledge or skills identified through programme evaluations necessary 
to undertake well-informed decisions, corrective measures or complementary activities 
to better attain EU development cooperation objectives. (Evaluation TOR: 4)

Specific objectives are to:

1.  identify relevant areas for potential improvement as well as examples of good practice 

in the implementation and design of the programmes concerned;

2.  disseminate the relevant findings in the form of practical and feasible recommenda-

tions;

3.  mainstream, to the relevant stakeholders, practical methods, skills or approaches to 

follow up on the recommendations. (loc. cit.).

1.3  The structure of the report

The present report is in two parts: the first part covers the final evaluation of AUP-2012 
and  the  second  the  baseline  study  of  AUP-2014.  It  was  decided  to  separate  the  two 
because they are different in too many ways to make it possible to report on the side-by-
side as was done with the mid-term and final evaluations of AUP-2012 and AUP-2010 
respectively (1).

The first part of the report is a final evaluation of the AUP-2012 programme for which the 
same team of evaluators carried out a mid-term evaluation eighteen months earlier. It is 
unsurprising then that we adopted the same structure in both. This allows for conclusions 

(1) For example, the baseline questionnaire is very different from that of the final evaluation and their results could not be 
compared as could the previous evaluations. Nor could key issues related to beneficiary satisfaction be compared, for obvious 
reasons.

25

in the final evaluation to be compared with those of the mid-term evaluation though the 
majority of the conclusions reached  are the  same, albeit using  more  recent  additional 
data. The second part of the report is completely different from the previous report.

As with the previous evaluation report the evaluators agreed with the EUD to present 
their findings focusing on learning issues, i.e. those where the team felt most innovation 
and modification could usefully be made. This is in contrast to a more conventional pres-
entation which consecutively presents the findings for each of the OECD-DAC evaluation 
criteria. This said, the OECD-DAC and the EC’s criteria have been fully addressed in this 
report, most comprehensively in Annex 5 (the Evaluation Question Matrix and Summary 
Answers) (1).

It is understood that focusing on areas where most change is suggested may emphasise 
less successful areas of the AUP-2012 programme and understate its successes. The eval-
uation team wants the reader to be aware that AUP-2012 has been a very success-
ful programme. For this reason, in addition to Annex 5, the report contains references 
to the Evaluation Matrix and OECD/DAC criteria at certain points, which it is hoped will 
provide the necessary balance to the identified areas of proposed improvement. At this 
point, however, we present the summary of project achievements from UN-Habitat’s final 
report on AUP-2012 which gives a flavour of what has been accomplished (UN-Habitat, 
2016: 9) (2). Most of the outcomes listed are discussed at various points in this report, in 
particular in Annex 4 of Part I.

Table 1: Summary of Project Achievements

Outcome
Total number of beneficiares
Number of houses constructed/ repaired

Number of land tenure documents regularised
Number of female headed households assisted with 
housing
Number of youth completing formal construction 
training
Number of persons trained in incorporating DRR 
into housing
Number of man-days paid for skilled labour
Number of persons benefitting from community 
infrastructure facilities
Number of Village Reconstruction Committees 
established and strengthened
Number of joint bank accounts opened
Percentage of women in decision making positions 
in VRCS

Target

Achievement

19,600
3,850 Full House 
Equivalents
2,600
1,000

71,489
4,250 Full House 
Equivalents/4,569 houses
3,776
631

200

200

250,000
16,000

N/A

N/A
40%

153

5,983

379,069
46,644

66

1,982
45%

(1) This matrix has been drawn up on the basis of the DAC/OECD criteria all of which are clearly reflected in it.

(2) Annex 19 of Part I of this report presents UN-Habitat’s the self-identified achievements in relation to the logical framework.

26

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMETHODS

2  Methods

The methodology employed in the final evaluation of AUP-2012 is very similar to that 
employed for the mid-term evaluation of the same programme. The method employed in 
the baseline study is different and is presented in the second part of this report.

The following summarises the methods used in the AUP-2012 final evaluation.

Evaluation  criteria  had  been  given  in  the  evaluation’s  Terms  of  Reference  (ToR).  These 
were  relevance,  effectiveness,  efficiency,  sustainability,  impact,  coherence  and 
community value added. From these the evaluation team drew up evaluation questions 
and compiled them in the Evaluation Question Matrix, which appears in Annex 4. This 
shows  the  criteria,  questions,  likely  sources  of  information  and  the  most  appropriate 
evaluation method to be employed to answer the questions.

The  ToR  required  that  the  evaluation  be  both  qualitative  and  quantitative  and  that 
household  surveys  be  carried  out  with  each  respondent’s  house  being  photographed 
and geo-referenced. The other methods (documentary analysis, focus group discussions, 
semi-structured interviews and non-participant observation) were selected by the evalu-
ation team.

2.1  Documentary Analysis

The evaluation requires that the AUP programmes be evaluated at different levels ranging 
from the global (e.g. their contribution to national development) to the very specific (such 
as the timely payment of grant instalments). The best source for this data is existing doc-
umentation. Strategy level documents provided the answers to the first type of question 
(e.g. the National Development Plan and the “Awakening the North” regional develop-
ment strategy) while programme documents address the second. In addition the team 
has made use of a range of other materials such as the AUP Operations Manual, Annual 
and Final Report of AUP-2012 which ended on 30 June 2015, specific research studies 
(e.g. on indebtedness and vulnerability) as well as academic articles.

2.2  Household Survey

A local survey team was sub-contracted to carry out a household survey. It carried out a 
total of 723 interviews with householders. These comprised 364 beneficiaries of the 
AUP-2012 programme (the final evaluation) and 259 potential beneficiaries of AUP-2014 
(the baseline study). In addition, 50 interviews were carried out for each programme as 
pilot surveys.

Those surveyed for the final evaluation of AUP-2012 were beneficiaries of a full house or 
repaired house. They were randomly selected from a database maintained by UN-Habi-
tat. The method used for the selection of respondents for the AUP-2012 baseline study is 
explained in the corresponding section of the second part of this report.

27

The  questionnaires  used  by  the  survey  team  for  the  final  evaluation  of  AUP-2012  are 
attached to this report (Annex 8) and the way in which the survey sample was drawn is 
described in Annex 6. The corresponding information for AUP-2014 is given in the sec-
ond part of this report.

2.3  Focus Group Discussions

As  for  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  AUP-2012,  focus  group  discussions  were  held  with 
community members in groups intended to number 10-12 persons. Members included 
VRC representatives and other key actors in each of the villages. These included repre-
sentatives of such community based organisations as Rural Development Societies, Wom-
en’s Rural Development Societies, elderly citizens groups, and fishermen’s and farmers’ 
associations.

Figure 4:  
Beneficiaries preparing for the start of the focus group in Vivekanandanagar village, Kilinochchi  
(28th March 2016)

In reality the number and composition of discussants was not as methodically determined 
as this. In a village a meeting like this can be a significant event and uninvited people 
often drifted in so that in most cases the group’s membership was twenty or more and in 
some cases had swollen to approximately double that figure. Clearly there is no way the 
evaluators could or would have attempted to remove anybody.

28

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMETHODS

Six focus groups were convened for the AUP-2012 evaluation (five more were held for 
the baseline study). Two of these were held in Batticaloa District, two in Kiinochchi, one 
in Mannar and one in Mullaitivu.

2.4  Semi-Structured Interviews and Case Studies

Semi-structured interviews were used to complement the household survey by probing 
fewer key evaluation questions in depth and aiming thereby to reveal ideas and experi-
ences that may not have been considered or hypothesised when designing the Evaluation 
Question Matrix. They also allowed a closer interrogation of important issues which were 
raised during the course of the evaluation.

Figure 5:  
Case Study in Uthayanagar West, Kilinochchi (12 September 2014)

Not  all  interview  questions  were  formulated  in  advance.  While  the  Evaluation  Matrix 
specified key questions semi-structured interviews should address, other questions were 
created during the interviews as the interviewer uncovered new avenues of enquiry sug-
gested by the answers received from the interviewee.

Interviews held were mainly with representatives of donors, implementing partners and 
government agencies. In mid-term evaluation of AUP-2012 members of the private com-
mercial sector were also interviewed.

29

Programme beneficiaries were not included. However, the evaluation team considered 
that a more in-depth view of the situations of individual households would provide val-
uable insights and decided that, in addition to the data which it is already committed to 
providing, it would develop a number of household case studies.

In total 36 case studies were carried out (19 for the mid-term evaluation and 17 for 
the final) and 20 semi-structured interviews held, which are not easily categorised into  
AUP-2012 or AUP-2014. A list of final evaluation interviewees is given in Annex 9.

2.5  Non-Participant Observations

Twenty-one  observations  were  made  for  AUP-2012  and  nineteen  for  AUP-2014 
making a total of 40. Three of the AUP-2012 observations were return visits to houses 
already  visited  during  the  September  2014  mid-term  evaluation  mission  and  fourteen 
were new observations. These are indicated at the top of the corresponding observation 
sheet in the annex.

The observations were intended to show how houses have been constructed and mod-
ified and to identify problems and interesting innovations. They also show how the con-
struction was carried out, by whom, what difficulties were faced and what solutions were 
found. In addition, consideration was given to the health and safety procedures and / or 
regulations which were followed and potential environmental impact of the works.

Figure 6:  
Observation of roof structure, Ganashapuram Village, Kilinochchi (29th March 2016)

The  houses  chosen  for  observation  were  mainly  those  interviewed  by  the  household 
survey team. This allowed the results of the survey to be complemented with technical 
detail. In addition, some cases were included which the survey team did not cover, such 
as child-headed households.

30

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMETHODS

The houses built under AUP-2012 were checked with respect to their technical perfor-
mance after an average of 18 months since their completion. Satisfaction of home own-
ers was also analysed (1). The technical audit gave special attention to possible settlement 
of  foundations,  causing  in  turn  possible  cracks  and  further  defects.  This  is  particularly 
likely on sandy soil because of sand’s tendency to absorb/release water – both rain and 
soil water – and to alter its volume.

All observations for both AUPs are listed in Annex 12. Here one can easily see the tech-
nical findings which have been recorded for each case and compare cases. Results have 
been analysed and some significant pictures included in each case to illustrate the find-
ings.

This method included a desk review of relevant documents (e.g. to check the accuracy 
of drawings), site visits and interviews with householders, geo-referenced photographs 
and measurements. Technical details were documented and appropriate non-destructive 
tests were carried out.

All  case  studies  carried  out  for  the  final  evaluation  of  AUP-2012  appear  in  full  in  An-
nex 13.

(1) One to two and a half years is a fair time to audit a house built under an ODA programme which is partially built by non-
professionals with a possible lack of construction skills and knowledge of the materials used.

31

3  Beneficiary Selection System 

(AUP – 2012)

As was highlighted in AUP-2012 Mid-term Evaluation Report (MTE), the selection of ben-
eficiaries has played an important role in the successful progress of the implementation 
of  AUP-2012.  The  AUP-2012,  attempted  to  introduce  objectivity  in  the  selection 
process through a scoring system as adopted in the Indian Housing Project (IHP). 
Though intended to build in a level of transparency in the selections, the scoring system 
did not receive the expected levels of acceptance from the target community. Criticisms 
of the system were perhaps mainly due to the community at large, particularly those not 
selected, tending to feel aggrieved as every single person in the target groups, rightly, 
considers himself or herself to be an “uprooted person” at whom the AUPs were tar-
geted  (1).  Apparently,  the  community  considered  the  criteria  and  the  relative  weights 
assigned to each in the scoring system to be very subjective and unfair. Though well-in-
tended, the scoring system had the tendency to discriminate against one of the most 
vulnerable such as those who had lost several members in the war, which reduced them 
to a small family who now may not be eligible for a house due to the scoring system’s 
bias towards larger families.

However, despite the efforts of the implementing partners and all others concerned to 
ensure  a  high  degree  of  fairness,  transparency  and  accountability  when  selecting  the 
beneficiaries, it was observed in the MTE report that a small but significant number of 
applicants had missed out being selected even though the general consensus was that 
that they should have. The bone of contention was that the selection criteria had been 
indifferent  to  certain  local  cultural  norms  and  ground  conditions.  On  the  basis  of  this 
observation  it  was  recommended  in  the  MTE  report  that  the  selection  criteria  be  re-
viewed and revised appropriately. For example, selection criteria should take into account 
what communities considered appropriate criteria. Another example, proposed here by 
the evaluation team, is that criteria do not discriminate against households with female 
members who are over 18 and unemployed as was the case in the AUP-2012 beneficiary 
selection process. However, by the time the MTE was concluded and the report with rec-
ommendations was released to the Implementing Partners all selections had been done, 
the houses constructed (except for a few) and were in occupation. It is now hoped that 
the beneficiary selection process for AUP-2014 would take due note of the AUP- 2012 
MTE conclusions and recommendations.

Despite the selection process formerly allowing for redress of grievances (UN-Habi-
tat Operational Manual 2013-2015, p6), almost 40% of non-beneficiaries surveyed 
for the MTE had claimed that they were unaware of the reasons why their appli-
cations were rejected and almost 60% felt that their disqualification was unfair.

(1) In most of the focus groups the beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries understood why the non-beneficiaries had not been 
selected for a grant but also felt this was unfair. Evaluation of the EU-funded housing reconstruction programmes in Sri Lanka 
implemented by UN-Habitat, 2015

32

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKABENEFICIARY SELECTION SYSTEM (AUP – 2012)

Beneficiaries surveyed in this evaluation (AUP-2012 Final) were also critical of the time 
taken  for  processing  the  applications,  announcing  the  outcome  and  releasing  of  the 
first instalment of the grant for the commencement of constructions. Only 1% of the 
beneficiaries said that they received the first instalment within two months of making 
the  application  (See  Annex 7  –  Table 1.2.2)  and  15%  claimed  that  it  took  more  than 
6 months. District wise, Batticaloa was the slowest to process applications with 24% of 
the beneficiaries having had to wait for more than 6 months and Mannar having only 7% 
having to wait for than six months.

33

4  Dependency

The present chapter is largely as it appeared in the AUP-2012 mid-term evaluation report 
since  the  issues  and  conclusions  remain  the  same.  However,  some  updates  are  made 
using information gathered during the final evaluation mission in March and April 2016, 
especially in the section on recommendations at the end.

Both the AUP programmes have adopted an approach which aims to place control in the 
hands of the home owner – the “Home Owner Driven” (HOD) approach also referred to 
in academic literature as “Owner Driven Reconstruction” (ODR). The mid-term evaluation 
of AUP-2012 pointed out that this has had notable success in the sense that most house 
plans have been adapted to a certain extent by the home owners and they have been 
responsible for organising their own construction process. They have also contributed to 
the construction themselves in kind and to the monetary costs through loans they have 
made  where  the  AUP  grant  was  not  (considered)  sufficient  for  the  size  of  house  they 
wanted.

Lyons  (2009,  395)  has  compared  owner-driven  and  donor-assisted  approaches  to 
post-tsunami housing in Sri Lanka and concludes:

The findings clearly demonstrate that the Owner-Driven Programme in Sri Lan-
ka (ODP) performed better than the Donor Assisted Programme (DAP) on both 
quantitative and qualitative criteria (Cernea, 1997, 2000). The ODP produced 
more  houses,  more  quickly,  of  better  construction  quality,  and  at  less  cost. 
Space standards were generally better, and the designs, layouts, and locations 
were  more  acceptable  to  beneficiaries.  Infrastructure,  services,  and  amenities 
were more readily provided to ODP sites.

She explains that DAPs also produced dependency amongst beneficiaries:

Far more than the ODP, the DAP fostered a culture of dependency among ben-
eficiaries,  arising  from  long  periods  in  transitional  shelters,  often  away  from 
both original and final places of abode, with no active role for beneficiaries to 
play in the development of their own futures. In contrast, the ODP fostered (re)
development of a cooperative local social fabric and institutions achieved only 
exceptionally in the DAP and, as a process, met a range of human rights needs 
generally neglected by DAP […]. It created opportunity for integrated develop-
ment (Cernea, 1997, 2000), built on beneficiaries’ energies (Oliver-Smith, 1991) 
and enhanced resilience of individuals and communities (Schilderman, 2004).

The  AUP  programmes  have  adopted  the  ODP  approach  and  appear  to  have  captured 
many of the benefits described by Lyons. Ironically though, it seems also to have rein-
forced  the  dependency  she  found  in  the  DAP  approach  which  was  adopted  by  some 
agencies in the post-tsunami housing programmes. The AUP programmes, except where 
they have been implemented by SDC, have not significantly fostered the redevelopment 

34

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKADEPENDENCY

of a cooperative social fabric and institutions or created opportunities for integrated de-
velopment and enhanced the resilience of individuals and communities. The UN-Habitat 
managed programmes have:

(a)  By-passed existing CBOs in favour of VRCs (1) which have no chance of being regis-
tered  and  therefore  representing  an  institutional  future  for  communities’  develop-
ment.  The  programmes  have  created  a  new  organisation  instead  of  strengthening 
the  legitimacy  of  existing  ones.  However,  it  should  be  noted  that  during  the  final 
evaluation of AUP-2012 it some villagers expressed their intention to continue using 
the VRCs even after the end of the programme. This reflects a generally positive ap-
preciation of the VRCs’ work during focus group discussions. The question remains 
that, if they do continue how far does their lack of official recognition restrict their 
future development role?

(b) Implemented a Settlement Improvement Planning process by means of which prior-
ities are listed but most remain unattended. Of course, AUP cannot meet all needs 
but communities are left with a list of priorities with which they do not know how 
to deal. A valuable planning process has been left incomplete. Focus groups told the 
evaluation team what the unmet needs were and were looking for external assistance 
to meet them.

(c)  Adopted  a  sectorial  approach  too  focused  on  housing  rather  than  an  integrated 
approach  which  would  better  develop  resilience  within  communities  (2).  This  was 
brought home in almost all focus group discussions in the mid-term evaluation where 
participants were extremely pleased with their houses but were worried that they had 
little or no income to cover daily expenses let alone repay the debts many of them had 
incurred as part of the housing process.

The  time  many  beneficiaries  had  spent  as  IDPs  in  camps  and  transitional  shelters  no 
doubt  contributed  to  a  culture  of  dependency.  Unfortunately,  the  design  of  the  AUP 
programmes  only  exacerbated  this  through  the  granting  of,  by  rural  Sri  Lanka  stand-
ards, enormous amounts of money to build or repair their houses. The decision by many 
beneficiaries to build their house design or specification beyond the minimum standard 
has driven many of them to take on debts they cannot repay (see Chapter Eight) and 
increased even further their likely future dependency (3).

(1) Some of these were established under the NEHRP programme and UN-Habitat has simply continued to use them instead 
of other CBOs.

(2) It should be said that this sectorial approach was a response to the requirements specified by the EU. The guidelines for 
grant applicants for AUP 2010 stated “The programme will seek to promote returns of populations to their place of origin 
by prioritising permanent housing, in addition to previous EU investments in reconstruction notably in the housing sector 
through the North East Housing Reconstruction Programme (NEHRP).” It goes on to state that whilst funding for flanking 
measures is not foreseen within this programme, strong coordination with other EU supported actions will be promoted. AUP 
2012 continued this approach. The evaluators are grateful to UN-Habitat for pointing this out. Nor is it the case that there are 
no ‘flanking measures’ (e.g. community infrastructure) incorporated by the programme. The point is that these investments 
have been too small compared to those made in housing.

(3) It has been said in this respect that this is the beneficiary’s choice (the peoples’ process is all about people making their 
own choices) which seems to the evaluators to be irresponsible.

35

This dependency is reflected in the replies given by most of the focus groups to questions 
about who would maintain common assets such as improved internal roads or drainage 
channels. They expected UN-Habitat, the District or NGOs to do it (1). This was despite the 
fact that most of the communities in which the focus groups were held had CBOs, such 
as RDSs and WRDSs, which had carried out such activities as providing organised labour 
for the road improvements, digging drainage channels, setting up small savings and loan 
programmes and digging foundations for pre-schools including contributions to UN-Hab-
itat implemented projects through community infrastructure projects (2). They have the 
potential to become a development force in their communities but this has probably not 
been developed within the AUP programmes as much they could have been.

4.1  Recommendations

1)  AUP-2012  has  included  a  component  of  CBO  strengthening  (leadership  training) 
which until now has not yet created the self-confidence to enable communities to 
tackle their own needs (3). The MTE recommended that this component be continued 
and reinforced in any subsequent phase of AUP and the proposal for the AUP-2014 
incudes a sub-programme specifically aimed at strengthening community organisa-
tions  and  reducing  the  culture  of  dependency.  Part  of  the  strengthening  of  CBOs 
should consist of training in how to follow up on those aspects of the Settlement 
Improvement Plan (SIP) process that AUP cannot (and should not) attend. This would 
include the preparation of plans and identifying development partners (4).

2)  The MTE recommended that incremental (yet fully functional) housing should be pro-
moted. This would establish a development model in which it is clear that a major 
part of the responsibility for completion of the house is the home owner’s. AUP-2012 
did not incorporate this recommendation after the mid-term evaluation. UN-Habitat 
say the reason for this is that the MTE report was finalised in February 2016 and the 
programme due to end five months later so there was insufficient time. In fact, the 
proposal was made during the first evaluation mission in September 2014, leaving a 
full nine months to implement changes. The evaluation team accepts that the official 
version  of  the  recommendation  did  indeed  arrive  later  but  feels  that  some  efforts 
could have been made nevertheless (5).

(1) In Iranapallai, the first reply to this question was “the next NGO that comes along”. They then corrected themselves: “We 
are confident we can do it ourselves” followed by “I think that is the right answer”. Communities are aware of the large 
resources available from which they can benefit but are also savvy to what development agencies want to hear.

(2) Community infrastructure contracts, signed directly with CBOs, require CBOs to contribute to construction, financial 
management and the contribution of organized labour. UN-Habitat provides training on finance and construction issues. This 
has happened in close to 100 community contracts implemented under Phases I and II.

(3) The programme’s final report explains that ”All members of the 66 VRCs established under the project have undergone 
training in leadership, CBO management, basic accounts, and book keeping conducted by UN-Habitat, SDC and external 
resources persons.” (UN-Habitat, 2016: 22) 

(4) The reader should bear in mind that, in comments on a draft of this report, UN-Habitat stated that “VRCs were formed 
exclusively of beneficiaries to ensure a high degree of interest and focus on house construction and other project activities. 
Engagement of other CBOs with different mandates and consisting of non-beneficiaries may have diluted the interested 
and focus due to other agendas. The political situation prevailing in project areas was not conducive for registration of new 
CBOs.”

(5) In comments on the draft version of this report UN-Habitat point out that “Only 177 new houses were commenced since 
the MTE, and thereby very little of the recommendations could be incorporated into the programme.”

36

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKADEPENDENCY

3)  The funds saved by implementing smaller incremental houses could be used to reach 
a larger number of beneficiaries and / or to invest in livelihoods programmes which 
would assist home owners in financing their later incremental housing.

37

5  Sustainability

The present chapter is largely as it appeared in the AUP-2012 mid-term evaluation report 
since  the  issues  and  conclusions  remain  the  same.  However,  some  updates  are  made 
using information gathered during the final evaluation mission in March and April 2016 
as well as from the programme’s Final Report which was published in May.

Sustainability  [in  evaluation]  is  concerned  with  measuring  whether  the  benefits  of  an 
activity  are  likely  to  continue  after  donor  funding  has  been  withdrawn.  (DAC,  2008, 
parentheses added).

In the AUP programmes the relevant benefits are their outputs, services and outcomes. 
The kind of sustainability envisaged is the maintenance of houses and community ser-
vices as well as any improvements in community organisational capacity and social 
cohesion.

Various  researchers,  consultants  and  practitioners  have  discussed  the  different  dimen-
sions of sustainability and how to achieve it (WASH, LinkedIn online, numerous discus-
sants; Roberts & Williams, 2008). From this work we can identify five generic types or 
components of sustainability as follows:

1)  Financial sustainability (attained through funding);
2)  Institutional (the delivery of benefits is taken up by government as part of its policy, 

strategy, legal framework, procedures or training programme);

3)  Environmental (natural resources are managed in such a way that, to the extent that 
they are needed for the delivery or maintenance of benefits, they will continue to be 
available and, in any case, will not be depleted to an extent that threatens their future 
existence);

4)  Technical (the benefits are technically replicable when the programme ends; the tech-
nology  needed  for  the  continued  delivery  of  benefits  is  maintained,  repaired  and 
replaced);

5)  Social (the benefits are valued by beneficiaries and are ‘owned’ by them);

The following table shows how these types of sustainability apply to the AUP-2012 pro-
gramme.

38

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKASUSTAINABILITY

Possible Strategies to Strengthen 
Sustainability

Develop community livelihoods strategies 
(e.g. community contracting for government) 
which are not project bound but are 
open-ended (e.g. road repairs and drainage 
clearance)

Strengthen CBOs so that sustainability of 
common benefits becomes an accepted 
communal responsibility. If possible, establish 
community – government partnerships for 
this.

GAs should continue the policy of requiring 
applications to cut down Palmyra trees and 
IPs should make beneficiaries aware of the 
alternatives (2)

Strengthen CBOs and create awareness of 
communities’ responsibility for sustainability.

Type

Applicability of Type to AUP-2012

I

L
A
C
N
A
N
I
F

L
A
N
O
I
T
U
T
I
T
S
N

I

L
A
T
N
E
M
N
O
R
V
N
E

I

I

L
A
C
N
H
C
E
T

I

L
A
C
O
S

Home owners value their new houses highly. They are likely to 
maintain them as far as resources allow. However, incomes are 
very low and indebtedness will restrain some.

Sustainability of community assets, such as roads and pre-
schools, is in doubt as local authorities struggle with limited 
financial resources (1)

The programme is environmentally sustainable. There have 
been problems such as damaging sand quarrying and Illegal 
logging in Kilinochchi but according to the GA these are now 
under control. The AUP-2010 Mid-Term Evaluation identified 
Palmyra tree depletion as a problem without providing data. 
The present evaluation did not measure this either but had an 
impression, no more, that the problem was not catastrophic. It 
is probably best to err on the side of caution.

The present evaluation team also feels that placing limitations 
on sand mining for housing is of questionable benefit 
(see Chapter Four of part II of this report)

The construction technology is replicable using local skills. 
Home owners can extend their houses or build new houses 
with / for others in the village or outside. However, the 
main demand for their service will be during the life of the 
programme (1).

Home owners value their houses but, because of the 
dependency generated during the AUP programmes, expect 
the maintenance of community facilities to be carried out 
either by government or other development programmes or 
NGOs.

The VRCs, as sustainable CBOs will have little, if any, role to 
play in sustaining the benefits of the programme. They were 
established solely for the programme and, although they have 
had significant success, they lack legal recognition. (2)

(1) It is intended that community infrastructure be handed over to District Councils, Divisional Secretariats, Zonal Education 
Offices and communities. These, however, have financial constraints which make it unlikely that they will be able to maintain it.

(2) The mid-term evaluation mentioned some alternatives which should be examined: “For structural work the beneficiaries 
tend to use Grandis (Eucalyptus grandis) as an alternative to Palmyra and in a small number of cases Palu is used. Traditionally 
Satinwood is preferred for front doors and Kohomba/Margosa, which has cultural significance, is used for door and window 
frames. Some beneficiaries proposed using Ginisapu, and subsequent investigation has suggested that it may have possible 
structural uses”(p. 113).

(3) The mid-term evaluation (MTE) of AUP-2010 concluded, in addition, that “most of the beneficiaries will not use their 
basic construction skills after their house is completed, as they will attend their main livelihood activities, such as fishing and 
agricultural work” (pp. 57-58 ) In this sense technical sustainability will not be achieved.

(4) The AUP-2010 MTE team were of the same opinion: “The VRCs that have been established by the project are likely to be 
temporary groups only. Whereas they are highly functional and useful during the construction process of houses for resettled 
households, they have neither the funds nor the sufficient organisational basis and objectives to continue functioning after 
the project ends.” However, UN-Habitat have commented that “Building capacities of the VRCs have not been wasted as 
these members also serve on committees of other CBOs, thereby contributing their knowledge and skills gained from capacity 
building programmes for the overall development of their communities.”

39

The main strategies presented in the table, concern livelihoods and strengthening CBOs. 
It was reported the AUP-2012 MTE that work on these strategic areas was weaker than 
it should be. One important overarching constraint on sustainability is the dependency of 
local communities (see Chapter Four). As long as this remains, a strong community role 
in guaranteeing sustainability is unlikely.

The  mid-term  evaluators  of  AUP-2010  extended  the  analysis  of  sustainability  into  the 
issue of sustainable resettlement as such. They argue that this requires more than the 
delivery of houses:

… if only houses are built in villages and other facilities are inadequate or un-
available, the chances for a sustainable resettlement in the place of origin are 
certainly reduced. Therefore, sustainable resettlement will to a large extent 
depend on the success in coordinating and providing complementary infra-
structure and services. [… ] the absence of an integrated process may result in 
a delayed or weakened socio-economic response and recovery by the commu-
nity. Several villages were visited where limitations on resources, such as water 
and schools, strained the social fabric. (Meindertsma and Nixon, 2012: 55-56).

The authors went on to tell of a village where some 100 families had left because of the 
lack of schools and drinking water. In the focus group discussions for the mid-term and fi-
nal evaluations, one of the recurrent expressed needs of the beneficiary villages remained 
water supply. AUP-2012, though UN-Habitat and its partner SDC, installed 16 community 
wells and 4 tube wells. They also built 19 pre-schools (UN-Habitat, 2016: 57-60). These 
are all important but coverage of all programme locations is far from complete. This is not 
a criticism of the Implementing Partners but rather an indication of design changes that 
could usefully be incorporated in future housing programmes (1).

In almost all the focus group discussions in both the AUP-2012 MTE and the final eval-
uation it was found that CBOs - in particular, the RDSs and WRDSs - had organised and 
carried out common activities to the benefit of the community. However, it was equally 
evident that they did not expect to maintain the benefits of the AUP programmes.

(1) AUP-2014 incudes water as one of its areas of intervention though it seems to be mainly in the areas of irrigation and 
conservation than drinking water supply (HfH & WVL, 2015). There appears to be no specific (pre-) school component.

40

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKASUSTAINABILITY

Figure 7:  
Pre-school in Vivekanandanagar, Kilinochchi District, provided by the programme.The RDS helped build 
it, but will it maintain it? (28th March 2016)

In summary, it can be stated that:

•  Houses will be maintained by home owners;
•  Pre-schools,  roads,  wells  could  be  maintained  by  communities  if  technical  support 

arrangements were put in place (with local government);

•  Low incomes and indebtedness threaten capacity for continued individual and com-

munity improvement;

•  CBO capacities have strong potential but have not been sufficiently developed.

Recommendations made by the MTE team:

1.  Establish community – local government partnerships;
2.  Increase the livelihoods development component in marketable and income generat-

ing trades (not only those with a fixed life span, like construction);

3.  Strengthen  CBOs  and  emphasise  community  responsibility  for  the  sustainability  of 

programme benefits.

UN-Habitat responded to the first and third of these by recruiting a Community Consoli-
dation Specialist at the end of the project “to ensure the sustainability of the VRCs and link 
them with the relevant development partners at ground level” (UN-Habitat, 2016: 22).  
The final evaluation team was unaware of this welcome measure until the programme’s 

41

final report was written in May 2016 so did not research it. The final report does not 
detail what the new Specialist would do.

The recommendations were also taken up in the new AUP-2014 proposal which includes 
components which specifically address the second and third of these. It is unclear wheth-
er the first recommendation will be incorporated (1).

(1) UN-Habitat provided the following interesting information in September 2016 after the draft report had been written 
and, of course, after the fieldwork period: “A CBO capacity building programme was continued after the end of the 
project to build capacities of the community to ensure the operation and maintenance of the completed infrastructure 
interventions. In addition all completed infrastructure was officially handed over to the respective line ministries and local 
government authorities for operation and maintenance and inventorization ….. Two District level workshops were conducted 
in Killinochchi and Mullaitivu in early September 2016 for government officials to ensure sustainability of completed 
infrastructure implemented by UN-Habitat during their total reconstruction programme.”

42

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKALIVELIHOODS AND TRAINING (AUP –2012)

6  Livelihoods and Training (AUP –2012)

The AUP-2012, following on from its predecessor AUP-2010, had been implemented in 
the development mode rather than in the emergency recovery mode as was observed 
in the MTE report. This being so, while the provision of shelters for the homeless refu-
gees was a priority of the programmes, it was also critical that the housing programmes 
were  sustainable.  Towards  this  end,  it  was  felt  that  beneficiary  households  should  be 
provided with adequate income earning opportunities to be able to afford the difference 
between the AUP grant (Rs.550,000) and the actual cost of construction, which tended 
to be higher than the grant. Long gone are the emergency circumstances under which 
quick-fix solutions were sought to address basic needs of the affected population. In the 
development mode, while addressing a basic need, its sustainability has also got to be 
considered (see also Chapter Five on Sustainability). It is in this context that this evaluation 
has  considered  livelihood  and  training  programmes  available  to,  and  taken  up  by,  the 
beneficiaries to be essential elements of the AUP programmes. The findings of the study 
in this respect are presented below.

6.1  Starting Life from Scratch

Most uprooted people appear to have lost all they had as sources of livelihood along 
with whatever movable assets they had accumulated over generations. Having resettled 
on their own land with almost nothing but the housing assistance from the AUP pro-
grammes, they are struggling to start afresh. Most are totally dependent on casual daily 
wages,  when  available,  to  meet  their  day-to-day  living  expenses.  Under  such  circum-
stances, a grant for the construction of a full house to replace the house lost in the war or 
to repair a partially damaged house is received with immense gratitude. However, unless 
there is a supplementary component to provide adequate and appropriate livelihood and 
training  opportunities  to  increase  household  incomes,  the  housing  programme  could 
turn out to be not only unsustainable but also a burden on households, especially those 
in relatively lower income groups.

Amongst  the  beneficiaries  there  were  those  who  had  regular  sources  of  income,  but 
which were inadequate to support supplementary expenditures, such as housing related 
expenses. There were others who had, at best, irregular, casual or seasonal income which 
drove them to borrowing at any cost rather than exploring opportunities to increase their 
income levels. The chapter on Indebtedness elaborates on these conditions.

This  study  examined  some  factors  inhibiting  beneficiary  households  from  engaging  in 
activities to improve their income levels, particularly, their tendency not to capitalise on 
the various training programmes for skills development and/or participating in any liveli-
hood enhancement programmes that may have been available to them. According to the 
household survey, only 1% of the AUP-2012 beneficiaries have been involved in formal 
construction training programmes (See Annex 7 – Table 1.2.20), 65% received “informal 
on-site training under skilled artisans” while their respective houses were under construc-

43

tion, and 33% received no training of any sort. The 1% that received formal training had 
gone on to get employed in the construction trade as well. It is rather unfortunate that 
more beneficiary households had not taken advantage of this opportunity. It is also inter-
esting to note that, while more than 80% of the beneficiaries in Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu 
and Batticaloa claimed that they had at least the informal onsite training, almost none 
of the beneficiaries in Mannar had been drawn to even the informal training on their 
building site.

As a part of livelihood enhancement 20% of the beneficiaries had received some support 
towards agricultural crops, but 86% of these were from Batticaloa district (Table 1.2.27). 
It was also evident that beneficiaries regard livelihood assistance as a significant need, 
though only for a minority, in any housing programme. When asked what other support 
they  would  have  desired  to  be  incorporated  in  any  future  housing  programme,  28% 
called for more livelihood assistance while only 4% wanted the quantum of the assis-
tance  increased  and  68%  had  no  opinion  (Table 1.2.33).  In  terms  of  what  additional 
benefits they would have desired in the current programme, more than a third opted for 
livelihood assistance (agricultural crops 5% and livestock 30%) while the rest voted for 
community based flanking measures (Table 1.2.32)

In order that future housing programmes mitigate stressful financial experiences of the 
target groups, adequate and appropriate considerations need to be given to the liveli-
hoods of beneficiaries. For example, a certain percentage of the housing grant could be 
set aside to support livelihood development programmes in which interested members 
of  households  could  participate  to  receive  training  and  other  support.  Since  the  com-
mencement of the AUP programmes, there has been a strong effort to provide training in 
masonry, carpentry and other vocations to members of the beneficiary households. How-
ever, the serious shortage of skilled labour in the target villages on the one hand and the 
fact that beneficiary households are struggling to make ends meet, on the other, means 
that the skills training programmes being implemented have fallen short of expectations. 
It would perhaps be necessary to conduct a focussed study to ascertain why the expected 
outcomes have not been achieved in these training programmes.

6.2  The AUP Programmes’ Approach to Livelihood and Training

Most  of  the  EU’s  Multi-annual  Indicative  Programmes  (MIPS)  for  Sri  Lanka  since  2008 
have  been  dedicated  to  livelihood  development.  An  exception  is  the  AUP  regional  fa-
cility which has been used solely to address housing needs and was not integrated into 
the  MIPs.  The  possible  justification  that  AUP-funded  housing  interventions  have  com-
plemented EU livelihood interventions has not been borne out in reality as there is little 
geographical overlap between the two types of programme. This lack of EU programme 
integration has constituted a challenge for EU housing implementing partners who have 
been mandated to focus on housing. Since NERHP (AUP-2005 and AUP-2006) the need 
to  include  livelihood  support  measures  within  the  housing  programmes  has  been  in-
creasingly acknowledged by all parties. However, when it came to a decision on how to 
allocate funds between houses and livelihoods the EU Delegation seems to have taken 

44

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKALIVELIHOODS AND TRAINING (AUP –2012)

the view that Sri Lankan authorities strongly preferred to dedicate AUP funds to maxim-
ising house construction with an understanding that GAs would take care of livelihoods.

Among  the  livelihood  support  measures  training  has  been  central.  In  conceptualising 
the Technical Assistance Package offered to the beneficiaries, skills training has in prac-
tice been considered in earnest (UN-Habitat Operations Manual 2013-2015). Under this 
scheme, local artisans and youth were to be offered:

•  Training in masonry and carpentry (conducted in collaboration with NAITA and GIZ)
•  Skills upgrading of skilled construction labour
• 

Joint effort in finding ways for cost-reduction and improved quality.

Such training was intended for beneficiaries (or members of their households) with an 
interest in developing the skills required to complete their houses cost effectively. Once 
the skills were acquired, recognised and certified, they should be a source of livelihood 
generation. However, less than 4% in either of the programmes had attempted to 
make  a  career  out  of  the  skills  they  had  acquired.  Further,  the  non-availability  of 
skilled and competent labour has often been cited as reasons for delays in completing 
the house constructions in the two programmes, which illustrates the demand for such 
skilled labour in the districts where the programmes are operational.

The beneficiary survey conducted for this study found that 77% of AUP-2010 beneficiar-
ies and 91% of those in AUP-2012 have claimed that they received training, of whom, 
63% of AUP-2010 and 87% of AUP-2012 received training in construction related ac-
tivities. There were instances of beneficiaries having acquired skills while in the refugee 
camps.  Those  who  had  been  traditional  farmers  from  Mannar  district  when  relocated 
around the fishing villages of Kalpitiya in the Puttalam district had acquired fishing skills 
and on return to Mannar had engaged in fishing for a livelihood in addition to agriculture 
(Case Study 10). Some others had not been able to use these skills productively either in 
their house construction or in generating an income (Case Study 15, in the second part 
of this report).

6.3  Life Beyond the Construction Phase

As  is  explained  in  Chapter 7  on  Indebtedness,  a  large  majority  of  beneficiaries  in  the 
north  and  some  in  Batticaloa  are  carrying  significant  post-construction  debts,  which 
could only be settled if there are flows of steady incomes to the beneficiaries. A general 
attitude of the beneficiaries towards these debts is that “…help would arrive from some-
where someday….will wait for such a day…” – a clear case of dependency syndrome 
(see  also  Chapter  Four  on  Dependency).  Future  programmes  should  be  conceived  to 
avoid such levels of dependency on external assistance. On a positive note, a very few 
have taken the debt burden seriously and have already sought and got employment in 
other parts of the country and overseas, mainly in the Middle East. However, for there 
to be more such job seekers among the beneficiaries, adequate skills are required and/
or placement counselling should be in place. In this regard, there are a few constraints 
to overcome.

45

6.4  Lack of Vocational Skills Training

Vocational skills such as masonry, carpentry, plumbing and electrical works are in great 
demand, but there are inadequate formal training opportunities (other than the afore-
mentioned training on the house the beneficiaries construct) and/or awareness among 
the target communities for making a vocation and livelihood from these demands. Other 
vocations  in  perpetual  demand  and  for  which  training  could  be  provided  are  sewing, 
housekeeping (for overseas markets), computing (data entry), motor mechanics, poultry 
farming, animal husbandry and many more.

The evaluation team interviewed the Batticaloa District Manager of NAITA and the Of-
ficer-In-Charge of the Kallady Vocational Training Centre (VTC) in the same city. NAITA 
has training centres located around the District but unfortunately does not provide mo-
bile  training  to  villages.  This  would  be  an  expensive  training  option  for  villagers  who 
would have to meet transport and accommodation costs, if they were expected to travel 
to these training centres.

Kallady  VTC,  however,  is  one  of  fourteen  Rural  Vocational  Training  Centres  (RVTCs)  in 
Batticaloa District which take training to the villages. Courses lead to certificates which 
are nationally recognized so can be used in applying for jobs. After six months’ training 
trainees are required to carry out six months on-the-job training with an employer near 
the village which has been found by the RVTC. Moreover, trainees receive Rs.2,000 per 
month as a stipend and when training on-the-job the employer is expected to provide 
payment. There are no fees for construction-based courses (although other courses cost 
Rs.8,000 per month).

6.5  Post-training investments for livelihood development

When asked why no members of the family had sought any kind of training, a typical 
answer was that with such big debts to carry there is no way that they would be able to 
pay for training as well. Some had cattle and/or poultry before they were displaced by 
the war and would be interested in continuing with such livelihoods, but they wouldn’t 
be able to afford to buy new livestock while burdened with current debts. Even those 
with interests in sewing or computing as careers, the mere thought of having to invest 
on sewing machines or computers after the training constrains them from considering 
these vocations.

6.6  Recommendations

1.  Housing grant packages need to consider an element of livelihood development in 
consultation with beneficiaries. These could be for formal vocational training (as op-
posed  to  the  current  scheme  of  training  offered  in  each  beneficiary’s  own  house 
construction) or setting up a home based livelihood activity;

2.  A focussed review of all AUP programmes linked to formal as well as informal training 
schemes need to be conducted in order for future housing programmes to be better 
designed to increase livelihood development while addressing the labour shortage;

46

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKALIVELIHOODS AND TRAINING (AUP –2012)

3.  Opportunities should be sought to collaborate with Rural Vocational Training Centres 
such as those in Batticaloa District and described above for formal vocational training;
4.  Where households are able to nominate one or two members for vocational training, 

they could be given bonus points in the selection process;

5.  Those being sent on training could also draw a nominal allowance during training, 
except where these are already provided by the training organisation, such as RVTCs, 
to motivate more to take up the opportunity. The allowance could be, at least, equiv-
alent to average daily wage they would normally earn;

6.  If  this  allowance  is  considered  unsustainable  because  of  the  numbers  involved,  it 
could be disbursed as a training loan to be paid back after a certain period on becom-
ing gainfully employed. The loan could be from a revolving fund to be set up by the 
state or NGO or a partnership of the two facilitated by one or more IPs;

7.  For those households who prefer to pursue a livelihood activity such as cattle farming, 
poultry farming or to set up a small enterprise like a tailoring shop an appropriate 
grant  plus  loan  scheme  could  be  built  in  to  the  housing  programme.  For  such  a 
scheme to be introduced, a clear understanding of all related aspects needs to be 
comprehended;

8.  An awareness campaign on the benefits of livelihood development/vocational train-

ing should precede the selection process.

47

7 

Indebtedness

The MTE cited a Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA) study conducted in three northern 
districts  of  Jaffna,  Kilinochchi  and  Mullaitivu,  which  suggested  that  the  housing  pro-
grammes had significantly increased indebtedness of beneficiary households (Romeshun, 
et al, 2014). This finding, however, has been contested at various fora because unsus-
tainable debt involves many other factors (e.g. while borrowing to build a house is a fun-
damental practice in any economy, having intermediaries lending at up to 30% interest 
rates is not and is exploitative). What is perhaps relevant to this evaluation is not whether 
the housing programmes caused indebtedness (and the study is careful to state that there 
is no direct causality) but the impact of high levels of indebtedness on the sustainability of 
the housing programmes and the overall living conditions of the beneficiaries.

7.1  Extent of indebtedness

According to the CEPA study, 85% of all households reported indebtedness with an av-
erage of Rs. 150,871. However, as this sample included those who had not commenced 
construction, not all the debts could be attributed to the housing programme. The MTE, 
on  the  other  hand,  found  that  the  debt  situation  had  improved  between  AUP-2010 
and AUP-2012. The beneficiary survey done for the MTE revealed that from among the 
AUP-2010 beneficiaries, 83% were found to be carrying debts, all related to house con-
struction, while there was a marked drop among the AUP-2012 beneficiaries at 68%. 
However, in the survey done for the current AUP-2012 Final Evaluation 93% of benefi-
ciaries had claimed to have borrowed for the construction of their house but only 72% 
find it to be a problem (see Annex 7 – tables 1.2.34 and 1.2.35). What was hypothesised 
in the MTE has proven correct according to the current survey: while the AUP-2010 sam-
ple contained all those who had completed their houses, the lower percentage of debt-
ors in the AUP-2012 sample then included beneficiaries of houses still in progress, some 
of whom may have not reached the stage in construction requiring funds in excess of the 
instalments from the housing grant. The current survey done on a sample of AUP-2012 
beneficiaries who had all completed the construction shows a much higher percentage 
of indebtedness. A scientific study exclusively on indebtedness among AUP beneficiaries 
would perhaps shed light on specific causes and the nature in which indebtedness occurs 
within communities. However, what is relevant to this study is not such specifics but the 
revelation of a borrowing trend emerging amongst the beneficiaries, which, if not taken 
into consideration and appropriately addressed in the programme design, may dilute the 
positive outcome of the AUP. There have been instances of relatively debt-free, highly 
disciplined  construction  practices  as  presented  in  Case  Study 1.  These  examples 
need to be documented and presented to potential beneficiaries to demonstrate 
what can be achieved through the exercise of discipline during the construction 
process (1).

(1) In their comments on a draft of the present report UN-Habitat informed the evaluation team that “..it also needs to be 
noted that SDC in its studies found that despite participatory budgeting and financial counselling for the beneficiaries, they 
could not prevent beneficiaries building beyond their means”.

48

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAINDEBTEDNESS

Figure 8:  
This beneficiary in Batticaloa District completed the house according to plan and within the grant 
amount. He did borrow to add a petty shop to the front of the house, which gives him sufficient 
income to pay off the loan and complete the plastering of walls still outstanding. (see Case Study 1)

The mid-term evaluation also showed that the AUP programmes may have caused stress 
to beneficiary households for the following reasons.

•  A requirement of the programme that beneficiaries contribute to the housing pro-
cess through the offer of their mostly unskilled labour, though well intended, may 
compete with the time necessary to go out and earn a living for the period of house 
construction, especially for those dependent on casual labour opportunities;

•  When income is reduced, some are driven to taking loans to cover living expenses, 

which are compounded when construction loans are added on;

•  When the house construction is complete, beneficiaries are dependent on the mea-
gre income from whatever irregular casual labour is available to settle all outstanding 
debts in addition to spending on the family’s daily living needs;

•  Despite having completed the house to the level required to receive the full grant, 
there are still houses with some incomplete features such as plastering of walls and 
fixing doors and windows. Only a steady income which is enough to allow saving 
beyond living expenses would see these features completed.

This study found the conditions leading to formal as well as informal borrowing at ex-
orbitant interest rates (1) affect the majority of AUP beneficiaries to varying degrees. The 
beneficiary survey found that, while the acquisition of a permanent home brought a lot 
of joy to the beneficiaries, the indebtedness had caused substantial anxiety, anguish and 

(1) Households interviewed for the case studies indicated borrowing at 3% per month from local money lenders.

49

loss of peace at home to at least the 72% who found the debt situation problematic. Of 
them, 29% had constant quarrels at home; 15% had lost pawned goods; and others had 
various other stressful experiences (see table 1.2.36)

50

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

8  The construction process

8.1  Overall consideration: high quality of houses

The MTE found that overall quality of the houses within AUP-2012 was good and this 
is confirmed in the 17 additional observations made during the final evaluation mission. 
The reasons for this are the same as given in the MTE (1). In addition, evaluators were 
pleased to hear from beneficiaries’ family members about their high level of satisfaction 
with living in the new houses, in terms of sense of security, sense of good investment 
for the future, houses perceived good quality and robustness, beauty (providing social 
estimation), technical resilience (2).

8.2  Supervision of construction

Observations made in the final evaluation also revealed some insights into how IPs and 
beneficiaries worked together.

In  one  of  the  observations  it  was  noted  that  all  the  houses  built  in  Puthuvely  village 
(Mannar district) (3) have some interesting common features such as the main door being 
on the gable wall (which is a good option in case the house is expanded). Here Vashtu 
prescriptions  are  not  followed  (because  of  the  beneficiaries’  Muslim  faith)  so  that  the 
internal organisation of space is free and independent of the imposition of measures and 
proportions.

In a second case, in another district, the IP lost control of some beneficiaries’ construction 
in terms of layout, design and technical actions. The reason for this is unclear. One case is 
especially alarming (4). Here the proposed design was completely changed by the benefi-
ciary, who decided instead on an over-ambitious ‘dream house’ which resulted in failure 
and leaving the house in an incomplete state (5). In addition, certain Vashtu prescriptions 
are currently dramatically inhibiting the daily use of the kitchen (with unexpected and 
undesirable  consequences  in  a  family  with  children)  and  the  internal  toilet  (accessible 
through  an  unnecessary  corridor)  which  is  highly  malodorous.  External  doors  are  also 
missing and the log-book was not available at the time of the visit. The evaluation team 
does not know how or when this lack of proper technical guidance was allowed to occur, 
who allowed it, who failed to warn the beneficiary of the impracticality of their prefer-
ence and who failed to prevent or mitigate this action. Unfortunately, this vindicates one 
of the more critical technical comments made in MTE report which stated:

(1) From MTE (page 48): “Drawings and technical specifications provide a sufficient set of details; The beneficiaries fully trusted 
both the Engineers and T.O.’s recommendations and duly followed their instructions and technical explanations”. 

(2) More information on satisfaction with the programme is given in Chapter Nine 

(3) See Observations nos. 22, 23, 24

(4) See Observation no. 17

(5) It is especially painful to point out that this house was considered “completed” in January 2016 (actually it is very much still 
in progress) and the MTE recommendations should have been applied in timely manner.

51

beneficiaries have been left with excessive freedom of decision over technical 
aspects whereas engineers’ opinion should not be amendable (1)

This should serve as a clear word of warning to AUP-2014 IPs.

Another significant observation was the almost total rejection of pre-cast doors and win-
dows  frames,  mostly  due  to  Vashtu  prescriptions.  All  of  those  interviewed  during  the 
2016  mission,  both  the  AUP-2012  beneficiaries  and  the  potential  applicants  for  AUP-
2014, believe such materials should not be used in a permanent private house and should 
only be used for public buildings or experimental houses.

It  was  confirmed,  during  all  observations  made,  that  construction  follow-up  from  IPs’ 
Technical Officers, Engineers and Community Mobilisers was timely and complete. They 
visited each and every site at least twice a week, which was generally sufficient to ensure 
good implementation (leaving aside the slow overall rate of construction (2)). The obser-
vations found that TOs and Engineers were still very warmly welcomed by all beneficiaries 
even after some time after completion. Beneficiaries stated they had been very proactive 
and technically supportive during the procurement and construction phases.

One minor defect reported in the MTE report (3) was an unfinished floor; this has since 
been rectified according to minimum requirement standards (see photographs below):

Figure 9:  
Observation 2 (ex MTE 29) –  
an unpaved floor rectified 
between evaluation visits 
according to minimum 
standards

(1) MTE, page 50

(2) See MTE, pages 54-55

(3) See MTE, pages 48-49 and illustration no. 7 (Obs. no. 2)

52

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

8.3  A future mezzanine option

A  point  which  the  evaluation  team  made  in  the  MTE  report  (pp. 50-51)  and  which  it 
reiterates  after  the  final  evaluation  mission  is  that  referring  to  the  excessive  height  of 
the spine wall as well as, therefore, of the external walls. This recommendation remains 
technically reasonable and will lead to financial savings (1).

Many beneficiaries justified the height of the spine wall (2) in terms of heat extraction. 
However, this was already refuted in the MTE report (3). Our position is that only a mezza-
nine, designed in the future, could reasonably justify the excessive height. Unfortunately, 
for  reasons  which  are  unclear,  beneficiaries  are  instinctively  opposed  to  the  idea  of  a 
mezzanine as an improvement to their houses (4). We reiterate our suggestion that the 
IPs carry out a technical study aimed at testing the immediate and financial benefits a 
mezzanine would bring to the basic house.

The mezzanine must obviously make use of the high roof and not interfere with bedroom 
and shrine room privacy. As such, the natural expansion would be parallel to the spine-
wall (sketch no. 1, below) along the living room, although a structural problem would 
arise,  as  it  would  be  necessary  to  have  a  long  concrete  beam  (section  roughly:  30cm 
large, 40cm height), plus foundations and plinths. Given that this increase in structural 
elements will reduce the intended flexibility of incremental growth, this option should be 
abandoned.

Figure 10:  
Sketch no. 1 – 
mezzanine not 
feasible

(1) With special reference to Puthuvely village (Observations nos. 22, 23, 24 - Mannar district) implemented houses, we still 
observed an unnecessarily height of the walls, meaning more materials, frameworks, working days, technical troubles,...

(2) Some 15”; up to 30 block rows over the finished floor level

(3) It seems redundant here to go back to those points

(4) We urge IPs to investigate on this technical portion of the house volume to be developed and exploited

53

Alternatively  (sketch  no. 2,  below),  a  small  mezzanine,  spacious  enough  to  set  up  a 
desk (1) and a mat at night and to allow access to the slab above the corridor, and which 
would be useful as storage space, seems a worthwhile option to explore. It does not sig-
nificantly need a structural increase and would provide the family with additional space 
which can be used in various ways.

Figure 11a:  
Sketch no. 2 – mezzanine feasible

(1) A desk space, especially dedicated to children’s study, has been repeatedly mentioned and urged by many beneficiaries 
(AUP2012) and potential applicants (AUP2014) as one of the most important tools to directly improve and benefit families’ 
life and social recognition

54

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

Figure 11b:  
Sketch no. 2 – mezzanine feasible

Figure 11c:  
Sketch no. 2 – mezzanine feasible

55

8.4  Women and family members contributed to construction

The  final  evaluation  observations  confirm  the  findings  of  the  MTE  that  female  family 
members  contributed  to  the  construction  phases  and  played  a  crucial  role;  no  major 
differences was reported in the kind of contribution made during the last phases of AUP-
2012 and as such all positive findings noted in the MTE report are (1).

In general, the more family members contributed to construction, the less money was 
spent on skilled and/or unskilled labour, confirming the programme’s intentions in this 
respect.

8.5  Materials quality tests

During the FTE mission no further strength compressive block tests could be carried out 
because of the absence of cement blocks available and suitable for testing (construction 
work had finished more than a year earlier). Evaluators asked the IP to provide them with 
official documents showing the results of tests spontaneously carried out during the con-
struction period (2) but this request was unsuccessful.

However,  our  numerous  visual  observations  confirm  the  good  results  reported  for  the 
MTE (3).

8.6  Toilets

It is confirmed that toilets have been one very significant improvement in the housing 
programme AUP-2012. It is important to partially revise what had been noted in the MTE:

In the Kilinochchi e Mullaitivu districts (Full and Repair Houses) detached toilets 
have  often  been  built  many  metres  away  from  the  house  (a  paradox,  taking 
into consideration the danger of snakes and overall insecurity, especially during 
the night). This choice is due to the perception, rooted in the traditional thinking 
mainly among rural Sri Lankans, particularly of the Tamils and especially in the 
northern districts, that a toilet in any form is “dirty” and hence needs to be de-
tached and located at a distance from the main house (4) (only the urban elites 
are comfortable with internal toilets).

By confirming these findings, the reason why such a preference is given should be recon-
sidered, since many potential applicants of future AUP-2014 highlighted that “detached 
toilets would be preferable because of the hygienic justification, due to scarcity of wa-

(1) From MTE, page 60: “Many female family members carried out activities such as mixing concrete, moving water and 
blocks, casting blocks, treating wood elements, preparing meals for the labourers. No harassment or misconducts have been 
reported”.

(2) Refer to: emails dated 28-29/03/2016

(3) See MTE, pages 67-68

(4) A new house with an attached toilet should be introduced to new applicants through thorough capacity building sessions; 
people are now used to that and the presence of Public Health Inspector would help in winning over people’s potential 
resistance

56

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

ter”. This comment therefore also appears in the second part of this report which deals 
with AUP-2014.

Figure 12:  
Different kinds of Toilet in 
AUP2012 implemented 
houses 
(left): attached with 
external access. 
Observation no. 04, 
Welikakandy village, 
Batticaloa District. 
(right): detached. 
Observation no. 21, 
Ganashapuram village, 
Kilinochchi District.

8.7  Verandas

As mentioned whilst commenting on AUP-2012 findings and incremental expansion over 
the grant, verandas have likely been the most common improvement across the all dis-
tricts. As mentioned in the case of the potentially proposed “washroom”, verandas could 
be erected more or less appropriately and DRR-wise, technically speaking. Many Obser-
vations carried on, show verandas made by proper and solid concrete poles, with fair 
tightness between vertical and horizontal elements, or through salvaged or raw materials 
(wood  poles);  the  practical  outcome  being  the  same  (protect  from  sun  rays  and  rain; 
allow family to have a natural extension of the internal living space; giving the family the 
opportunity to develop a livelihood activity; giving the children a protected playground; 
etcetera), obviously the performances, the costs and the technical quality will be different 
according to the materials and the techniques used.

Figure 13:  
Verandas in AUP2012 implemented houses: different kinds and technical alternatives:Left: Observation 
no. 4 (Veppavedduwan village - Batticaloa district) andRight: Observation no. 27 (Iranaipillai village - 
Mullaitivu district)

57

Verandas could also be seen (in an incremental housing perspective) a valid step to pre-
pare the “larger house of tomorrow”. This can be done by erecting columns (with rele-
vant plinth and iron bars, prolonged over the top in order to be ready to receive a beam 
later on) instead of poles, by digging proper trenches and filling them with rubble stones, 
to have a sort of pre-foundation ready. To effectively respond to DRR requirement and 
collaborate to the whole structure solicitation, core-house columns in the front should 
also be enlarged, to receive an increased charge and wind pressure; the below drawings 
displays  a  potential  veranda,  designed  as  part  of  the  core-house,  not  intended  to  be 
“stuck” in the future:

Figure 14:  
Veranda – if foundations are properly implemented, it might be used as a 
large incremental growth potential

The costs related to such an element are not excessive, considering the very high poten-
tial of the veranda as an important open volume to exploit in different manners.

8.8  Sanitation facilities

Harvesting rain water for non-drinkable uses, was already explored within MTE (refer 
to pages 65-66): it was said that “both beneficiaries and local practice seem [to] discour-
age this practice, therefore Indian Housing Project Model house displays a practical solu-
tion to be explored”. We insist that the proposed IHP Model House solution is a very good 
one, worthy to be replicated and broadly spread throughout the future housing scheme(s).

58

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

Figure 15:  
Rain-water harvesting for non-drinkable use (incomplete):Indian Housing Project Model House 
(Kilinochchi district)

But unfortunately, again during the 40 observations carried out (for both AUP-2012 and 
AUP-2014) the majority of beneficiaries and potential applicants seemed not interested 
in this practice, as common reply was: “we have enough water during the rainy season, 
whereas during the dry season harvested water got rapidly deteriorated and hence not 
usable”. The above points from people are correct and Evaluation Team does not state 
anything going opposite the practicality of a reasonable lifestyle.

An alternative reservoir approach was identified on the way to Mannar which is described 
in the second part of the report (section on sanitation) as it has potential for incorpora-
tion in the new AUP-2014.

8.9  Use of appropriate alternative technologies

Within the last phase of AUP-2012, alternative construction materials and/or technolog-
ical alternatives have been hardly used for the construction of the houses; as reported in 
the MTE, this has been mainly due to the extreme shortage of building material available 
that differs from the local customs, to the costs potentially linked to the transport, the 
possibly higher prices of new materials themselves and to the lack of specific technical 
knowledge (1) of the unskilled labour employed. Moreover, culturally, new material and/

(1) Fixing sashes needs some more technical skills and training than traditional wood frames

59

or technologies cause a certain level of mistrust and fear among the population, thus 
making the use of new elements difficult.

Many  amongst  interviewed  potential  applicants  under  AUP-2014  showed  a  very  high 
interest in bulk purchasing as much as possible of construction materials (such as: tiles, 
wood components, cement blocks, sand and cement), sharing transportation costs and 
optimising logistics; this witnesses about a solid social cohesion existing in the villages 
and a clear picture about purchasing bigger quantities at more competitive prices.

8.10  Recommendations and Lessons Learnt

As  mentioned  in  the  MTE  report,  the  overall  technical  quality  of  the  houses  is  good, 
and all materials have been appropriately procured, treated, used and partly maintained. 
Some improvements have been observed, mainly concerning a new veranda in the main 
front  (wood  poles  and  tin-sheets),  plastering  and/or  painting  new  house  surfaces  and 
power supplying by their own means or loaning further money.

All beneficiaries highlighted the Technical Officers’ (TOs) crucial role in orienting and sup-
porting them during the construction period; their appreciation is very large and many 
stated  that  “without  TOs  this  outcome  wouldn’t  be  possible”.  TOs’  role  was  not  only 
supportive  in  technical  terms  (materials,  techniques)  but  also  from  procurement  and 
management side at large, by supporting and orient CBOs to organize bulk purchases, 
selecting suppliers, testing materials.

Unfortunately,  MTE  technical  recommendations  (see  particularly  MTE  report  pp. 50-51 
and 70-71) did not have a real impact and were not taken into any practical account; 
actually, engineers claimed that those recommendations were officialised only in January 
2015, when the houses had been completed or in an advanced stage, however those 
technical  recommendations  (ridge  height;  cross  ventilation;  limiting  beneficiaries’  free 
initiatives  beyond  their  possibilities;  etc.)  had  been  repeatedly  urged  during  the  many 
Observations, and discussed in detail during both the workshop held in Kilinochchi on 
17/09/2014 and the debriefing held in Colombo on 25/09/2014 (1).

Generally beneficiaries said houses are easily maintainable and nobody complained about 
it; also internal kitchen displayed a very good technical functionality (chimney is full per-
forming in removing the smoke) and allowing women to cook and look after children at 
once, even during strong rains or during the night.

A long-term vision (the house is expected to last for at least two generations) is largely 
notable throughout many interviewees; beneficiaries have returned after 20-30 years of 
continued displacement and a complete lack of roots (livelihood, social networks, homes, 
etc.) marks their lives. Since they display a fair knowledge of their future possibilities (ba-
sically they do not expect great changes in their lives, unless restarting a fair job-income 

(1) In their comments on a draft of this report UN-Habitat stated “… over 3,000 houses were well into wall construction of 
which almost 2,300 had commenced roof construction by September 2014. There was little that could be incorporated from 
these particular recommendations at this stage.”

60

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

chain to stabilise their near future), they point out the house as the very element to bet 
on, to turn a brand new page in their family’s life; any change regarding the house (new 
materials;  restriction  to  Vashtu  prescriptions;  twinning  the  houses;  etc.)  are  badly  per-
ceived as they potentially affect that abovementioned simple goal.

61

9  The Participatory Process

This evaluation looked for evidence on the nature of beneficiary participation in the AUP-
2012  programme.  There  was  encouraging  evidence  of  very  high  involvement  of  ben-
eficiaries  in  the  construction  of  their  own  houses  as  well  as  in  those  of  others  in  the 
community. However, the study also concluded that there could have been and should 
have been greater participation in some other aspects of the programme discussed be-
low.

Being  promoted  as  an  “Owner  Driven  Programme”,  it  is  expected  that  the  AUP  pro-
grammes  employ  participatory  strategies  at  all  stages  of  the  programme.  Such  an  ap-
proach would result in a greater degree of success in the programme as beneficiaries, as 
primary stakeholders, tend to take “ownership” of the programme by actively involving 
in all aspects of the programme.

This study has observed a great deal of beneficiary participation in three forms. Firstly, 
they have been involved in the design and construction of their own houses. When asked 
about their levels of satisfaction in this regard almost 90% rated it at 8 or above on a 1 
to 10 scale with 10 being highest level of satisfaction (see Annex 7 – Table 1.2.12). The 
district of Batticaloa scored a high 98% at this satisfaction level while Mannar only had a 
score of 63%. It is unclear to the evaluators why there was such a variation between the 
two districts. The reason why such high average proportion of beneficiaries felt satisfied 
with  their  involvement  was  because  they  had  the  opportunity  to  see  the  plan  of  the 
house to be constructed (57% felt this was important) and all aspects of the construction 
was with their consent and cooperation (30%). Strangely, only 12% cited all aspects of 
the construction being as they desired as the reason for their levels of satisfaction (An-
nex 7 – Table 1.2.15).

Secondly,  though  not  to  a  very  great  extent,  they  have  voluntarily  assisted  in  the 
construction  of  other  houses  in  the  village  with  a  62%  participation  rate  (Annex 7  –  
Table 1.2.16). Of those who did not participate a significant 18% felt that it was improper 
to interfere in others’ affairs.

Thirdly, they have contributed their skills, time and labour towards various aspects in the 
overall planning and implementation of the programmes or in the planning and/or the 
construction of community infrastructure initiated through AUP programmes.

Perhaps the only serious concern is the inadequate involvement of the beneficiaries in 
the beneficiary selection process and in the generation of model plans for beneficiaries 
to choose from.

The theoretical “ownership” that stakeholder participation is expected to bring to a pro-
gramme  was  quite  evident  in  the  pride  most  beneficiaries  expressed  while  describing 
their  experiences.  Some  talked  of  how  much  they  contributed  in  labour  towards  the 

62

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKATHE PARTICIPATORY PROCESS

construction. The relatively high levels of stakeholder participation in the housing process 
could be attributed to the involvement of the Village Rehabilitation Committees (VRCs).

The VRC is a ten-member committee in each GN Division made up of AUP programme 
beneficiaries  in  each  of  those  GN  Divisions.  Their  roles  have  been  varied  –  advocacy 
to  facilitation  of  skilled  labour  hire  and  bulk  material  purchase  to  mobilising  voluntary 
unskilled  labour.  In  almost  all  VRCs  there  had  been  a  tendency  for  members  of  other 
village  level  CBOs  (Community  Based  Organisations)  such  as  RDS  (Rural  Development 
Society) and WRDS (Women’s Rural Development Society) to be voted in as members. 
This perhaps is a rural political phenomenon where persons acting with authority in an 
existing organisation are perceived to be influential enough in the village to be repeatedly 
voted in to take on any new position being created in the village. For this reason, doubts 
have been raised as to whether there is a real need for VRCs and if all activities current-
ly carried out by them could not be assigned to existing CBOs. There is no doubt that 
the VRCs, formed exclusively for the housing programme, are performing well and have 
made significant contributions towards the positive outcomes of the AUP programme. 
It is doubtful that CBOs formed for other purposes and reporting to different agencies 
would be as conscientious as VRCs have been. Would these other CBOs, for instance, 
obtain quotes from local traders for the supply of various building materials and arrange 
for their purchase in bulk for groups of beneficiaries resulting in cheaper and better qual-
ity building materials? Would they be able to bring in skilled labour when required by the 
beneficiaries and, most importantly, mobilise volunteers to provide unskilled labour to the 
most vulnerable in the village?

9.1  Recommendations

•  Housing designs need to be flexible enough to accommodate beneficiary inputs at a 
very early stage in the process. Ideally, workshops should be organised for potential 
beneficiaries at convenient locations to jointly generate the type plans. This would be 
a great opportunity, not only to draw in user inputs into the design of the type plans, 
but also to make the potential beneficiaries aware of the likely financial and other 
hardships to be encountered when deviating from the type plan. Case studies of good 
practices as well as bad practices with reasons for both need to be made aware of to 
all beneficiaries

•  A mechanism to solicit and include target group suggestions to improve the benefi-
ciary selection process should be built into the programmes. This idea appears in the 
AUP-2014 proposal presented by HfH and WVL.

•  Regular workshops for community leaders (perhaps for groups of VRCs) with experi-
enced facilitators should be scheduled to implement community action plans such as 
the SIP.

63

10  Visibility

If compared with MTE (field activities: September 2014), no significant changes are to be 
mentioned regarding visibility of AUP-2012 housing programme; still, some signboards 
showing the project’s main information are present throughout many targeted villages.

During the debriefing held in Colombo with the IPs (April 12th, 2016) Evaluation team 
again asked why recommended clay-plaques (1) (small dimension) had not been placed 
(following AUP-2008 example) (2): accordingly, IPs representative insisted in their posi-
tion, stating that such a plaques would increase a sense of dependence, whereas the 
newly acquired home should be considered as of their own entire property. However, 
plaques  were  installed  at  all  infrastructure  works  carried  out  under  AUP-2012  such  as 
wells, community centres and pre-schools. This amounted to 47 plaques.

Whilst understanding the abovementioned consideration, the evaluation team does not 
entirely agree with that, since many examples of donors’ contribution are duly “signed” 
through those simple plaques, paying respect to people having contributed to that con-
struction, moreover they show the help factually provided to affected people living so far 
away; the below illustration shows on the left a standard road-side board and on the right 
a possible, an example of a commemorative plaque of another EU-funded programme:

Figure 16:  
(left) Typical 
signboard village 
under EU-
AUP-2012; (right) 
Typical clay-plaque 
under EU-ACAP 
programme

Prior to the field phase of the mission, the evaluation team received the UN-Habitat Final 
Report on AUP-2012 where it was reported that five ‘visibility stickers’ had been pasted 
on vehicle vehicles funded by the EU.

Media tools as mentioned in the Final Report (page 26), such as: publication, video, pho-
to galleries, are very comprehensive and of good quality and provide the viewer with a 
large (and touching, in some case) set of information (3).

(1) From MTE, page 77: “these plaques are also recommended as form of discrete visibility in the AUP-2012 contract “Annex 
VI: Communication and visibility Strategy for EU-funded activities in Sri Lanka”.

(2) Refer to: MTE Illustration 23, page 77 

(3) A short (8-9 minute) video documentary on the project (http://unhabitat.lk/multimedia/improving-living-conditions-
through-housing-multimedia/improving-living-conditions-in-returnee-areas-of-sri-lanka-through-housing/) shows its key 
achievements for a general audience. UN-Habitat has informed the evaluators that it will discuss more specific, technical 
challenges of post-conflict reconstruction programmes, including AUP-2012, in a forthcoming report on good practices and 
lessons learned. This was in preparation at the time of writing (September 2016).

64

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

11  Conclusions & Recommendations

11.1  Introduction

In this chapter we look at both the conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation. 
However, we shall not be listing or reviewing either. They are detailed and summarised 
in the forgoing chapters. Many are the same as presented in the report of the mid-term 
evaluation which took place in September 2014. Some of them have been adopted in 
the design for the AUP-2014 programme. Here, however, we wish to concentrate on the 
overall conclusions and recommendations - those which can be used to guide the future 
direction and design of the AUP programmes.

11.2  Positive Features of the AUP Programmes

The  global  objective  of  AUP-2012  is  “to  address  medium  term  rehabilitation  needs  of 
returnees and their host communities in the North and East of Sri Lanka” with the key 
indicators being: “the number of returnees benefiting directly from improved housing, 
flanking infrastructure, training in construction or tenure title regularisations as a result of 
the action”. The target set for these indicators is 19,600 people which the programme 
easily  surpassed  with  71,489.  The  reasons  the  implementing  partner  gives  for  such  a 
large  difference  in  the  figures  are  that  it  made  foreign  exchange  rate  gains,  achieved 
savings on operations costs and required increased beneficiary contributions (UN-Habitat, 
2016: 30).

There are many positive features but the following are some of the most notable:

1.  There is a very high-level of beneficiary satisfaction, not simply because they now 
have a permanent house instead of temporary dwellings but because of the technical 
quality of the houses. The field survey shows that 94% of beneficiaries were very sat-
isfied with the programme;

2.  As a result the EU, UN-Habitat and SDC are all held in very high regard (1);
3.  There  was  a  high-level  of  home  owner  participation  but  somewhat  more  in  the 
construction  than  the  design  of  the  houses  where  shortcomings  have  been  iden-
tified  in  Chapter  Eight.  There  has  been  an  attempt  to  take  local  culture  into  ac-
count though, as pointed out in parts of the report this is not everywhere the case. 
Toilets are a case in point. In some districts detached toilets have been built to ad-
dress  perceptions  that  toilets  are  “dirty”  and  must  be  at  a  distance  from  the  main  
house;

4.  There  are  parts  of  the  programme  where  women’s  participation  is  clearly  visible, 
most  notably  in  the  implementation  and  management  of  the  construction  process 
and  in  the  leadership  of  the  VRCs.  UN-Habitat-provided  leadership  training  which 
undoubtedly contributed to this;

(1) Though AusAID/DFAT was a donor it was never specifically mentioned by discussants in the FGDs

65

5.  Many  process  aspects  of  the  programme  are  very  good  and  several  improved  in 
AUP-2012  compared  with  AUP-2010  before  it.  For  example,  beneficiaries  reported  
almost universally in the survey and focus group discussions that grant instalments 
were  always  paid  on  time  and  that  Technical  Officers  and  other  field  staff  of  the 
IPs  were  of  much  assistance  in  the  procurement  and  construction  process.  At  the 
management level the monitoring system is a detailed and systematic one providing 
regular progress updates.

6.  There  is  evidence  that  social  cohesion  has  been  improved  by  AUP-2012.  In  the 
household survey some 90% of AUP-2012 beneficiaries believed that the relationship 
with other members of the community had improved greatly since the start of the 
housing programme.

The  following  table  summarises  the  achievements  of  AUP-2012  by  comparing  targets 

with results. The fourth column shows whether targets were achieved or not.

Achievement 
Level

>360%

Summary of Achievements (Using KPIs from Logical Framework )

Intervention Logic Key OVI5 (1)

Achieved

The overall 
objective is to 
address medium 
term rehabilitation 
needs of returnees 
and their host 
communities in the 
North and East of 
Sri Lanka

Number of returnees 
benefitting directly from 
improved housing, flanking 
infrastructure, training in 
construction or tenure 
title regularisations as a 
result of the action (target: 
19,600 people)

71,489 beneficiaries. 
17,436 benefitted from 
housing support, 153 from 
formal construction training, 
46,644 from infrastructure, 
and 18,276 persons from 
temporary livelihoods 
from construction. Of 
the housing beneficiaries 
3,776 households were 
assisted to regularize their 
land tenure documentation. 

(1) The evaluation team used the OVIs which appear in the Addendum No. 1 to Grant Contract No. DCI-Asie/2012/296-666 
which refers to AUP-2012. An earlier version of the logical framework, which had been submitted as part of UN-Habitat’s 
proposal to the EU, contained numerous indicators which were not SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and 
time-bound). The present version represents a significant improvement which allows for better tracking of progress (the same 
is true for the revised AUP-2010 logframe). The evaluators received the Quarterly Report for Quarter 3 of 2014 when they 
had already almost completed the draft evaluation report so were unable to incorporate much of its information. However, 
this final report does make use of them.

66

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Achievement 
Level

133%

Summary of Achievements (Using KPIs from Logical Framework )

Intervention Logic Key OVI5 (1)

Achieved

Estimated share of the total 
number of beneficiaries 
who consider their living 
conditions and social 
cohesion as having 
substantially improved on 
project completion (target: 
75% of 19,600)

Specific objective: 
to improve the 
living conditions 
and social 
cohesion of 
displaced people, 
returnees and their 
host communities 
in the North and 
East through 
the facilitation 
of construction 
and repair of 
permanent 
housing and of 
flanking measures.

The FTE household survey 
found that on a scale of  
1 to 10 where 10 was the 
highest level of improvement 
in standard of living and  
1 the lowest, all respondents 
rated their increased living 
standards as between 6 and 
10 and the vast majority 
between 9 and 10.

There is no indicator for 
social cohesion in the 
logframe but the FTE 
household survey reveals that 
100% of respondents felt 
that their relationships with 
other community members 
had improved as a result of 
the housing programme with 
an average of 90% rating the 
improvement between  
8 and 10.

67

Summary of Achievements (Using KPIs from Logical Framework )

Intervention Logic Key OVI5 (1)

Achieved

Achievement 
Level

92%

17,436 persons. 631 female-
headed households and 
365 households with persons 
with disabilities received 
housing assistance

Result 1: Improved 
housing for the 
most vulnerable 
using the ‘Home 
Owner Driven’ 
approach in a 
conflict-sensitive 
and equitable 
manner.

1. Number of people, 
women-headed households, 
disabled and of families 
benefiting from the project 
having moved to permanent 
housing meeting the 
minimum construction 
standards (target: 
4,350 families involving 
18,000 to 20,000 people, 
1,000 women-headed 
households, 150 families 
with a disabled family 
member)

2. Number of houses built 
or repaired previously 
damaged by conflict (target: 
3,850 FHEs)

3. % of constructed houses 
complying with the adopted 
minimum construction 
standards (target: 100%)

4. Eligibility criteria set up 
on the basis of transparency, 
equal opportunities, 
vulnerability assessment and 
fair potential access to the 
project.

5. % of people and families 
strictly selected under 
the established eligibility 
conditions (target: 100%)

68

110%

4,569 houses have been 
completed during the project 
period including 3,932 full 
houses and 637 repairs. This 
equates to 4,250.5 full house 
equivalents. 

100%

100%

% not 
applicable

100%

Chapter Three argues 
that the selection system 
is flawed. However, in all 
the FGDs, discussants, 
including those who were 
not selected, understood the 
criteria and none complained 
they had been wrongly 
assessed; complaints were 
limited to the fairness of the 
criteria.

There is no reason to believe 
that the eligibility criteria 
were not correctly applied 
and no complaints were 
received from any non-
beneficiaries in this respect.

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Achievement 
Level

145%

Summary of Achievements (Using KPIs from Logical Framework )

Intervention Logic Key OVI5 (1)

Achieved

3,776 households were 
assisted to regularize their 
land tenure documentation.

Result 1b: 
improved 
tenure security 
of beneficiary 
communities

Number and percentage 
of people and families 
benefiting from 
regularisation of deeds 
/ documents of legal 
land ownership or other 
documents providing 
security of tenure 
through the project 
(target: 2,600 families 
or 60% of beneficiaries, 
involving approximately 
11,700 people).

Result 2: improved 
livelihood capacity 
locally and poverty 
alleviated through 
temporary / new 
job opportunities, 
vocational training 
and capacity 
building.

1. Number of individuals 
having completed formal 
construction training and 
intensive on-site immersion 
training who then use their 
acquired skills as a mid-
term livelihood profession. 
(Target: 200)

153 youth completed formal 
construction training.

Not 
assessable

There is no data in the 
M&E system on numbers 
of trainees who received 
employment after training 
but survey data suggests that 
only 3.3% of trainees used 
their training to get a job.

2. Number of individuals 
trained in and utilising 
disaster resilient building 
methods in housing 
construction (target: 200).

5,983 beneficiaries have 
participated in training to 
incorporate Disaster Risk 
Reduction elements into 
housing reconstruction. 

Almost 
3,000%

3. Number of man-days paid 
for to implement the project 
for temporary employment 
(target: 250,000 man-days)

379,069 man-days.

152%

69

Summary of Achievements (Using KPIs from Logical Framework )

Intervention Logic Key OVI5 (1)

Achieved

Achievement 
Level

292%

46,644 persons are 
benefitting from completed 
community infrastructure. 

Result 3: improved 
community 
access to social 
infrastructure 
(flanking measures)

1. Number and % of 
people (including those 
not receiving housing 
assistance) and villages 
actively benefiting 
from flanking measures 
(target: 40-50 villages, 
16,000 people and 20% of 
houses built or repaired)

2. Technical specifications, 
plans and illustrations of the 
infrastructure as-built 

2. Technical Specifications, 
plans and illustrations of the 
infrastructure as-built

Unclear what this means. No 
data collected.

UNMEASUR-
ABLE

11.3  Learning the Big Lessons

In this section we consider how this positive performance can be taken into the future, 
such as in the AUP-2014 which was launched in December 2015 and future potential 
housing-related programmes. AUP has already gone through five phases and donors and 
implementing agencies have shown themselves capable of learning from the first when 
designing the following. Similarly, they are now keen to learn from the lessons of Phase 
II or, rather, from the combined lessons of Phases I and II (1). Below we present what we 
believe to be the most important of these.

11.3.1  General Considerations of the AUP Approach

The preceding chapters have identified several important problems which have not been 
solved during the implementation of AUP-2012 or preceding programmes such as de-
pendency, indebtedness and low sustainability. We believe that these can at least in part 
be traced to the model of home owner driven development as practised in the Owner 
Driven Model approach in Sri Lanka. We shall explain why and go on to propose how the 
model can be transformed to make use of its existing strengths while acquiring essential 
new ones.

(1) In the workshop held in Kilinochchi with IPs the participants showed that they had numerous ideas of how to improve the 
AUP some of which coincide with the evaluation team’s ideas. This is a positive sign demonstrating willingness to learn from 
their own experiences.

70

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

The Irony of the Home Owner Driven Approach
In Chapter Four we argued that the home owner driven approach has largely failed to ex-
ploit the development of a cooperative social fabric or created opportunities for integrat-
ed development which could enhance the resilience of individuals and communities. This 
is because the approach adopted has been sectorial (i.e. housing) and has focused on 
individual household participation in the design and construction of houses rather than 
village approaches such as practised by SDC. Flanking work has provided some broader 
community benefits but little to make community actions sustainable (e.g. CBOs capable 
of community level planning, financing, implementation and maintenance). As explained 
in Chapter Four the focus on housing was required by the donor in the call for propos-
als (1) with the reasoning that it complemented multiple parallel livelihood development 
projects in existence at the time. However, this complementarity is more theoretical than 
real in so far as they do not always coincide geographically.

The Unwanted Consequences
The home owner driven approach has not managed to overcome, and at times might 
have exacerbated, problems of unsustainable indebtedness, dependency syndrome and 
the low sustainability of community and possibly individual assets. This is not to say that 
the approach is the only cause but it has contributed to it. The way it has done so we 
present graphically as an interconnected process in the figure below.

Home Owner Driven Approach

Weak CBOs

Individualistic
development

Indebtedness

Dependency

Low ownership
of community assets

Low sustainability

Figure 17:  
The Interconnected 
Process of the 
Home Owner Driven 
Approach, Indebtedness, 
Dependency and Low 
Sustainability

The emphasis on the home owner taking the lead in decisions about his/her house has 
unintentionally contributed to further indebtedness which home owners cannot manage. 
Meanwhile the individualistic house-centred approach leaves CBOs weak (though social 
cohesion is high) and ownership of community assets low. This results in a dependent 
attitude to the sustainability of the latter.

(1) Source: UN-Habitat, response to the draft evaluation report

71

The Shape of Future Housing Assistance Programmes in Sri Lanka
The MTE evaluation team believed that as AUP-2012 ended one should consider design-
ing a different developmental model for future housing programmes. It would address 
the key problems of dependency and indebtedness and ensure that benefits are not only 
sustainable but more widely enjoyed as explicitly formulated in the Action Document for 
AUP-2014. An ideal approach places not the individual but the community at the heart, 
not hand-outs but partnership, not a programme which ends when the project closes, 
but which continues through strengthened community organisations. This model would 
be  more  holistic  than  in  AUP  programmes  up  to  and  including  AUP-2012.  Transition-
ing from household to a form of integrated rural settlement development which would 
combine housing assistance with major components of livelihoods and micro-enterprise 
development would provide for a more balanced approach.

The People’s Process: a Community Driven Approach
One can see this approach in the model of the “People’s Process” which has been sup-
ported successfully by UN-Habitat in many resettlement and reconstruction programmes 
in  South  and  South-East  Asia  (Lankatilleke,  2009  and  no  date,  UN-Habitat  2010e).  It 
starts from the premise that while families need a house, they also live in communities 
and  have  a  responsibility  to  each  other.  While  households  need  houses  communities 
need services such as water, sanitation, roads, power, civic facilities, child-care and el-
derly-care support. Satisfying community needs requires collective, not individual, effort. 
This extension from the individual to the community is what is articulated as the People’s 
Process of housing and settlement development.

The  figure  below  presents  graphically  how  this  approach  would  address  indebtedness 
and contribute to sustainability. By strengthening CBOs and providing livelihoods-related 
training, internal organisational capacity and funds should be generated to both reduce 
indebtedness and make community asset formation feasible. CBOs would be strength-
ened not only through leadership training but also through a concerted effort to develop 
community contracting. These would involve both contracts with local government to 
undertake construction and maintenance work but also in the non-construction indus-
tries such as tailoring, metalwork or farm based enterprises. These trades would be de-
veloped through a livelihoods programme.

72

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Community Driven Approach

CBO Strengthening

Livelihoods
& Training

Community planning
& implementation

Community
ownership

Lower indebtedness,
more disposable
income

High sustainability

Community
assets produced

Figure 18:  
The Relationships 
between the Community 
Driven Approach, 
Indebtedness and 
Sustainability

Because it is concerned with the whole village the community driven approach to ben-
eficiaries is that all families need to benefit and not only some. This implies examining 
approaches to construction which are lower-cost (so that the available funds stretch fur-
ther than they do at present and can reach even the extremely poor) and this leads to the 
consideration of incremental housing and lower-cost alternative materials. Both of these 
will  require  the  inclusion  of  robust  awareness  programmes.  It  is  unfortunate  that  the 
approach adopted so far, which has delivered relatively large complete houses through 
grants, is likely to have created resistance to the introduction of incremental housing and 
the use of lower-cost building materials.

More Questions
This raises the question of whether a grant or whole grant approach is desirable. The full 
grant  approach  is  likely  to  create  dependence  rather  than  self-driven  development  (1). 
Alternative funding mechanisms should be sought which emphasise a partnership rather 
than  donor-recipient  relationship  for  households  that  can  afford  to  put  some  savings 
aside. These could include part grant-part own savings arrangements (e.g. 80% - 20%). 
And it would also encourage home owners to look more favourably on lower cost solu-
tions. The own saving contribution would be in addition to the present provision of home 
owner labour.

The  incremental  approach  to  housing  coupled  with  part-granting  would  reduce  the 
amount of ‘up-front’ grant cash required by the programme for housing. This could be 
invested instead in livelihoods activities.

(1) In an interview with Habitat for Humanity in Batticaloa we were told that the experience of grants, in the form of housing, 
as part of the post-tsunami reconstruction process, led to such dependency that many beneficiaries even stopped working as 
they came to expect that all their needs would be met by an external agent.

73

In an interview with CEPA the team was asked whether housing was even the priority 
of beneficiary communities (1). The only way to be sure is to ask them, of course. We 
believe, however, from the responses received during our focus group discussions, that 
priorities are multiple and that as houses become less of a priority, others become more 
important. The community driven approach is well equipped to identify and address the 
range of community needs and priorities.

A final thought, on the question of how broadly one should aim to spread the benefits 
of a housing programme, is this. One can consider spending almost another €160 million 
on  solving  the  whole  problem  of  remaining  war-destroyed  or  damaged  houses  in  the 
North and East based on the current approach. This would solve the problem for today, 
which would of course be laudable. However, it does little for future generations and 
the needs of newly formed households. As the children of present beneficiaries grow up 
and start their own families they will require housing. The AUP programmes can leave 
an important legacy if they establish a housing finance mechanism which is accessible 
to young households. For them houses will need to be affordable and they will not have 
the benefit of the grants their parents have had. This will probably mean they have to 
look for the kind of incremental housing promoted in this report, including the use of 
alternative building materials. It is recommended that in a future AUP programme part of 
the funding be set aside to establish such a financing mechanism.

What are the prospects?
The above recommendations were directed partly at AUP-2012 as it prepared to enter its 
last nine months but, because this is a short period in which to incorporate a wide range 
of recommendations, they were mainly aimed at future AUP programmes. Since the mid-
term evaluation report was written a new programme, AUP-2014, has been established 
which started its activities in December 2015, although it had not yet begun field imple-
mentation when the present evaluation and baseline study took place in March and April 
2016. What does its project design tell us about the way in which it differs from previous 
programmes and the extent to which it incorporates the recommendations of the mid-
term evaluation (largely restated in the present report)? Here we will briefly mention what 
we believe are the most significant design features (2).

The  beneficiary  selection  process  has  been  identified  as  a  source  of  dissatisfaction  in 
this report largely because worthy applicants, as perceived by communities, have been 
declined a grant. AUP-2014 takes up this challenge and will introduce community par-
ticipation in the selection process. It will also reconsider applicants above and below a 
preliminary cut-off level rather than automatically exclude those who fall below it. Both 
these correspond to recommendations made in the MTE of AUP-2012.

(1) In a focus group discussion in Mulliwaikkal East (Mullaitivu District) on 5th April 2016 participants were asked whether 
housing was a priority for them. There followed a heated discussion amongst participants, some of whom were arguing that 
if support were given to their current livelihoods problems they would earn more money than they would receive from the 
programme for housing. The village was a candidate for the AUP-2014 programme.

(2) Fuller details can be found in HfH (2015).

74

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

A range of house designs (four) will be offered with differing levels of grant. The designs 
cover ten house types. In seven of these cases grants will be supplemented by loans of 
between 2.7% and 22% of the total house cost. This aims to reduce dependency while 
offering most grant support to the neediest. Loans will be available through a non-ex-
ploitative  micro-finance  institution  in  an  attempt  to  prevent  indebtedness.  Livelihoods 
support including skills training and micro-enterprise development (e.g. in the production 
of alternative building materials) also aim to ward off indebtedness as well as increase 
living standards.

Many grants will be smaller and therefore five of the house types are for smaller houses. 
This is in an attempt to provide houses which match need rather than have one size for 
all, optimise the use of grants and provide a wider spread of benefits. The same intention 
lies behind having three of the four house designs incorporate alternative building mate-
rials including sun-dried brick and compressed stabilised earth block. This will be a major 
challenge to implement as resistance will be high.

As with previous AUPs, training will be provided to CBOs in order to strengthen local ca-
pacity for sustainability which will also benefit from increased incomes of home owners.

All the terms underlined were key focus areas of the mid-term evaluation of AUP-2012 
which have been restated in the present report. The fact that AUP-2014 is addressing 
them,  including  using  the  recommendations  made  by  the  evaluation  team,  we  think 
bodes well for the future. However, major changes bring with them major challenges 
which AUP-2014 will certainly encounter. The evaluation team believes AUP-2014 is set 
on the right track and expects it to add to the wealth of experience and good practices 
which have been built up so far by AUP-2012 and preceding AUP programmes.

75

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

PART I - ANNEXES

77

Annex 1 – Terms of Reference

Specific Terms of Reference

Evaluation of the 
EU-funded housing reconstruction programmes 
in Sri Lanka implemented by UN-Habitat 
(Aid to Uprooted People programmes AUP-2010 and AUP-2012)

FWC COM 2011 - LOT 1

1. 

BACKGROUND

Until 2009, two decades of conflict left nearly 365,000 houses fully or partially damaged 
in the Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka. This further aggravated the conse-
quences over populations previously affected by the Tsunami in December 2004 which 
also provoked massive destruction throughout most of Sri Lanka’s coastline, notably in 
the East and North-East.

After  the  declared  end  of  the  conflict  in  May  2009  the  international  community  rein-
forced efforts in assisting Sri Lanka reconstruct social infrastructure and livelihoods main-
ly  in  conflict-affected  areas.  These  have  involved  a  new  wave  of  permanent  housing 
reconstruction led mainly by donors such as the EU, Australian Aid, Swiss Development 
Cooperation and more recently the High Commission of India. Housing reconstruction 
has been building up on experiences from the post-tsunami such as the “Home Own-
er-Driven” approach earlier consolidated by UN-Habitat in Sri Lanka.

Since  2005,  EU  support  to  housing  reconstruction  in  Sri  Lanka  has  already  resulted  in 
16,000 houses benefiting over 64,000 people. Four programmes have involved the fol-
lowing Implementing Partners in chronological order: the World Bank (2005-2008), ASB 
(2008-2013) and UN-Habitat (2010-2014 and 2013-2015). By 2015, the EU expects to 
have contributed to funding the reconstruction of 20,000 houses (approximately 10,000 
in the North and 10,000 in the East).

Other donor activities

So  far,  the  EU  remains  the  donor  having  assisted  reconstruct  most  houses  in  Sri  Lan-
ka, although the Government of India is currently financing the reconstruction of up to 
50,000 houses (1) and hence will shortly take over. This is the largest ever development 
cooperation programme run by India and marks its emergence as an international donor. 
The most important allocation of the Indian-funded programme is being implemented 
by  UN-Habitat  also,  which  simplifies  donor-coordination  at  the  field  level.  Other  Indi-
an-funded implementing partners are the  International  Federation  of  the Red  Cross  in 
partnership  with  Sri  Lanka  Red  Cross,  Habitat  for  Humanity  and  the  National  Housing 
Development Agency of Sri Lanka.

(1) See http://www.hcicolombo.org/page/display/170 

78

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

From post-emergency to development

In January 2010 the ‘International Monetary Fund’ (IMF) upgraded Sri Lanka to ‘Middle 
Income Emerging Markets’. And recently, the Government of Sri Lanka, has declared that 
the “humanitarian phase is over”. Accordingly, a number of humanitarian donors (e.g.: 
ECHO) and many INGOs have withdrawn and ‘Official Development Assistance’ (ODA) 
has been shifting focus from post-emergency (e.g. transitional shelter and WATSAN) to 
development  (e.g.  permanent  housing  and  flanking  measures).  Development  agencies 
such as DfID have recently withdrawn their permanent offices from Colombo. However, 
according  to  the  ‘Sri  Lanka  Human  Development  Report  2012’:  “Development  oppor-
tunities  are  skewed  towards  a  few  urban  centres,  resulting  in  migration  to  cities  and 
poor living standards in several rural provinces. Prevailing inequalities and disparities have 
adversely impacted the growth potential as well as the equitable human development 
of all people living in the country”. Growth and infrastructure development in the richer 
Western Province where almost half of the national GDP is accounted for, contrasts with 
progress in the North and the East.

Whilst  Government  has  committed  to  undertake  large  social  permanent  housing  pro-
grammes  nationwide,  low-cost  housing  reconstruction  in  the  North  and  East  remains 
mainly dependant on ODA and diaspora remittances. Despite international efforts, ODA 
will not cover the gap in housing needs on a “house-for-a-house” basis estimated for 
2015 to remain between 60,000 and 100,000 in the North only. UN-Habitat guesses that 
another 20,000 houses are needed in the Eastern District of Batticaloa. Community-build-
ing, livelihood development and access to basic social infrastructure for the poorest in 
rural areas remain a crucial developmental challenge requiring local sustainable solutions.

Current situation in the reconstruction sector

Large-scale  infrastructure  (e.g.  national  roads  and  energy  supply  network)  are  quickly 
spreading in the South West and steadily reaching the North and East. Housing recon-
struction  for  IDPs  has  also  been  determined  as  top  priority  for  Government  but  ad-
vances are yet to materialise. The wide-spread location of returnee villages throughout 
rural  areas  does  not  make  it  easier.  Returnee  immigration,  such  as  many  among  the  
50,000 Sri Lankan refugees in India, puts pressure on land resources. There are concerns 
over instances of interventionism in land dispute resolutions and the number of landless 
remains a serious challenge to be addressed. Whilst beneficiary selection has been man-
aged with scoring systems accounting for vulnerability, the rise of political interventions 
and favouritism in allocations to particular communities needs to be carefully monitored.

The recent elections of 21 September Northern, Central and North-West provinces have 
resulted in a representational victory of Tamil communities winning 30 out of 36 seats in 
the North. The practical implications of this are yet to be seen.

Whilst ODA can claim humanitarian successes on many fronts in conflict-affected Sri Lan-
ka, the combination of economic devastation caused by armed conflict with an accrued 
form of donor-dependency have not helped towards the creation of a local and reliable 
construction market nor of the industrial or entrepreneurial fabric necessary to supply low-

79

cost housing in the North and East. Implementing Partners involved in reconstruction have 
even struggled attract labour to the construction sector. In addition, construction resourc-
es (labour and materials) inflation has led to prohibitive costs for individuals left without 
assistance. The average size of construction contractors remains small and their reliability 
low as compared to a more competitive and functional market in the South and West.

The EU-funded ‘Aid to Uprooted People’ housing programmes in Sri Lanka

The post-tsunami emergency context of 2005 led the European Commission to under-
take major commitments to support social-infrastructure and livelihood projects. Housing 
reconstruction, in particular, has been financed under the EU’s regional facility called ‘Aid 
to Uprooted People’ (AUP).

The first two AUP programmes for housing reconstruction in Sri Lanka contributed with 
EUR 6,000,000 in 2005 and EUR 10,000,000 in 2006 to the ‘North East Reconstruc-
tion Programme’ (NEHRP) led by the World Bank and Government. By that stage, the 
‘Home Owner Driven’ approach had already been consolidated as the main implemen-
tation  approach.  This  programme  set  out  clear  standards  (1)  for  housing  construction 
partly as a reaction to the plethora of spontaneous housing projects that had emerged 
from international solidarity response to the tsunami. Whilst the respect of these stand-
ards are a condition sine qua non for implementation, a critical analysis of the same in 
view of pointing at ways to upgrading them are necessary particularly in view of accom-
modating more flexibly the remaining housing needs.

Figure 1  
NEHRP permanent house next to transitional shelter, Ampara District, 2007

(1) An important document to be reviewed: ‘Technical Guideline for Owner-driven housing construction strategy-North East 
Housing Reconstruction Programme’ prepared by Eng. A. E. R. Suresh Miranda. 
80

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

Figure 2  
Woman-headed household beneficiaries of NEHRP in Ampara District, 2007

In 2008 the EU committed an additional EUR 12,000,000 to housing reconstruction im-
plemented by INGOs ASB (EUR 10.1M) and supporting flanking measures by ZOA (EUR 
1.9M) to meet the needs of Internally Displaced People (IDPs) in Vavunya District, name-
ly  around  the  refugee  camp  Menik  Farm.  The  housing  programme  completed  in  mid-
2013 has led to the reconstruction of 2,794 (accommodating 11,473 individuals) under  
the  “Home  Owner-Driven”  approach,  5,514 beneficiaries  improved  their  livelihoods 
thanks to additional capacity building measures, 455 beneficiaries improved their capa-
bilities  in  terms  of  construction  processes  and  31  brick  producers  are  making  a  living  
out of it.

81

Figure 3  
Exterior of a completed house built under ASB guidance in Vavuniya, 2012

Figure 4  
Subsequent veranda extension financed and built by owners, 2012

82

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

The programmes to be evaluated

In 2010 the EU allocated another EUR 12,000,000 to the ‘Support to Conflict Affect-
ed People through Housing’ programme (referred to as AUP-2010 or UN-Habitat 
housing Phase-I) in the North (1) in collaboration with Australian Aid (AusAID/DFAT), and 
Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC) implemented by UN-Habitat as well as SDC. With 
a total joint provision of EUR 15,958,000 this programme has already led to the full re-
construction of 2,830 houses and of 1,929 repairs (totalling 4,759 families), 3,111 ben-
eficiaries assisted in resolving land tenure issues. AusAID/DFAT has placed additional EUR 
1.4 million, which remain outside the Contribution Agreement contract, to build an ad-
ditional 248 full houses.

Figure 5  
EU-funded permanent house being extended by owners, Mussali village Mannar, 2013

Technical assistance and guidance for reconstruction is provided to beneficiaries by field‐
based  UN‐Habitat  and  SDC  teams.  Vulnerable  groups  such  as  female-headed  house-
holds, elderly and disabled persons are given priority assistance in order to ensure their 
safety and welfare. Due to destruction and loss of documents during the conflict, many 
families have difficulty in proving their ownership of land and it is anticipated that ap-
prox. 2,400 families will benefit from assistance to establish security of tenure through 
the project.

(1) See http://www.unhabitat.lk/project7a.html 

83

Figure 6  
House with veranda made of former temporary shelter tin sheets in Kilinochchi, 2012

Finally, in 2012 the EU and the same donor partners decided to replicate the previous 
programme (1) this time called ‘Improving Living Conditions in Returnee Areas of Sri 
Lanka through Housing’ (AUP-2012, known also as UN-Habitat Housing Phase-II) 
with another EUR 12,000,000. With the contributions of AusAID/DFAT and SDC the total 
provision is of EUR 15,294,700 in view of attending more than 100 villages in the four 
target districts including this time a target of 1,000 households in Batticaloa in the East. 
The target is the full reconstruction of 3,000 fully damaged houses, and the major repair 
of approximately 1,000 damaged ones. Through a “Home Owner Driven” approach, it 
seeks to empower the beneficiary families to take charge of their own recovery process. 
Additional AusAID/DFAT funding is being contractually integrated with the EU-UN-Habi-
tat Contribution Agreement.

2.  DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT

›  Global objective

Empower  key  stakeholders  involved  in  EU-funded  housing  reconstruction  pro-
grammes in Sri Lanka with knowledge or skills identified through programme eval-
uations  necessary  to  undertake  well-informed  decisions,  corrective  measures  or 
complementary activities to better attain EU development cooperation objectives.

(1) See http://www.unhabitat.lk/project14.html

84

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

›  Specific objectives

1.  Identify relevant areas for potential improvement as well as examples of good 

practice in the implementation and design of the programmes concerned;

2.  Disseminate the relevant findings in the form of practical and feasible recommen-

dations;

3.  Mainstream, to the relevant stakeholders, practical methods, skills or approaches 

to follow up on the recommendations.

›  Requested services, including suggested methodology

Note: as part of the tender, the Consultant is expected to submit a concise methodol-
ogy (max five pages) including an indicative description of the performance and 
impact  evaluation  surveys  (max  three  pages).  Evaluation  methods  will  be  reviewed 
at the inception phase of each mission and consolidated with the Contracting Authority 
prior to commencing the field activities.

These are the indicative services and evaluation methods required:

1. ‘Performance’ and ‘Impact Evaluations’:

First of all, throughout the exercise, the evaluators are expected to check on the com-
pliance of beneficiaries selected with respect to the relevant eligibility criteria set 
out in coordination with the Presidential Task Force (PTF). Please note that Phase-I and 
Phase-II differ in so far as the first was not subjected to scoring.

Then, ‘performance evaluations’ need to account for the methods described by DEVCO 
and available on-line (1). The following evaluation criteria (2) correspond to the traditional 
practice  of  evaluation  of  development  aid  formalised  by  the  OECD-DAC  (the  first  five 
criteria), and to the specific EC requirements (the last two criteria).

Relevance

• Extent to which the objectives of the development intervention are consistent with ben-
eficiaries’ requirements, country needs, global priorities and partners’ and EC’s policies.

Effectiveness

• Extent to which the development intervention’s objectives were achieved, or are ex-
pected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance.

(1) See http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/methodology/index_en.htm 

(2) See page 27 of the ‘Guidelines for project and programme evaluation’ available at http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/
evaluation/methodology/examples/guide3_en.pdf 

85

Efficiency

• Extent to which the outputs and/or desired effects have been achieved with the lowest 
possible use of resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time, administrative costs, etc.).

Sustainability

• Extent to which the benefits from the development intervention continue after termi-
nation of the external intervention, or the probability that they continue in the long-term 
in a way that is resilient to risks.

Impact

• Positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by a devel-
opment intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended.

Coherence

• Extent to which activities undertaken allow the European Commission to achieve its 
development policy objectives without internal contradiction or without contradiction 
with other Community policies. Extent to which they complement partner country’s pol-
icies and other donors’ interventions.

Community value added

• Extent to which the project/programme adds benefits to what would have resulted 
from Member States’ interventions in the same context.

The ‘impact  evaluation’ component is to develop on the ‘impact’ component of the 
‘performance  evaluation’  and  is  to  be  addressed  through  randomised  assessments  as 
further specified below:

a.  Final Evaluation of the AUP-2010 programme (Phase-I)

The programme was subject of a Mid-Term Evaluation in 2012 and hence the ‘per-
formance evaluation’ of the Implementing Partners vis-à-vis the recommendations 
therein will have to be thoroughly assessed. The Consultants are invited to critically 
question those recommendations and add theirs as necessary.

The Consultant is expected to undertake extensive field data collection in view to un-
dertake a meaningful ‘impact evaluation’ addressing qualitatively and quantitatively 
the extent to which “positive and negative, primary and secondary long-term effects 
produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintend-
ed”. Namely, whether the living conditions and social cohesion of beneficiaries and 
hosting  communities  have  actually  been  improved,  should  be  addressed.  This  will 
involve both a qualitative enquiry as to “what is the good life for the beneficiaries” 
and  contrast  it  with  usual  development  indicators,  as  well  as  a  more  quantitative 
survey and analysis of the factual conditions of the household prior and following the 
programme.

86

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

For  the  purpose  of  the  tender,  a  commitment  to  survey  at  least  100  beneficiary 
households of AUP-2010 is expected. The more households the tender can commit 
to survey the more convincing it will be for the Contracting Authority when selecting 
the winning tender. The Consultant might consider subcontracting data collection 
in  view  to  increase  the  sample  size.  In  addition,  a  statistically  relevant  number  of 
non-beneficiaries should be documented for comparison. Please note, that in the ab-
sence of a baseline survey (implementation started in 2010), the Consultant is to find 
best  possible  relevant  elements  of  comparison  with  non-beneficiaries  (e.g.:  house-
holds  under  equivalent  original  circumstances)  in  order  to  appraise  the  incidence 
of  the  Implementing  Partners’  work  (e.g.  households  could  be  grouped  by  typolo-
gies and then equivalent non-beneficiary households associated to each typological 
group). Emphasis on gender issues will be considered important. Each household sur-
veyed needs to be photographed and geo-referenced. A map and database with the 
geo-coordinates and illustrations of each household should be annexed to the report.

The recommendations that might arise from the findings will be directed towards the 
replica Phase-II (e.g.: ways of overcoming shortcomings which could compromise the 
intended results, ways of furthering the environmental or cost-efficiency of construc-
tion, testing improvements in community-building processes, needs for better main-
streaming gender issues, potential adjustments to eligibility matrix, etc…).

b.  Evaluation  of  ‘Improving  Living  Conditions  in  Returnee  Areas  of  Sri  Lanka 

through Housing’ programme (AUP-2012 housing, Phase-II):

i.  Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE)

The first field mission being held in early 2014 many beneficiaries would not have 
started  construction,  offering  the  Consultant  the  opportunity  to  collect  actual 
baseline data. A sample of 200 beneficiary houses should be surveyed in view 
of completing the ‘impact evaluation’ for AUP-2012 in the later final evaluation 
report. As above, this part might benefit from subcontracting some data collection 
in view of reaching more households. Each household surveyed needs to be pho-
tographed and referenced. A database with the geo coordinates and illustrations 
of each household should be annexed to the report.

A second field mission in year 2 should allow the Consultant to observe progress 
and produce the Mid-Term-Evaluation. This Mid-Term-Evaluation will be the last 
chance  for  the  Consultant  to  really  influence  the  Implementing  Partners’  work. 
Hence, recommendations should be prioritised at this stage.

ii. 

Final Evaluation

This phase will be more about synthesis and pointing at policy recommendations 
(including to Sri Lankan authorities) in view of addressing housing reconstruction 
challenges.  It  will  be  built  on  all  data  collected,  all  analytical  work  and  should 
assess whether recommendations  have  been followed  and,  if  so,  whether  they 

87

have led to improvements. If the EU is at that stage in the process of contracting 
or implementing an additional housing programme, the recommendations should 
be aimed to improve that new programme.

The AUP-2012 housing programme will, in principle, conclude on 30 June 2015. 
Again, UN-Habitat and SDC will have six months to submit the final report. Hence, 
fieldwork should start in the third quarter of that year (might have to be antici-
pated should UN-Habitat close down offices) such that the Consultant can share 
preliminary findings prior to the submission of the Implementing Partners’ Final 
Report. The last quarters of the evaluation contract should allow for revisions of 
the Final Evaluation Report on the basis of donors’ comments.

2. Build stakeholders capacity to improve programmes’ impact

Under this component it is expected that the Consultant makes sure that evaluation rec-
ommendations reach out to the intended targets and that they are duly informed as to 
how to undertake the corresponding remedial or additional actions. For the purpose of 
tendering, the Consultant is expected to commit to organising at least three workshop 
events  (one  during  each  mission)  in  Colombo  or  elsewhere  in  a  relevant  District 
of  Sri  Lanka.  Each  should  be  estimated  with  an  input  of  least  4 man-days.  The 
Consultant will cover the running expenses as reimbursable costs. In the tender, a one 
page proposal of possible capacity building sessions should be presented based on the 
expertise of the experts. Indicatively these could concern:

1.  Manageable social research methods for needs assessment of rural livelihoods;
2.  How to measure ‘impact’ and development indicators in rural context: ‘impact evalu-

ations’ and randomised trials;

3.  On  mainstreaming  beneficiary  acceptance  of  alternative  low-cost  and  environmen-
tally-friendly construction methods (e.g.: Stabilised compressed Earth Block construc-
tion, filler-slab, rat-trap bond, soil-cement, etc…);

4.  Participatory low-cost housing design and designing for better incremental growth;
5.  Best  practices  in  ‘Community  Action  Planning’  relevant  for  Village  Reconstruction 

Committees;

6.  Promoting entrepreneurship for small construction service providers;
7.  Identifying potential improvements in the NEHRP technical guidelines for owner driv-

en housing construction;

8.  Village Reconstruction Committee management: including better gender mainstream-

ing.
9.  Etc.

Concerning the target stakeholders:

a.  Beneficiaries

The Consultant is not encouraged to directly interfere with beneficiaries beyond data 
collection, surveys and interviews. However, it is expected that recommendations be 
complemented with descriptions of plausible actions for the Implementing Partners 

88

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

to induce the recommended change. Accordingly, it is expected from the Consultant 
to  assist  Implementing  Partners  in  punctually  running  or  devising  focused  capacity 
building approaches or sessions (e.g.: drafting a relevant training strategy or running 
a particular session on sensitisation about the role of women in Community Recon-
struction Committees, or on how to reduce material wastage in construction).

b.  Local Authorities

The Consultant should assess the role of Local Authorities (Division Secretariats) par-
ticularly concerning the process of identification of needs, beneficiary selection to the 
delivery of assistance. If the Consultant concludes that a particular message should be 
conveyed to a Local Authority, again, it is not expected that they establish a bilateral 
dialogue with them but it will be positively valued that the Implementing Partners are 
assisted strategically in getting the relevant message, data, knowledge or skills across.

c.  Implementing Partners

The Consultant should undertake capacity building sessions with key officers of Im-
plementing Partners (UN-Habitat and SDC), beyond the mere debriefing of findings 
and  recommendations.  As  indicated  above  these  could  include  workshops  or  lec-
tures on how to further develop the scope of alternative low-cost or environmentally 
sound  construction  materials,  or  case-studies  illustrating  how  to  improve  social  re-
search methods, or data collection on needs, etc… Participation of the Consultant to 
conferences on the programme organised by the Implementing Partners is required.

d.  Donors

Finally, donors could also be subject to more than debriefing. Beyond evaluation rec-
ommendations  they  could  exchange  experiences  on  state  of  the  art  methods  for 
improving programme design and undertaking developmental needs assessments.

3. Identification of AUP-2014 housing programme (should such programme be de-
cided)

Subject  to  the  pending  Implementing  Decision  of  the  European  Commission  on  the 
programming  cycle  for  2014-2020  concerning  the  Asia  Regional  DCI  Programme,  the 
Consultant might be requested to assist the EU-Delegation in drafting the Identification 
Documents for an additional ‘Aid to Uprooted People’ housing programme for Sri Lan-
ka (AUP-2014 or AUP-2015). A priori (subject to recommendation) the intention would 
be to keeping up the inertia of “Home Owner Driven” reconstruction whilst ensuring a 
smooth transition from donor dependency in housing reconstruction to local self-reliance 
by promoting the sustainability of local service providers.

The Consultant should tentatively allocate 12 man-days for this purpose. Should this 
component not be required, then the man-days will be reallocated to the other expected 
services.

89

›  Required outputs

1.  Each evaluation is expected to result eventually in state-of-the-art publishable 
final report that will be disseminated to the public at large. Hence, it is requested 
to distinguish ‘progress reports’ (of administrative nature) from the ‘evaluation 
reports’. Each ‘evaluation report’ will comprise of three parts described in Sec-
tion 5 below. The Contracting Authority will place more  importance on quality 
and  readability  than  on  quantity  of  pages  produced.  All  additional  information 
should be covered in annexes, each presented with the same high standards as 
the body text.

2.  The  capacity  building  dimension  should  materialise  in  the  form  of  workshops 
as described above and compilations of the corresponding teaching material 
should be included in the form of annexes to the evaluation reports or as separate 
reports should it be considered more appropriate.

3.  The Identification of AUP-2014 housing programme will require assistance in the 
production of a short indicative document. Specification will be defined as and 
when necessary.

4.  PowerPoint presentations of the drafts and final reports for debriefing and dis-

cussion purposes are expected as necessary.

3. EXPERTS PROFILE OR EXPERTISE

›  Number of requested experts per category and number of man-days per expert
Three (3) experts out of which at least one (1) Senior expert for sixty-two (62) man 
days and two (2) junior for sixty-six (66) man days each.

Profile or expertise required (education, experience, references and category as 
appropriate)

Qualifications and skills

- Development housing specialist or development economist 
(or equivalent) with authoritative credentials/qualifications in 
social research methods applied to development contexts and 
with capacity to undertake quantitative analysis. 

- Architect or civil engineer (or equivalent) with authoritative 
credentials/qualifications in low-cost construction, alternative 
construction methods, environmental design and participatory 
processes.

Expert Requirement

1 2 3

At least one 
expert. This expert 
should preferably 
be the Team 
Leader.

At least one expert

90

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

- Humanitarian/development/community building/data 
analyst specialist with credentials from any background 
relevant to the assignment e.g.: rural development, sociology or 
anthropology of development, humanitarian action, emergency, 
climate change, risk-reduction, etc…) 

- Relevant academic qualifications or professional accreditations 
(e.g.: Post-graduate specialisations, Masters, PhD, Post-doc, 
fellowship, lectureships, professorships, LEAD, BREAM, FIDIC, 
PMI, Prince 2, etc…) in issues relevant to low-cost participatory 
housing reconstruction in development context.

General professional experience

- 10 years of experience in addressing international 
development through project management or research.

- relevant experience in evaluation or studies services for 
international donors;

- practical/operations project management experience in 
developing contexts;

- relevant experience in development cooperation programme 
evaluation.

Expert Requirement

1 2 3

Optional

will be positively 
considered

At least one 
including the Team 
Leader 

At least one expert

At least one expert

At least one expert

- relevant experience in undertaking large field research projects

At least one expert

- international publications concerning issues relevant to the 
assignment;

Advantage

- extensive experience in consultancy services for ODA donors

Advantage

Specific professional experience

- directing quantitative analysis research in development 
contexts;

- undertaking qualitative research on social cohesion/living 
conditions in development contexts or work on development 
indicators;

- field data collection with rural communities in developing 
contexts;

- in undertaking impact evaluations (randomised).

- in low-cost construction management/design/research 
involving alternative construction materials; 

At least one expert

At least one expert

At least one expert

At least one expert

At least one expert

91

- in social or post-emergency housing, participatory planning 
or construction processes, development planning, social 
infrastructure in developing contexts;

Expert Requirement

1 2 3

At least one expert

- participatory design/community building in post-emergency 
context;

At least one expert

- capacity building of stakeholders of development projects;

At least one expert

- in data collection and processing;

At least one expert

- Gender issues mainstreaming in development;

- environmental sustainability management/design/consultancy;

- extensive relevant publications record namely on issues 
relevant to the challenges faced by Sri Lankan IDPs;

- practical or research experience in the region.

Advantage

Advantage

Advantage

Advantage

›  Working languages
English will be the main working language vis-à-vis the Contracting Authority and Imple-
menting Partners. However, Tamil will be essential for fieldwork namely to interact with 
most beneficiaries and some Local Authorities. The Consultant will have to make arrange-
ments for a high-standard Tamil-English translation service for the experts. Sinhala will 
be necessary for some beneficiary communities and Local Authorities.

4. LOCATION AND DURATION

›  Starting period
The indicative start of the assignment is February 2014.

Foreseen finishing period or duration

› 
The duration of the assignment is 27 months from the actual date of commencement.

›  Planning
A proposed allocation of man-days will be presented by the tender with the methodolo-
gy. Then, it will be agreed upon with Contracting Authority prior to every mission. Below 
is an indicative timetable:

92

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

Result

Term 1

Term 2

Term 3

Term 4

Term 1

Term 2

Term 3

Term 4

Term 1

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Data 
processing 
and reporting 
(field/home)

Data 
processing 
and reporting 
(home)

Completing 
evaluation 
report (home)

1.a.

1.b.

1.c.

2.

3.

Field data 
collec-
tion (min 
100 house-
holds 
+non-benefi-
ciaries)

Field Baseline 
data collec-
tion (min 
200 house-
holds)

Workshop 1 
(field)

TC

Data 
collection 
(field)

Processing 
and reporting 
(home)

Processing 
and reporting

Processing 
and reporting

Data 
collection 
(field)

Workshops 3 
(field)

Workshops 2 
(field)

›  Locations of assignment
The Consultant shall undertake a minimum of three missions to Sri Lanka involving the 
full-time dedication of the three experts. That requires a minimum of 120 man-working 
days in Sri Lanka (including travel). The rest of the time the Consultant is allowed to work 
from home.

Villages involving beneficiaries of AUP-2010 and AUP-2012 housing programmes include 
the  District  of  Kilinochchi,  Mullaitivu,  Vavuniya,  Mannar  in  the  Northern  Province  and 
Batticaloa District in the Eastern Province.

5. REPORTING

›  Content
There are two main categories of reports:

a.  Progress reports (essentially of administrative nature)

Very  succinct  (max  10 pages)  description  of  activities  undertaken  and  estimated 
achievements  mainly  to  provide  an  overview  of  progress  in  view  to  substantiating 
payment  requests.  They  should  include  time-sheets,  lists  of  outputs,  budgets  and 
indicative forecast of activities.

b.  Evaluation reports (of technical nature)

The  final  evaluation  reports  are  primarily  produced  for  donors  and  Implementing 
Agencies but they should be publishable and comprehensible for other organisations 
undertaking housing reconstruction in Sri Lanka and the public at large. Hence, it is 
expected that they be produced as state of the art documents both in terms of con-
tent quality as well as presentation.

93

The text of the report should be properly referenced (comparable but not necessarily 
as densely referenced as academic standards) and illustrated with maps, graphs and 
tables; a geo-referenced map and corresponding data tables of the surveyed house-
holds is required (to be attached as Annex).

Each evaluation report will be consolidated as chronologically as follows:

1. Evaluation methods consolidation report (of maximum 10 pages) at the latest 
after 5 days from the start of the Country Missions. In the report the Consultant will 
include  updated  evaluation  methods  on  the  basis  of  the  latest  events,  findings  or 
requirements of the Contracting Authority. It should also include a clear work pro-
gramme of foreseen activities and updated strategies;

2. Draft final report (of maximum 30 pages excluding annexes). Besides answering 
the evaluation questions, the draft final report should also synthesise all findings and 
conclusions into an overall assessment of the project and will detail the comments 
received from the stakeholders. The report should be presented short after the field 
missions and prior to the submission of the Final Report by the Implementing Partner.

3. Final report (of maximum 30 pages excluding annexes) with the same specifica-
tions as mentioned above, incorporating any comments received from the concerned 
parties on the draft report, to be presented  within 20 days  of  the receipt  of  these 
comments.

The reports should include a preamble (context of the evaluation assignment), an ex-
ecutive summary (max 1.5 pages with the very key recommendations and findings), 
the ‘performance evaluation’ and ‘impact evaluation’ studies (including method-
ology), following the above mentioned points a series of ‘recommendations’  and 
‘conclusions’. The annexes should include the questionnaires, surveys, additional 
maps (including geo-referencing data) and illustrations, technical annexes (includ-
ing construction drawings), the capacity building material, etc…

Each operational recommendation should lead to a clear description of how it could 
be implemented. When appropriate, the recommendation could be the subject of a 
capacity building workshop. The corresponding training material should be included 
as an annex.

›  Language
English

›  Submission/comments timing

a.  Progress reports:

Two progress reports will be submitted with each payment request following the ap-
proval of the corresponding due outputs. One will be the ‘Interim Progress Report’ 
and the other the ‘Final Progress Report’.

94

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE

b.  Evaluation reports:

For 1.a. Final Evaluation of the AUP-2010 programme

The implementation period of the ‘Support to Conflict Affected People through Hous-
ing’ programme is expected to end by 30 March 2014 and the corresponding Final 
Report  should  be  submitted  within  6 months  by  Implementing  Partners.  The  eval-
uation  of  this  programme  should  start  before  implementation  end  and  should  be 
completed after the submission of the final report from the Implementing Partners.

- Methods consolidation report: at the latest 5 days from the start of the country 
mission.

- Draft final report is indicatively expected to be submitted by June 2014 such that 
the Implementing Partners can take due consideration of the preliminary observations 
prior to completing their final report. The final draft report will be expected by Octo-
ber such that the Consultants will have seen UN-Habitat’s Final report.

- Final report: expected by end of third Quarter of 2014 following the submission of 
the final report from the Implementing Partners and comments on the draft.

For 1.b Evaluation of AUP-2012 housing programme (Phase-II):

i. Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE)

- Methods consolidation report at the latest 5 days from the start of the second 
mission.

- Draft final report should be indicatively submitted during the second quarter of 
year two of the evaluation assignment.

- Final report: during the third quarter of year two of the evaluation assignment.

ii. Final Evaluation

- Methods consolidation report after 5 days from the start of the third country 
mission.

-Draft  final  report  should  be  indicatively  submitted  during  the  third  or  fourth 
quarter of year two of the evaluation assignment.

-Final  report:  at  the  latest  by  the  first  quarter  of  year  three  of  the  evaluation 
assignment.

›  Number of report(s) copies
Each draft-final and final evaluation report should be submitted in 5 colour copies, print-
ed back to front and should comprise ideally of no more than 30 pages (excluding an-
nexes).

95

The  Consultant  is  expected  to  provide  soft  copies  as  requested  by  the  Contracting  
Authority. Each printed copy should include a DVD with all the corresponding soft ver-
sions of the report.

6. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

Interviews if necessary indicating for which experts/position

› 
The Team Leader and the architect/civil engineer might be interviewed by telephone or 
video-conference if deemed necessary by the Contracting Authority.

›  Other authorised items to foresee under ‘Reimbursable’
International travel costs, per diems and services such as interpretation, translation, data 
collection, rental of equipment for sampling or to perform laboratory tests, the organi-
sation of workshops (consider at least EUR 3,000 per workshop for the purpose of ten-
dering) can be allocated to the ‘reimbursable’ budget allocation. Note that all local travel 
costs are to be covered by the per diem.

›  Operational conditionality for intermediary payment if any
The intermediary payment is conditioned to the approval of the

›  Tax arrangements
N/A

96

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – ITINERARY

Annex 2 – Itinerary

Month Date

Place

Description

15

Colombo

RS (Reinhard Skinner) arrives in Colombo. (MK, Mano 
Kumarasuriyar arrived previous week).

16

17

Colombo

Meeting Habitat for Humanity International; briefing at EUD; 

Colombo

Internal travel arrangements; meeting UN-Habitat; meeting 
EUD; questionnaire preparation (final evaluation and baseline)

18

Colombo

Meeting survey team coordinator; meeting Habitat for Humanity 
International.

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

March 
2016

Colombo

Colombo

Colombo

Colombo › 
Batticaloa

Batticaloa 
district 

Batticaloa 
district

MM (Mario Martelli) reaches the mission - team meeting – 
meeting with Secretary of Ministry of Resettlement

Travelling from Colombo to Batticaloa – Organization of field 
activities. Meeting survey team coordinator.

Field activities: Final Evaluation AUP-2012: NPOs n° 01, 02, 03, 
04, 05, 06. Focus groups and case studies.

Field activities: Baseline AUP-2014: NPOs n° 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 
12, 13 – Meeting with HfH District Manager. Focus groups and 
case studies.

Batticaloa › 
Passikudah

PUBLIC HOLIDAY. Meeting with GA Batticaloa Mrs. Charles – 
Travelling from Batticaloa to Passikudah – Desk study.

26

Passikudah

PUBLIC HOLIDAY. Desk study and organisation field activities 
with Team members.

27

Passikudah › 
Kilinochchi

28

Kilinochchi

Travelling from Passikudah to Kilinochchi

Meeting with UN-H District Manager and engineers – Field 
activities: Final Evaluation AUP-2012: NPOs n° 14, 15, 16, 17. 
Focus groups and case studies

29

Kilinochchi

Field activities: Final Evaluation AUP-2012: NPOs n° 18, 19, 20, 
21. Focus groups and case studies

30

31

Kilinochchi ›  
Jaffna › 
Kilinochchi

Travelling to/from Jaffna: Meeting with Chief Ministry of 
Northern Province – Field activities: visiting new GoSL proposed 
housing project Model house – Meeting with DS Karachchi 
Division – Workshop logistics. 

Kilinochchi ›  
Mannar › 
Kilinochchi

Travelling to/from Mannar: Field activities: Final Evaluation AUP-
2012: NPOs n° 22, 23, 24, 25 - Focus groups and case studies – 
Meeting with UN-H District engineers – Workshop logistics. 

97

Month Date

Place

Description

01

02

03

04

05

Kilinochchi › 
Mullaitivu › 
Kilinochchi

Travelling to/from Mullaitivu: Field activities: Final Evaluation 
AUP-2012: NPOs n° 26, 27, 28 – Focus groups and case studies 
- Workshop logistics

Kilinochchi

Desk study

Kilinochchi

Desk study: refining topics and question for AUP-2014 baseline

Kilinochchi

Kilinochchi district, Maruthanagar and Kili Town GNs – HfH: 
Field activities AUP-2014 Baseline: NPOs n° 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 
34. Focus groups and case studies.

Kilinochchi › 
Mullaitivu › 
Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu district, Suthanthirapuram and Mullivaikai East GNs – 
HfH: Field activities AUP-2014 Baseline: NPOs n° 34, 35, 36, 37, 
38, 39, 40. Focus groups and case studies

06

Kilinochchi

Workshop: “Promoting Beneficiary Acceptance of Alternative 
materials Low-Cost and Environmentally-Friendly Construction 
Methods and Materials”.

07

Kilinochchi › 
Colombo

Travelling from Kilinochchi to Colombo – Contribution to the 
Evaluation Team Steering Committee presentation

April 
2016

08

Colombo

Participation in EU-Housing Steering Committee meeting – Desk 
study – meeting HfH and WVL monitoring and evaluation 
managers.

09

Colombo

MK completes his mission - desk study: selection of photos and 
captions for next debriefings

10

11

12

13

Colombo

Colombo

Desk study: selection of topics for next debriefings Debriefing 
with HfH and WVSL 

Colombo

Debriefing with EUD. Debriefing with UN-Habitat

Colombo

PUBLIC HOLIDAY. Team meeting – Desk study: drafting Final 
Report

14

Colombo

PUBLIC HOLIDAY. Desk study: drafting Final Report. Meeting 
survey team coordinator.

15

Colombo

Logistics (collecting invoices from supplier Mal-Key) – Desk 
study: drafting Final Report - RS and MK leave Sri Lanka

16

Colombo

MM leaves Sri Lanka

98

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 3 – LIST OF PERSONS MET

Annex 3 – List of persons met

Name

Position

Organisation

Address

GoSL

V. Sivagnanasothy

Secretary 

Ministry of 
Rehabilitation and 
Resettlement

135/4 Kirula Rd. 
-Colombo 05

Justice C.V. 
Wigneswaran

P.S.M. Charles

Chief Minister - 

Northern Province

26, Somasuntharam  
Av. - Chundikuli, Jaffna

Govt. Agent/District 
Secretary

District Sec. Batticaloa

T. Syammakhrishna Public Officer

Div. Sec. Mullaitivu

V. Muhunthan

Assistant Director

Div. Sec. Mullaitivu

H.D.G. Pryanthan

AD Disaster management DDMCU Mullaitivu

Dhammiha 
Gasarandan

Director

CIDA

M. Jeyachandran

Duputy Director Planning Katcheri Batticaloa

S. Arunainayaham Govt. Agent/District 

Secretary

P. Naamagal

Director

District Sec. 
Kilinochchi

MPRRR&HRA

U.A.W.L. 
Sumanaserar

Assistant Director 
Planning

Dept. Of National 
Planning

GKK Aniyavatna

Deputy Director General NERDC

Anoja Seneviratne Director

DMC

EUD

Jaime Royo Olid

Programme Manager: 
Infrastructure & 
Reconstruction

Chandana 
Hewawasam

Programme Manager 
(back up)

HfHSL

Desiree Bartosiak

A.I. Chief of Party

HfHSL

389, Bauddhaloka 
Mawatha, Colombo 7

22/5 Station Road, 
Dehiwala

99

Name

Position

Organisation

Address

Nurlan 
Moldosherip

Manager Construction & 
Apprep. Techs.

HfHIAP

H.Christian Sujith Manager, M&E

HfHSL

J. S. Jeyamaran 
(Maran)

Dr. Dinesh 
Kanagaratnam

Amila de Mel

Anjalie Page

D. 
Savundranayagam

Senior Project Manager

HfHSL

National Director

HfHSL

Architect, volunteer - 
Board Member

HfHSL

Senior Manager Strategic 
Partnership 

HfHSL

Manager Finance

HfHSL

T.M. Collins

Admin officer

S. Pushpa

P. Kaandepaan

Projet Manager 
Batticaloa

Projet Manager 
Kilinochchi

T.Y. Vaheeshan

Technical Officer

K. Pathmarasa

Technical Officer

WVL

HfHSL

HfHSL

HfHSL

HfHSL

HfHSL

A. Lesley Jesurajan Zonal Director - Field 

WVL

Operation

Alex Benyamin

Project Manager

G.A. Dias

Field Accountant

WVL

WVL

UN-Habitat

I.A. Hameed

National Project Manager

Jezeer Hameed

Deputy Project Manager

Keiko Matsuo

Human Settlements 
Officer

100

619/8 Dr. Damister Silva 
Mawatha - Colombo 09

30 Asoka Gardens, 
Colombo 4; (National 
Project Office) 33/9 De 
Fonseca Place,  
Colombo 5

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 3 – LIST OF PERSONS MET

Name

Position

Organisation

Address

Piyal Ganepola

Deputy National Project 
Manager

Charmalee 
Jayasinghe

Aziza Usaef

Australian Aid 
(DFAT)

P.D.S. Dilhari

ZOA

Monitoring and 
Reporting Officer

Monitoring & Reporting 
Manager

Senior Programme 
Officer

Raga Alphonsus

Advisor

ZOA

Univ. Moratuwa

Sithumini R.

Senior Lecturer

Evaluation Team

Reinhard Skinner

Evaluation Team Leader

University of 
Moratuwa

STEM VCR/IBF 
Consortium

Mano 
Kumarasuryiar

Evaluation Team member STEM VCR/IBF 

Consortium

Mario Martelli

Evaluation Team member Baa/IBF Consortium 

Survey Team

Mr. M. Jiffrey

Survey Team Coordinator

Survey 

T. Vasanthagumar

Interpreter

101

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

C
D
S

d
n
a

T
A
T
I
B
A
H

i

,
d
A
e
p
o
r
u
E

)
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c
(

n
a
P

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N
L
S

,
s
r
o
n
o
d

,
L
S
o
G

(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

i
r
S

r
o
f

s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

)
s
O
G
N

.
a
k
n
a
L

k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

l

i

a
c
g
o

l

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

C
R
D

A
O
Z

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

P
D
N
U

C
D
S

/

P
N
S
&

C
D
R
E
N

D
R
F
T
P

l

l

a
b
o
g
e
h
t

e
r
a

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

e
c
n
a
v
e
e
R

l

j

f
o
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s
d
n
a

i

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

l

a
b
o
g

l

,
s
d
e
e
n

y
r
t
n
u
o
c

?
s
e
c
i
l

i

o
p

s
’
C
E
d
n
a

’
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p
d
n
a

,
s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

)
5
(

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

)
4
(

r
o
t
c
e
S

e
t
a
v
i
r
P

)
3
(

s
O
G
N

&
s
r
o
n
o
D

)
1
(

L
S
o
G

)
2
(

s
P

I

l

a
n
F

i

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

:
x
i
r
t
a
M
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

–

4
x
e
n
n
A

102

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

r
o
f

e
c
r
o
F

k
s
a
T

l

a
i
t
n
e
d
i
s
e
r
P

)
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o
e
r
t
n
e
C
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
d
n
a

l

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
R

g
n
i
r
e
e
n
g
n
E

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

(

C
D
R
E
N

,
)
y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
A
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
g
n
i
s
u
o
H

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

(

A
D
H
N

:
)
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

(

L
S
o
G

)
1
(

&
g
n
n
a
r
T

i

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
C
r
o
f

e
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I
(

D
A
T
C

I

,
)
y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
A
g
n
n
a
r
T

i

i

l

a
i
r
t
s
u
d
n

I

d
n
a

e
c
i
t
n
e
r
p
p
A

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

(

A
T
I
A
N

,
)
P
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P
(

i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

r
o
f

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
S

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

,
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
R

.
s
e
c
n
v
o
r
P

i

n
r
e
t
s
a
E

d
n
a

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N
n

i

)

N
G
d
n
a

S
D

(

s
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

l

a
c
o

l

,
)
n
o
i
t
a
z
i
n
a
g
r
O
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
R

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
B

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

(

O
R
B
N

,
)
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
B
&
g
n
n
n
a
P

l

i

,
g
n
i
s
u
o
H

r
o
f

e
r
t
n
e
C

(

B
P
H
C

,
)
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

g
n
i
s
u
o
H

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

,
)

H
H

f

(

y
t
i
n
a
m
u
H

r
o
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H

,
)

C
R
L
S
(

s
s
o
r
C
d
e
R

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

,
)
s
s
o
r
C
d
e
R

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
d
e
F

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

i
(

C
R
F
I

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

,
)
d
n
u
B
-
r
e
t
i
r
a
m
a
S
-
r
e
t
i
e
b
r
A

(

B
S
A

,
:
)
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
P

g
n
i
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

I
(

s
P

I

)

A
D
H
N

(

y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
A
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

i

o
C
a
d
e
M
&
n
e
m
o
W

,
e
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

h
t
r
a
E

e

l
l
i

v
o
r
u
A

,
s
e
r
è
i
t
n
o
r
F

s
n
a
S

e
r
u
t
c
e
t
i
h
c
r
A

,
)
n
o
i
t
a
z
i
n
a
g
r
O

r
e
t
s
a
s
i
D

l

a
r
u
t
a
N
d
n
a

i

t
c
fl
n
o
C
-
t
s
o
P

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C
h
c
t
u
D

(

A
O
Z

,
)
l
i

c
n
u
o
C
e
e
g
u
f
e
R

h
s
i
n
a
D

(

C
R
D

:
s
O
G
N

)
3
(

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

i

p
a
c
d
n
a
H

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

e
g
A
p
e
H

l

,
)
F
L
S
(

n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
F

a
k
n
a
a
v
e
S

l

,
)
L
S
M
G

(

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
M
n
e
e
r
G

,
)
J
E
C

(

e
c
i
t
s
u
J

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
E

r
o
f

e
r
t
n
e
C

,
)
L
S
(

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

g
n
i
t
s
o
h
-
n
o
n

n

i

s
C
R
V

,
)
s
C
H

(

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

g
n
i
t
s
o
h

n

i

)
s
C
R
V

(

s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
C
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
R

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

,
)
s
H
B
N

(

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
-
n
o
n

,
)
s
H
B

(

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

:
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

.
s
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

/

s
r
e
d

l
i

u
b

l

a
c
o

l

,
)
s
e
h
c
n
a
r
b

l

e
e
a
m
o
c
n
i
r
T

d
n
a

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

(

)
L
S
A
C
N

(

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

i

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
A
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
C

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o
y
r
t
s
u
d
n

I

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
C
f
o
r
e
b
m
a
h
C

:
r
o
t
c
e
S

e
t
a
v
i
r
P

)
4
(

)
5
(

.
)
s
C
H
N

(

P.
D
N
U

,

O
H
C
E

,
)
L
S

n

i

e
c
ffi
o
d
e
s
o
c

l

s
a
h

(

D
I
F
D

,
n
o
i
s
s
i

m
m
o
C
h
g
H
n
a
d
n

i

i

I

,

I

D
A
s
u
A

,

C
D
S

,
n
o
i
t
a
g
e
e
D
U
E

l

:
s
r
o
n
o
D

)
2
(

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

l

i

a
c
g
o

l

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E
m
r
e
T
-
d
M

i

ANNEx 4 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

)
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
o
n
o
d

(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

)

l

d
e
fi

n

i
(

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

l

a
u
n
a
M

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

n
e
m
o
W

i

a
d
e
M
&

e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
C

O
G
N

r
o

(

h
t
i

w

l

e
g
d
e
w
o
n
k

)
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

f
o

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

0
1
0
2
-

P
U
A

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

C
R
D

A
O
Z

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

B
S
A

,

C
D
S

i
r
S

/

C
R
F
I

d
e
R

a
k
n
a
L

D
U
E

s
s
o
r
C

A
D
H
N

P
D
N
U

D
U
E

i

a
d
n

I
(

O
H
C
E

)
e
c
ffi
O

A
H
C
O

d
e
r
o
h
t
u
a

y
l
e
g
r
a

l

n
g
i
s
e
d
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

s
I

?
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

y
b
d
e
n
w
o
d
n
a

l
l

e
w
d
n
a

r
a
e
l
c

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

e
h
t

s
I

?
d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

y
l
e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a

n
e
e
b

s
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

r
e
d
n
e
g

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
d
n
a

l

a
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

e
v
a
H

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

?
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

103

j

?
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

l

i

a
c
g
o

l

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

s
t
u
p
t
u
o
d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
h
t

e
r
A

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

P
U
A

f
o

d
n
a

l

l

a
b
o
g
s
t
i

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

)
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
o
n
o
d

(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

)

l

d
e
fi

n

i
(

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

l

a
u
n
a
M

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

r
o
f

e
r
t
n
e
C

-
n
o
r
i
v
n
E

l

a
t
n
e
m

)
J
E
C

(

e
c
i
t
s
u
J

t
n
e
m
e
v
o
M

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o

a
k
n
a
a
v
e
S

l

/

)
L
S
M
G

(

n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
F

n
e
e
r
G

/

P
D
N
U

t
c
e
p
s
e
r

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
e
o
D

?
s
d
e
e
n

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

104

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

,
s
r
o
n
o
d

,
L
S
o
G

(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

l

d
e
fi

n

i
(

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

)
s
O
G
N

l

a
u
n
a
M

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

,
s
r
o
n
o
d

,
L
S
o
G

(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

)

l

d
e
fi

n

i
(

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

)
s
O
G
N

l

a
u
n
a
M

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)

C
B

(

s
C
R
V

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)

C
B

(

s
C
R
V

C
R
D

A
O
Z

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P
D
N
U

D
U
E

C
D
R
E
N

s
N
G

n
e
e
b

e
c
n
a
n
r
e
v
o
g

)

d
o
o
g

(

s
a
H

/
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
a
m

i

?
)
P
/
P
(

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

C
R
D

A
O
Z

O
H
C
E
P,
D
N
U

)
e
c
ffi
O
a
d
n

i

I
(

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

A
H
C
O

D
U
E

f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

y
l
e
v
i
t
c
a
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

s
e
o
D

?
s
t
h
g
i
r

n
a
m
u
h

s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
E

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 4 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

g
n
i
t
r
o
p
e
r

W
3

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
d
o
c
n
e

s
a

s
e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
n
a

s
t
u
p
t
u
o
t
c
e
o
r
P

j

.

A
H
C
O

f
o
m
e
t
s
y
s

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
d

s
’
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

s
H
B

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

i

)
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
f
o
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
h
t
l
a
e
h

(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

y
e
v
r
u
S

y
t
i
l
i

l

b
a
r
e
n
u
V
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

/

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

)
s
C
H
N

(

s
C
R
V

)
s
C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

C
R
D

A
O
Z

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
S

y
t
i
l
i

l

b
a
r
e
n
u
V
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

i

)
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
f
o
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
h
t
l
a
e
h

(

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

s
H
B

)
s
C
H
N

(

s
C
R
V

)
s
C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

C
R
D

A
O
Z

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

C
D
S

B
S
A

C
R
F
I

j

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s
d
n
a

i

l

a
b
o
g

l

y
e
h
t

e
r
a
r
o

,

d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

i

?
d
e
v
e
h
c
a
e
b
o
t
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
e

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

a
o
t

e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
C

:

O
G

D
U
E

C
D
R
E
N

s
’
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

i

n
g
i
r
o
f
o
e
c
a
p

l

e
h
t

n

i

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

D
U
E

C
D
R
E
N

s
r
o
t
c
a
f

j

r
o
a
m
e
h
t

e
r
a

t
a
h
W

e
h
t

f
o
t
l
u
s
e
r
a

s
a
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

e
l
t
i
t

e
r
u
n
e
t

r
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

n
o

?
n
o
i
t
c
a

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

f
o
e
r
a
h
s

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
w

:

O
S

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
g
n
v
i
l

i

r
i
e
h
t

r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

i

g
n
v
a
h

s
a
n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s
d
n
a

o
h
w
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

n
o
p
u
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

y
l
l

a
i
t
n
a
t
s
b
u
s

?
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

,
B
S
A

,

C
D
S

C
R
F
I

i

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a
e
h
t
g
n
c
n
e
u
fl
n

i

i

e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a
-
n
o
n

i

r
o

?
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

105

t
s
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
a

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

e
h
t

r
o
f

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

h
t
r
o
N
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

l

,
e
p
o
e
p

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

f
o

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
a

f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
h
t

e
v
o
r
p
m

i

o
T

:

O
S

.
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d
g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
w

:

O
G

,

g
n
i
s
u
o
h
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

m
o
r
f

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

,
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

i

g
n
k
n
a
fl

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

a
t
a
d

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
C
E

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
s
i

m

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

l

a
u
n
n
A
0
1
0
2
-

P
U
A

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

)
s
(
n
a
P

l

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
E

H
B

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

a
t
a
d

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
C
E

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
s
i

m

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

,

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

n
e
m
o
W

i

a
d
e
M
&

,
e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
C

e
g
A
p
e
H

l

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

i

p
a
c
d
n
a
H

-
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

l

a
n
o
i
t

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
e
v
a
h
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
g
n
v
i
l

i

,
s
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v
i
l

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

n
e
e
b

e
r
u
n
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

N
O
I
T
S
E
U
Q

I

)
L
A
P
C
N
R
P
(

I

L
A
R
E
N
E
G

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

?
n
o
p
u
d
e
t
c
a

n
e
e
b

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

h
c
u
s

l

s
p
u
o
r
g
e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v
g
n
d
u
l
c
n
i
(

l

i

l

,
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
d
e
d
a
e
h

l

e
a
m
e
f

s
a

l

?
)
s
n
o
s
r
e
p
d
e
b
a
s
i
d
d
n
a
y
l
r
e
d
e

l

i

g
n
d
u
l
c
n
i
(

l

e
p
o
e
p

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

l

,
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
d
e
d
a
e
h
-
n
e
m
o
w

e
r
a

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
d
n
a

)

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
d

y
b

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

m
o
r
f
g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p
o
t
d
e
v
o
m
g
n
v
a
h

i

d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

e
h
t
g
n
i
t
e
e
m
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

S
N
O
I
T
S
E
U
Q
-
B
U
S
C
I
F
I
C
E
P
S

?
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
m
u
m
n
m

i

i

r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d
r
o
t
c
fl
n
o
c

i

y
b
d
e
g
a
m
a
d

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
e
s
u
o
h

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

s
e
s
u
o
h

y
n
a
m
w
o
h
d
n
a
t
l
i

u
b

?
d
e
r
i
a
p
e
r

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

106

D
U
E

C
D
R
E
N

e
h
t

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

a
t
a
d

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
C
E

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
s
i

m

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

n

i

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
%

t
a
h
W

d
e
t
p
o
d
a
e
h
t

h
t
i

w
y
l
p
m
o
c

P
U
A
e
h
t

?
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
m
u
m
n
m

i

i

ANNEx 4 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
C
E

.
s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
s
i

m

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

a
t
a
d

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

s
H
B

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
s
i

m

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
C
E

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

a
t
a
d

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

)
s
C
H
N

(

s
C
R
V

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B
N

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

s
N
G

e
h
t

f
o
s
d
r
o
c
e
r

n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l
l

a

d
n
a
L

t
n
e
g
A
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
d

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
’
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

s
N
G

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v
L

i

s
H
B

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

A
T
I
A
N

D
A
T
C

I

t
a
h
w
o
t
d
n
a

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c

n
e
e
b

y
e
h
t

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

r
i
a
f
d
n
a
t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

l

a
u
q
e

,
y
c
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t

f
o
s
i
s
a
b

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o

e
h
t

n
o
p
u

t
e
s

n
e
e
b

a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
g

i
l

e

e
v
a
h

r
a
f

w
o
H

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
d
n
a
e
p
o
e
p

l

f
o
%

t
a
h
W

?
d
e

i
l

p
p
a

e
v
a
h

P
U
A
e
h
t

m
o
r
f
g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c
d
n
a

y
l
t
c
i
r
t
s

n
e
e
b

d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u
d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

?
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
g

i
l

e

/
s
d
e
e
d

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

m
o
r
f

d
n
a

l

l

a
g
e

l

f
o
s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

r
e
h
t
o
r
o
p
h
s
r
e
n
w
o

i

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
a

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
n
a

l

e
p
o
e
p

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

e
r
u
n
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

i

i

g
n
d
v
o
r
p

?
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
v
a
h

,
s
l
a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

i

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
m
r
o
f

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
t
i
s
-
n
o
e
v
i
s
n
e
t
n

i

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

r
i
e
h
t

e
s
u

n
e
h
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
s
r
e
m
m

i

m
r
e
t
-
d
m
a

i

s
a

s
l
l
i

k
s

d
e
r
i
u
q
c
a

?
n
o
i
s
s
e
f
o
r
p

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

107

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
M

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

s
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
u

l
l
i

.
t
l
i

u
b

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

,

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

n
e
m
o
W

i

a
d
e
M
&

,
e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
C

e
g
A
p
e
H

l

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

i

p
a
c
d
n
a
H

-
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

l

a
n
o
i
t

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

C
D
S

t
a
t
i
b
a
H

/

C
R
L
S

/

y
t
i
n
a
m
u
H

r
o
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
D
H
N

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v
L

i

s
H
B

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

A
T
I
A
N

D
A
T
C

I

s
N
G

l

e
p
o
e
p

f
o
%

t
a
h
w
d
n
a

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

d
n
a

)
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

l

y
e
v
i
t
c
a

e
r
a

?
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
n
a
fl

i

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
a
d
e
fi
s
i
t
a
s
w
o
H

?
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

P
U
A
e
h
t

h
t
i

w

s
N
G

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

e
h
t

s
a
h

r
a
f

w
o
H

?
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

n
e
e
b

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h
d
n
a

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

t
o
n
e
s
o
h
t

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i
(

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
l
a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

i

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

-
r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d

g
n
i
s
i
l
i
t
u

d
n
a

n

i

d
e
n
a
r
t

i

n

i

s
d
o
h
t
e
m
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

t
n
e

i
l
i
s
e
r

?
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

o
t

r
o
f

i

d
a
p

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
y
a
d
-
n
a
m
y
n
a
m
w
o
H

?
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

r
o
f

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

108

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 4 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

s
N
G

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

r
o
f

i

e
c
n
a
d
u
g
d
n
a

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

y
b
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
r

?
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
P
g
n
i
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

I

s
N
G

y
c
a
u
q
e
d
a
d
n
a

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
d
n
a
e
v
i
t
a
r
t
s
i
n
m
d
a

i

f
o

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
P
U
A

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

P
U
A

n
a
p

l

E
&
M

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

,

C
R
F
I

,
B
S
A

A
O
Z

,

C
R
D

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

D
U
E

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

t
r
o
p
e
r

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
t
e
g
d
u
b

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
i
d
u
A

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

D
U
E

A
D
H
N

e
h
t
o
t

s
P

I

e
h
t

i

y
b
d
e
d
v
o
r
p
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

i

?
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

d
n
a

E
&
M

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
s
e
s
s
e
c
o
r
p
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

o
d
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
t

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
m
r
o
f
n

i

y
e
h
t

t
a
h
w
o
t
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
e
v
l
o
v
n

i

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

e
r
a

t
n
e
t
x
e

?

m
e
h
t

n

i

y
c
n
e
i
c
ffi
E

s
t
u
p
n
i
/
s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

f
o
e
s
u

l

e
b
i
s
s
o
p

t
s
e
w
o

l

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

,
e
m

i
t

,
e
s
i
t
r
e
p
x
e

,
s
d
n
u
f
g
n
d
u
l
c
n
i
(

i

?
)
.
s
t
s
o
c

e
v
i
t
a
r
t
s
i
n
m
d
a

i

s
t
c
e
f
f
e
d
e
r
i
s
e
d
d
n
a

s
t
u
p
t
u
o

e
h
t

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

109

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

)
e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l
(

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

H
B

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

n
o
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
r
e
W

P
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

d
n
a

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
n
o
d
e
s
a
b

l

,
e
u
d
e
h
c
s

o
t
d
e
k
n

i
l

y
l
r
a
e
l
c

,
s
n
a
p

l

e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

l

s
e
u
d
e
h
c
s

e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

d
n
a

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
A

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
P
U
A

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

,

C
R
F
I

,
B
S
A

A
O
Z

,

C
R
D

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

/

H
H

f

/

C
R
L
S

A
D
H
N

d
e
g
a
n
a
m

,
t
e
g
d
u
b

i

n
h
t
i

w

,
e
m

i
t

f
o

l

u
f
t
c
e
p
s
e
r
d
n
a

y
l
t
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t

n
o
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a

s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

e
r
e
W

?
s
e
r
u
d
e
c
o
r
p
d
n
a

s
e
u
r

l

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

110

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
e
u
d
e
h
c
s

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
i
d
u
A

i

c
g
o

l

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

?
d
e
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
y
l
r
a
u
g
e
r
d
n
a

l

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

H
B

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

s
t
c
e
f
f
e
d
e
r
i
s
e
d
d
n
a
s
t
u
p
t
u
o
e
r
e
W

P
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

?
e
m

i
t

n
o
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

H
B

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

d
o
o
g
f
o
d
e
r
e
v
i
l

e
d
s
t
u
p
t
u
o
e
r
e
W

P
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

o
t
g
n
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c
d
n
a
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

?
d
e
n
n
a
p

l

s
a

s
e
m
o
c
t
u
o

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 4 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

-

N
U

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

s
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n
i
-
r
e
t
n

i

o
D

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

,

C
D
S

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

t
n
a
v
e
e
r

l

l
l

a
w
o

l
l

a

/

T
A
F
D
D
A
S
U
A

I

s
N
G

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

n

i

i

e
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

y
l
l

u
f
o
t

?
g
n
i
r
e
e
t
s
d
n
a
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

)

C
H

(

s
R
C
V

H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

-

N
U

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

,

C
D
S

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

/

T
A
F
D
D
A
S
U
A

I

s
N
G

r
i
e
h
t

l

l

fi
u
f

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l
l

a
o
D

?
s
t
n
e
m

t
i

m
m
o
c

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

s
r
o
t
c
a
f

j

r
o
a
m
e
h
t

e
r
a

t
a
h
W

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

,

C
D
S

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

T
A
F
D

,

D
U
E

T
A
F
D

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

,

C
D
S

s
N
G

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

i

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a
e
h
t
g
n
c
n
e
u
fl
n

i

i

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a
-
n
o
n

i

r
o

?
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

n
e
e
b

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

s
a
H

i

g
n
n
n
a
p

l

P
U
A
n

i

d
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

e
c
n
i
s

,

o
s

f
i

,

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
d
n
a

?
)
y
a
w

t
a
h
w
n

i

d
n
a

(

n
e
h
w

111

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

,

C
D
S

s
N
G

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
d
n
a
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o

r
i
e
h
t

r
e
t
f
a
e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c
o
t

y
l
e
k
i
l

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

e
r
a

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

T
A
F
D

?
n
o
i
t
a
n
m
r
e
t

i

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
S

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
s
e
r
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

/
L
S
-
I
C
C

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

L
S
A
C
N

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
e
t
a
t
s

f
o
s
e
t
i
s
b
e
W

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
e
t
a
t
s

f
o
s
e
t
i
s
b
e
W

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
a

f
o
s
e
p
o
C

i

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

s
t
e
g
d
u
b

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

i

p
h
s
r
e
n
w
o
f
o

l

e
v
e

l

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

t
i

l
l
i

w
d
n
a

s
p
u
o
r
g
t
e
g
r
a
t

y
b

?
s
d
n
e
U
E

r
e
t
f
a

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

?
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

t
u
o
-
e
s
a
h
p

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

s
H
B
N

s
H
B

)

C
H
N

(

s
C
R
V

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
p

l

t
e
g
r
a
t

y
b
d
e
v
e
c
r
e
p

i

/

C
D
R
E
N

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
i

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

s
N
G

l

u
f
s
s
e
c
c
u
s

s
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o

e
t
a
t
s
-
n
o
n
d
n
a

e
t
a
t
s
d
n
a

?
)
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e
(

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

,

C
D
S

s
N
G

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
n
e
n
o
p
m
o
c

s
u
o
i
r
a
v

e
h
t

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

r
e
v
o
e
k
a
t
o
t

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
h
t
i

w

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

d
e
h
c
a
e
r

n
e
e
b

s
t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
a

e
v
a
H

T
A
F
D

?
h
c
h
w

i

,

o
s

f
I

?
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

P
U
A
e
h
t

e
r
A

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

e
h
t
o
t

l

e
b
a
d
r
o
f
f
a

s
N
G

r
i
e
h
t

r
o
f

y
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
g
n
m
u
s
s
a

i

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi
a
e
r
e
h
t

s
I

?
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

112

T
A
F
D

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

,

C
D
S

s
N
G

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

?
P
U
A
r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

y
c
i
l

o
p

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e
g
n
o
r
t
s

e
v
a
h

P
U
A
s
e
o
D

i

a
d
e
M

/

s
s
e
r
P
(

)
s
r
e
c
ffi
O

T
A
F
D

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

,

C
D
S

s
N
G

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

i

?
s
n
o
p
m
a
h
c

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 4 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s
n
a
p

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
P
U
A

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
d
n
a

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

o
t
g
n
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

P
U
A
s
i

l
l

e
w
w
o
H

s
N
G

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
O

I

f
o
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

?
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
c
a
p
m

I

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

s
H
B

/

L
S
-
I
C
C

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

,

D
U
E

/

C
D
R
E
N

d
n
a
e
v
i
t
i
s
o
p

e
h
t

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

t
a
h
W

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
-
n
o
N

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

L
S
A
C
N

,

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

P,
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
s
d
n
a

y
r
a
m

i
r
p

,
e
v
i
t
a
g
e
n

n
e
m
o
W

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

/

C
D
S

s
N
G

y
b
d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p

s
t
c
e
f
f
e
m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o

l

,
e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
C

i

a
d
e
M
&

e
g
A
p
e
H

l

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

i

p
a
c
d
n
a
H

-
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

J
E
C

,
l
a
n
o
i
t

a
k
n
a
a
v
e
S

l

/

L
S
M
G

/

n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
F

T
A
F
D

h
t
o
b

,
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
d
n
a

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

d
e
d
n
e
t
n

i

,
y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d
n

i

d
n
a
y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d

?
d
e
d
n
e
t
n
n
u
d
n
a

i

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
F

a
t
a
d

r
o
t
c
e
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
H

)

C
H

(

s
C
R
V

n
e
m
o
W

/

I

D
A
S
U
A

/

C
D
S

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

a
u
n
n
a

P
U
A

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
E

s
H
B
N

s
H
B

/

L
S
-
I
C
C

/

C
R
F
I

/

B
S
A

,

D
U
E

L
S
A
C
N

,

A
O
Z

/

C
R
D

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

,
t
e
k
r
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
(

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

)
r
u
o
b
a

l

,
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
p

)

C
H
N

(

s
C
R
V

,
e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
C

e
g
A
p
e
H

l

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

i

a
d
e
M
&

/

L
S
M
G

n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
F

a
k
n
a
a
v
e
S

l

T
A
F
D

A
D
H
N

A
T
I
A
N

D
A
T
C

I

B
P
H
C

s
N
G

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

l

a
c
o

l

e
h
t
(

t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

y
r
e
v
i
l

e
d

t
s
o
c

,
t
e
k
r
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
y
t
i
l
i

b
a

i
l

e
r
d
n
a

e
z
i
s

,
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

d
n
a

r
u
o
b
a

l

f
o
y
t
i
l
i

b
a

l
i

a
v
a
d
n
a

a

s
a
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

n
e
e
b

)
s
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

?
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

P
U
A

f
o
t
l
u
s
e
r

113

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

i
r
S

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
U
E

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

i

n
o
g
e
r

e
h
t

/
a
k
n
a
L

D
U
E

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
e
h
t
o
d
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

w
o

l
l

a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
y
b

n
e
k
a
t
r
e
d
n
u

y
c
i
l

o
p

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
s
t
i

l

i

e
v
e
h
c
a

o
t

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
m
o
C
n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E

e
h
t

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
d
n
a

i

n
o
i
t
c
d
a
r
t
n
o
c

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

i

w
n
o
i
t
c
d
a
r
t
n
o
c

?
s
e
c
i
l

i

o
p

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

e
c
n
e
r
e
h
o
C

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

i
r
S

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
U
E

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

i

n
o
g
e
r

e
h
t

/
a
k
n
a
L

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

n
a
P

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N
L
S

t
r
o
p
e
r

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
D

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

d
n
a

y
c

i
l

o
p

i

d
A
e
p
o
r
u
E

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
S

e
h
t

d
n
a

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

r
o
f

s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

n
o
g
e
r

P
D
N
U

P
N
S
&
D
R
F
T
P

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
s
e
h
t
o
d
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

D
U
E

,

C
D
R
E
N

/

i

s
e
c
i
l

o
p

s
’
L
S
o
G
e
h
t

t
n
e
m
e
p
m
o
c

l

A
D
H
N

?
s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

’
s
r
o
n
o
d
r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

D
U
E

d
e
d
d
a

P
U
A
s
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

e
v
a
h
d
u
o
w

l

t
a
h
w
o
t

s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

’
s
e
t
a
t
S

r
e
b
m
e
M
m
o
r
f
d
e
t
l
u
s
e
r

t
x
e
t
n
o
c

e
m
a
s

e
h
t

n

i

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

d
e
d
d
A
e
u
a
V
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

s
d
o
h
t
e
M
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

I

f
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
&
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

114

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

i

d
e
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

d
n
a

s
d
a
o
r

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

,
t
n
e
n
o
p
m
o
c

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

n
a

e
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

l
l

a
h
s

s
i
h
T
…

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N

.
”
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

s
a

h
c
u
s

,
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

:
s
r
e
w
s
n
A

f
o
y
r
a
m
m
u
S

d
n
a

x
i
r
t
a
M
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

–

5
x
e
n
n
A

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

l

a
n
F

i

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
c
n
a
v
e
e
R

l

t
s
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
a

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

f
o
s
d
e
e
n

n
o
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

b
a
h
e
r

m
r
e
t

i

m
u
d
e
m

s
s
e
r
d
d
a
o
t

:
e
r
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

l

a
b
o
g

l

e
h
T

i

c
fi
c
e
p
s
d
n
a

l

l

a
b
o
g
e
h
t

e
r
a
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o
t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

s
d
e
e
n

s
’
y
r
t
n
u
o
c

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

j

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
e
s
e
h
t

,
2
1
0
2

i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

f
o
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A
r
o
f

n
a
P

l

i

t
n
o
J

s
t
i

d
n
a

)

2
1
0
2
-
9
0
0
2

(

i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

r
o
f

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
m
a
h
t
n
a
s
a
V
n
k
a
d
d
a
V
s
’
L
S
o
G
o
t

i

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

:
s
d
e
e
n

y
r
t
n
u
o
C

.
s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

e
r
a

e
s
e
h
t

:
s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

s
’
e
p
o
e
p

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

y

l
l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

f
o
g
n
i
s
u
o
h
-
e
r

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

n
r
e
c
n
o
c

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

l

a
b
o
g

l

s
a

r
a
f
o
s
n

i

:
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

l

a
b
o
G

l

.

m
e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

e
r
a

j

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
e
s
e
h
t

t
n
e
r
r
u
c
e
r

s
’
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

f
o
t
c
e
p
s
a

l

i

a
c
o
s

l

a
c
i
t
i
r
c
A
“

s
e
fi
i
t
n
e
d

i

3
1
-
7
0
0
2

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

y
r
t
n
u
o
C
U
E

e
h
T

:
s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
C
E

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d
o
w

t

r
o
e
n
o
n

i

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

d
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
n

i

n
o
e
b
o
t

3
1
-
7
0
0
2

s
d
n
u
f
C
E

f
o
s
u
c
o
f

i

n
a
m
e
h
t
“

t
a
h
t

)

1
2

.
p

(

s
e
t
a
t
s
o
s
l
a

t
I

.
)
9

.
p
(
”
)
s
P
D

I
(

s
n
o
s
r
e
P

l

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
D
y

l
l

a
n
r
e
t
n

I

f
o
e
u
s
s
i

e
h
t

]
s
a
[

i

t
c
fl
n
o
c

.
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
d
o
i
r
e
p

e
h
t

t
u
o
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
a

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

?
s
e
c
i
l

i

o
p

s
’
C
E
d
n
a

’
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p
d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

l

,
e
p
o
e
p

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

f
o
n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
h
t

e
v
o
r
p
m

i

o
T

:
e
r
a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

j

f
o
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

e
h
T

l

a
b
o
g

l

,
s
d
e
e
n

y
r
t
n
u
o
c

,
s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

o
t

n
o
i
t
a
r
a
p
e
r
p
m
o
r
f

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

f
o
s
e
s
a
h
p

s
u
o
i
r
a
v

e
h
t

r
e
v
o
d
a
e
r
p
s

d
e
n
fi
e
d

e
r
a

”
s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
A
“
4
2

)
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
n
a
fl
(

i

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

l

i

a
c
o
s
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

 i
•

d
e
fi
i
t
n
e
d

i

e
s
o
h
t

r
o
f

t
p
e
c
x
e

j

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

d
n
a

l

a
b
o
g

l

s
t
i

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

e
r
a

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
s
e
h
T

.
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

e
l
t
t
i
l

r
a
e
b

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

t
h
g
e

i

e
h
t

f
o
r
u
o
f

e
r
e
h
w
2

t
l
u
s
e
R

r
o
f

:
s
t
i
d
u
a

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

,
y
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
i
v

,
s
a
e
r
a

t
l
u
s
e
r

t
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

.
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o
b
o

j

w
e
n

/

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
e
t
a
v
e

i

l
l

a

y
t
r
e
v
o
p

d
n
a

y

l
l

a
c
o

l

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

 i
•

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

 i
•

d
n
a

e
v
i
t
i
s
n
e
s
-
t
c
fl
n
o
c

i

a

n

i

h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

’
n
e
v
i
r

D

r
e
n
w
O
e
m
o
H

‘

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
u

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

.
r
e
n
n
a
m
e
b
a
t
i
u
q
e

l

t
s
o
m
e
h
t

r
o
f

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

 i
•

i

c
fi
c
e
p
s
d
n
a

l

l

a
b
o
g
s
t
i

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

?
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

115

:
e
r
a

)
”
s
t
l
u
s
e
R
“

d
e

l
l

a
c
(

s
t
u
p
t
u
O
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

t
n
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

P
U
A

f
o
s
t
u
p
t
u
o
d
n
a
s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
h
t

e
r
A

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
P,
H
R
E
N

,
T
A
T
I
B
A
H

,
B
S
A

,

U
E

e
h
t

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i
(

d
e
t
i
v
n

i

e
r
e
w

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
t

n

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
r

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

n

i

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

d
e
s
i
v
e
r

a

n

i

r
a
e
p
p
a

s
I
V
O
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
h
T

.

w
o
e
b

l

”
s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
E
“

r
e
d
n
u

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

e
h
t

f
o
t
s
r
fi

e
e
S

.
t
n
e
m
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

i

d
e
n
a
t
n
o
c

s
i
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
s
r
e
v

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
T

.
6
6
6
-
6
9
2
/
2
1
0
2
/
e
i
s
A
-
I
C
D

.

o
N

t
c
a
r
t
n
o
C
t
n
a
r
G
o
t

1

.

o
N
m
u
d
n
e
d
d
A
n

i

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

e
h
T

.
)
d
n
u
o
b
-
e
m

i
t

d
n
a

c
i
t
s
i
l

a
e
r

l

,
e
b
a
n
a
t
t
a

i

l

,
e
b
a
r
u
s
a
e
m

i

,
c
fi
c
e
p
s
(

T
R
A
M
S

t
o
n

e
r
e
w
h
c
h
w

i

s
r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

s
u
o
r
e
m
u
n

.
s
s
e
r
g
o
r
p

f
o
g
n
k
c
a
r
t

i

r
e
t
t
e
b

r
o
f

s

w
o

l
l

a

i

h
c
h
w

t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

t
n
a
c
fi
n
g
i
s

i

a

s
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
r
e
v

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

i

s
e
c
n
e
g
a

l

0
3
y
e
t
a
m
x
o
r
p
p
a

i

i

h
c
h
w
o
t

d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

e
r
e
w

)
s
G
W
T
H

(

s
p
u
o
r
G
g
n
k
r
o
W

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

g
n
i
s
u
o
H
0
1
-
9
0
0
2

n

I

?
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

y
b

.
s
e
Y

d
e
n
w
o
d
n
a
d
e
r
o
h
t
u
a

y
l
e
g
r
a

l

n
g
i
s
e
d
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

s
I

i

.
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

s
a

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
d
a
e
h
-
n
e
m
o
w

r
o
f

t
e
g
r
a
t

d
n
a

r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

.
)
2
(

i

s
e
d
o
b

r
i
e
h
t

r
e
v
o

l

o
r
t
n
o
c

s
’
n
e
m
o
w

i

c
fi
c
e
p
s

a

s
a
h

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
h
T

n
a
h
t

e
r
o
m

s
i

s
i
h
t

e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p

a

s
A

.
0
5
3
,
4

f
o

l

a
t
o
t

a

f
o
t
u
o
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l

d
e
d
a
e
h
-
n
e
m
o
w
0
0
0
,
1

f
o
t
e
g
r
a
t

a

s
t
e
s

t
I

:
e
r
a

s
i
h
t
o
d

i

h
c
h
w
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

t
s
g
n
o
m
A

.
s
d
e
e
n

r
e
d
n
e
g

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

d
e
s
s
e
r
d
d
a

s
a
h
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

m
e
t
s
y
s

s
t
n
o
p

i

e
h
t

n

i

i

t
h
g
e
w
e
r
o
m
n
e
v
g

i

e
r
a

i

)
s
e
v
w
d
e
t
a
r
a
p
e
s

,
s

w
o
d
w

i

(

s
H
H
F

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

n

I

.
0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
r
o
f

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
t

l

e
b
u
o
d

.

%
5
4

t
a

d
e
s
s
a
p
r
u
s

s
a
w

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
T

.
n
e
m
o
w
e
b
o
t

e
v
a
h

s
r
e
d
a
e

l

C
R
V
f
o
%
0
4

t
a
h
t

l

e
u
r

e
h
t

g
n
i
t
t
e
s

s
t
n
u
o
c
c
a

k
n
a
b

t
n
o

i

j

i

g
n
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
 e
•

)

i

g
n
k
a
e
p
s

c

i
l

b
u
p

.
g
.
e
(

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
s
’
n
e
m
o
w

r
o
f

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

p
h
s
r
e
d
a
e
 l
•

d
n
a

,
s
e
g
a
w

l

a
u
q
e

,
e
c
n
e
o
v

l

i

c
i
t
s
e
m
o
d

,
s
t
h
g
i
r

l

a
g
e

l

s
a

s
e
u
s
s
i

h
c
u
s

e
d
u
c
n

l

i

y
a
m
d
n
a

s
t
x
e
t
n
o
c

l

r
a
u
c
i
t
r
a
p
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

s
n
a
p

l

e
h
t

d
e
n
fi
e
d

y
e
h
t

R
C
H
N
U
d
n
a

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U
y
b

-

d
e
r
i
a
h
c
-
o
C

.
)
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
e
g
r
a

l

d
n
a

l
l

a
m

s

r
e
h
t
o
y
n
a
m
d
n
a

P
H

I

e
h
t

f
o
n
g
i
s
e
d

,
n
o
i
t
a
c

i
l

p
u
d

i

d
o
v
a
o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

s
N
G
h
c
h
w

i

r
e
v
o
c

l

d
u
o
w

i

s
e
c
n
e
g
a

i

h
c
h
w
d
e
e
r
g
a

,
s
N
G
d
e
z
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

d
n
a

e
h
t

y
b

y

l
l

u
f

d
e
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

s
a
w

s
i
h
T

.
t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

f
o
t
n
u
o
m
a

e
h
t

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

r
o
f

a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

,

m
e
t
s
y
s

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

.

D
U
E

e
h
t
o
t

s
l
a
s
o
p
o
r
p

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
t
t
i

m
b
u
s

i

s
a
w
h
c
h
w
n
g
i
s
e
d

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

e
d
a
m

)
s
P
I
(

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
P

.
s
A
G

d
n
e
t

d
n
a

,
s
u
t
a
t
s

l

a
i
c
o
s

i

e
t
a
n
d
r
o
b
u
s

r
i
e
h
t

f
o
t
l
u
s
e
r

a

s
a

n
e
m
o
w
y
b

d
e
fi
i
t
n
e
d

i

e
r
a

)
s
I
G
S
(

s
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

r
e
d
n
e
G
c
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

i

y
r
a
v

s
I
G
S

.
s
e
o
r

l

d
n
a

s

m
r
o
n

d
e
n
fi
e
d

y

l
l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
a
r
t

d
n
a

,
l

o
r
t
n
o
c

d
n
a

r
e
w
o
p

r
u
o
b
a

l

f
o
s
n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

r
e
d
n
e
g

e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c
o
t

.
)
1
(

i

y
t
e
c
o
s

n

i

n
o
i
t
i
s
o
p

i

e
t
a
n
d
r
o
b
u
s

s
’
n
e
m
o
w
d
n
a

r
u
o
b
a

l

f
o
s
n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

r
e
d
n
e
g

e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c

t
o
n
o
d

y
e
h
t

d
n
a

,
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

d
n
a

e
r
a
c

h
t
l
a
e
h

,
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

r
e
t
a
w

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

n

i

i

s
e
c
a
u
q
e
d
a
n

i

o
t

e
t
a
e
r

l

y

l
l

a
u
s
u

s
N
G
P

.
y
t
i
s
s
e
c
e
n
d
e
v
i
e
c
r
e
p
e
t
a
d
e
m
m

i

i

?
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

y
l
e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a

n
a
o
t

e
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

a

s
a

,
s
e
o
r

l

d
e
n
fi
e
d

y

l
l

i

a
c
o
s

r
i
e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
n
e
m
o
w
y
b

d
e
fi
i
t
n
e
d

i

e
r
a

)
s
N
G
P
(

s
d
e
e
N

r
e
d
n
e
G

l

a
c
i
t
c
a
r
P

n
e
e
b

s
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

i

r
e
d
n
e
g
c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
d
n
a

l

a
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

e
v
a
H

n

i

e
s
u

d
e
t
i

m

i
l

f
o
e
r
o
f
e
r
e
h
t

d
n
a

y
t
i
r
a
c

l

k
c
a

l

i

h
c
h
w

s
r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

e
m
o
s

i

d
e
n
a
t
n
o
c

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
r
o
f

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
T

?
d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

l
l

e
w
d
n
a

r
a
e
l
c

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

e
h
t

s
I

116

l

/
t
a
t
s
u
a
t
/
t
u
s
i
a
k
u
j
/
fi
.
d
n
a
n
fi
.
l
a
b
o
g
/
/
:
p
t
t
h

l

l

.
9
9
9
1

,
s
r
i
a
f
f

A
n
g
e
r
o
F

i

r
o
f

i

y
r
t
s
i
n
M
d
n
a
n
F

i

l

:
i
k
n
i
s
l
e
H

l

.
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
y
r
o
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

r
o
f

l

o
o
t

a
d
n
a

k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

A

:
r
e
d
n
e
G
g
n
i
t
a
g
v
a
N

i

.

A

,
a

l
i
t
t
a
M
-
o
n
a
V

i

i

)
1
(

l

m
t
h
.
y
r
a
s
s
o
g
/
r
e
d
n
e
g
_
v
a
n

d
b

i

I

)
2
(

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
s
t
i

o
t

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
e
c
n
a

i
l

p
m
o
c

e
h
t

s
s
e
s
s
a
o
t

m

s
i
n
a
h
c
e
m
 A
•

.
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

f
o
e
g
a
t
s

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

h
c
a
e

t
a

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
s
i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
c
e
r
i
d

d
n
a

s
l
a
v
o
r
p
p
a

d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

t
a
h
t

e
r
u
s
n
 E

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

h
c
a
e

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
e
r
e
t
n
u
o
c
n
e

s
e
u
s
s
i

f
o
w
e
v
e
r

i

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

e
h
t

e
r
u
s
n
 E

•

•

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

l
l

a
o
t

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

i

g
n
d
r
a
g
e
r

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

f
o
w
o
fl

r
e
p
o
r
p

e
h
t

e
b
i
r
c
s
e
 D
•

t
r
a
p

e
h
t

n
o
d
e
d
r
o
c
e
r

n
e
e
b
o
s
l
a

e
v
a
h

s
n
o
i
t
c
a

t
u
b

s
n
r
e
c
n
o
c

e
m
o
s

e
r
a

e
r
e
h
t

e
s

r
e
p

e
g
a
m
a
d

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

i

g
n
d
r
a
g
e
R

)

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
E
T
M
e
h
t

n

i

s
s
e
c
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
C
e
h
T

n
o
e
n
n

i

r
e
t
p
a
h
c

e
e
s

–

d
e
c
a
p

l

y

l
l

a
m

i
t
p
o
t
o
n

e
r
a

e
s
e
h
t

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
o
h
c
e

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

e
s
e
h
t

d
n
a

)
k
c
o
r

,
r
e
b
m

i
t

,
d
n
a
s
(

s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

l

a
r
u
t
a
n

f
o
n
o
i
t
e
p
e
d

l

f
o
s
r
a
e
f

d
e
s
s
e
r
p
x
e

E
T
M
e
h
T

l

.
s
e
v
e
s
m
e
h
t

s
P

I

e
h
t

t
o
n

f
i

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

i

s
r
o
t
c
a

r
e
h
t
o
f
o

h
g
u
o
h
t
(

i

.
s
d
n
w
h
g
h

i

n

i

f
f
o
g
n
w
o
b

l

i

f
o
o
r

e
h
t

f
o
s
k
s
i
r

i

e
z
i
m
n
m
o
t

i

p
o
t
f
o
o
r

e
h
t

n
o
s
d
n
a
b
-
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

f
o
n
o
i
t
r
e
s
n

i

;
)
f
o
o
r
-
e
b
a
g

l

r
o
f
o
o
r
-
p
h

i

(

s
f
o
o
r

d
e
h
c
t
i
p

e
h
 t

e
h
 t

•

•

:
s
a

h
c
u
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
R

k
s
i
R

r
e
t
s
a
s
i
D
o
t

d
e
t
a
e
r

l

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

n
g
i
s
e
d

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

i

d
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

s
a
h

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
T

i

i

.
g
n
n
m
e
n
o
t
s

l

e
b
b
u
r

d
n
a

l

e
v
a
r
g

,
d
n
a
s
o
t

t
c
e
p
s
e
r

h
t
i

w

,
)
h
c
n
a
r
B

a
n
f
f
a
J
(

u
a
e
r
u
B

i

s
e
n
M
&
y
e
v
r
u
S

l

i

a
c
g
o
o
e
G

l

t
s
e
u
q
e
r
o
t

e
v
a
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

t
a
h
t

d
n
a

i

,
g
n
n
m

i

l

i

a
r
e
n
m
d
n
a

i

g
n
g
g
o

l

r
e
b
m

i
t

h
t
o
b

l

o
r
t
n
o
c
o
t

e
c
a
p

l

n

i

e
r
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
g
e
R

l

e
s
o
c

l

t
i
s
i
v

a

g
n
i
r
u
d

d
e
s
s
e
n
t
i

w

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
a
e
r
a

t
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

n

i

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

i

i

g
n
n
m
d
n
a
s

d
n
a

i

g
n
g
g
o

l

l

a
g
e

l
l
I

.
d
n
a

l

n
w
o
r
i
e
h
t

n
o
s
e
e
r
t

t
u
c
o
t

n
e
v
e
A
G
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
r
e
p

y
n
a
m
e
h
t

l

y
p
p
u
s
o
t

n
o
g
n
o
g

i

i

s
a
w
g
n
n
m
d
n
a
s

i

r
e
v
i
r

l

a
g
e

l
l
i

e
r
e
h
w

,
)
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

(

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

n
a
v
u
t
t
e
w
a
y
M
o
t

l

.
a
e
r
a

e
h
t

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

a
r
y
m
a
P

l

f
o
s
t
s
e
r
o
f

f
o
y
t
n
e
p

l

d
n
u
o
f

e
w

s
a

)
1
(

.
)
t
f
e

l

e
r
a

s
e
e
r
t

e
r
u
t
a
m
w
e
f
(

t
c
n
i
t
x
e

y
l
l

a
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

s
i

a
r
y
m
a
P

l

i

s
e
c
e
p
s

e
v
i
t
a
n

e
h
t
d
n
a
d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d
n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
t
s
e
r
o
f

y
n
a
m
…

“

t
a
h
t

w
e
v

i

E
T
M
e
h
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
o
t

e
c
n
e
d
v
e
o
n

i

d
n
u
o
f

e
w

r
e
v
e
w
o
H

i

c
n
a
g
r
o
t
u
o
y
r
r
a
c

d
n
a

n
a
e
c

l

s
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

r
i
e
h
t

p
e
e
k
o
t

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
s
i
l
i

b
o
m
o
s
l
a

s
r
e
c
ffi
O

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

.
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

y
b

s
e
e
r
t

0
0
0
,
2
5

f
o
g
n
i
t
n
a
p

l

e
h
t

d
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

.

m
e
h
t

f
o
y
n
a
m

t
u
c
o
t

d
e
w
o

l
l

a

e
r
e
w

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

d
n
a

,
s
e
e
r
t

i

.
g
n
n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

:
g
n
w
o

i

l
l

o
f

e
h
t
o
d

l
l
i

w
e
c
n
a
n
r
e
v
o
g

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

d
o
o
g

s
a
h

i

h
c
h
w

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

a

t
a
h
t

e
m
u
s
s
a

e
W

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
a
m
n
e
e
b

i

e
c
n
a
n
r
e
v
o
g

)

d
o
o
g

(

s
a
H

.
s
r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d

l

a
r
u
t
a
n

e
d
u
c
n

l

i

o
t

l

”
a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e
“

e
k
a
t

e
w
e
r
e
H

?
s
d
e
e
n

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

t
c
e
p
s
e
r

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
e
o
D

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

n

i

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

s
p
u
o
r
g

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

l
l

a

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

i

s
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

e
h
t

e
n

i
l
t
u
 O
•

?
)
P
/
P
(

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
/
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

n

i

t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

n
a

h
t
i

w

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

l
l

a

i

g
n
y
f
i
t
n
e
d
 I

•

l

s
e
b
a
r
e
v

i
l

e
d

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

d
e
e
r
g
a

n
 A
•

r
e
g
a
n
a
m

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

a

f
o
t
n
e
m
t
n
o
p
p
a

i

e
h
 T

•

e
h
t
o
t

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

n
o
i
t
a
i
t
i
n

i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
m
o
r
f

s
e
g
a
t
s

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

l
l

a

s
n
a
p
s

t
a
h
t

n
a
p

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

d
e
h
s
i
l

b
u
p

,
t
n
e
r
r
u
c
 A
•

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

d
n
a

s
e
o
r

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

f
o
t
n
e
m
n
g
i
s
s
a

l

r
a
e
 C
•

.
s
d
r
o
c
e
r

e
m

i
t

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

g
n
i
t
r
o
p
e
r
-
s
s
e
r
g
o
r
p

d
n
a

-
s
u
t
a
t
s

d
r
a
w
p
u

e
t
a
r
u
c
c
a

f
o
m
e
t
s
y
s
 A
•

.
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
t

n
o
i
t
i
s
n
a
r
t

8
4

e
g
a
p

,
E
T
M

)
1
(

117

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

t
a
h
t

s
e
t
a
t
s

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
t
r
o
p
e
R

l

a
n
F

i

e
h
T

l

.
e
p
o
e
p

0
0
6
,
9
1

s
a
w
n
e
v
g

i

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
T

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
a
r
a
c
e
D

l

l

i

a
s
r
e
v
n
U
8
4
9
1

e
h
t

n

i

g
n
v

i

i
l

f
o
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a

n
a
o
t

t
h
g
i
r

e
h
t

f
o
t
r
a
p

s
a

d
e
s
i
n
g
o
c
e
r

s
a
w
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

&
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

(

s
t
h
g
R

i

l

a
r
u
t
l
u
C
d
n
a

l

i

a
c
o
S

i

,
c
m
o
n
o
c
E

n
o
t
n
a
n
e
v
o
C

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

6
6
9
1

e
h
t

n

i

d
n
a

s
t
h
g
R

i

n
a
m
u
H

f
o

.
)
9
0
0
2

,
R
H
C
N
U

.
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

f
o
e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

e
h
t

n

i

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

f
o
s
r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

e
h
t

r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

e
w
e
r
e
H

i

c
fi
c
e
p
s
d
n
a

l

l

a
b
o
g
s
’
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
s
a
h

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

,
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

f
o
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

t
c
e
r
i
d

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
t

s
a
w
O
G
e
h
t

r
o
f

r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

e
h
T

o
t
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
e

y
e
h
t

e
r
a

r
o

,

d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
E

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

n
e
e
b

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

?
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

e
b

e
t
a
u
q
e
d
A

.
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

f
o
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a

n
a
o
t

t
h
g
i
r

s
’
e
n
o
y
r
e
v
e

s
e
s
i
n
g
o
c
e
r

w
a

l

s
t
h
g
i
r

?
s
t
h
g
i
r

n
a
m
u
h

f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
p

n
a
m
u
h

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

l

.
e
p
o
e
p

l

s
s
e
e
m
o
h

d
n
a

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
a
h

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
T

.
s
e
Y

e
h
t
o
t

e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

y
l
e
v
i
t
c
a

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
e
o
D

.
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

e
s
e
h
t

t
e
m

s
a
h

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
h
T

118

,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
h
m
o
r
f

d
e
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

6
3
4
,
7
1

.
9
8
4
,
1
7

s
a
w

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

s
s
e
r
d
d
a
o
t

:
e
r
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

l

a
b
o
g

l

e
h
T

s
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

m
o
r
f

s
n
o
s
r
e
p

6
7
2
,
8
1

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

m
o
r
f

4
4
6
,
6
4

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
m
r
o
f

m
o
r
f

3
5
1

d
n
a

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

f
o
s
d
e
e
n

n
o
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

b
a
h
e
r

m
r
e
t

i

m
u
d
e
m

.
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

s
a
h
O
G
e
h
t

e
r
o
f
e
r
e
h
T

.
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
m
o
r
f

f
o
t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
n
a

s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

g
n
v

i

i
l

r
i
e
h
t

r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c
o
h
w

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
%
“

s
a
w
O
S

e
h
t

r
o
f

r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

e
h
T

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

s
i
h
t

d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
m
a
e
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
t

r
o
n

P

I

e
h
t

r
e
h
t
i
e
N

l

.
”
)
e
p
o
e
p

0
0
6
,
9
1

f
o
%
5
7
-

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

(

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

y
b

o
T

:
e
r
a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

j

f
o
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

e
h
T

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

i

s
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

r
i
e
h
t

t
a
h
t

t
l
e
f

s
t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

f
o
%
0
0
1
y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

I

.
)
s
s
e
c
o
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
a

l
i

m

i
s

s
i

e
r
e
h
t

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w

i
t

l

r
a
e
c
n
u

s
i

t
I

.
t
s
r
fi

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

y
d
a
e
r
l
a

s
i

y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c

t
s
a

l

e
h
t

t
a
h
t

e
t
o
N

.
)
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

e
r
u
n
e
t

r
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

n
o
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

,
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

e
r
o
m

t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

e
n
o
a

l

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

e
h
t

l

,
s
s
e
e
h
t
r
e
v
e
N

.
s
e
i
r
o
g
e
t
a
c

r
e
h
t
o
e
h
t

f
o
y
n
a

n

i

g
n
i
t
n
u
o
c

l

e
b
u
o
d

?
n
o
i
t
c
a
e
h
t

f
o
t
l
u
s
e
r

a

s
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

e
l
t
i
t

)

0
0
6
,
9
1

(

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
t

l

e
b
u
o
d

n
a
h
t

.
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

s
a
h
O
S

e
h
t

,
e
r
o
f
e
r
e
h
T

.
0
1

d
n
a

8
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

e
h
t

g
n
i
t
a
r

%
0
9

f
o
e
g
a
r
e
v
a

n
a

h
t
i

w
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
t
l
u
s
e
r

a

s
a

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

d
a
h

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h
m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

6
3
4
,
7
1

(

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

f
o
d
n
e

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

d
a
h

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

9
0
0
,
8
6
:
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
w

:

O
G

e
l
t
i
t

d
n
a

l

m
o
r
f

6
7
7
,
3
d
n
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

m
o
r
f

4
4
6
,
6
4

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
m
r
o
f

m
o
r
f

3
5
1
,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

i

g
n
k
n
a
fl

,

g
n
i
s
u
o
h
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

m
o
r
f

y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d
g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

n

i

i

g
n
p
e
h

l

d
n
a

s
d
a
o
r

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

.
g
.
e
(

d
o
o
g

n
o
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

k
r
o
w
o
t

r
e
h
t
e
g
o
t

l

e
p
o
e
p

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

d
a
h
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

t
s
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
a

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

l

,
e
p
o
e
p

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

f
o

f
o
s

m
r
e
t

n

i

t
i

d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

”
n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s
“

f
o
s
r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

o
n

e
v
a
h

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

e
c
n
S

i

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

f
o
e
r
a
h
s

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
w

:

O
S

e
h
t

1

d
n
a

g
n
v

i

i
l

f
o
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

t
s
e
h
g
h

i

e
h
t

s
a
w
0
1

e
r
e
h
w
0
1
o
t
1

f
o
e
a
c
s

l

a

n
O

:
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

y
l
l

a
i
t
n
a
t
s
b
u
s
g
n
v
a
h

i

s
a

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s
d
n
a

s
a

s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

g
n
v

i

i
l

d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

r
i
e
h
t

d
e
t
a
r

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
fi

e
h
t

n

i

s
t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

f
o
%
0
0
1
,
t
s
e
w
o

l

?
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

n
o
p
u
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

.
0
1
d
n
a

6

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

.
s
t
l
u
s
e
r

y
e
v
r
u
s

e
h
t

e
r
a

e
s
e
h
T

.
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

i

s
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

r
e
h
t
e
h
w

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
g
n
v
i
l

i

r
i
e
h
t

r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c
o
h
w
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

t
a
h
t

d
e
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
e
t
f
o
s
a
w

t
i

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
fi

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
f

n

i

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

l

.
y
e
t
a
r
u
c
c
a

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
h
t

e
v
o
r
p
m

i

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

e
s
o
h
t

l

y
n
o
t
o
n

(

s
e
d
a
r
t

g
n
i
t
a
r
e
n
e
g

e
m
o
c
n

i

d
n
a

l

e
b
a
t
e
k
r
a
m
n

i

t
n
e
n
o
p
m
o
c

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

s
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

e
h
t

e
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

)
?
(

s
e
Y

.
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

r
o
f

i

s
p
h
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

l

a
c
o

l

–

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
E

.
7

.
8

n

i

p
u

n
e
k
a
t

e
r
e
w

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

e
h
t

f
o
y
n
a
m

,
e
s
a
c

y
n
a

n

I

.
)
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

i

g
n
n
r
e
c
n
o
c

.
g
.
e
(

4
1
0
2

r
e
b
m
e
t
p
e
S

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w

r
e
d
n
u

s
r
e
t
p
a
h
c

e
h
t

f
o
g
n
d
a
e
h

i

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u

d
e
t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

e
h
T

.
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
s

w
o

l
l

o
f

i

h
c
h
w
4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
h
t

f
o
n
g
i
s
e
d

e
h
t

g
n
i
t
a
r
a
p
e
s

”
e
r
u
s
n
u
“

f
o
d
n
a
b

”
y
e
r
g
“

a

e
d
u
c
n

l

i

o
t

d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c
e
r

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
s

e
h
t

n
o
0
.
0
1

t
a

f
f
o
-
t
u
C
.
2

o
N
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

l

a
r
u
t
l
u
c

t
n
u
o
c
c
a
o
t
n

i

e
k
a
t
o
t

d
e
s
i
v
e
r

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

a
i
r
e
t
i
r
C

.
1

N
O
I
T
C
E
L
E
S
Y
R
A
C
I
F
E
N
E
B

I

.
E
T
M

y
a
m
o
h
w

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

a
m

s

y
r
e
v

r
o
f

d
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

e
b

l

d
u
o
c

)
s
h
k
a

l

2
o
t

5
.
1

,
y
a
s
(

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

i

g
n
d
n
u
f

f
o
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c

l

i

a
c
e
p
S

.
3

o
N

l

.
”
t
u
o
y
e
t
i
n
fi
e
d
“

f
o
”
e
t
i
h
w
“

d
n
a

”
n

i

l

y
e
t
i
n
fi
e
d
“

f
o
”
k
c
a
b
“

l

e
h
t

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u
d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

n
e
e
b

y
d
a
e
r
l
a
d
a
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l
l

a

t
s
o
m
a

l

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

n
o
p
u
d
e
t
c
a

e
r
e
w
s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r
o
N

.

o
N

.
s
e
c
n
a
t
s

m
u
c
r
i
c

g
n

i
l
l

e
p
m
o
c

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w
d
e
c
a
f

e
r
a

r
o
r
a
w
e
h
t

n

i

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

y
n
a
m

t
s
o

l

e
v
a
h

.

m
e
t
s
y
s

l

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s
g
n
i
t
s
i
x
e

S
T
I
F
E
N
E
B
F
O
D
A
E
R
P
S

i

.
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
o
m
h
c
a
e
r
o
t

l

e
b
i
s
s
o
p

t
i

e
k
a
m
o
t

d
e
s
o
p
o
r
p

e
r
e
w

s
n
a
p

l

e
p
y
t

e
s
u
o
h

l

e
b
a
d
n
a
p
x
e

d
n
a

r
e
p
a
e
h
c

r
u
o
F

.
4

s
e
Y

.
d
e
c
r
o
f
n
e
r

i

d
n
a

d
e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

i

g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s
O
B
C

o
N

.
d
e
t
o
m
o
r
p

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

)
l
a
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
f

y

l
l

u
f

t
e
y
(

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

I

.
5

.
6

Y
T
I
L
I
B
A
N
A
T
S
U
S

I

Y
C
N
E
D
N
E
P
E
D

o
N

s
a

y
l
r
a
e

s
a

n
w
o
n
k

e
r
e
w

,
e
g
a
t
s

t
a
h
t

t
a

l

a
m
r
o
f
n

i

h
g
u
o
h
t
l
a

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

e
h
t

f
o

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

s
a

y

l
l

i

a
c
e
p
s
e

d
e
t
p
m
e
t
t
a

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

l

d
u
o
c

e
r
o
m

t
a
h
t

s
l
e
e
f

m
a
e
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
t

n
o
i
t
i
s
o
p

l

e
b
a
n
o
s
a
e
r

a

y

l
l

a
r
e
n
e
g

s
i

s
i
h
t

e

l
i

h
W

.
r
a
e
y

t
a
h
t

f
o
e
n
u
J

n

i

i

g
n
d
n
e

s
a
w
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
a

)

5
1
0
2
y
r
a
u
r
b
e
F
(

e
t
a

l

o
o
t

d
e
r
e
v

i
l

e
d

s
a
w

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

e
h
t

i

i

g
n
n
a
t
n
o
c

t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
t

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

s
i

s
i
h
t

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U
o
t

-

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
A

.
n
o
p
u

d
e
t
c
a

n
e
e
b

t
o
n

e
v
a
h

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

y
n
a
m
e
h
t

n
e
e
s

e
b

l
l
i

w

t
I

i

.
n
a
t
r
e
c
s
a
o
t

l

e
b
a

s
a
w
m
a
e
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
t

s
a

r
a
f

s
a

n
o
p
u

d
e
t
c
a

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
o
t

t
n
e
t
x
e

?
n
o
p
u
d
e
t
c
a
n
e
e
b

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

e
h
t

n
o
s
t
n
e
m
m
o
c

f
e
i
r
b

h
t
i

w
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

l

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
m
r
e
t
-
d
m
e
h
t

i

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

e
h
t

e
r
a

i

g
n
w
o

l
l

o
f

e
h
T

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

e
h
t

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

.
s
r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
u

d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
e
b

t
o
n
n
a
c

j

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
c
fi
c
e
p
s

i

d
n
a

l

a
b
o
g

l

e
h
t

e
c
n
i
s

l

e
b
a
c

i
l

p
p
a

t
o
N

i

e
h
t
g
n
c
n
e
u
fl
n

i

s
r
o
t
c
a
f

j

r
o
a
m
e
h
t

e
r
a

t
a
h
W

e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a
-
n
o
n

i

r
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

?
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o

j

o
N

)

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
k

i
l

,
n
a
p
s

e
f
i
l

d
e
x
fi

a

h
t
i

w

119

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
o
N

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

e
d
u
c
n

l

i

o
t

s
e
g
a
k
c
a
p

t
n
a
r
g

g
n
i
s
u
o
H

.
9

I

I

G
N
N
A
R
T
D
N
A
S
D
O
O
H
I
L
E
V
I
L

n

i

s
t
n
o
p

i

s
u
n
o
b

i

e
v
e
c
e
r

l

d
u
o
h
s

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

r
o
f

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
o
w

t

r
o
e
n
o
e
t
a
n
m
o
n

i

i

h
c
h
w

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

.
0
1

o
N
e
g
a
w
y

l
i

a
d

e
g
a
r
e
v
a
o
t

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

t
s
a
e

l

t
a

)

n
a
o

l

r
o

(

e
c
n
a
w
o

l
l

a

l

i

a
n
m
o
n

a
w
a
r
d

l

d
u
o
h
s

s
e
e
n
a
r
T

i

.
1
1

o
N
s
s
e
c
o
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
r
o
f
e
b

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
/
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

f
o
s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

i

n
o
n
g
a
p
m
a
c

s
s
e
n
e
r
a
w
a

h
c
n
u
a
L

o
N

.
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

i

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e

l
l

a
m

s

r
o
f

e
m
e
h
c
s

n
a
o

l

s
u
p

l

t
n
a
r
g

e
d
u
c
n

l

I

.
2
1

.
3
1

o
N
e
s
u
o
h

e
r
u
t
u
f

n
w
o
r
i
e
h
t

e
s
o
o
h
c

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l

p
e
h
o
t

s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
s
l
e
d
o
m
e
a
c
s

l

e
c
u
d
o
r
t
n

I

o
N
s
a
e
r
a

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M
d
n
a

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
n

i

o
s
l
a

d
e
c
r
o
f
n
e

t
e

l
i

o
t

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

o
N
s
n
a
e
m

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

l

s
’
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
n
o
y
e
b

s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

t
c
i
r
t
s
e
R

o
N
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
d
o
i
r
e
p

e
h
t

e
c
u
d
e
R

.
4
1

.
5
1

.
6
1

.
7
1

S
S
E
C
O
R
P
N
O
I
T
C
U
R
T
S
N
O
C

o
N

.
s
s
e
c
o
r
p

o
N

.
s
n
a
p

l

e
p
y
t

e
t
a
r
e
n
e
g

y
l
t
n
o

i

j

o
t

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

r
o
f

s
p
o
h
s
k
r
o
w
n
u
R

.
8
1

S
S
E
C
O
R
P
Y
R
O
T
A
P
C
I
T
R
A
P

I

E
H
T

P
I
S

e
h
t

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
n
a
p

l

n
o
i
t
c
a

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

n
o
s
r
e
d
a
e

l

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
o
f

s
p
o
h
s
k
r
o
w

l

r
a
u
g
e
r

n
u
R

.

o
N

.
s
s
e
c
o
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

e
v
o
r
p
m

i

o
t

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
g
g
u
s

p
u
o
r
g

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
d
u
c
n

l

i

d
n
a

t
i
c

i
l

o
S

.
9
1

.
0
2

o
N

e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

t
s
e
h
g
h

i

e
h
t

s
a
w
0
1

e
r
e
h
w
0
1
o
t

1

f
o
e
a
c
s

l

a

n
o
t
a
h
t

d
n
u
o
f

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

E
T
F

e
h
T

d
n
a

0
1

d
n
a

6

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

s
a

s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

g
n
v

i

i
l

d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

r
i
e
h
t

d
e
t
a
r

s
t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

l
l

a

t
s
e
w
o

l

e
h
t

1
d
n
a

g
n
v

i

i
l

f
o
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

N
O
I
T
S
E
U
Q

I

)
L
A
P
C
N
R
P
(

I

L
A
R
E
N
E
G

120

y
b

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

t
s
o
m
d
e
t
n
a
w
y
e
h
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

e
h
t

s
a

k
c
o
t
s
e
v

i
l

g
n
i
t
a
t
s

l

y
e
v
i
t
i
s
o
p

i

g
n
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

e
s
o
h
t

f
o
%
0
4
h
t
i

w

,
s
a
w
e
r
e
h
t

s
a

h
c
u
s

l

s
p
u
o
r
g
e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v
g
n
d
u
l
c
n
i
(

l

i

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

i

d
a
s

%
4
7

i

e
v
e
c
e
r

t
o
n

d
d

i

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
d
e
k

i
l

e
v
a
h

l

d
u
o
w
y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

f
o
d
n
k

i

y
n
a

s
a
w
e
r
e
h
t

f
i

d
e
k
s
a

n
e
h
W

.
0
1
d
n
a

9

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

y
t
i
r
o
a
m

j

t
s
a
v

e
h
t

,
s
d
o
o
h
i
l
e
v
i
l

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

n
e
e
b
e
r
u
n
e
t
f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s
d
n
a
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
g
n
i
v
i
l

e
r
u
n
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

e
r
o
f
e
r
e
h
t

d
n
a

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u

”
s
e
l
t
i
t

d
n
a
“

l

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

d
a
h

y
e
h
t

t
a
h
t

i

d
a
s

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

h
t
o
b

f
o
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

l
l

a

y
l
r
a
e
n

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
f

e
h
t

l
l

a

n

I

?
)
s
n
o
s
r
e
p

.
)

%
4
3

(

r
e
t
a
w
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

i

r
o
f

s
l
l

e
w

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
d
d
n
a

y
l
r
e
d
e

l

l

,
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
d
e
d
a
e
h

l

e
a
m
e
f

.
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

f
o
e
s
o
c

l

y
b

6
3
4

,
7
1

d
e
d
a
e
h
-
n
e
m
o
w
g
n
d
u
l
c
n
i
(

i

l

e
p
o
e
p

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

S
N
O
I
T
S
E
U
Q
-
B
U
S
C
I
F
I
C
E
P
S

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
a

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
d
n
a

)

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
d

l

,
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p
o
t
d
e
v
o
m
g
n
v
a
h

i

y
b

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

i

i

m
u
m
n
m
d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

e
h
t
g
n
i
t
e
e
m
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

?
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

s

l

m
e
b
o
r
p
r
o
n
m
d
n
u
o
f

i

E
T
M
e
h
t

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

.
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
m
u
m
n
m

i

i

t
e
e
m
H
R
d
n
a
H
F
h
t
o
b
,
s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
%
0
0
1

P
U
A
e
h
t

n

i

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
%

t
a
h
W

s
i
h
T

.
s
r
i
a
p
e
r

7
3
6

d
n
a

s
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
f

2
3
9
,
3
g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

i

d
o
i
r
e
p

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
e
s
u
o
h

9
6
5
,
4

y
n
a
m
w
o
h
d
n
a

t
l
i

u
b

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
e
s
u
o
h

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

.
)
t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
t

f
o
%
0
1
1

(

l

s
t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
f

5
.
0
5
2
,
4
o
t

s
e
t
a
u
q
e

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d
r
o
t
c
fl
n
o
c

i

y
b
d
e
g
a
m
a
d
s
e
s
u
o
h

?
d
e
r
i
a
p
e
r

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
0
4

e
h
t

n

i

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

d
n
a

E
T
M
e
h
t

n

i

d
e
t
o
n

e
r
e
w

s
t
c
e
f
e
d

i

t
n
a
c
fi
n
g
i
s
o
w

t

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
0
3

t
u
o
2

n

I

.
c
t
e

.
E
T
F

e
h
t

,
r
o
o
fl

d
e
v
a
p
n
u

n
a

,
s

i

w
o
d
n
w
d
n
a

s
r
o
o
d

d
e
s
s
i

m

,
s
e

l
i
t

e
g
d
i
r

r
o
s
e

l
i
t

l

d
e
a
e
s
n
u

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
%
0
2

l

i

y
e
t
a
m
x
o
r
p
p
a

n

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
m
u
m
n
m
d
e
t
p
o
d
a

i

i

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
y
l
p
m
o
c

?
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

t
r
o
p
e
r

e
h
t

e
c
n
i
s

d
e
g
n
a
h
c

t
o
n

s
a
h

s
i
h
T

.
d
e

i
l

p
p
a

a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

d
n
a

s
s
e
c
o
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
h
t

s
e
u
q
i
t
i
r
c

E
T
M
e
h
t

f
o
e
e
r
h
T

r
e
t
p
a
h
C

n
o
p
u

t
e
s

n
e
e
b
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
g

i
l

e

e
v
a
h

r
a
f

w
o
H

.
.
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

s
i
h
t

i

n
a
t
b
o
t
o
n

d
d

i

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
T

m
o
r
f
g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
d
n
a

l

e
p
o
e
p

f
o
%

t
a
h
W

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c
d
n
a

y
l
t
c
i
r
t
s

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

P
U
A
e
h
t

?
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
g

i
l

e
d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u

.
n
e
t
t
i
r

w

s
a
w

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o

l

a
u
q
e

,
y
c
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t

f
o
s
i
s
a
b

e
h
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

r
i
a
f
d
n
a

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a
y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

n
e
e
b

y
e
h
t

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
t
d
n
a

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

?
d
e

i
l

p
p
a

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c

g
n
i
r
u
d

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
n
a

l

r
i
e
h
t

l

e
z
i
r
a
u
g
e
r
o
t

d
e
t
s
i
s
s
a

e
r
e
w

)

l

d
a
o
e
s
a
c

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

f
o
%
3
8

(

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

6
7
7
,
3

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
a

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
n
a

l

e
p
o
e
p

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

.
d
o
i
r
e
p

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

a
g
e

l

f
o
s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d
/
s
d
e
e
d

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

m
o
r
f

i

i

g
n
d
v
o
r
p

s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

i

r
e
h
t
o
r
o
p
h
s
r
e
n
w
o
d
n
a

l

?
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

e
r
u
n
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

f
o
s
h
t
n
o
m
3

f
o
d
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

i

h
c
h
w

,
d
o
i
r
e
p

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
m
r
o
f

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

h
t
u
o
y

3
5
1

l

a
m
r
o
f

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

i

g
n
v
a
h

,
s
l
a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

i

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

l

e
v
e

l

Q
V
N

r
o
f

l

y
p
p
a
o
t

l

e
b
g

i

i
l

e

e
b

l
l
i

w

s
e
e
n
a
r
t

i

e
s
e
h
T

i

.
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

b
o

j

e
h
t

n
o
f
o
s
h
t
n
o
m
3
d
n
a

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

m
o
o
r
s
s
a
c

l

e
t
i
s
-
n
o
e
v
i
s
n
e
t
n

i

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

i

.
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

r
e
t
f
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r
o
h
w

s
e
e
n
a
r
t

i

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
u
n

n
o
m
e
t
s
y
s

E
&
M
e
h
t

n

i

a
t
a
d
o
n

s
i

e
r
e
h
T

?
n
o
i
s
s
e
f
o
r
p

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

m
r
e
t
-
d
m
a

i

i

.
p
h
s
e
c
i
t
n
e
r
p
p
a

f
o
r
a
e
y

e
n
o
f
o
d
n
e

e
h
t

t
a

n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
i
t
r
e
c

3

s
a

s
l
l
i

k
s

d
e
r
i
u
q
c
a

r
i
e
h
t

e
s
u

n
e
h
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
s
r
e
m
m

i

.
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
r

g
n
i
s
u
o
h
o
t

n

i

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

R
R
D
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

o
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n

i

d
e
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

e
v
a
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

3
8
9
,
5

d
n
a

n

i

d
e
n
a
r
t

i

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
l
a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

i

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
T

.
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

f
o
d
n
e

e
h
t

t
a

s
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

n

i

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

R
R
D
d
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

d
a
h

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

9
6
5
,
4

n

i

.
s
l
a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

i

0
0
2

s
a
w

s
d
o
h
t
e
m
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

t
n
e

i
l
i
s
e
r
-
r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d

g
n
i
s
i
l
i
t
u

?
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

.
d
o
i
r
e
p

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
b

r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e

l
l
i

k
s

r
o
f

i

d
a
p

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
y
a
d
-
n
a
m
9
6
0
,
9
7
3

o
t

r
o
f

i

d
a
p

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
y
a
d
-
n
a
m
y
n
a
m
w
o
H

?
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

r
o
f

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

121

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.
s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
f

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

e
s
o
h
t

y
b

d
e
t
a
r
o
b
o
r
r
o
c

e
r
a

a
t
a
d

e
s
e
h
T

e
n
o
r
e
v
o
d
n
a

0
1

d
n
a

8

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

s
a

t
i

d
e
t
a
r

%
4
9

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

r
i
e
h
t

t
u
o
b
a

d
e
k
s
a

n
e
h
W

P
U
A
e
h
t

h
t
i

i

w
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
a
d
e
fi
s
i
t
a
s
w
o
H

.
0
1

l

e
v
e

l

t
a

)

%
8
2

(

r
u
o
f

n

i

?
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

f
o
%
0
0
1

t
a
h
t

s
l
a
e
v
e
r

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

E
T
F

e
h
t

t
u
b

e
m
a
r
f
g
o

l

e
h
t

n

i

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

r
o
f

r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

o
n

s
i

e
r
e
h
T

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

e
h
t

s
a
h

r
a
f

w
o
H

.
g
n
i
s
u
o
h
m
o
r
f

t
fi
e
n
e
b

?
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
n
a
fl
m
o
r
f

i

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

l

y
e
v
i
t
c
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
t
l
u
s
e
r

a

s
a

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

d
a
h

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

i

s
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

r
i
e
h
t

t
a
h
t

t
l
e
f

s
t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

?
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

n
e
e
b

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h
d
n
a

.
0
1
d
n
a

8
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

e
h
t

g
n
i
t
a
r

%
0
9

f
o
e
g
a
r
e
v
a

n
a

h
t
i

w
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l
l

a

s
s
o
r
c
a

h
g
h

i

s
a
w

.

A
.
T

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

e
h
t

t
a
h
t

m
r
fi
n
o
c

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
s
’

m
a
e
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
T

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

i

r
i
e
h
t

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

l

y
u
d

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

s
’
.

O
.
T

d
n
a

s
r
e
e
n
g
n
E

i

e
h
t

h
t
o
b

d
e
t
s
u
r
t

y

l
l

u
f

.
s
n
o
i
t
a
n
a
p
x
e

l

n

i

e

l
i

h
w
”
d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v
“

r
o
f

l

%
8
5
y
n
o
s
a
w

t
i

%
7
9

s
a
w
g
n
i
t
a
r

e
h
t

r
a
n
n
a
M
n

i

e

l
i

h
w

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
h

l

,
y
g
n
i
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

.
”
d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v
“

y
b
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
r

r
o
f

i

e
c
n
a
d
u
g
d
n
a

r
o
”
d
o
o
g
“

s
a

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

e
h
t

d
e
t
a
r

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
%
8
9

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

E
T
F

e
h
t
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
A

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

.

%
5
9

d
n
a
%
1
9
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

d
e
g
n
a
r

g
n
i
t
a
r

i

m
u
m
x
a
m
e
h
t

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

r
e
h
t
o

?
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
P
g
n
i
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

I

.
e
s
a
h
p

r
i
a
p
e
r
/
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
t
c
e
p
s
a

l
l

a

n

i

s
r
e
c
ffi
o

’
s
P

I

m
o
r
f

e
d
u
t
i
t
t
a

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

y

l
l

u
f

a

d
e
y
o
n
e

j

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

i

e
v
i
t
a
r
t
s
i
n
m
d
a
f
o
y
c
a
u
q
e
d
a
d
n
a
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

o
s
l
a
m
e
h
t

f
o
0
2
0
,
1
1

l

.
e
p
o
e
p

0
0
0
,
6
1

f
o
t
e
g
r
a
t

e
h
t

s
e
m

i
t

e
e
r
h
t

y
l
r
a
e
n

s
i

s
i
h
T

.
d
o
i
r
e
p

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
r
a

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

d
n
a

)
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

t
o
n

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c
m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
a

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v
4
2
1
m
o
r
f

s
n
o
s
r
e
p

4
4
6
,
6
4

e
s
o
h
t

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i
(

l

e
p
o
e
p

f
o
%

t
a
h
w
d
n
a

y
n
a
m
w
o
H

122

n

i

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
-
n
o
n

d
n
a

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

,
s
t
n
a
c

i
l

p
p
a

d
e
t
n
e
i
r
o
s
r
e
e
n
g
n
E

i

d
n
a

s
r
e
s
i
l
i

b
o
M
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

,
s
r
e
c
ffi
O

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

e
h
t
o
t

s
P

I

e
h
t

y
b
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
d
n
a

.
s
e
u
s
s
i

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
d
n
a

e
v
i
t
a
r
t
s
i
n
m
d
a

i

g
n

i
l

k
c
a
t

i

?
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D
d
n
a

i

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
T
A
T
I
B
A
H
y
b

d
e
r
i
a
h
c
-
o
c
(

s
g
n
i
t
e
e
m
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

l

l

i

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D
y
h
t
n
o
m
o
s
l
a

e
r
e
w
e
r
e
h
T

.
4
1
0
2
y
r
a
u
r
b
e
F

n

i

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

n

i

l

d
e
h

s
a
w

t
s
a

l

e
h
T

.
s

w
e
v
e
r

i

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

s
a

l

d
e
h

e
r
e
w

s
t
a
e
r
t
e
R

l

a
u
n
n
A

.
s
r
i
a
h
c
A
G
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
g
n
i
t
e
e
m

s
s
e
r
g
o
r
P

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
s
a

l
l

e
w

s
a

)
y
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l
l

a

f
o
s
t
r
o
p
e
r

e
h
t

i

d
e
n
b
m
o
c
o
h
w
Q
H

t
a

i

)
l
a
c
n
h
c
e
T

,
r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

(

M
P
D
o
t

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

t
r
o
p
e
r

e
h
t

t
n
e
s

M
D

t
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A
d
n
a

s
r
e
e
n
g
n
E

i

,
s
O
T

e
h
t

d
n
a
M
D
e
h
t

y
b

d
e
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

e
r
e
w

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

e
s
e
h
t

n

i

s
O
T

y
b

d
e
fi
i
t
n
e
d

i

s

l

m
e
b
o
r
P

.
)
s
t
r
o
p
e
r

O
T

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
u
(

l

y
k
e
e
w
e
s
a
b

a
t
a
d

e
h
t

d
e
f

)
s
t
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A
g
n
i
t
r
o
p
e
R
&
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
M

(

s
r
o
t
a
r
e
p
o
e
s
a
b

a
t
a
D

.

A
T
C
e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
i

d
e
r
a
h
s
o
h
w

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N
o
t

t
i

t
n
e
s

d
n
a

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

e
h
t

.
s
n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

e
e
r
g
a

d
n
a

s

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

y
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

o
t

s
O
T

h
t
i

w
d
e
h

l

e
r
e
w

s
g
n
i
t
e
e
m
y
k
e
e
w
-
o
w
T

l

.
)
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
m
o
d
n
a
r

t
u
o
d
e
i
r
r
a
c
o
s
l
a
o
h
w

(

s
r
e
e
n
g
n
E

i

d
e
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
o
n

s
a
w
e
r
e
h
t

t
u
b

t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

f
o
s
t
c
e
p
s
a

s
u
o
r
e
m
u
n

d
n
a

y
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
i
v

,
r
e
d
n
e
g

,
)
’
s
t
u
p
t
u
o

‘
(

y
e
h
t
o
d
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
t

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w

e
h
T

.
r
e
c
ffi
O
E
&
M
e
h
t

a
v

i

)

M
D

(

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
e
h
t
o
t

l

y
k
e
e
w
d
e
t
r
o
p
e
r

s
O
T

l

:
e
u
d
e
h
c
s

g
n
i
t
r
o
p
e
r

r
a
e
c

l

a

s
a
w
e
r
e
h
T

?

m
e
h
t

n

i

d
e
v
l
o
v
n

i

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

e
r
a
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w

s
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

r
o
n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

o
t
d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
n
a
t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
m
r
o
f
n

i

s
a
e
r
A
t
l
u
s
e
R

n
o
d
e
r
e
h
t
a
g

s
a
w
a
t
a
D

l

.
e
t
e
p
m
o
c
n

i

t
u
b

d
o
o
g

d
n
a

c
i
t
a
m
e
t
s
y
s

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
M

s
e
s
s
e
c
o
r
p
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

d
n
a

E
&
M

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

a

d
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

o
s
l
a

s
i
h
t

;
s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

d
n
a

e
m

i
t

g
n
i
t
s
a
w
y
b
e
r
e
h
t

e
m

i
t

h
c
u
m
o
o
t

k
o
o
t

r
i
a
p
e
r
/
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

g
n
i
s
u
o
H

d
e
r
i
s
e
d
d
n
a

s
t
u
p
t
u
o
e
h
t

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

s
s
o

l

d
n
a

)
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e
o
t

d
e
s
o
p
x
e

d
n
a

d
e
t
c
e
t
o
r
p

l

y
d
a
b

g
n
e
b

i

y
b

g
n
i
t
a
r
o
i
r
e
t
e
d

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

(

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

f
o
e
g
a
t
s
a
w

l

e
b
i
s
s
o
p

t
s
e
w
o

l

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

s
t
c
e
f
f
e

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

.
s
l
o
o
t

h
t
i

w
e
t
i
s
o
t

e
t
i
s

m
o
r
f

h
t
r
o
f

d
n
a

k
c
a
b

d
e
v
o
m

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a

l

r
e
v
o
e
r
o
M

.
t
i
r
i
p
s

m
a
e
t

d
n
a
m
s
a
i
s
u
h
t
n
e

f
o

,
e
s
i
t
r
e
p
x
e

,
s
d
n
u
f
g
n
d
u
l
c
n
i
(

i

s
t
u
p
n
i
/
s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

f
o
e
s
u

-

N
U
y
b

n
e
v
g

i

s
n
o
s
a
e
r

e
h
t

f
o
e
n
o
d
n
a

t
e
g
r
a
t

e
v
o
b
a

l
l

e
w
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
t
l
u
s
e
r

y
n
a
m

t
a
h
t

d
e
t
o
n

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

t
i

?
)
.
s
t
s
o
c

e
v
i
t
a
r
t
s
i
n
m
d
a

i

,
e
m

i
t

.
s
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
r

t
s
o
c

s
i

s
i
h
t

r
o
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H

y
c
n
e
i
c
ffi
E

d
n
a

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

s
k
r
o
w

r
o
i
r
p

e
c
n
o
s
t
n
u
o
c
c
a

k
n
a
b

e
h
t

n

i

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

l

y
e
m

i
t

e
r
e
w

s
t
n
e
m
a
t
s
n

l

i

t
a
h
t

d
e
t
a
t
s

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l
l

A

,
t
e
g
d
u
b

i

n
h
t
i

w

,
e
m

i
t

n
o
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a

s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

e
r
e
W

.
s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

g
n
i
r
u
d

d
e
t
r
o
p
e
r

e
r
e
w

i

s
r
u
o
v
a
h
e
b

y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n
n
u

r
o
s
e
s
u
s
i

m
o
N

.
s
e
v
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

s
P

I

y
b

d
e
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

d
n
a

s
e
u
r

l

f
o

l

u
f
t
c
e
p
s
e
r
d
n
a

y
l
t
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t
d
e
g
a
n
a
m

?
s
e
r
u
d
e
c
o
r
p

.
s
i
h
t

n
o
a
t
a
d

i

n
a
t
b
o
t
o
n

i

d
d
m
a
e
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
T

d
e
s
a
b

l

,
e
u
d
e
h
c
s

n
o
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
r
e
W

o
t
d
e
k
n

i
l

y
l
r
a
e
l
c

,
s
n
a
p

l

e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r
d
n
a

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

n
o

l

y
l
r
a
u
g
e
r
d
n
a

i

c
g
o

l

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

?
d
e
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

.
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

d
o
o
g

f
o
d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

e
b

n
a
c

s
t
u
p
t
u
o

,
d
o
o
g

s
a
w
H
R

d
n
a
H
F

h
t
o
b

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

e
h
t

s
A

d
n
a
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
d
o
o
g
f
o
d
e
r
e
v
i
l

e
d
s
t
u
p
t
u
o
e
r
e
W

?
d
e
n
n
a
p

l

s
a

s
e
m
o
c
t
u
o
o
t
g
n
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

?
e
m

i
t

.
s
i
h
t

n
o
a
t
a
d

i

n
a
t
b
o
t
o
n

i

d
d
m
a
e
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
T

n
o
d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

s
t
c
e
f
f
e
d
e
r
i
s
e
d
d
n
a

s
t
u
p
t
u
o
e
r
e
W

e
r
e
w

s
A
G

.
g
n
i
r
e
e
t
s

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

n

i

i

e
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
o
t

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
w
o

l
l

a
o
t

m

s
i
n
a
h
c
e
m
o
n

s
a
w
e
r
e
h
T

t
n
a
v
e
e
r

l

l
l

a
w
o

l
l

a

s
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n
i
-
r
e
t
n

i

o
D

d
n
a

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
T
A
T
I
B
A
H
y
b

d
e
r
i
a
h
c
-
o
c
(

s
g
n
i
t
e
e
m
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

l

i

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D
y
h
t
n
o
m
e
h
t

l

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

n

i

i

e
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

y
l
l

u
f
o
t

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

s
r
i
a
h
c
A
G
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
g
n
i
t
e
e
m

s
s
e
r
g
o
r
P

l

y
h
t
n
o
M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
e
h
t

d
n
a

)
y
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D

i

?
g
n
i
r
e
e
t
s
d
n
a
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

r
e
w
s
n
a
o
t

t
l
u
c
ffi
d

i

e
r
o
f
e
r
e
h
t

d
n
a

l

r
a
e
c
n
u

s
i

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

s
i
h
t

i

f
o
g
n
n
a
e
m
e
h
T

?
s
t
n
e
m

t
i

m
m
o
c

r
i
e
h
t

l

l

fi
u
f

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l
l

a
o
D

.
”
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
S
“

n
o
e
v
F

i

r
e
t
p
a
h
C
n

i

l
i

a
t
e
d

n

i

d
e
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

s
i
h
T

I

0
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

e
r
a
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

r
i
e
h
t

r
e
t
f
a

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c
o
t

y
l
e
k
i
l

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
d
n
a

?
n
o
i
t
a
n
m
r
e
t

i

.
e
v
F

i

r
e
t
p
a
h
C
n

i

l
i

a
t
e
d

n

i

d
e
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

s
i
h
T

i

e
h
t
g
n
c
n
e
u
fl
n

i

s
r
o
t
c
a
f

j

r
o
a
m
e
h
t

e
r
a

t
a
h
W

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
S

?
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a
-
n
o
n

i

r
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

123

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

f
o
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A
r
o
f

n
a
P

l

i

t
n
o
J

s
t
i

d
n
a

)

2
1
0
2
-
9
0
0
2

(

i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

r
o
f

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
m
a
h
t
n
a
s
a
V

h
t
i

w
y
r
t
n
u
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
h
t
r
o
N
d
n
a

t
s
a
E

e
h
t

n

i

s
P
D

I

r
o
f

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

s
s
a
m
a

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
t
n

i

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

s
a
w

,
n
o
i
s
s
i

m
E
T
F

e
h
t

f
o
e
m

i
t

e
h
t

t
a

,
L
S
o
G
e
h
t

s
a

e
s
a
c

e
h
t

i

s
n
a
m
e
r

s
i
h
t

r
e
h
t
e
h
w

r
a
e
c

l

t
o
n

s
i

t
i

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

.
2
1
0
2

l

y
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

e
b
a

e
b
o
t

d
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r

y
l
r
o
o
p
o
o
t

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

t
u
b

s
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

l

a
c
o

l

e
m
o
s

h
t
i

w
d
e
h
c
a
e
r

e
r
e
w

s
t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
A

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
h
t
i

w
d
e
h
c
a
e
r

n
e
e
b

s
t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
a
e
v
a
H

.
y

l
l

u
f

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
n
e
n
o
p
m
o
c

s
u
o
i
r
a
v

e
h
t

r
e
v
o
e
k
a
t
o
t

?
h
c
h
w

i

,

o
s

f
I

?
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

?
)
y
a
w

t
a
h
w
n

i

.
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

t
u
o
-
e
s
a
h
p

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi
o
n

s
i

e
r
e
h
T

l

.
e
b
a
d
r
o
f
f
a

t
o
n

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

,

o
N

e
h
t
o
t

l

e
b
a
d
r
o
f
f
a

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

P
U
A
e
h
t

e
r
A

r
i
e
h
t

r
o
f

y
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
g
n
m
u
s
s
a

i

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

t
u
o
-
e
s
a
h
p

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

a
e
r
e
h
t

s
I

?
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

?
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
U
E

e
h
t

r
e
t
f
a

n
o
i
t
a
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

e
h
T

.
s
t
e
s
s
a

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

f
o
t
o
n

t
u
b

s
e
s
u
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

i

f
o
p
h
s
r
e
n
w
o
e
v
a
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
p
u
o
r
g
t
e
g
r
a
t

y
b

i

p
h
s
r
e
n
w
o
f
o

l

e
v
e

l

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

.
e
n
N

i

r
e
t
p
a
h
C
n

i

n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

l
l

u
f

e
e
S

.
l
u
f
t
b
u
o
d

s
i

s
d
n
e

?
s
d
n
e

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
U
E

e
h
t

r
e
t
f
a

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

t
i

l
l
i

w
d
n
a

l
l

a

n

i

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

t
s
g
n
o
m
a

h
g
h

i

l

y
e
m
e
r
t
x
e

s
i

f
f
a
t
s

l

d
e
fi

s
t
i

d
n
a

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

,
e
v
o
b
a

d
e
t
a
t
s

s
A

i

d
e
v
e
c
r
e
p

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
i

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

.
d
e
k
r
o
w

t
i

i

h
c
h
w
n

i

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

e
t
a
t
s
-
n
o
n
d
n
a
e
t
a
t
s
d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
p

l

t
e
g
r
a
t

y
b

r
o
f

e
v
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

e
t
a
t
s
o
N

.
e
v
i
t
i
s
o
p

y
r
e
v

e
r
a

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

d
n
a

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

,
i
h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
f
o
s
A
G
e
h
t

:
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
e
t
a
t
S

?
)
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e
(

l

u
f
s
s
e
c
c
u
s

s
a
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o

.
s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
n
a
p

l

P
U
A
n

i

d
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

t
o
n

s
a
w
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
S

P
U
A
n

i

d
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

n
e
e
b

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

s
a
H

124

d
n
a

(

n
e
h
w
e
c
n
i
s

,

o
s

f
i

,

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
d
n
a
g
n
n
n
a
p

l

i

i

n
k
a
d
d
a
V
s
’
L
S
o
G
g
n
d
r
a
g
e
r

i

e
v
o
b
a

d
e
n
o
i
t
n
e
m

s
a

y
c

i
l

o
p

e
t
a
t
s

h
t
i

w
d
e
d
c
n
o
c

i

i

.
s
i
h
t

t
u
o
b
a

d
e
k
s
a

s
a
w

r
a
n
n
a
M

t
i

s
a

h
g
h

i

s
a
w

t
i

E
T
M
e
h
t

f
o
e
m

i
t

e
h
t

t
A

?
P
U
A
r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

y
c
i
l

o
p

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

e
h
t

s
i

t
a
h
W

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
i
n
r
u
f

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

s
e
s
u
o
h

e
m
a
r
f

l

e
e
t
s

t
l
i

u
b
-
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

0
0
0
,
5
6

i

i

g
n
d
v
o
r
p

d
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

s
i
h
T

.
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

t
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

a

e
r
o
m

s
e
m

i
t

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

,
t
i
n
u

r
e
p

0
0
0
,
5
1
$
S
U
y
e
t
a
m
x
o
r
p
p
a

l

i

e
b
o
t

d
e
v
e

i
l

e
b

s
i

t
a
h
w

f
o
t
s
o
c

a

t
a

t
n
e
m
p
u
q
e

i

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

.
s
e
s
u
o
h

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
h
t

n
a
h
t

d
n
a

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

,
i
h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
n

i

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
A
G
e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

d
n
a

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

.
t
s
i
x
e

t
o
n
o
d

h
c
u
s

s
a

i

s
n
o
p
m
a
h
C

i

?
s
n
o
p
m
a
h
c

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e
g
n
o
r
t
s

e
v
a
h

P
U
A
s
e
o
D

.
l
u
f
e
s
u

s
a

l

y
b
a
b
o
r
p

e
r
a

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

.
d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

t
o
n

s
a
w
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

r
i
e
h
t

d
e
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s

s
a
h
C
D
S

i

h
c
h
w
o
t

t
n
e
t
x
e

e
h
t

;
)
y
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

d
n
a

y
c
n
e
d
n
e
p
e
d

n
o
e
v
F

i

d
n
a

r
u
o
F

s
r
e
t
p
a
h
C
e
e
s
(

s
a
e
r
a

T
A
T
I
B
A
H
n

i

s
O
B
C
d
e
n
e
k
a
e
w
y
b
i
s
s
o
p

l

s
a
h

?
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
O

I

f
o
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

t
I

.
s
O
G
N

r
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

i

f
o
s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

r
o

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

e
h
t
o
t

e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

P
U
A

d
n
a

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

o
t
g
n
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

P
U
A
s
i

l
l

e
w
w
o
H

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – EVALUATION QUESTION MATRIx AND SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o

l

d
n
a
o
g
a

r
a
e
y

a

t
u
o
b
a

d
e
h
s
i
n
fi

l

y
n
o
t
i

s
a

e
n
fi
e
d
o
t

l

e
b
i
s
s
o
p
m

i

e
r
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
s
t
c
e
f
f
e
m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o

l

e
h
T

,
e
v
i
t
a
g
e
n
d
n
a

e
v
i
t
i
s
o
p

e
h
t

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

t
a
h
W

t
c
a
p
m

I

l
l
i

w

t
c
a
p
m

i

t
a
h
t

d
e
t
c
e
p
x
e

s
i

t
i

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
t

n

i

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
s
t
l
u
s
e
r

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

l

.
e
b
a
r
u
s
a
e
m

t
e
y

t
o
n

s
i

t
c
a
p
m

i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

n

i

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

r
e
t
a
e
r
g

,
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

f
o
e
s
n
e
s

d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
t

i

t
n
o
p

s
t
l
u
s
e
r

y
e
v
r
u
s

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

:
d
e
d
n
e
t
n

I

:
e
b

s
t
c
e
f
f
e

m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o
l
y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
s
d
n
a
y
r
a
m

i
r
p

d
n
a

y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d
h
t
o
b

,
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
y
b
d
e
c
u
d
o
r
p

i

?
d
e
d
n
e
t
n
n
u
d
n
a
d
e
d
n
e
t
n

i

,
y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d
n

i

-
f
l
e
s

d
n
a

s
u
t
a
t
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

,
”
e
f
i
l

t
n
e
d
n
e
p
e
d
n
“

i

n
a

,
y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
s

l

i

l

a
c
g
o
o
h
c
y
s
p

d
n
a

d
n
m

i

f
o
e
c
a
e
p

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

d
e
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

l

y
b
a
t
s

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

l
l
i

w

t
s
a
e

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
n

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
p

l

l

a
i
t
n
a
t
s
b
u
s

a

,
e
s
r
u
o
c

f
o

,
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

n

I

.

m
e
e
t
s
e

.
d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

)

n
e
v
e
S

r
e
t
p
a
h
C
e
e
s
(

s
s
e
n
d
e
t
b
e
d
n

i

d
n
a

)
r
u
o
F

r
e
t
p
a
h
C
e
e
s
(

y
c
n
e
d
n
e
p
e
D

.
t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

d
n
a

d
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r
o
t

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

d
n
a

l

e
b
a
t
s
n
u
m
o
r
f

:
d
e
d
n
e
t
n
n
U

i

,
s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

y
n
a
m
n

i

s
p
o
h
s

e
r
a
w
d
r
a
h

l

e
a
c
s

i

m
u
d
e
m
d
n
a

l
l

a
m

s

n

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

d
e
k
r
a
m
a
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

P
U
A

y
r
e
v
i
l

e
d
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

j

r
o
a
m
a

s
a
w

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e

l
l
i

k
s

f
o
y
t
i
c
r
a
c
s

s
a
e
r
e
h
w
e
u
s
s
i

i

r
o
n
m
a

s
a

d
e
t
r
o
p
e
r

e
r
e
w

s
e
g
a
t
r
o
h
s

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
M

d
n
a

e
z
i
s

,
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
n
a

r
u
o
b
a

l

f
o
y
t
i
l
i

b
a

l
i

a
v
a
d
n
a

.
s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

d
n
a

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

l
l

a

s
s
o
r
c
a

e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c

t
l
u
s
e
r

a

s
a
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

n
e
e
b

)
s
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

f
o
y
t
i
l
i

b
a

i
l

e
r

.
n
o
i
t
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
e
k
r
a
m

l

a
e
r

g
n
i
t
a
e
r
c

t
s
o
c

,
t
e
k
r
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
c
o

l

e
h
t
(

t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

?
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

P
U
A

f
o

e
c
n
e
r
e
h
o
C

g
n
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

n
o
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

s
t
i

s
u
c
o
f
o
t

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c
o
t

y
c

i
l

o
p
U
E

s
i

t
I

.
s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

g
n
i
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

n

i

s
a

l
l

e
w

s
a

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
y
c
i
l

j

o
p

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
s
t
i

l

i

e
v
e
h
c
a

e
h
t

f
o
s
a
e
r
a

d
e
t
c
e
f
f
a

i

t
c
fl
n
o
c

e
h
t

n

i

a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

n

i

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

s
t
i

d
e
s
u
c
o
f

s
a
h
U
E

e
h
t

e
d
a
c
e
d

t
s
a

l

e
h
t

t
s
o
m
a

l

r
o
F

o
t

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
m
o
C
n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E

e
h
t

w
o

l
l

a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
y
c

j

i
l

o
p

s
t
i

i

g
n
v
e
h
c
a

i

n

i

y

l
l

a
i
t
n
a
t
s
b
u
s

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
m
o
C
n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E

e
h
t

s
t
s
i
s
s
a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

y
b

n
e
k
a
t
r
e
d
n
u

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
h
t
o
d
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

d
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
n

i

n
a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t
“

y
r
t
n
u
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
p

l

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

i

n
o
i
t
c
d
a
r
t
n
o
c

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
d
n
a

i

n
o
i
t
c
d
a
r
t
n
o
c

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

l

/
s
n
o
i
t
a
g
e
e
d
/
u
e
.
a
p
o
r
u
e
.
s
a
e
e
/
/
:
p
t
t
h

.
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
m
n
g

i
l

a

e
r
u
s
n
e

l
l
i

w

t
a
h
t

h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

?
s
e
c
i
l

i

o
p

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C
r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

)

m
t
h
.
n
e
_
x
e
d
n
i
/
p
o
o
c
_
v
e
d
/
a
k
n
a
_
i
r
s
_
u
e
/
a
k
n
a
_
i
r
s

l

l

125

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
y
t
i
l

a
m
r
o
n
o
t

n
r
u
t
e
r

a

d
n
a

r
e
t
l
e
h
s

l

e
b
a
r
u
d

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

i

e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t

:
s
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
g
a
m
a
d

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
r

d
n
a

r
i
a
p
e
R

n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
t
n

i

e
h
t

d
e
c
n
u
o
n
n
a

L
S
o
G
e
h
t

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
E
T
F

e
h
t

f
o
t
r
a
t
s

e
h
t

e
r
o
f
e
b

y
l
t
r
o
h
s

t
a
h
t

d
e
t
o
n

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

t
i

,
r
e
v
e
w
o
H

P
U
A
g
n
d
e
c
e
r
p

i

e
h
t

d
n
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
t
a
h
t
o
t

h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

t
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

y
l
t
c
n
i
t
s
i
d

a

h
t
i

w
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

s
s
a
m
a

f
o

)
P
U
A
r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

y
c

i
l

o
p

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

i

g
n
d
r
a
g
e
r

e
v
o
b
a

e
e
S
(

.
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

.
s
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
g
a
m
a
d

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
r

d
n
a

r
i
a
p
e
r

e
h
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

.
d
e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c
s
i
d

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

s
i
h
t

t
u
b

)

D
I
F
D

(

K
U
e
h
t

s
a
w
a
e
r
a

s
i
h
t

n

i

d
e
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
v
a
h
o
t

e
t
a
t
s

r
e
b
m
e
m
y
n
o
e
h
T

l

o
t

s
t
fi
e
n
e
b
d
e
d
d
a

P
U
A
s
a
h

t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

’
s
e
t
a
t
S

r
e
b
m
e
M
m
o
r
f
d
e
t
l
u
s
e
r

e
v
a
h
d
u
o
w

l

t
a
h
w

t
x
e
t
n
o
c

e
m
a
s

e
h
t

n

i

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

l

d
e
d
d
A
e
u
a
V
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

s
e
m
e
h
c
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

n

i

d
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

e
r
o
f
e
b

s
e
e
g
u
f
e
r

d
n
a

s
P
D

I

i

g
n
n
r
u
t
e
r
o
t

r
e
t
l
e
h
s

i

e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t

:
r
e
t
l
e
h
S

.
r
e
t
l
e
h
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
s
n
a
r
t

i

e
v
e
c
e
r
o
t

d
e
t
e
g
r
a
t

e
b

l
l
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

,
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p

a

s
A

.
r
e
t
l
e
h
s

l

e
b
a
r
u
d

r
o
f

)

2
1
0
2

(

i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

,
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A
r
o
f

n
a
P

l

i

t
n
o
J

s
t
i

n

i

n
a
p
a
J

i

s
d
n
W
e
c
a
e
P

:
e
r
a

s
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
O

j

r
o
t
c
e
S

s
t
i

l

r
a
u
c
i
t
r
a
p

n

I

d
n
a

y
t
i
n
a
m
u
H

r
o
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H

,

A
O
Z

,
a
k
n
a
L
V
W

,
R
O
C
M
U

,

C
D
S

,
a
k
n
a
L

i
r
S

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

C
S

,

C
R
D

,
B
S
A
s
O
G
N
e
h
t

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

)
S
P
O
N
U

,
R
C
H
N
U

,
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

,

M
O

I
(

N
U
e
h
t

h
t
i

w
g
n
k
r
o
w

i

s
i

L
S
o
G
e
h
t

,
d
e
n
o
i
t
n
e
m
y
d
a
e
r
l
a

s
A

?
s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

’
s
r
o
n
o
d
r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

i

s
e
c
i
l

o
p

s
’
L
S
o
G

.
l
l

e
w
y
r
e
v

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

’
s
r
o
n
o
d

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

L
S
o
G
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m
o
c

l

e
v
a
h

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
h
t

t
n
e
m
e
p
m
o
c

l

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

e
s
e
h
t
o
d
t
n
e
t
x
e

t
a
h
w
o
T

126

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 6 – SAMPLE SELECTION: FGDS, SSIS, OBSERVATIONS AND CASE STUDIES FOR AUP-2012 & AUP-2014

)
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

l

a
n
F
(

i

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
s
a
C
d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

,
s
I
S
S

,
s
D
G
F

:
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
S

l

l

e
p
m
a
S

–

6
x
e
n
n
A

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
&
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
r
o
f

i

s
e
d
u
t
S

i

s
e
d
u
t
s

e
s
a
C

.
s
b
O

s
I
S
S

s
D
G
F

y
e
v
r
u
S

0
5

0
5
3

0
0
4

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
t
c
a
t
n
o
c

y
e
K

s
p
u
o
r
G

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

)

%

(

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

r
e
p

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

2

0

2

2

1

7

2

0

2

3

2

9

3

0

3

3

2

1
1

2

0

2

2

2

8

4
7

0

7
7

1
9

5
0
1

7
4
3

1
2

0

2
2

6
2

0
3

9
9

:
d
e
y
e
v
r
u
s

l

a
t
o
T

t
o

l
i

P

l
l

u
F

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

r
a
n
n
a
M

i

a
y
n
u
v
a
V

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

a
o
a
c

l

i
l
l

a
B

l
a
t
o
T

y
e
K

s
n
o
i
s
s
u
c
s
i
d

p
u
o
r
g

s
u
c
o
f

:
s
D
G
F

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
-
i

m
e
s

:
s
I
S
S

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

:
.
s
b
O

n

i

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

d
e
t
c
e
p
x
e

r
o

(

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l

a
t
o
t

f
o

e
r
a
h
s

l
l

a
r
e
v
o

r
i
e
h
t

o
t

d
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r
r
o
c

i

h
c
h
w

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
n

e
h
t

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

,
s
p
u
o
r
g
s
u
c
o
F

i

-

.
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U
y
b
d
e
d
v
o
r
p
e
s
a
b
a
t
a
d
a
m
o
r
f

l

y
m
o
d
n
a
r
d
e
t
c
e
e
s
e
r
e
w

l

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d
h
c
a
e
n
h
t
i

i

W

.
)
4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
e
s
a
c
e
h
t

6
6
3

g
n

i
l
l

a
t
o
t
(

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

h
c
a
e

n

i

d
e
r
e
t
s
i
n
m
d
a

i

e
r
e
w

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

y
e
v
r
u
s

e
r
o
m

t
a
h
w
e
m
o
s

y
t
i
l

a
e
r

n

i

t
u
b

n
w
a
r
d

l

e
p
m
a
s

e
h
t

e
r
a

s
e
r
u
g
fi

e
v
o
b
a

e
h
T

.
d
e
n
n
a
p

l

n
a
h
t

t
u
o
d
e
i
r
r
a
c

e
r
e
w

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
e
r
o
m

,
y
l
r
a

l
i

m
S

i

.
)
7
4
3

f
o
d
a
e
t
s
n

i

127

.
y
a
w
e
m
a
s

e
h
t

n

i

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

d
e
n
o
i
t
r
o
p
p
a

e
r
e
w

i

s
e
d
u
t
s

e
s
a
c

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i

s
e
d
u
t
s

e
s
a
C

.
s
b
O

s
I
S
S

s
D
G
F

y
e
v
r
u
S

0
5

0
5
2

0
0
3

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
t
c
a
t
n
o
c

y
e
K

s
p
u
o
r
G

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

)

%

(

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

r
e
p

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

0

0

2

1

2

5

0

0

3

4

3

0

0

4

4

2

0
1

0
1

0

0

2

2

1

5

0

0

3
9

3
9

3
6

8
4
2

0

0

7
3

7
3

5
2

9
9

:
d
e
y
e
v
r
u
s

l

a
t
o
T

t
o

l
i

P

l
l

u
F

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

r
a
n
n
a
M

i

a
y
n
u
v
a
V

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

a
o
a
c

l

i
l
l

a
B

l
a
t
o
T

r
e
t
f
a
d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

l

y
m
o
d
n
a
r

t
o
n
e
r
e
w
y
e
h
t

t
a
h
t

t
p
e
c
x
e
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
r
o
f

s
a

y
a
w
e
m
a
s

e
h
t
n

i

l

y
e
v
r
u
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
e
h
t

r
o
f
d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
r
e
w

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

-
t
a
B

n

i

3

d
n
a

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M
n

i

4

,
i
h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

n

i

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

5

y
e
v
r
u
s

o
t

d
e
d
c
e
d

i

s
a
w

t
I

.
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

h
c
a
e

r
o
f

t
e
s

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

s
e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

f
o

s
n
o
i
t
r
o
p
o
r
p

)
y
e
v
r
u
S

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

128

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

t
e
e
m
o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

y

l
l

a
u
q
e

s
s
e

l

r
o
e
r
o
m

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
s
o
h
t

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

p
u

d
e
d
v
d

i

i

n
e
h
t

e
r
e
w

s
e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

I

l

.
a
o
a
c
i
t

e
s
o
p
r
u
p

l

l

u
f
e
s
u
o
n
d
e
v
r
e
s
e
v
a
h
d
u
o
w
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
d
e
s
i

i

l

m
o
d
n
a
R
.
d
e
y
e
v
r
u
s
e
r
e
w
P

I

e
h
t
y
b
d
e
t
c
e
e
s
-
e
r
p
s
e
g
a

l

l
l
i

l

v
y
n
O

.
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d
h
c
a
e
r
o
f

i

.
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

a

s
a
w
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

y
n
a

n

i

e
n
o
y
n
a

d
n
a

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

n
e
e
b

t
e
y

t
o
n

d
a
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
c
n
i
s

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Annex 7 – Survey Questionnaire – AUP-
2012 Final Evaluation

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Synthesis of results

1. AUP-2012 FINAL SURVEY

Two types of questionnaires (AUP-2012 Final and AUP-2014 Baseline) were developed 
and administered in four districts – three in the north, Kilinochchi Mullaitivu and Mannar 
and in the east Batticaloa.

1.1 AUP-2012 Final Survey Distribution in Four Districts

The AUP-2012 final survey was conducted for a randomly selected sample of 364 house-
holds from among the AUP-2012 beneficiaries in 11 Grama Niladari Divisions in all four 
districts. Table 1.1 illustrates the distribution for the AUP-2012 Final Survey.

Table 1.1 - AUP-2012 Final Survey Distribution in the Four Districts

Number of Questionnaires Administered Per Grama Niladari Division by District

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitheevu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

52

13

2

7

4

GN_Division Uttupulam

Uriyan

Jayanthinagar

Uthayanagar-West

Vivehanandanagar

Iralappalai

Puthuveli

Savariyarpuram

Koppaveli

Maylavettuwan

Eralakkulam

92

39

37

52

13

2

7

4

92

39

37

41

10

67

41

10

67

Total

78

92

76

118

364

129

1.2 AUP-2012 Final Survey Analysis

Table 1.2.1 - Respondent Family Category /Vulnerability

Respondent Family Category- District 

District

Respond-
ent Cate-
gory

Female Headed 
Household

Aged (Over 
60 yrs)

Disabled

Total Above

None of above

Total

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

24

31

23

25

7

9

27

23

81

22

8

3

35

43

78

10

4

45

55

100

6

5

34

58

92

7 15

20

27

23

56

15

5

0

37 22

63 54

0

29

71

0

54

64

0

46

54

8

147

219

2

39

60

100 76

100 118

100

364

100

Table 1.2.2 - Waiting time between application and first instalment

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No % No % No % No % No %

2

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

5

1

64

82

82

89

70

92

89

75

305

84

12

15

9

10

5

7

28

24

54

15

How long 
Await After 
Application 
for First 
Instalment?

< 2 
Months

2-6 
Months

> 6 
Months

Total

78

100

92

100

76

100

118

100

364

100

130

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.3 - Completed House Size

District

House Size 
Sq. Ft

<400

401 - 500

501 - 525

526 - 545

546 - 560

561 - 625

>625

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

0

7

19

29

1

6

2

0

11

30

45

3

9

2

0

19

49

9

5

3

2

0

22

56

10

6

3

2

64

100

87

100

2

16

23

18

2

1

11

73

3

22

32

25

3

1

15

100

1

0

0

1

0

0

3

42

91

95

96

151

0

2

1

0

2

1

8

12

16

1

13

28

47

2

4

5

99

100

323

100

Table 1.2.4 - Completed House Hall Size

Hall Size 
Square 
Feet)

100-200

201-300

Above 301

Total

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No

%

No

%

24

39

1

64

38

61

2

100

28

57

2

87

32

66

2

21

44

8

29

60

11

98

99

171

1

0

1

0

141

11

53

44

3

100

73

100

99

100

323

100

Table 1.2.5 - Completed House Bedroom 01 Size

Bedroom 
01 Size 
Sq. Ft.

90-125

126-150

Above 
151

Total

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No % No % No

%

43

16

5

64

67

25

8

81

93

5

1

6

1

48

15

10

66

21

14

1

98

0

1

173

99

134

0

16

54

41

5

100

87

100

73 100

99

100

323

100

131

Table 1.2.6 - Full House Bedroom 02 Size

Bedroom 02 
Size

District

Sq. Ft.

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

60-100

101-125

126-140

Above 141

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No % No %

9

36

13

6

14

56

20

9

40

47

0

0

46

54

0

0

17

38

12

6

23

52

16

8

2

0

2

0

68

21

121

37%

97

98

122

0

0

12

38

4

64

100

87

100

73

100

99 100

100

100

Table 1.2.7 - Full House Kitchen Size

Full House Kitchen 
Size Square feet

30-70

71-100

Above 100

Total

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No % No % No %

12

50

2

19

78

3

4

75

8

5

86

9

2

64

7

3

88

10

96

97

114

2

1

2

1

191

18

35

59

6

64

100

87

100

73 100

99 100

323

100

Table 1.2.8 - Living Condition Improved by the Permanent Housing

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

Living Condition 
Improved by Permanent 
House

Yes

Total

78

78

92

92

76

118

364

76

118

364

132

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.9 - Level of Living Condition Improvement

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

Level Six

Level Seven

Level Eight

Level Nine

Level Ten

0

6

10

25

37

78

0

8

13

32

47

100

0

7

17

30

38

92

0

8

18

33

41

2

12

18

32

12

3

16

24

42

16

0

7

11

45

55

0

6

9

38

47

2

32

56

132

142

1

9

15

36

39

100

76 100 118

100

364 100

Level of Living 
Condition 
Improvement

Total

Table 1.2.10 - Level of Relationship Improvement with other Community Members

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Level Five

Level Six

Level Seven

Level Eight

Level Nine

Level Ten

0

2

9

15

21

31

78

0

3

12

19

27

40

100

0

1

9

16

31

35

92

0

1

10

17

34

38

2

3

5

19

26

21

3

4

7

25

34

28

0

1

3

12

50

52

0

1

3

10

2

7

26

62

42 128

44 139

1

2

7

17

35

38

100

76 100 118 100 364

100

Level 
Relationship 
with Others  
by Housing

Total

133

Table 1.2.11 - Important Benefits Obtained from the Project

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu

Mannar 

Batticaloa 

Total

No

% No

%

No % No % No %

71

2

91

3

87

1

95

1

41

8

54

11

65

10

55 264

73

8

21

6

3

2

4

3

3

1

3

1

18

9

24

12

19

24

16

20

43

36

12

10

Important 
Benefits 
Obtained 
from the 
Project

Safe House

Improved 
Relationship 
with 
Neighbours

Peaceful Life

Independent 
Life

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100

118

100 364 100

Table 1.2.12 - Satisfaction Level of Received Benefits

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu

Mannar 

Batticaloa 

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Satisfaction 
Level of 
Received 
Benefits

Level Six

Level Seven

Level Eight

Level Nine

Level Ten

0

5

18

33

22

0

6

23

42

28

Total

78 100

0

5

19

42

26

92

0

5

21

46

28

1

6

14

29

26

1

8

18

38

34

0

3

27

61

27

0

3

23

1

19

78

52 165

23 101

0

5

21

45

28

100

76 100 118

100 364 100

134

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.13 - Reason for Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

74

95

90

98

54

71

81

69 299

82

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

4

5

1

0

2

2

0

0

3

3

0

0

1

1

0

0

3

4

17

14

20

1

5

7

4

3

12

1

14

18

10

0

0

0

1

8

1

27

1

5

3

7

0

Reason for 
Satisfaction 
or Dissatis-
faction

Permanent 
House

Because 
of House 
Repairing 
not Getting 
any Other 
Supports

Repaired 
Permanent 
House

Living in 
Harmony with 
Nature

Basic Needs 
Fulfilled

Social Status 
Improved

Total

78

100

92

100

76

100

118 100 364 100

Table 1.2.14 - Involvement in Design and Building

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu

Mannar 

Batticaloa 

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Involvement 
of Design 
and Building

Level Six

Level Seven

Level Eight

Level Nine

Level Ten

2

2

9

37

28

3

3

12

47

36

Total

78 100

4

4

10

45

29

92

4

4

11

49

32

9

19

17

25

6

12

25

22

33

8

0

2

23

51

42

0

2

19

15

27

59

43 158

36 105

4

7

16

43

29

100

76 100

118 100 364

100

135

Table 1.2.15 - Participation in the design and building of the house

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

50

64

62

67

64

84

31

26 207

57

8

10

5

5

3

4

28

24

44

12

20

26

25

27

5

7

58

49 108

30

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

3

1

4

1

0

1

0

2

3

1

1

How did you 
participate 
in the 
development 
of your 
house?

Shown the 
Plan and We 
Accepted

All aspects 
of the 
construction 
were as we 
desired

All aspects 
of the 
construction 
were with our 
cooperation

Plan not 
Shown to Us

We had very 
little or no 
involvement

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100

118 100 364 100

Table 1.2.16 - Involvement in other’s housing construction

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Yes

No

46

32

59

41

60

32

65 41

35 35

54

46

77

41

65 224

35 140

62

38

Were You or 
Your Household 
Members Involved 
Other Community 
Members’ Housing 
Construction?

Total

78

100

92

100 76

100 118

100 364

100

136

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.17 - How Involved or reason for non- involvement

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

34

44

42

46

26

34

41

35 143

39

2

3

1

1

8

10

16

17

2

0

2

3

0

3

1

0

1

0

2

1

3

1

1

0

15

20

1

14

18

0

20

17

23

6

9

5

1

4

8

35

10

4

9

1

16

3

21

2

4

6

13

17

11

12

14

18

15

13

53

15

17

22

20

22

4

5

23

19

64

18

Explain 
What Way 
You Coop-
erated or 
If Did Not 
Why Not

We Jointly 
Procured Building 
Materials

Assisted in the 
Purchasing of 
Materials

Assisted in 
Material 
Transportation

We Gave/
Received Financial 
Assistance

We Gave/Received 
Unskilled Labour 
Assistance

We Did Not Ask 
Help

Others Did Not 
Ask Help

As a Community 
We Did Not 
Interfere in Others 
Affairs

Total

78 100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

Table 1.2.18 - Training Received on the Project by the Beneficiary Family

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Any Body Received 
Training form 
Project?

Yes

No

63

15

81

19

80

12

87

13

3

4

73

96

96

22

81 242

19 122

66

34

Total

78 100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364

100

137

Table 1.2.19 - Recipient of Construction Training on the Project

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Household Head

Training 
Received 
House-
hold 
Member

Spouse

Son

Daughter

48

14

1

0

62

18

1

0

Not Applicable

15

19

Total

78 100

50

28

2

0

12

92

54

30

2

0

3

0

0

0

4

0

0

0

59

32

4

2

50 159

27

74

3

2

7

2

44

20

2

1

13

73

96

21

18 121

33

100

76 100

118 100 364

100

Table 1.2.20 - Type of Training Received by the family members

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No

%

No %

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

2

2

1

63

81

80

87

1

1

94

80

238

65

Formal 
Constriction 
Training

Type of 
Training

Informal On Site 
Training Under 
Skilled Artisan

Other/Advice

Not Applicable

0

15

78

0

19

100

0

12

92

0

2

3

13

73

96

1

21

1

3

18

121

1

33

100

76 100

118

100

364

100

Total

Table 1.2.21 - Whether Training Used to Get Job

District

Total

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar

Batticaloa

No %

No

% No % No % No %

2

60

16

3

77

20

2

76

14

2

83

15

0

1

0

1

75

99

1

95

22

1

5

80 232

19 127

1

64

35

78

100

92

100

76 100

118

100 364

100

Since 
Completing the 
Training has it 
been Used to 
get a Job?

Yes

No

Not 
Applicable

Total

138

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.22 - Formal Technical Guidance Received in the Project

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

Yes

No

74

4

95

5

90

2

98

2

47

29

62 117

99 328

38

1

1

36

90

10

Did You Receive 
Any Kind of Formal 
Technical Guidance 
or Assistance in the 
Construction of Your 
House?

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

Table 1.2.23 - Type of Guidance and Assistance Received from the Project

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

46

59

52

57

18

24

66

56 182

50

32

41

40

43

11

14

21

18 104

29

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

45

59

26

22

71

20

2

0

3

0

4

1

3

1

6

1

2

0

Did you 
Receive any 
Technical 
Guidance or 
Assistance?

Continuous 
Supervision

Quality 
Checking

Advice/
Consultation

Problem 
Solving

Not answered

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100

118

100 364

100

139

Table 1.2.24 - Respondents’ View on the Received Technical Assistance

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu

Mannar

Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No %

No

%

How 
Good 
was the 
Technical 
Assis-
tance/ 
Guid-
ance?

Total

Very Good

71

91

87

95

Good

Fair

Poor

Not 
Applicable

5

2

0

0

6

3

0

0

4

1

0

0

4

1

0

0

44

30

0

1

1

58 107

91

39

0

1

1

8

2

0

1

7

2

0

1

309

47

5

1

2

85

13

1

0

1

78 100

92

100

76

100 118

100

364

100

Table 1.2.25 - Explanations for Opinion on Technical Guidance

District

Explanation 
of Level of 
Technical 
Assistance/ 
Guidance

Continuous 
Supervision

Technical 
Assistance

Community 
Consultation for 
Decisions

Unavailable for 
Guidance

No Comments

Not Applicable

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

69

88

86

93 35

46 110

93 300

82

7

2

0

0

0

9

3

0

0

0

5

1

0

0

0

5 36

47

1

1

0

0

0

1

1

2

1

1

1

3

7

0

0

0

1

6

55

15

0

4

0

0

1

1

1

3

1

0

0

1

Total

78

100

92

100 76

100 118

100 364

100

140

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.26 - Other Support Received by the Project

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

Apart from Housing 
and Training has Project 
Provided Any Other 
Support?

Yes

Total

78

78

92

76

118

364

92

76

118

364

Table 1.2.27 - Apart from Housing and Training What Other Support Received

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

76

97

91

99

66

87

55

47 288

79

0

0

0

0

10

13

62

53

72

20

2

3

1

1

0

0

1

1

4

1

What was 
the support 
you 
received?

Sanitation 
Facilities

Sanitation 
Facilities and 
Agricultural 
Crops

Sanitation 
Facility and 
Access Roads

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364

100

Table 1.2.28 - Beneficiary Opinion on Additional Support Received

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Fair

Good

Very Good

How Good Do 
You Thing it 
Was?

Total

9

34

35

78

12

44

45

100

6

36

50

92

7

1

39 40

54 35

1

53

46

5

48

65

4

21

41 158

55 185

6

43

51

100 76 100 118 100 364

100

141

Table 1.2.29 - Explanation for the Opinion

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

44

56

65

71

15

19

10

11

2

1

3

37

31 148

41

1

21

18

47

13

19

78

24

100

17

92

18

73

96

60

51 169

46

100

76 100

118

100 364

100

Still continuing the 
project assisted 
farming activities

Our Living 
Condition 
Improved

Not Answered

Explain 
the 
reasons 
for 
your 
opinion

Total

Table 1.2.30 - Benefits requested or Not

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

Did you 
request this 
support 
or was it 
offered 
without 
you 
requesting?

We Requested

Community 
Requested

We were Offered

Community was 
Offered

Not Applicable/
Not Answered

6

4

26

19

8

5

33

24

3

2

28

37

3

2

0

0

0

0

30 76 100

40

0

0

0

0

14

10

45

28

12

8

23

16

38 175

24

84

6

4

48

23

21

18

66

18

23

29

22

24

Total

78

100

92

100 76 100 118 100 364

100

Table 1.2.31- Desired Support not received

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No % No % No % No %

Yes

No

Not Sure

58

15

5

74

19

6

75

13

4

82

14

4

43

28

5

57

37

7

95

20

3

81 271

17

3

76

17

74

21

5

78

100

92 100

76 100 118 100 364 100

Was there any other 
kind of support that 
you would have 
liked but you did not 
receive?

Total

142

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table 1.2.32 - Desired Support

Sanitation Facilities

Agricultural Crops

Livestock

Drinking Water 
Wells

Improved Access 
Roads

Community 
Facilities

Not Applicable

What 
other 
support 
did you 
desire?

Total

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

9

0

37

11

3

1

12

0

47

14

4

1

17

78

22

100

12

0

36

23

6

2

13

92

13

0

39

2

5

4

3

7

5

25 27

36

7

2

5

2

7

3

12

12

31

32

9

0

10

10

35

17

26 108

27

93

8

0

23

5

10

5

30

26

6

1

14 31

41

22

19

83

23

100 76 100 118 100 364

100

Table 1.2.33 - Suggestions to Improve Project

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

22

28

20

22

20

26

39

33 101

28

2

3

1

1

2

3

9

8

14

4

54

78

69

100

71

92

77

54

71

70

59 249

68

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

Provided more 
livelihood 
assistance

Increase grant to 
be provided

Not Answered

What 
would 
suggest to 
Improve 
the 
project?

Total

Table1.2.34 - Borrowing Finance for Housing

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

Did you Borrow 
Money to build your 
house?

Yes

No

74

4

95

5

90

2

98

68

89 105

89 337

93

2

8

11

13

11

27

7

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

143

Table 1.2.35 - Problems Arising from Borrowings

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar  Batticaloa 

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

50

26

4

64

33

5

63

27

2

68

29

2

64

84

4

8

5

11

84

22

13

71 261

19

11

79

27

72

22

7

Has the 
borrowing 
caused you any 
problems?

Yes

No

Not 
Applicable

Total

78 100

92

100

76 100

118 100 364 100

Table1.2.36 - Types of Problems Arising due to Borrowings

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

25

32

31

34

8

11

43

36 107

29

6

2

8

3

13

17

4

5

28

78

36

100

12

13

14

18

22

19

54

15

4

8

8

29

92

4

9

9

0

0

42

55

2

3

2

3

8

66

2

18

0

0

14

12

26

7

32

12

16

34

29 103

28

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

Constant 
quarrels in the 
family

Lost Pawned 
Items

Lost Livelihood

Difficult to 
repay the loan

Pressure from 
Creditors

Not Applicable

Problems 
caused due 
borrowings

Total

144

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 7 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION

Table1.2.37 - Variation from the original plan of the house

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No %

No

% No % No % No %

How has the 
current state 
of your house 
varied from 
the original 
plan given?

Increased size 
of the house

Re-planed as 
per Vashtu

Added an 
extra room

Luxury floor 
tiles

Luxury doors 
and Windows

No variation 
from original 
plan

25

32

88

96

35

46

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

53

68

0

0

0

0

4

0

0

0

0

4

1

0

2

2

1

0

3

3

2

0

1

0

0

2 150

41

0

1

0

0

1

1

2

2

0

0

1

1

36

47 115

97 208

57

Total

78

100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

Table 1.2.38 - Incomplete Features in the House

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No % No %

2

3

4

4

42

54

59

64

5

8

7

6

5

17

5

11

65

55 174

48

Doors and 
Windows

Plastering of 
the walls

Floor Finishes

14

18

10

11

18

24

10

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

3

0

0

4

8

0

3

52

14

2

4

1

1

20

26

19

21

43

57

33

28 115

32

What 
features of 
the original 
plan still 
remains 
incomplete?

Roof

Painting of 
Walls

All features 
completed as 
per plan

Total

78 100

92

100

76 100 118 100 364 100

145

Other than the door and windows the remaining works are not compulsory to the project 
minimum standard of the housing programme. During the survey the beneficiaries stated 
that the beneficiaries utilized the project money for other works without fixing doors and 
windows or with the expectation of putting a high quality doors and windows. About 
14% of the beneficiaries not fully finished (project works completed) with the expectation 
of fitting the tiles for the floor.

Table 1.2.39 - Reason for Current Status of the Construction

District

Kilinochchi  Mullaitivu  Mannar 
No % No
4

3

2

0

4

0

% No % No % No %

Batticaloa 

Total

0

0

6

Delays in 
release of 
funds

Delays in 
supply of 
materials
Unavailability 
of skilled 
labour
Project money 
not sufficient
Not Applicable

What are 
the reason 
for the 
current 
state of 
your con-
struction

Total

2

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

3

1

3

13

11

48

13

73
76

96 105
100 118

89 306
100 364

84
100

2

0

20

54
78

3

0

26

69
100

1

0

13

74
92

1

0

14

80
100

0

1

2

Table 1.2.40 - Proposal to Complete Outstanding Works

District
Kilinochchi Mullaitivu Mannar Batticaloa
No %

No

Total

% No % No % No %
52
62

53 191

21

16

72

47

60

66

0

4

0

5

0

2

0

2

3

6

4

8

4

7

3

6

7

19

2

5

2
25
78

3
32
100

1
23
92

1
25
100

3

1
66

2
1
50
38
76 100 118 100 364 100

8
35 139

4
41

How do you 
propose to 
complete 
the 
incomplete 
features?

Expect 
supplementary 
grant
Will borrow 
informally
Complete it 
progressively 
from own 
savings
Not sure how
Not Applicable

Total

146

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 8 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL SURVEY

i

r
o
n
e
s

y
n
a
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

l

,
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a
n
u

s
i

e
e
t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

f
i

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

S
D
L
O
H
E
S
U
O
H
Y
R
A
C
I
F
E
N
E
B

I

)
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

r
a

i
l
i

m
a
f

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

s
y
a
s
o
h
w

r
e
b
m
e
m
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l

e
d
o
c

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

P
U
A

n
o
i
t
a
c

i
l

p
p
a

f
o
e
t
a
D

e
c
n
a
t
p
e
c
c
a

f
o
e
t
a
D

:
)
e
m
a
n

(

N
G

r
e
b
m
u
n

t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
R

)
r
e
b
m
u
n

e
d
o
c

y
e
v
r
u
s
(

t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

f
o
e
m
a
N

:
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

y
e
v
r
u
S

l

a
n
F

i

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
–

e
r
i
a
n
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q
y
e
v
r
u
S

–

8

x
e
n
n
A

e
r
a
u
q
s
(

E
Z
I
S

)
t
e
e
f

l

)
y
p
p
a

i

h
c
h
w
e
t
a
c
d
n

i

i
(

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

f
o
e
p
y
T

o
t

t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

e
h
t

i

f
o
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
R

l

)
t
e
e
f

s
r
i
a
p
e
R

e
r
a
u
q
s
(

E
Z
I
S

e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

?
s
e
i
r
o
g
e
t
a
c

e
s
e
h
t

f
o
y
n
a
o
t
n

i

l
l

a
f

t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

e
h
t

s
e
o
D

)
t
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

f
i
(

e
e
t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

e
z
i
S

-

s

m
o
o
r

d
e
d
d
A

e
z
i
S

2
m
o
o
R

d
e
B

e
z
i
S
-

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

e
z
i
S

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

e
z
i
S
-

t
e

l
i

o
T

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
1

r
e
h
t
O

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_

r
e
h
t
O

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
2

r
e
h
t
O

d
e
r
i
a
p
e
r

a
e
r
a

f
o
o
R

a
e
r
a

l

a
t
o
t

s
l
l

a
W

d
e
r
i
a
p
e
r

e
z
i
S

1
m
o
o
R

d
e
B

e
z
i
S

l
l

a
H

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
d
a
e
h

l

e
a
m
e
F

)
r
e
v
o
d
n
a

s
r
a
e
y

0
6

(

d
e
g
A

e
v
o
b
a

e
h
t

f
o
e
n
o
N

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
D

147

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

A
N

y
l
t
a
e
r
G

,
2

o
N

.
1

s
e
Y

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

e
e
f

u
o
y
o
D

r
u
o
y

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

s
a
h

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

s
i
h
t

n

i

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

2

?
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

l
l

a

t
a

t
o
N

n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

e
e
f

u
o
y
o
d

h
c
u
m
w
o
h

,
s
e
y

s
a
h

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

s
i
h
t

n

i

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

f
I
I

f
o

s
h
t
n
o
m
6

>

s
h
t
n
o
m
6

–

2

s
h
t
n
o
m
2

<

e
h
t

r
o
f

l

y
p
p
a
o
t

t
p
m
e
t
t
a

t
s
r
fi

r
u
o
y

e
d
a
m

.
3

.
2

.
1

u
o
y

e
c
n
i
s

t
i
a
w
o
t

e
v
a
h

u
o
y

d
d

i

g
n
o

l

w
o
H

s
a
w

t
n
e
m
a
t
s
n

l

i

t
s
r
fi

e
h
t

l
l
i
t

t
n
a
r
g

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

?
u
o
y
o
t

d
e
s
a
e
e
r

l

1

e
m
o
c
n

I

y
l
k
e
e
W

n
e
h
W
e
c
n
S

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
O

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

e
g
A

i

p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
R

l

r
e
b
m
e
M
y
l
i

m
a
F

f
o
e
m
a
N

148

s
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
Q

0
1

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

?
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

r
u
o
y

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

3

,
2

o
N

.
1

s
e
Y

a

n
o
s
i
h
t

e
c
a
p

l

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
I
(

)

0
1
-
1

f
o
e
a
c
s

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

e
e
f

u
o
y
o
D

u
o
y

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
e
m

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

?
n

i

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
r
a

i

s
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

r
u
o
y

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

s
a
h

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

4

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

A
N

y
l
t
a
e
r
G

l
l

a

t
a

t
o
N

n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

e
e
f

u
o
y
o
d

h
c
u
m
w
o
h

,
s
e
y

f
I

r
u
o
y

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

s
a
h

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

f
o

0
1

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

e
h
t

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
e
m

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

i

s
p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

a

n
o
s
i
h
t

e
c
a
p

l

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

?
n

i

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
r
a

u
o
y

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

)

0
1
-
1

f
o
e
a
c
s

l

5

.
2

o
N

.
1

s
e
Y

?
u
o
y

d
e
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

s
i
h
t

s
a
H

6

ANNEx 8 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL SURVEY

/

A
N

y
l
t
a
e
r
G

l
l

a

t
a

t
o
N

u
o
y

s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
u
o
y

e
r
a

d
e
fi
s
i
t
a
s

w
o
H

0
1

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a

n
o
s
i
h
t

e
c
a
p

l

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

)

0
1
-
1

f
o
e
a
c
s

l

?
d
e
v
e
c
e
r

i

e
v
a
h

i

l

n
a
p
x
E

d
e
fi
s
i
t
a
s
s
i
D

n
o
i
s
i
v
r
e
p
u
s

s
d
n
u
f

h
t
i

w

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s

-
n
o
c

f
o

d
e

l
l

l

fi
u
F

s
d
e
e
N

.
r
e
h
t
O

.

8

.

7

t
c
e
r
i

D

.

6

c
i
s
a
B

.

5

n

i

i

g
n
v
L

i

.

4

y
n
o
m
r
a
h

r
i
a
p
e
r
o
t

l

e
b
A

.

3

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
R

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
P

t
o
N

.

2

.

1

e
r
u
t
a
n

e
s
u
o
h

g
n
i
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

r
e
h
t
o
y
n
A

e
s
u
o
H

f
o

l

e
v
e

l

r
u
o
y

r
o
f

s
n
o
s
a
e
r

e
h
t

e
r
a

t
a
h
W

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s
s
i
d

r
o
n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

8

9

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
n
a
p
x
E

i

l

s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

e
f
i
l

t
n
e
d
n
e
p

e
f
i
l

-
n
o
i
t
a
e
R

l

h
t
i

w

i

,
p
h
s

s
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
N

i

r
e
h
t
O

.

6

o
N
/
e
l
t
t
i
L

.

5

-
e
d
n

I

.

4

l

u
f
e
c
a
e
P

.

3

e
v
o
r
p
m

I

.

2

e
f
a
S

.

1

e
s
u
o
H

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

i

t
s
o
m
e
h
t

e
r
a

y
a
s

u
o
y

l

d
u
o
w

t
a
h
W

s
i
h
t

m
o
r
f

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
e
v
a
h

u
o
y

s
t
fi
e
n
e
b

7

?
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

y
l
t
a
e
r
G

l
l

a

t
a

t
o
N

0
1

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

a

d
e
y
a
p

l

e
v
a
h

u
o
y

t
a
h
t

l

e
e
f

u
o
y
o
d

r
a
f

w
o
H

d
e
n
g
i
s
e
d

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

r
u
o
y
w
o
h

i

g
n
d
c
e
d

i

n

i

t
r
a
p

a

n
o
s
i
h
t

e
c
a
p

l

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

?
t
l
i

u
b

d
n
a

0
1

)

0
1
-
1

f
o
e
a
c
s

l

149

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
l

e
b
a
c

i
l

p
p
A

t
o
N

.
6

.
r
e
h
t
O

.
9

a

s
A

.

8

s
r
e
h
t
O

.

7

d
d

i

e
W

.

6

i

l

n
a
p
x
E

e
r
e
f
r
e
t
n

i

s
r
e
h
t
o
n

i

s
r
i
a
f
f
a

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

k
s
a

t
o
n

d
d

i

r
o
f

k
s
a

t
o
n

t
o
n
o
d

e
w

l

p
e
h

r
o
f

l

p
e
h

d
c
e
r
/
e
v
a
g

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
W

.

5

d
c
e
r
/
e
v
a
g

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

e
W

.

4

.
h
c
e
t

d
c
e
r

e
c
n
a
d
u
g

i

e
W

.

3

/
e
v
a
g

/
y
r
n
o
s
a
m

y
r
t
n
e
p
r
a
c

r
u
o
d
c
e
r

s
l
l
i

k
s

e
W

.

2

/
e
v
a
g

d
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

e
W

.

1

y
l
t
n
o

i

j

.
2

o
N

.
1

s
e
Y

r
e
h
t
O

.

5

-
h
g
u
a
D

.

4

n
o
S

.

3

e
s
u
o
p
S
.

2

f
o
d
a
e
H
1

.

i

:
n
a
p
x
E

l

r
e
t

H
H

d
e
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
c

u
o
y

y
a
w

t
a
h
w
n

i

i

l

n
a
p
x
e

e
s
a
e
P

l

y
n
a

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

s
i
h
t

n

i

y
d
o
b
y
n
a

s
a
H

s
i

o
h
w
k
s
a

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

)

m
o
h
w
h
t
i

w

t
a
h
w
g
n
o
d

i

?
t
o
n

y
h
w

,
t
’
n
d
d

i

u
o
y

f
i

r
o

3
1

e
v
i
s
n
e
t
n

i

r
o
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
m
r
o
f

r
o
f

t
p
m
o
r
p

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

4
1

)
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

n

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

e
t
i
s
-
n
o

r
o
f

k
s
a

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

5
1

?

m
o
h
w

,

o
s

f
I

)
t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r
o
t

i

p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

?
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

f
o
t
r
a
p

s
a

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

-

r
e
h
t
O

.

7

l

i

n
a
p
x
E

y
r
e
v

d
a
h

e
W

.

6

r
u
O

.

5

s
e
r
i
s
e
d

o
n

r
o
e
l
t
t
i
l

s
t
n
a
w
d
n
a

l

-
e
v
o
v
n

i

t
o
n

e
r
e
w

t
n
e
m

d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

t
o
n

s
a
w

n
a
P

l

.

4

n
w
o
h
s

s
u
o
t

s
t
c
e
p
s
a

e
h
t

f
o

l
l

A

.

3

-
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
r
e
w
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
h
t
i

w

-
a
r
e
p
o
o
c

n
o
i
t

s
t
c
e
p
s
a

e
h
t

f
o

l
l

A

.

2

-
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
r
e
w
n
o
i
t

d
e
r
i
s
e
d

e
w

s
a

e
s
u
o
H

.

1

s
a
w
n
a
p

l

o
t

n
w
o
h
s

e
w
d
n
a

s
u

d
e
t
p
e
c
c
a

w
o
h

i

g
n
d
c
e
d

i

n

i

t
r
a
p

a

d
e
y
a
p

l

t
o
n

r
o
d
e
y
a
p

l

1
1

?
t
l
i

u
b

d
n
a

d
e
n
g
i
s
e
d

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

r
u
o
y

e
v
a
h

u
o
y

t
a
h
t

l

e
e
f

u
o
y

y
h
w
n
a
p
x
e

l

i

e
s
a
e
P

l

150

.
2

o
N

.
1

s
e
Y

l

k
r
o
w
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
r
u
o
y

f
o
y
n
a

r
o
u
o
y
o
D

e
h
t

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
e
m

r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w

r
e
h
t
e
g
o
t

2
1

?
s
r
i
e
h
t

r
o
e
s
u
o
h
r
u
o
y
g
n
v
o
r
p
m

i

i

n

i

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 8 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL SURVEY

l

e
b
a
c

i
l

p
p
A

t
o
N

.
4

.
7

/

A
N

.
6

.
5

.
4

.
3

.
2

.
1

6
1
0
2

5
1
0
2

4
1
0
2

3
1
0
2

2
1
0
2

1
1
0
2

/

A
N

.

6

-
e
R

t
’
n
a
C

r
e
b
m
e
m

.

5

s
r
a
e
Y
4
>

3

-

r
a
e
y
1

s
h
t
n
o
m
4

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
<

.

4

.

3

.

2

.

1

s
r
a
e
Y

r
a
e
y

1
-

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

n

i

d
e
n
o
i
t
n
e
m
n
o
s
r
e
p

h
c
a
e

r
o
f

”
o
n
“

)

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

h
t
n
o
m
n

i

l
l

fi

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

s
a

d
e
n
o
i
t
n
e
m
n
o
s
r
e
p

h
c
a
e

r
o
f

r
a
e
y

d
n
a

8
1

)

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

n

i

b
o

j

a

g
n
i
t
t
e
g

?
b
o

j

e
h
t

t
e
g

y
e
h
t

d
d

i

n
e
h
W

r
e
b
m
u
n

n

i

l
l

fi

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

n
o
s
r
e
p

h
c
a
e

r
o
f

s
h
t
n
o
m
d
n
a

s
r
a
e
y

f
o

)

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

n

i

d
e
n
o
i
t
n
e
m

9
1

?
b
o

j

t
a
h
t
o
d

y
e
h
t

d
d

i

g
n
o

l

w
o
H

E
L
T
T
I
L
A

O
N

.

3

Y
L
N
O

,
S
E
Y

T
O
L
A

,
S
E
Y

.

2

.

1

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

l

a
m
r
o
f

f
o
d
n
k

i

y
n
a

i

e
v
e
c
e
r

u
o
y

i

d
D

?
e
s
u
o
h

s
i
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

e
c
n
a
d
u
g

i

r
o
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

s
t
i
s
i
v

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
n
a

s
n
a
p

l

e
s
u
o
h

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

t
n
e
d
n
o
p
s
e
r

f
i

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

y
e
h
t

f
i

i

g
n
k
s
a

y
b

t
p
m
o
r
p

,
d
e
s
u
f
n
o
c

d
e
m
e
e
s

0
2

)
f
f
a
t
s

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

y
b

151

i

.
.
.
.
n
a
p
x
E

l

e
t
i
s
-
n
o

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

r
e
d
n
u

d
e

l
l
i

k
s

n
a
s
i
t
r
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s

-
n
o
C

i

g
n
n
a
r
T

i

r
e
h
t
O

.

3

l

a
m
r
o
f
n

I

.

2

l

a
m
r
o
F
.
1

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
m
r
o
f
(

i

?
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

f
o
e
p
y
t

i

h
c
h
W

e
h
t

n

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

e
t
i
s
-
n
o
R
O
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

d
e
n
o
i
t
n
e
m
n
o
s
r
e
p

h
c
a
e

r
o
f

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

f
o
e
p
y
t

h
c
a
e

k
c
e
h
c

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

e
b
o
t

–

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

f
o
e
p
y
t

r
e
h
t
o
R
O
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

)

i

d
e
fi
c
e
p
s

6
1

.
3

/

A
N

.
2

O
N

.
1

S
E
Y

d
e
s
u

y
e
h
t

e
v
a
h

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

r
o
”
s
e
y
“

k
c
e
h
c

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

)

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

n

i

e
h
t

l

g
n
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
c
n
S

i

?
b
o

j

a

t
e
g
o
t

t
i

I
(

7
1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

A
N

.
8

s
n
o
s
a
e
R

r
e
h
t
. O
7

s
t
n
e
m
m
o
C

o
N

.

6

t
o
n

s
e
o
D

o
t

r
a
e
p
p
a

-
l

w
o
n
k

e
b

l

e
b
a
e
g
d
e

.

5

-
l
i

a
v
a
n
U

r
o
f

l

e
b
a

e
c
n
a
d
u
G

i

.

4

-
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

-
l
u
s
n
o
C
y
t

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
a
t

s
n
o
i
s
i
c
e
D

.

3

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

.

2

-
u
n
i
t
n
o
C

-
i
v
r
e
p
u
S

n
o
i
s

s
u
o

.

1

:
r
e
w
s
n
a

r
u
o
y

i

l

n
a
p
x
e

e
s
a
e
P

l

3
2

/

A
N

.

5

r
o
o
P

.

4

r
i
a
F

.

3

d
o
o
G

d
o
o
G
y
r
e
V

.

2

.

1

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

e
h
t

k
n
h
t

i

u
o
y
o
d

d
o
o
g
w
o
H

i

?
s
a
w
e
c
n
a
d
u
g
/
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

2
2

.
2

O
N

.
1

S
E
Y

s
a
h

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

d
n
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h
m
o
r
f

t
r
a
p
A

r
e
h
t
o
y
n
a

h
t
i

w
u
o
y

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

?
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

r
o
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

s
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

,
l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

r
o
f

t
p
m
o
r
p

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

4
2

r
e
h
t
O

.

5

l

m
e
b
o
r
P

.

4

l

i

n
a
p
x
E

i

g
n
v
o
S

l

i

/
e
c
v
d
A

.

3

-
a
t
l
u
s
n
o
C

n
o
i
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
Q

.

2

-
u
n
i
t
n
o
C

.

1

i

g
n
k
c
e
h
c

-
r
e
p
u
s

s
u
o

?
t
i

s
a
w

t
a
h
w

,

o
s

f
I

152

n
o
i
s
i
v

f
o
e
p
y
t

n

i

l
l

fi

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

1
2

)
e
c
n
a
d
u
g

i

r
o
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

.

/

A
N

.
9

.
.
.
r
e
h
t
. O
8

i

l

n
a
p
x
E

e
l
t
i
t

d
n
a
L

d
e
e
D

-
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
F

y
t

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

i

g
n
k
n
i
r

D

k
c
o
t
s
e
v
L

i

-
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
A

n
o
i
t
a
t
i
n
a
S

s
s
e
c
c
A

s
d
a
o
R

r
e
t
a
W

s
l
l

e
W

s
p
o
r
c

l

a

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

.

7

.

6

.

5

.

4

,

3

.

2

.

1

?
d
e
v
e
c
e
r

i

u
o
y

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

e
h
t

s
a
w

t
a
h
W

5
2

,

1

s
e
x
o
b

n

i

n
w
o
h
s

s
n
o
i
t
p
o
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
f

t
p
m
o
r
p

)

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

t
x
e
n

n

i

6
-
4

/

A
N

.

5

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
V

.

4

d
o
o
G

.

3

r
i
a
F

.

2

r
o
o
P

.

1

?
s
a
w

t
i

k
n
h
t

i

u
o
y
o
d

d
o
o
g
w
o
H

6
2

o
s
l
a

d
n
A

.
)
e
l
t
i
t

d
n
a

l

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

i

i

g
n
n
a
t
b
o
n

i

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 8 – SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – AUP-2012 FINAL SURVEY

/

A
N

.
9

/

A
N

.
7

r
e
h
t
O

.

8

e
l
t
i
t

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
A

d
n
a

l

h
t
i

w

-
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
F

y
t

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

i

g
n
k
n
i
r

D

k
c
o
t
s
e
v
L

i

-
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
A

n
o
i
t
a
t
i
n
a
S

s
s
e
c
c
A

s
d
a
o
R

r
e
t
a
W

s
l
l

e
W

s
p
o
r
c

l

a

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

.

7

.

6

.

5

.

4

,

3

.

2

.

1

r
e
h
t
. O
6

i

:
n
a
p
x
E

l

e
r
u
s
s
e
r
P

m
o
r
f

s
r
o
t
i
d
e
r
c

.

5

t
l
u
c
ffi
D

i

y
a
p
e
r
o
t

n
a
o

l

.

4

-
i
l

e
v

i
l

t
s
o
L

d
o
o
h

.

3

d
e
n
w
a
P

s

m
e
t
i

t
s
o
L

.

2

n

i

s
l
e
r
r
a
u
q

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

t
n
a
t
s
n
o
C

.

1

.
3

/

A
N

.
2

O
N

.
2

O
N

.
1

S
E
Y

.
1

S
E
Y

t
s
e
g
g
u
s

u
o
y

l

d
u
o
w

t
a
h
w

,
d
e
k
s
a

e
r
e
w
u
o
y

f
I

?
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

e
v
o
r
p
m

i

o
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

y
e
n
o
m
w
o
r
r
o
b
o
t

d
a
h

u
o
y

e
v
a
H

?
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

i

e
s
u
o
h

r
u
o
y

1
3

2
3

i

?
e
v
e
c
e
r

?
t
a
h
w

,

o
s

f
I

0
3

?
s

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

y
n
a

u
o
y

d
e
s
u
a
c

s
i
h
t

s
a
H

3
3

s
i
h
t

i

p
k
s

:
r
o
t
a
r
e
m
u
n
e
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

I
(

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

r
e
w
s
n
a

e
h
t

)
”
o
n
“

f
i

s
i

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

4
3

?
h
c
h
w

i

,

o
s

f
I

153

/

A
N

.

5

-
u
m
m
o
C

s
a
w
y
t
i
n

d
e
r
e
f
f
o

.

4

e
r
e
w
e
. W
3

d
e
r
e
f
f
o

d
e
t
s
e
u
q
e
R

y
t
i
n
u
m

-

m
o
C

.

2

-
e
r

e
. W
1

d
e
t
s
e
u
q

t
i

s
a
w

r
o
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

s
i
h
t

t
s
e
u
q
e
r

u
o
y

i

d
D

?
t
i

g
n
i
t
s
e
u
q
e
r

u
o
y

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
d
e
r
e
f
f
o

e
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

r
u
o
y

r
o
f

s
n
o
s
a
e
r

e
h
t

l

i

n
a
p
x
E

7
2

8
2

e
r
u
s

t
o
N

.

3

O
N

.

2

S
E
Y

.

1

t
a
h
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

f
o
d
n
k

i

r
e
h
t
o
y
n
a

e
r
e
h
t

s
a
W

t
o
n

i

d
d

u
o
y

t
u
b

d
e
k

i
l

e
v
a
h

l

d
u
o
w
u
o
y

9
2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
-
a
i
r
a
V
o
N

m
o
r
f

n
o
i
t

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o

n
a
p

l

.
8

e
r
u
t
a
e
f

l
l

A

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

.
7

r
e
p

s
a

n
a
p

l

/

A
N

.
8

/

A
N

.
7

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
r
e
h
t
. O
7

r
e
w
o
P

l

r
a
o
S

.

6

r
o
s
r
o
o
d

s

w
o
d
n
w

i

y
r
u
x
u
L

.

5

s
e

l
i
t

r
o
o
fl

y
r
u
x
u
L

.

4

a
r
t
x
e

n
a

d
e
d
d
A

m
o
o
r

.

3

d
e
n
a
p
-
e
R

l

r
e
p

s
a

u
t
h
s
a
V

.

2

d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

f
o
e
z
i
s

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

e
h
t

.

1

e
s
u
o
h

r
u
o
y

f
o
e
t
a
t
s

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

s
a
h
w
o
H

u
o
y
o
t

n
e
v
g

i

n
a
p

l

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
i
r
a
v

r
u
o
y

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

d
e
e
r
g
a

u
o
y

i

h
c
h
w
n
o
d
n
a

5
3

?
e
s
u
o
h

154

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
r
e
h
t
O

.

6

g
n
i
t
n
a
P

i

s
l
l

a
w

.

5

f
o
o
R

.

4

s
e
h
s
i
n
fi

r
o
o
F

l

.

3

g
n
i
r
e
t
s
a
P

l

.

2

e
h
t

f
o

s
l
l

a
w

&
s
r
o
o
D

s

w
o
d
n
w

i

.

1

l
l
i
t
s

n
a
p

l

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
t

f
o
s
e
r
u
t
a
e
f

t
a
h
W

l

?
e
t
e
p
m
o
c
n

i

i

s
n
a
m
e
r

6
3

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
r
e
h
t
. O
7

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

e
c
n
a
d
u
g

i

-
i
v
r
e
p
u
s

-
i
g
i
r
o
m
o
r
f

n
o
i
s

n
a
p

l

l

a
n

r
o
o
P

e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a
n

I

n
o
i
t
a
v
e
D

i

.

6

.

5

.

4

-
l
i

a
v
a
n
U

f
o
y
t
i
l
i

b
a

d
e

l
l
i

k
s

r
u
o
b
a

l

.

3

n

i

s
y
a
e
D

l

l

f
o
y
p
p
u
s

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

.

2

n

i

s
y
a
e
D

l

f
o
e
s
a
e
e
r

l

s
d
n
u
f

.

1

e
t
a
t
s

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

s
n
o
s
a
e
r

e
h
t

e
r
a

t
a
h
W

l

)
y
p
p
a

t
a
h
t

l
l

a

e
t
a
c
d
n

i

i
(

?
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

r
u
o
y

f
o

7
3

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
r
e
h
t
. O
6

e
r
u
s

t
o
N

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
C

r
o
f

l

y
p
p
A

w
o
h

-
o
r
p

t
i

s
n
a
o

l

k
n
a
B

.

5

.

4

.

3

l

y
e
v
i
s
s
e
r
g

n
w
o
m
o
r
f

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

y

l
l

a
m
r
o
f
n

i

w
o
r
r
o
b

l
l
i

. W
2

t
c
e
p
x
E

l

-
e
p
p
u
s

y
r
a
t
n
e
m

t
n
a
r
g

.

1

e
h
t

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

e
s
o
p
o
r
p

u
o
y
o
d
w
o
H

r
u
o
y

n

i

s
e
r
u
t
a
e
f

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
n

i

i

g
n
d
n
a
t
s
t
u
o

8
3

?
e
s
u
o
h

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 9 – LIST OF SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
O

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

L
S
o
G

L
S
o
G

L
S
o
G

L
S
o
G

L
S
o
G

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

d
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
S
-
i

m
e
S

f
o
t
s
i
L

–

9

x
e
n
n
A

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U

-

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

i

K
e
t
a
c
o
s
s
A
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
E
&

r
e
d
n
e
G

i

n
a
y
a
K

l

.
B

.
s

M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

,
r
e
g
a
n
a
M

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

n
a
h
K
r
e
v
n
A

.
r

M

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

y
t
u
p
e
D

n
a
h
t
n
a
n
a
m
h
t
a
P

.

K

.
r

M

r
e
c
ffi
O
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
l
i

b
o
M

r
i

m
a
h
S

.
F
.
S
.
M

.
r

M

r
e
e
n
g
n
E

i

i

r
o
n
e
S

n
a
y
a
h
c
n
u
r
A
m
a
g
n

i
l

a
g
a
y
n
V

i

.
r

M

r
e
c
ffi
O
E
&
N

n
a
v
a
s
a
V

.

A

.
r

M

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
&
E
T
F

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
l
t
i
T

e
m
a
N

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

,
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c
-
b
u
S
&

r
o
t
a
v
i
t
o
M

)
i
v
e
h
T
(

i

i

a
k
b
m
a
u
r
A

l

.
s

M

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
O
e
t
a
t
S

i

n
o
i
s
i
v
D
y
t
t
a
p
u
v
a
r
E

i

,
g
n
n
n
a
P

l

f
o
r
o
t
c
e
r
i

D

.
t
s
s
A

a
r
a
k
a
n
u
r
a
K

.
r

M

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
R

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

b
a
h
e
R

f
o
y
r
t
s
i
n
M

i

,
y
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

y
h
t
o
s
a
n
a
n
g
a
v
S

i

.

V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

,
y
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

/

t
n
e
g
A
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

s
e
l
r
a
h
C

.

M
.
S
P.

.
s
r

M

155

i

e
c
n
v
o
r
P

n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

,
r
e
t
s
i
n
M

i

i

f
e
h
C

i

n
a
r
a
w
s
e
n
g
W
V
C
e
c
i
t
s
u
J

.

.

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

,
y
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D

i

n
a
r
a
w
h
s
e
g
a
N

i

a

l
l
i

l

p
a
a
b
o
G

.
r

M

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
a
k
n
a
L

n
o
i
s
i
V
d
l
r
o
W
&

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

y
t
i
n
a
m
u
H
r
o
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
O

e
l
t
i
T

e
m
a
N

156

H
H

f

L
V
W

H
H

f

L
S
H
H

f

L
S
H
H

f

L
S
H
H

f

L
S
H
H

f

L
V
W

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

i

r
o
n
e
S

)

n
a
r
a
M

(

n
a
r
a
m
a
y
e
J

.
S

.
J

y
t
r
a
P

f
o
f
e
h
C

i

.
I
.

A

k
a
i
s
o
t
r
a
B

e
e
r
i
s
e
D

r
o
t
c
e
r
i

D

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

m
a
n
t
a
r
a
g
a
n
a
K
h
s
e
n
D

i

.
r

D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

n
a
a
p
e
d
n
a
a
K
P.

a
p
h
s
u
P

.
S

r
e
g
a
n
a
M

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

r
e
g
a
n
a
M
E
&
M

i

n
m
a
n
e
B

j

x
e
A

l

.
r

M

h
t
i
j

u
S

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O
d
e
F

i

l

-

r
o
t
c
e
r
i

D

l

a
n
o
Z

j

n
a
a
r
u
s
e
J

y
e
l
s
e
L

.

A

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 10 – LIST OF FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (AUP-2012 & AUP-2014)

Annex 10 – List of Focus Group 
Discussions (AUP-2012 & AUP-2014)

The following are the focus group discussions which the evaluation team undertook.

Date

23.3.16

23.3.16

24.3.16

24.3.16

28.3.16

31.3.16

1.4.16

4.4.16

4.4.16

5.4.16

5.4.16

District

Batticaloa

Batticaloa

Batticaloa

Batticaloa

Village

Karaikadu

Welikkakandy

Karadiyanaaru

Kilhulwewa

AUP-2012 or AUP-2014

AUP-2012

AUP-2012

AUP-2014

AUP-2014

Kilinochchi

Vivekanandanagar

AUP-2012

Mannar

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Mullaitivu

Puthuveli

Ganeshapuram

Irannapallai

Maruthanagar

Mulliwaikal East

AUP-2012

AUP-2012

AUP-2012

AUP-2014

AUP-2014

Suthanthirapuram

AUP-2014

157

E
S
U
O
H

E
S
U
O
H

D
E
T
E
L
P
M
O
C

D
E
C
N
E
M
M
O
C

I

S
N
O
I
S
I
V
D
N
G
/
S
D

D

I

E
M
A
N

I

T
C
R
T
S
I
D

P
U
A

4
1
0
2
/
3
0
/
4
1

3
1
0
2
/
8
0
/
1
0

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

,
n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

7
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B

m
a
v
i
s
a
m
a
r
a
P

.

V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

2
1
0
2

4
1
0
2
/
5
0
/
4
1

3
1
0
2
/
8
0
/
1
0

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

,
n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

3
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B

m
a
r
a
h
t
n
u
s
a
m
o
S

.

K

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

2
1
0
2

4
1
0
2
/
4
0
/
7
0

3
1
0
2
/
7
0
/
5
0

y

l
l

e
v
a
p
p
o
K

,
y
d
n
a
k
a
k

i
l

e
W

1
2
0
0
/
K
G
W
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B

i
r
a
h
o
n
a
m
a
v
e
h
T
.
K

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

2
1
0
2

-

-

-

-

-

-

l

l

a
u
K

,
r
u
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

l

l

a
u
K

,
r
u
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

r
a
g
a
N
a
y
d
o
v
r
a
S
,
l
u
t
t
i
K

-

-

-

i

l

h
t
a
v
a
a
m
a
K

&
m
a
g
u
m
n
a
h
S

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

4
1
0
2

j

a
r
a
d
n
u
o
S

P

/

i

m
a
s
a
h
d
n
a
K
S

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

4
1
0
2

i

b
m
a
h
t
a
y
i
r
e
P

i

m
a
s
a
h
d
n
a
K

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

4
1
0
2

i

i

h
c
a
r
a
K

5
1
0
2
/
2
1

4
1
0
2
/
0
1

,
t
s
e
W

r
a
g
a
n
a
k
n
a
n
a
k
e
v
V

i

I

8
7
0
0
/
V
V
/
R
A
K
/
L
I
K

r
a
m
u
k
a
v
S

l

.
R

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

2
1
0
2

5
1
0
2
/
4
0

5
1
0
2
/
6
0

4
1
0
2
/
8
0

4
1
0
2
/
6
0

3
1
0
2
/
1
1

3
1
0
2
/
4
0

4
1
0
2
/
0
1

i

i

h
c
a
r
a
K

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
e
n
a
G

2
0
0
0
/
P
N
G
/
R
A
K
/
L
I
K

h
a
m
m
a
e
V

l

.

V

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

2
1
0
2

4
1
0
2
/
8
0

i

i

h
c
a
r
a
K

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
e
n
a
G

6
0
0
0
/
P
N
G
/
R
A
K
/
L
I
K

i

l

v
e
h
c
t
u
r
A
K

.

i
l

a
s
u
M

,
i
l

e
v
u
h
t
u
P

9
0
0
0
/
T
U
P
/
S
U
M
N
A
M

/

i

a
y
p
u
n
a
V
C
A
.
S

.

.

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

2
1
0
2

r
a
n
n
a
M

2
1
0
2

u
p
p
u
r
r
i
i

d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

n

i
l

a
s
o
R

,
i
a

l
l

i

a
p
p
a
n
a
r
I

5
2
0
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M

y
r
a
M
n
a
r
a
p
a
y
a
h
T

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

2
1
0
2

4
1
0
2
/
9
0

3
1
0
2
/
4
0

,
i
a

l
l

i

a
p
p
a
n
a
r
I

2
0
0
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M

l

a
a
m

r
i

N
n

i
l

o
r
a
K

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

2
1
0
2

u
p
p
u
r
r
i
i

d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

a
s
a
r
a
y
a
h
t
U

Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

.

O
N

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0
1

1
1

2
1

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
&
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
–

i

s
e
d
u
t
s

e
s
a
c

f
o
t
s
i
L

–

1
1

x
e
n
n
A

158

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 11 – LIST OF CASE STUDIES – AUP-2012 & AUP-2014

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

,
t
s
e
w

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

i

h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

,
t
s
e
w

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

i

h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

u
p
p
u
r
r
i
i

d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

I

P
K
T
P

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

I

P
K
T
P

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

,
i
a

l
l

i

a
p
p
a
n
a
r
I

7
2
2
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M

A
K
I
S
M
A

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

2
1
0
2

-

-

-

-

i

v
e
d
a
k

i
l
l

a
M
n
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
S

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
l
i

K

4
1
0
2

r
a
m
u
K
h
s
e
r
u
S

h
a

i
l
l

e
S

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

4
1
0
2

r
a
m
u
k
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
S

i

m
a
n
a
m
a
r
b
u
S

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

4
1
0
2

r
e
t
e
P

y
n
o
h
t
n
A

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
l
i

K

4
1
0
2

E
S
U
O
H

E
S
U
O
H

D
E
T
E
L
P
M
O
C

D
E
C
N
E
M
M
O
C

I

S
N
O
I
S
I
V
D
N
G
/
S
D

D

I

E
M
A
N

I

T
C
R
T
S
I
D

P
U
A

Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

.

O
N

3
1

4
1

5
1

6
1

7
1

159

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

m
u
m
n
m
o
t

i

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

,
d
e
v
a
p

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

,
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

t
s
r
fi

e
h
t

f
o
e
m

i
t

e
h
t

t
a

d
e
v
a
p

t
o
n
m
o
o
r
A

h
c
u
s

s
a

d
e
s
u

r
e
g
n
o

l

o
n

e
r
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
h
t

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

e
h
t

-

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
3
2

-

0
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

E
T
M
n

i

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

1
0

–

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
3
2

-

9
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

E
T
M
n

i

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

2
0

e
t
o
N

r
o
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

)

6
1
0
2

(

.

o
N

e
t
a
D

.
s
b
O

y
d
u
t
s

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
b
d
n
a
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
fi
r
i
e
h
t

f
o
t
r
a
p
s
a

k
o
o
t
r
e
d
n
u
m
a
e
t
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

e
h
t
h
c
h
w

i

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
e
h
t

e
r
a
g
n
w
o

i

l
l

o
f

e
h
T

.
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
r
o
f

)

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
&
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

(

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
t
s
i
L

–

2
1

x
e
n
n
A

160

l

i

y
e
t
a
d
e
m
m

i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

y
p
u
c
c
o
-
e
r
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
a

e
k
a
t

o
t

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

d
e
n
r
a
w

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
-
n
U
m
o
r
f

r
e
c
ffi
O

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

3
0

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
2
2

-

1
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

y
d
n
a
k
a
k

i
l

e
W

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

t
n
a
h
p
e
e

l

d

l
i

w
a

y
b

d
e
g
a
m
a
d

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
H

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
0

5
0

6
0

7
0

8
0

9
0

0
1

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 12 – LIST OF OBSERVATIONS (AUP-2012 & AUP-2014)

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
a
b

y

l
l

a
c
i
t
i
r
c

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

d
n
a

t
e
y

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
o
n

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

r
a
g
a
N
a
h
t
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
8
2

l

y
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
t

s
k
c
o
b

l

B
E
S
C
h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
d
o
M

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

r
a
g
a
N
a
h
t
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
9
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
a
n
a
G

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
9
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
a
n
a
G

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
9
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

l

u
h
t
i
K

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

l

u
h
t
i
K

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

l

u
h
t
i
K

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

r
a
g
a
N
a
h
t
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
8
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

r
a
g
a
N
a
h
t
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
8
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

r
a
g
a
N
a
h
t
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
8
2

)

b
a
l
s

r
e

l
l

fi

,
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

d
u
m

,
s
e
m
a
r
f

w
+
d

t
s
a
c
-
e
r
p

,
d
e
c
a
f

r
i
a
f
(

e
s
u
o
H

l

e
d
o
M

t
o
n

s
i

i

y
e
n
m
h
c
o
s
l
a

;
)
’
s
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

e
s
u

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f
(

d
e
s
u

t
o
n

s
i

t
e

l
i

o
T

e
l
t
t
o
b

s
a
g

h
t
i

w
d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K
s
a

,
d
e
s
u

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
5
1

-

3
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

m
a
r
u
p
a
a
y
a
a
M

l

l

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

h
c
r
a
M
9
2

l

y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

r
a
n
n
a
M

h
c
r
a
M
1
3

l

y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

r
a
n
n
a
M

h
c
r
a
M
1
3

l

y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

r
a
n
n
a
M

h
c
r
a
M
1
3

l

y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

r
a
n
n
a
M

h
c
r
a
M
1
3

i

a

l
l
i

i

p
a
n
a
r
I

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
1
0

i

a

l
l
i

i

p
a
n
a
r
I

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
1
0

1
1

2
1

3
1

4
1

5
1

6
1

7
1

8
1

9
1

0
2

1
2

2
2

3
2

4
2

5
2

6
2

7
2

161

e
t
o
N

r
o
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

)

6
1
0
2

(

.

o
N

e
t
a
D

.
s
b
O

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

,
l
l

a
r
e
v
O

.
h
c
u
s

s
a

l

e
b
a
s
u

t
o
n

s
i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t

i

s

i

w
o
d
n
w
d
n
a

s
r
o
o
d

e
m
o
s

:
g
n
v

i

i
l

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

l

e
b
a
t
i
u
s

a

n

i

t
o
n

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

a
o
t

e
u
D

.
t
e
y

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
o
n

e
r
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
g
n
i
s
s
i

m
e
r
a

d
e
g
a
m
a
d

y
l
t
r
a
p

s
i

f
o
o
r

e
h
t

t
n
e
d
c
c
a

i

e
t
a
n
u
t
r
o
f
n
u

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

n
w
o
T

i
l
i

K

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

n
w
o
T

i
l
i

K

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

n
w
o
T

i
l
i

K

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

t
s
a
E

t
s
a
E

t
s
a
E

i

i

i

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

u
M

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

u
M

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

u
M

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

9
2

0
3

1
3

2
3

3
3

4
3

5
3

6
3

7
3

8
3

9
3

0
4

h
c
a
e
r

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

,

-

H
N
U
y
b

d
e
t
a
t
s

n
o
i
t
a
n
m
r
e
T

i

l

i

a
c
ffi
o
e
h
t

e
t
i
p
s

n

I

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

i

a

l
l
i

i

p
a
n
a
r
I

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

l
i
r
p
A
1
0

8
2

e
t
o
N

r
o
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

)

6
1
0
2

(

.

o
N

e
t
a
D

.
s
b
O

162

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 13 – PRESENTATION OF CASE STUDIES

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

,
n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V
-

7
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B
–
m
a
v
i
s
a
m
a
r
a
P

.

V

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

i

s
e
d
u
t
S

e
s
a
C
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
P

–

3
1

x
e
n
n
A

4
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
4
1

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

3
1
0
2

t
s
u
g
u
A
1
0

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

a

-

y

l
l

i

a
n
g
i
r

O

.
)
l

o
o
h
c
s

n

i

e
n
o
d
n
a

p
o
h
s

e
h
t

n

i

t
u
o
g
n
p
e
h

l

i

e
n
o

,
r
u
o
b
a

l

l

a
u
s
a
c

n

i

e
n
o

(

s
n
o
s

e
e
r
h
t

d
n
a

e
f
i

w

i

,
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

–

e
v
fi

f
o
y

l
i

m
a
F

.
n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

d
n
a

e
s
u
o
h

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g
m
o
r
f

i

e
r
c
a
¾
d
e
n
a
t
b
o
–
7
0
0
2

l
l
i
t

l

s
s
e
d
n
a

l

s
a
W

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

.

w
a
h
s
k
c
i
r
o
t
u
a

n
a
+

p
o
h
s

a
e
t

r
e
g
r
a

l

a
+

e
s
u
o
h

P
U
A
-
U
E
w
e
n

e
h
T

–
w
o
N

.
s
n
o
s
r
e
p

e
v
fi

r
o
f

e
t
a
u
q
e
d
a

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

p
o
h
s

y
t
t
e
p

l
l

a
m

s

a

+

e
t
i
s

e
m
a
s

t
a

t
u
h

d
u
m
d
e
h
c
t
a
h
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

s
u
h
t

0
0
0
,
7
1
.
s
R

l

y
n
o
d
e
l
t
t
e
s

e
v
a
h

t
u
b

e
s
i
t
r
o
m
a
o
t
o
g
o
t

s
h
t
n
o
m
e
e
r
h
T

.
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

r
o
f
0
0
0

,

0
6

.
s
R

f
o
n
a
o

l

B
D
R

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
e
s
i
l

a
t
i
p
a
c

s
a
w

s
i
h
T

.
s
e
i
r
d
n
u
s

d
n
a

s
k
n
i
r
d

t
f
o
s

s
l
l

e
s
o
s
l
a

d
n
a

,
s
k
c
a
n
s

d
n
a

a
e
t

s
e
v
r
e
s

p
o
h
s

y
t
t
e
p
’
0
2
x
’
0
2

e
h
T

.
r
e
v
e
o
s
t
a
h
w

s
t
b
e
d
o
N

.
d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

n
e
h
w
d
n
a

s
a

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

y

l
i

a
d
m
o
r
f

t
n
e
p
s
0
0
0
5
2

,

.
s
R

f
o
e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

–

)

0
0
0
,
0
5
5
.
s
R

(

t
e
g
d
u
b

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
n
a

n
a
p

l

e
h
t

n

i

i

d
e
fi
c
e
p
s

s
a

y
l
t
c
a
x
e

t
l
i

u
b

e
s
u
o
H

.
l
l

e
w
n
w
o
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

r
o
f

d
a

i

e
b

l

d
u
o
w
e
r
e
h
t

i

g
n
p
o
H

.
l
l

e
w

s
’
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

a
m
o
r
f

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

r
e
t
a
w
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

i

t
u
b

y
a
w
a

s
r
e
t
e
m
0
0
1
r
e
v
i
r

e
h
t
o
t
o
g
o
t

e
v
a
h

i

,
g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
F

.

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

j

r
o
a
m
a

s
i

r
e
t
a
w

t
u
b

l

,
y
p
p
u
s

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

s
i

e
r
e
h
T

.

0
0
0
7
-
6

.

.
s
R

t
u
o
b
a

t
s
o
c

s
i
h
T

.
p
o
h
s

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

r
e
h
t
o
e
r
o
t
s
o
t

d
n
a

y
r
d

d
o
o
w
e
r
fi

i

g
n
p
e
e
k

r
o
f

e
r
o
t
s

’
0
1
x
’
7

a

d
e
d
d
A

.
r
a
f

l

.
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
n
o
d

y

l
l

a
i
t
r
a
p

e
h
t

d
n
a

d
e
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

e
b
o
t

e
v
a
h

s
l
l

a
w
e
h
t

e
r
e
h
w

s

m
o
o
r

w
e
f

a

r
o
f

t
p
e
c
x
e

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
H
–

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
C

.
f
l
e
s

y
b

d
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

r
e
h
t
o

l
l

A

.
s
e

l
i
t

f
o
o
r

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

–

l

y
e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

d
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
M

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.
t
n
e

l
l

e
c
x
e

s
i

e
f
i
l

w
o
n

t
u
b

,
s
n
o
o
s
n
o
m
e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

i

g
n
d
o
o
fl

s
a

l
l

e
w

s
a

s
t
n
a
h
p
e
e

l

d
n
a

s
e
k
a
n
s

h
t
i

w

s

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

f
o
t
o

l

a

d
a
h

e
v
a
h

,
y
l
s
u
o
v
e
r
P

i

.
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w

r
e
h
t
o
o
t

t
u
o
d
e
r
i
h

s
i

y

l
l

a
n
o
i
s
a
c
c
o
t
u
b

l

,
y
n
o
e
s
u

l

a
n
o
s
r
e
p

r
o
f

s
i

w
a
h
s
k
c
i
r
o
t
u
a

e
h
T

.
p
o
h
s

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

s
i

e
m
o
c
n

i

f
o
e
c
r
u
o
s

i

n
a
M

.
s
y
a
d

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

g
n
i
r
u
d

t
r
o
f
m
o
c

n
a
b
r
u

e
m
o
s

d
e
c
n
e
i
r
e
p
x
e

i

g
n
v
a
h

e
t
i
p
s
e
d

l

e
y
t
s
e
f
i
l

l

a
r
u
r

e
h
t

r
e
f
e
r
P

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
i
p
s
A

s
t
a
e
r
h
T

163

.
l
l

e
w

s
a

r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u

n

i

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
F

.
l
l

e
w

s
a

s
r
e
p
e
h

l

e
h
t

n

i

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

.
.
.
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

e
d
i
s
t
u
o
m
o
r
f

r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e

l
l
i

k
S

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

,
n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V
-

3
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B
–
m
a
r
a
h
t
n
u
s
a
m
o
S

.

K

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
2
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

164

4
1
0
2

y
a
M
4
1

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

3
1
0
2

t
s
u
g
u
A
1
0

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

l
l

a
m

s

a

t
l
i

u
b

d
n
a

7
0
0
2

n

i

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
n
a

l

e
r
c
a
½
a

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
d
a
h

y
e
h
t

r
a
w
e
h
t

y
b

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

g
n
e
b

i

e
r
o
f
e
B

.
e
s
u
o
h

t
l
i

u
b

l

y
w
e
n

e
h
t

n

i

e
v

i
l

l

e
p
u
o
c

l

d
o
e
h
t

l

y
n
O

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

d
e
l
t
t
e
s

d
n
a

d
e
i
r
r
a
m

l
l

a

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

e
v
fi

,
7
f
o
y

l
i

m
a
F

.
t
u
h

d
u
m

n

i

i

g
n
n
w
a

n
a

s
a

d
e
s
u

g
n
e
b

i

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
i

i

h
c
h
w

f
o
s
t
e
e
h
s

g
n
fi
o
o
r

e
h
t

,

A
O
Z

y
b

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

d
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

e
t
i
s

e
h
t
o
t

n
r
u
t
e
r

n
O

.
r
a
w
e
h
t

y
b

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

n
e
h
w
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

e
h
t

n

i

t
o
n

d
n
a

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

h
t
i

w
d
e
y
a
t
s

l

e
p
u
o
c

e
h
T

l

a
r
u
r

s
a

d
e
n
a
r
t

i

s
a
w
e
f
i

W

.
p
u

t
o
h
s

s
a
h

n

l
i

k

e
h
t

r
o
f

d
o
o
w
e
r
fi

f
o
e
c
i
r
p

e
h
t

d
n
a

.

0
3
4
s
R

r
o
f

g
n

i
l
l

e
s

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
i

t
u
b
o
g
a

r
a
e
y

a

.

0
5
6
s
R

t
a

l

d
o
s

e
r
e
w

s
k
c
i
r
b

–

s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b

l

e
b
a
t
fi
o
r
p

a

t
o
n

s
i

t
u
b

,
y
b
r
a
e
n

n

l
i

k

k
c
i
r
b

n
w
o
s
i
h

s
a
h

d
n
a
b
s
u
H

.
t
s
e
v
r
a
h

r
e
t
f
a

y
d
d
a
p

y
r
d
o
t

d
e
s
u

g
n
e
b

i

s
i

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

l

d
o
e
h
t

f
o
t
s
e
R

.
e
s
u
o
h
w
e
n

e
h
t

f
o
t
n
o
r
f

e
h
t

.
f
f
o
g
n
y
a
p

i

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
i

e
h
s

i

h
c
h
w

,
y

l
l

a
c
o

l

n
a
o

l

0
0
0

,

0
5

.
s
R

a

n
e
k
a
t

d
a
h
o
h
w

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

a

d
n
a

)

,

0
0
0
0
3
.
s
R

(

r
a
t
a
Q
n

i

d
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

n
o
s

a

y
b

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
a
w
0
0
0
,
0
8
.
s
R

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

e
h
t

–

0
0
0
,
0
3
6
.
s
R

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h
w
e
n

e
h
t

f
o
t
s
o
c

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
T

e
n
o
d

e
b
o
t

i

g
n
v
a
p

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

-

e
s
u
o
h

n
o
k
r
o
w
g
n
d
n
a
t
s
t
u
O

i

.
e
c
n
a
n
fi
o
r
c
m

i

l

a
m
r
o
f
n

i

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
e
r
r
u
c
n

i

s
h
k
a

l

0
1
.
R

f
o
t
b
e
d

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
n
a

s
a
h

,
s
i
h
t

m
o
r
f

t
r
a
p
A

.
y

l
l

a
c
o

l

s
h
t
r
i
b

d

l
i

h
c

n

i

g
n
i
t
s
i
s
s
a

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

d
n
a

e
f
i

w
d
m

i

n
o
i
t
a
t
s
e
f
n

i

e
k
a
n
s

d
n
a

t
n
a
h
p
e
E

l

.
d
e
e
n

t
n
e
g
r
u

–

y
r
n
o
s
a
m

r
o
f

,

0
0
0
0
2
1

i

,
g
n
g
d
e
r
d

r
o
f

0
0
0

,

0
8

.
s
R

t
s
o
c

–

l
l

e
w

l
l

a
m
S

i

.
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

r
o
f

l
l

e
w
d
o
o
h
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

d
n
a

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
f

y
a
w
a

e
r
t
e
m
o

l
i

k

a

t
s
o
m
a

l

r
e
v
i
r

–

r
e
t
a
w

s
a
w
m
e
b
o
r
p

l

t
s
e
g
g
B

i

.
l
l
i

b

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

h
t
i

w

s
t
n
e
m
a
t
s
n

l

i

n

i

i

d
a
p

e
b
o
t

e
v
a
h

l

d
u
o
w

t
s
o
c

r
u
o
b
a

l

t
u
b

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

y
b

e
n
o
d

e
b

l
l
i

w
–

e
n
o
e
b
o
t

g
n
i
r
i

w

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

–

n
e
v
g

i

n
o
i
t
c
e
n
n
o
c

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E
•

l

.
y
d
d
a
p

i

g
n
y
r
d

r
o
f

d
e
s
u

a
e
r
a

-

f
o
o
r

t
u
o
h
t
i

w

s
d
n
a
t
s

l
l
i
t
s

n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

k
c
o
b

l

t
n
e
m
e
C
f
o
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

r
a
w

t
s
o
P
•

e
s
i

w
r
e
h
t
o
y
p
p
a
h

y
r
e
V

.
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

o
N

.

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

a
o
s
l
a

e
r
e
w

.
n
o
i
s
n
e
t
x
e

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

r
o
f

d
e
s
u
w
o
n
A
O
Z

y
b

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

t
e
e
h
s

f
o
o
R

.

C
R
V
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

t
o
g

,
s
e

l
i
t

f
o
o
r

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

h
t
i

w

s
a
w

s
A

.
y

l
l

i

a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

t
i

t
o
g

r
e
v
e
n

,
y
b
r
a
e
n

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

h
g
u
o
h
t

,
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

r
o
f

s
k
c
i
r
B
•

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

,
n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p
p
e
V
-

7
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B
–
m
a
v
i
s
a
m
a
r
a
P

.

V

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
3
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

4
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
4
1

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

3
1
0
2

t
s
u
g
u
A
1
0

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

ANNEx 13 – PRESENTATION OF CASE STUDIES

e
h
t

y
b

d
a

i

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

h
t
i

w
m
a
r
u
p
a
d
n
a
u
p
V
n

l

i

i

d
n
a

l

h
c
r
e
p
0
2

a

y
l
t
n
e
u
q
e
s
b
u
S

.
n
w
o
t

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B

n

i

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
R

a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

n
O

.
f
o
o
r

h
c
t
a
h
t

h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

b
u
a
d
&
e
l
t
t
a
w
n

i

e
s
u
o
h
m
o
o
r

2
a

i

d
e
p
u
c
c
o
–

r
a
w
o
t

r
o
i
r
P

.
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

y
b

i

d
e
p
u
c
c
o
w
o
n

s
i

i

h
c
h
w
e
s
u
o
h

t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
o
t
0
0
0
,
5
2
+

0
0
0
7
.
s
R

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

.
g
n
i
s
s
i

m

l
l
i
t
s

–

1
9
9
1
n

i

y
m
r
a

y
b

y
a
w
a

n
e
k
a
t

s
a
w
d
n
a
b
s
u
H

l

.
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
d
a
e
h

l

e
a
m
e
f

A

r
e
t
a

l

d
e
t
c
v
e

i

e
r
e
w

s
r
e
l
t
t
e
s

e
h
t

,
e
t
a
v
i
r
p

e
r
e
w

s
l
e
c
r
a
p

d
n
a

l

e
h
t

s
A

.
s
r
a
e
y

3

r
o
f

l

s
e
v
e
s
m
e
h
t

y
b

d
e
s
a
e

l

d
n
a

l

h
c
r
e
p

n
e
t

a

n
o
–

r
o
n
o
d

e
h
t

t
u
o
b
a

e
r
u
s

t
o
n

–

)
y

l
l

e
v
a
p
p
o
K

(

t
s
o
p
e

l
i

m

h
t
8
7

t
a

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
a
w
d
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a

s
i
h
t

i

g
n
w
o

l
l

o
F

.

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

s
e
k
a
n
s

d
n
a

s
t
n
a
h
p
e
e
o
s
l
a

l

e
r
e
w
e
r
e
h
t

–

n
w
o
r
g
r
e
v
o
d
a
h

t
s
e
r
o
f

e
h
t

s
a

y
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

o
t

t
l
u
c
ffi
d

i

y
r
e
v

s
a
w
h
c
h
w

i

,
)
t
n
e
s
e
r
P
(

e
t
i
s

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
o
t

k
c
a
b

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

n
e
h
T

.
g
n
i
t
t
a
u
q
s

l

e
a
c
s

e
g
r
a

l

d
e
z
i
l

a
e
r

r
e
n
w
o
e
h
t

s
a

)
t
n
e
r
r
u
c
(
e
s
u
o
h
U
E

e
h
t

g
n
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e

l
i

h
w

s
r
a
e
y
2

r
o
f

d
e
v

i
l

–

e
t
i
s

t
s
o
p
e

l
i

m

h
t
8
7

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
v
e
i
r
t
e
r

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
h
t
i

w

t
u
h

e
l
t
t
i
l

a

t
l
i

u
b

,
e
t
i
s

e
h
t

i

g
n
n
a
e
c

l

r
e
t
f
A

d
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

t
o
g
3
1
0
2

n

i

y
l
t
n
e
u
q
e
s
b
u
S

.
y
d
n
a
k
a
k

i
l

e
W
n

i

s
e
s
u
o
h
6
2

t
l
i

u
b

i

h
c
h
w
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
0
1
0
2

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

t
o
n

–

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
b
o
t

n
w
o
h
s

s
a
w
d
e
e
d

e
l
t
i
T

.
n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

y
b

i

e
d
v
o
r
p

s
d
n
u
f

–

t
n
a
r
g

f
o
s
s
e
c
x
e

n

i

h
k
a

l

1
.
s
R

d
n
u
o
r
a

t
n
e
p
s

e
v
a
H

d
n
a
b
s
u
h

g
n
i
s
s
i

m
n
o
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

f
o
n
o
i
s
s
i

m
b
u
s

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

s

w
o
d
n
w
3

i

+

s
r
o
o
d
2

–
0
0
0

,

8
5

.
s
R
o
t

p
u

e
m
a
c
m
e
h
t

y
b

d
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

l
l

A

.
e
t
a
g

t
a

d
e
r
e
v

i
l

e
d

,

0
8
9

.
s
R
C
R
V
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

,
n
o
i
t
a
t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t

l

s
u
p
0
0
2
1
.
s
R

y

l
l

i

a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

t
h
g
u
o
b

f
i

-
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

l

k
u
b

n

i

s
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
C
R
V

.
l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n

d
e
s
s
i

m

s
u
b

f
i

,

:

0
3
5
y
b

e
m
o
h

e
v
a
e

l

o
t

d
e
e
n

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
C

.

m
a

0
3
8

:

t
a

l

y
n
o
s
i

t
x
e
n

e
h
t

d
n
a
m
a

5
1
6

:

t
a

s
e
v
i
r
r
a

s
u
B

–

l

u
t
t
i
K
n

i

y
a
w
a
m
k
6

–

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
S

d
n
a

y
a
w
a
m
k
½

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

.
t
s
o
c
o
n

t
a

t
s
o
m
a

l

y

l
l

a
c
o

l

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
e
b

n
a
c

.
c
t
e

,
r
e
t
a
w

,
d
o
o
f

e
k

i
l

s
l
a
i
t
n
e
s
s
e

s
a
e
r
a

l

a
r
u
r

n

i

e

l
i

i

h
w
g
n
h
t
y
r
e
v
e

r
o
f

y
e
n
o
m

s
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

e
f
i
l

n
a
b
r
U

.
e
f
i
l

n
a
b
r
u

r
e
v
o
e
f
i
l

l

a
r
u
r

r
e
f
e
r
P

.
r
e
t
a
w

f
o
t
n
a
w

r
o
f

f
f
o
d
e
i
r
d

t
s
o
m

t
u
b

–

s
d
e
e
s

n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
A
O
Z

l

.
d
o
s

4

d
n
a

s
e
k
a
n
s
o
t

t
s
o

l

g
n
e
b

i

9

e
t
i
p
s
e
d

s
t
a
o
g

7
e
v
a
h
w
o
n

–

f
f
o
r
i
a
p

l
l

a

n
o
%
0
5

d
n
a

n
a
o

l

t
n
a
r
g
%
0
5
–

0
0
0
,
5
2

h
t
r
o
w

s
t
a
o
g

3
d
e
t
f
i
g

–

e
m
e
h
c
s

i

h
d
r
u
a
m
S

.
s
t
n
a
h
p
e
e

l

f
o
r
a
e
f

n

i

t
h
g
n

i

e
h
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

n
o
t
p
e
k

s
t
h
g

i
l

–

s
t
n
o
p

i

t
h
g

i
l

3
1

s
a
h

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

y
b

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

n
a
f
-
e
g
d
i
r
F
-

h
t
n
o
m
/
0
0
0
9
.
s
R

l
l
i

b

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

.
y
a
w
a

s
r
e
t
e
m
0
5
2
–

t
u
o
b
a

l
l

e
w
a

n

i

i

g
n
h
t
a
B

.
y
a
w
a

s
r
e
t
e
m
0
0
1

s
i

2
1
-
P
V
A
r
e
d
n
u

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

r
e
t
a
w
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

i

r
o
f

l
l

e
w
–

r
e
t
a
w
–
m
e
b
o
r
p

l

t
s
e
g
g
B

i

.
e
s
u
o
h
o
t

t
c
e
p
s
e
r

h
t
i

w

s
t
b
e
d
o
n

–

l

d
o
s

e
r
a

s
t
a
o
g

l

n
e
h
w
y
n
o
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
t
s
o
p
e

l
i

m

h
t
8
7

(

t
u
h
m
o
r
f

d
e
v
e
i
r
t
e
r

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m
m
o
r
f

r
e
y
o
f

d
e
d
d
A

165

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
8
2

i

h
c
i
a
r
a
K

,
t
s
e
W

r
a
g
a
N
a
d
n
a
n
a
k
e
v
i
V
-
N
G
–

I

8
7
0
0
/
V
V
/
R
A
K
/
L
I
K
–
m
a
v
i
s
a
m
a
r
a
P

.

V

5
1
0
2
r
e
b
m
e
c
e
D

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

4
1
0
2

r
e
b
m
e
v
o
N
5
0

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
7
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

166

-
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
2
1
0
2

n

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

a
o
t

d
e
v
o
m
y
e
h
t

l
i
t
n
u

s
r
a
e
y

2

r
o
f

e
r
e
h
t

i

d
e
n
a
m
e
r

d
n
a

a
n
f
f
a
J

n

i

e
s
u
o
h

s
’
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

a
o
t

d
e
v
o
m
d
n
a

s
h
t
n
o
m
8

r
o
f

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

y
e
h
t

n
e
h
T

.
9
0
0
2

f
o
h
c
r
a
M
n

i

d
n
a

l

e
v
i
t
a
n

s
t
i

m
o
r
f

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
n
o
i
s
s
e
f
o
r
p

l

a
r
t
s
e
c
n
a

r
i
e
h
t

,
y
r
e
t
t
o
P

i

g
n
o
d

y
b

g
n
v

i

i
l

r
i
e
h
t

e
d
a
m
d
n
a

I

K
T
P
o
t

g
n
o
e
b

l

y

l
l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
y
e
h
T

.
r
a
w
n

i

d
e
s
a
e
c
e
d

e
n
o
e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
b

n
o
s

a

d
n
a

l

e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
3

f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

-
k
a
m

f
o
n
o
i
s
s
e
f
o
r
p

l

a
r
t
s
e
c
n
a

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c
o
t

t
u
h

a

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
s
e
e
p
u
r

h
k
a

l

f
l
a
h

a

d
n
a

e
v
fi

r
o
f

y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
b

d
n
a

l

f
o

l

e
c
r
a
p

e
r
c
a
¼
a

d
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

r
a
w

t
s
o
p

n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

a
o
t

i

g
n
n
r
u
t
e
r

n
o
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
t
s
i
s
s
a

,
i
h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

k

/
a
n
a
f
f
a
J

-

e
d
i
s
t
u
o
m
o
r
f

r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e

l
l
i

k
s

h
t
i

w
d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.

m
o
o
r

a
r
t
x
e

n
a

r
o
f

e
d
i
s

h
t
g
n
e

l

e
h
t

n
o

.
t
f

9
s
a
w
n
o
i
s
n
e
t
x
e

e
h
T

.
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
t

h
t
i

w
g
n
o
a

l

n
o
i
s
n
e
t
x
e

e
h
t

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

e
h
t

d
a

i

l

e
h

e
c
a
p
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

e
h

t
u
b

,
.
t
f

.
q
s
0
5
5

d
e
e
c
x
e

t
o
n

l

d
u
o
h
s

e
s
u
o
h

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t

s
A

.
t
l
i

u
b

e
b
o
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

r
o
f

a
e
r
a

d
n
a

n
a
p

l

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
r
e
h
d
a

e
h
3
1
0
2

n

i

t
n
a
r
g

P
U
A
-
U
E

r
o
f

d
e

i
l

p
p
a

i

g
n
v
a
H

.
y
r
e
t
t
o
p

g
n

i

f
o
s
a
w
m
o
o
r

e
n
i
r
h
s

e
h
t

f
o
s
r
o
o
d

e
h
T

.
s
k
r
o
w
m
e
t
s
y
s
C
R
V
e
h
t

w
o
h

f
o
e
r
a
w
a

t
o
n

e
r
e
w
y
e
h
t

s
a
C
R
V
s
a

h
c
u
s

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

o
N

.
f
l
e
s

n
w
o
y
b

d
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

e
r
e
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
s
u

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
h
t

l
l

A

l

.
e
p
u
o
c

y
e
h
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
0
0
5
,
0
1

-

)
i
a
r
i
h
d
u
M

(

n
i
t
a
S

f
o
o
s
l
a

s
a
w

r
o
o
d

k
c
a
b

e
h
T

.

0
0
0

,

5
2
f
o

l

a
t
o
t

a

i

g
n
k
a
m
0
0
0

,

7

.
s
R

r
o
f

i

s
g
n
v
r
a
c

l

a
t
n
e
m
a
n
r
o
h
t
i

,

w
0
0
0
8
1
.
s
R
–

)
i
a
r
i
h
d
u
M

(

n
i
t
a
S

f
o
r
o
o
d

i

n
a
m
e
h
t

,
0
0
0
,
3
1

g
n
i
t
s
o
c

)
u
b
m
e
V

(

a
s
o
g
r
a
M

n

i

l

y
a
e
d

e
h
T

.
r
a
e
y

1

r
o
f

%
4
1
@
0
0
0
,
0
5
.
s
R

r
o
f

y

l
l

a
c
o

l

n
a
o

l

a

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
o
s
l
a

e
v
a
h

y
e
h
t

,
y
r
e
t
t
o
p
m
o
r
f

e
m
o
c
n

i

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
s
h
k
a

l

1
1

.
s
R

t
a

s
d
n
a
t
s

e
t
a
d

l
l
i
t

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
T

.
0
0
0
,
5
3
.
s
R

f
o
t
s
o
c

a

t
a

n

l
i

k

a

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

d
e
g
a
n
a
m
o
s
l
a

.
r
e
o
g

l

o
o
h
c
s

a

s
i

d
n
a

l

d
o
r
a
e
y

t
h
g
e

i

l

y
n
o
s
i

n
o
s

r
i
e
h
T

.
k
r
o
w
y
r
e
t
t
o
p

e
h
t

n

i

m
h

i

s
t
s
i
s
s
a

e
f
i

w

s
’
y
r
a
c

i

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
i
c
n
a
n
fi
d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

.
s
h
t
n
o
m
2
1
f
o
d
o
i
r
e
p

i

g
n
n
r
u
o
m
e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

e
s
u
o
h

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
k

i
l

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

i

s
u
o
c
p
s
u
a

i

y
n
a

e
u
s
r
u
p
o
t

t
o
n
m
o
t
s
u
c

a

s
i

t
I

.
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

e
s
o
c

l

a

f
o
h
t
a
e
d

–

l

a
r
u
t
l
u
c

t
u
b

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

t
o
n

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

m
e
h
t
o
t

h
t
w
o
r
g

r
i
e
h
t

e
t
u
b
i
r
t
t
a

d
n
a

P
V
A
y
b

n
e
v
g

i

n
o
i
t
a
v
i
t
o
m
e
h
t

f
o
e
v
i
t
a
c
e
r
p
p
a

i

e
r
e
w

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

:
n
o
i
t
a
i
c
e
r
p
p
A

.

0
0
0

,

,

5
4
1
.
s
R
m
e
h
t

d
e
t
s
a
o
c

t
I

.
e
g
a
s
u

c
i
t
s
e
m
o
d

d
n
a

r
e
t
a
w
e
b
a
t
o
p

l

r
o
f

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

l
l

e
w
e
b
u
T

l

.
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

s
d
a
o
r

d
a
b

f
o
t
a
h
t

s
i

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
c
a
f

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

l

y
n
o
e
h
T

:

l

m
e
b
o
r
P

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.
y
r
t
l
u
o
p

e
m
o
s

d
a
h
o
s
l
a

y
e
h
T

.
t
u
n
o
c
o
c

d
n
a

a
n
a
n
a
b

i

y
l
t
n
a
n
m
o
d
e
r
p

i

g
n
w
o
r
g

n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

a

i

d
e
n
a
t
n
a
m
y

i

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 13 – PRESENTATION OF CASE STUDIES

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
9
2

i

h
c
i
a
r
a
K

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
e
n
a
G

-

2
0
0
0
/
P
N
G
/
R
A
K
/
L
I
K
–

h
a
m
m
a
e
V

l

.

V

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
8
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

5
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

4
1
0
2

r
e
b
o
t
c
O

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

l
r
i
g

e
h
T

.
s
r
a
e
y
o
w

t

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
n
e
t
e
d

n

i

e
r
e
w
y
o
b

a

d
n
a

l
r
i
g

t
s
e
g
n
u
o
y

e
h
T

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

d
e
l
t
t
e
s

d
n
a

d
e
i
r
r
a
m
y
d
a
e
r
l
a

e
r
a

e
v
fi

,
x
i
s

e
h
t

f

O

.
s
l
r
i
g

e
e
r
h
t

d
n
a

s
y
o
b

e
r
a

e
e
r
h
t

-

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

x
i
s

d
n
a

l

e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

–

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
7
f
o
p
u

e
d
a
m

s
i

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.

m
r
a
f

i

k
n
r
a
M
o
t

9
0
0
2

n

i

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w

r
a
w

f
o
e
c
n
e
u
q
e
s
n
o
c

a

s
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
s
s
e
r
p

g
n
i
t
n
i
r
p

l

a
c
o

l

e
h
t

n

i

s
k
r
o
w
y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

-
s
i
g
e
r

t
o
g

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

n
e
h
T

.
f
e

i
l

e
r

i

e
t
a
d
e
m
m

i

s
a

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
a
w

r
e
t
l
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a
M
O

I

f
o
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

e
h
t

h
t
i

W

.
d
e
n
e
t
t
a
fl

l

l

y
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
u
h

d
u
m

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
r
i
e
h
t

d
n
fi
o
t

l

y
n
o
m
r
a
f

i

k
n
r
a
M
m
o
r
f

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t
0
1
0
2

n

I

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

l

.
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

y
d
e
e
n

f
o
t
s
i
l

e
d
a
m
d
n
a

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

d
e
t
i
s
i
v

e
c
ffi
o
s
’
S
D
m
o
r
f

r
e
c
ffi
O

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
e
h
t

n
e
h
w
3
1
0
2

n

i

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

P
U
A
-
U
E

r
o
f

d
e
r
e
t

.
s
r
e
t
s
i
s

g
n
o
m
a
6
o
t
n

i

i

d
e
d
v
d
b
u
s

i

s
a
w
d
n
a

l

f
o
s
e
r
c
a

2

e
h
t

n
e
h
w
y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

l

a
n
r
e
t
a
m
m
o
r
f

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

d
n
a

l

e
h
T

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
s
u
o
H
e
h
T

e
n
o
d

s
a
w
k
r
o
w
e
h
t

f
o
t
s
o
M

.
t
e
g
d
u
b

l

d
e
t
a
u
p
i
t
s

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
n
a

a
e
r
a

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

l

g
n
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

n

i

l

u
f
l
i

k
s

e
b
o
t

d
e
m
e
e
s
o
h
w

r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

a

f
o
p
e
h

l

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
e
m
o
h

e
r
i
t
n
e

e
h
t

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

d
n
a

d
e
t
r
a
t
s

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

e
h
t

i

n
a
t
n
o
c
o
t

s
u
o
i
t
u
a
c

s
a
w
e
c
n
e
h

,
e
r
o
m
d
n
e
p
s
o
t

s
n
a
e
m
o
n

d
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t
o
s
l
A

.

o
t

d
e
r
e
h
d
a

e
r
e
w

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
5
5
s
i

i

h
c
h
w

t
l
i

u
b

e
b
o
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

r
o
f

a
e
r
a

d
n
a

n
a
p

l

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t
P,
U
A
-
U
E
o
t

d
e
r
e
t
s
i
g
e
r

s
i

t
n
e
n
o
p
o
r
p

e
h
t

s
A

o
n

d
n
a

e
m
o
c
n

i

n
w
o
m
o
r
f

t
e
m
e
r
e
w

s
e
s
n
e
p
x
e

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

e
h
T

.

0
0
0

,

0
3

.
s
R

d
n
u
o
r
a

s
a
w
h
c
h
w

i

f
l
e
s

y
b

e
n
o
d

s
a
w

t
s
e
r

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
e
t
s
a
P

l

.
l
e
v
e

l

l

e
t
n

i
l

o
t

p
u

s
r
e
v
o
c

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
T

.
0
0
0
,
0
5
,
5
.
s
R

f
o
t
n
u
o
m
a

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w

t
s
o
c

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

.
r
e
v
e
o
s

t
a
h
w

t
h
g
u
o
s

e
r
e
w

s
n
a
o

l

l

y
e
v
i
t
c
a

t
o
n

h
g
u
o
h
t
C
R
V

.
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

e
h
t

y
b

d
e

i
l

p
p
u
s

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

r
o
f

d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
h
t

l
l

a

,

o
s
l
A

.
f
o
o
r

r
o
f

l

s
r
e
p
e
h
o
w

t

d
n
a

s
r
e
t
n
e
p
r
a
c
o
w

t

,
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

r
e
p
u
s

r
o
f

r
e
p
e
h

l

d
n
a

n
o
s
a
m
e
n
o
g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c
m
a
e
t

s
’
r
o
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c

e
h
t

y
b

.
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

l

i

a
c
fi
r
e
p
u
s

i

i

g
n
d
v
o
r
p

s
a
w
d
e
v
o
v
n

l

i

.
n
o
o
s
n
o
m

r
e
b
o
t
c
O

l
i
t
n
u

l

d
e
y

i

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

d
n
a

y
a
M
n

i

p
u

s
e
i
r
d

y

l
l

a
u
s
u

t
i

s
a

l

i

a
n
n
e
r
e
p

t
o
n

s
i

t
i

t
u
b

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
s
d
e
e
n

r
e
t
a
w
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

i

e
h
t
o
t

s
r
e
t
a
c

y
a
w
a
m
0
3

t
u
o
b
a

d
e
t
a
c
o

l

l
l

e
w
A

.
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s

s
i
h
t
o
t

y
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

r
e
t
a
w

r
e
p
o
r
p
o
N

.
r
e
t
s
i
s

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
t
i
b
a
h
n

i

e
s
u
o
h

g
n
i
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

n
w
a
r
d

s
i

i

g
n
k
n
i
r
d

d
n
a

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
f

r
e
t
a
W

l

.
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

o
T

d
n
a

t
u
o
r
a
f

m
o
r
f

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

r
o
f

r
e
t
a
w

t
a
h
t

y

l
l

a
c
o

l

d
e
v
e

i
l

e
b

s
i

t
I

.
h
t
a
b

a

r
o
f

i

s
g
n
n
e
v
e

e
h
t

n

i

l

k
a
w
a

e
k
a
t
o
t

l

e
p
o
e
p

e
h
t

r
o
f

l

a
u
t
i
b
a
h

e
m
o
c
e
b

s
a
h

t
i

d
n
a

y
a
w
a

e
r
t
e
m
o

l
i

k

a

f
l
a
h

s
i

e
c
r
u
o
s

r
e
t
a
w
e
h
t

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
F

.

m
p
4
e
r
o
f
e
b

e
b
o
t

s
a
h

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

,
r
e
h
t
o
n
a
o
t

y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

e
n
o
m
o
r
f

t
n
e
m
e
v
o
m

r
e
t
a
w

t
n
e
v
e
r
P

167

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
9
2

i

h
c
i
a
r
a
K

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
e
n
a
G

-

6
0
0
0
/
P
N
G
/
R
A
K
/
L
I
K
–
)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b
d
e
p
p
a
c
i
d
n
a
h

y
l
l

a
u
s
i
v
(

i
v
l
e
h
c
t
u
r
A
K

.

5
1
0
2

e
n
u
J

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

4
1
0
2

t
s
u
g
u
A

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
9
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

168

g
n
i
r
a
e
r

k
c
o
t
s
e
v

i
l

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

s
i

r
e
t
s
i
s

e
h
t

r
o
f

e
m
o
c
n

i

f
o
e
c
r
u
o
s

l

y
n
o
e
h
T

.
r
a
w
e
h
t

e
r
o
f
e
b

h
c
u
m
d
n
a

l

e
r
c
a
½
h
t
i

w
g
n
o
a

l

e
s
u
o
h
m
o
o
r

d
e
b

e
e
r
h
t

e
h
t

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

y
e
h
T

.
r
e
t
s
i
s

l

r
e
d
o
r
e
h

h
t
i

w

s
e
v

i
l

d
n
a

d
e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c

y

l
l

a
u
s
i
v

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

e
r
e
w
y
e
h
T

.
h
c
a
e

0
5
2
.
s
R

d
a

i

y
t
r
e
v
o
p

,
h
t
o
b

r
o
f

h
t
n
o
m
/
0
0
0
1

.
s
R

–

e
m
e
h
c
s

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
a

i

s
t
e
g

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

e
v
o
b
a

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
e
c
n
e
t
s
i
s
b
u
s

r
o
f

t
u
n
o
c
o
c

d
n
a

k

l
i

m

r
o
f

e
l
t
t
a
c

,
n
e
k
c
h
c

i

5
1
d
a
h

y
e
h
T

.
n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

d
n
a

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
a
w

s
i
h
T

.
r
e
t
l
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

s
a

t
u
h

l
l

a
m

s

a

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
M
O

I

l

.
s
s
e
e
m
o
h
m
e
h
t

i

g
n
v
a
e

l

d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

e
s
u
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

t
a
h
t

t
u
o
d
n
fi
o
t

l

y
n
o

,
s
h
t
n
o
m
0
1
r
e
t
f
a

d
n
a

l

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

s
r
e
t
s
i
s

e
h
t

,
r
a
w

t
s
o
P

o
t

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

d
n
a

s
d
n
e
i
r
f

m
o
r
f

l

p
e
h

e
h
t

k
o
o
t

,
d
e
g
n
a
h
c

s
a
w
m
a
e
t

d
n
a

n
o
s
a
m
e
h
t

n
e
h
T

.
t
s
o
c
o
n

t
a

t
u
o
g
n
i
t
t
e
s

e
h
t

i

d
d
o
h
w

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
C
R
V
d
n
a

n
o
s
a
m
a

f
o
p
e
h

l

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h
w
e
n

a

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

d
e
t
r
a
t
s

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

y
d
a
e
r
l
a

f
f
o
d
a
p

i

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
h
k
a

l

1

f
o
n
a
o

l

a

h
t
i

w
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

d
n
a

d
e
d
n
e
t
x
e

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

.
0
1
0
2

l

y
u
J

n

i

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

d
n
a
9
0
0
2

r
e
b
o
t
c
O
n

i

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

n

i

l
l
i
t
s

s
i

k
r
o
w
e
h
t

s
A

.
n
o
i
s
i
v
r
e
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

s
l
a
c
ffi
o
p
e
h

l

e
v
o
b
a

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
r
u
o
b
a

l

f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
r
e
p
u
s

d
n
a

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
g
n
i
r
u
c
o
r
p

r
o
f

y
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

e
h
t

k
o
o
t

s
r
i
e
h
t

f
o
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

g
n
u
o
y
A

.
y
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
e
c
o
r
p

f
o
k
n
a
B
m
o
r
f

d
e
w
o
r
r
o
b

d
a
h
o
s
l
A

l

.
n
o
y
e
C
f
o
k
n
a
B

n

i

s
r
a
e
y
3

r
o
f

9
8
p
0
0
5
3
.
s
R

f
o
n
a
o

l

a

r
o
f

d
e

i
l

p
p
a

e
v
a
h

s
r
e
t
s
i
s

e
h
T

.
h
k
a
L
1

l

i

.
y
e
t
a
m
x
o
r
p
p
a
o
t

s
t
n
u
o
m
a

r
o
d
i
r
r
o
c

d
n
a
m
o
o
r

e
n
i
r
h
s

,

m
o
o
r

g
n
v

i

i
l

n

i

s
e

l
i
t

r
o
o
fl

r
o
f

e
t
a
m

i
t
s
e

e
h
t

,
s
s
e
r
g
o
r
p

.
h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p

0
0
5
3
@
0
0
0
,
5
5

f
f
o
d
a
p

i

s
a
h

d
n
a

f
o
o
r

r
o
f

h
k
a

l

1
.
s
R

l

n
o
y
e
C

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

–
m
e
b
o
r
p

l

r
e
t
a
w
o
N

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 13 – PRESENTATION OF CASE STUDIES

R
A
N
N
A
M

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

i
l

a
s
u
M

,
i
l

e
v
u
h
t
u
P

-

9
0
0
0
/
T
U
P
/
S
U
M
N
A
M
–

/

a
y
i
p
u
n
a
V
C
A
.
S

.

.

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
0
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

.
s
r
a
e
y

0
1
r
o
f

e
t
i
s

a

t
a

e
s
u
o
h

k
c
i
r
b

a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
o
t

l

r
o
i
r
P

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

s
e
v

i
l

d
n
a

d
e
t
a
r
a
p
e
s

s
i

d
n
a
b
s
u
h

e
h
T

.
s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

r
u
o
f

d
n
a

s
n
o
s
o
w

t

,
f
l
e
s

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
6
f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

t
s
o
p

d
n
a

s
r
e
m
r
a
f

e
r
e
w
d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

e
h
t

y

l
l

i

a
n
g
i
r

O

.
r
a
n
n
a
M
o
t

i

g
n
n
r
u
t
e
r

e
r
o
f
e
b

s
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

n

i

d
e
y
a
t
s

y
e
h
t

s
r
a
e
y

n
e
t

t
x
e
n

e
h
t

r
o
F

.
0
9
9
1

n

i

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

r
e
t
f
a

,
d
e
b
m
o
b

r
a
w
n

i

d
e
h
s
i
l

o
m
e
d

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
H

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

4
1
0
2

t
s
u
g
u
A

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

3
1
0
2

r
e
b
m
e
v
o
N

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

.
a
y
i
t
i
r
p
a
K
t
a

l

i

g
n
h
s
fi

n

i

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

e
m
a
c
e
b

s
i

t
u
h

e
h
t
o
s
l
a

d
n
a

,
e
s
u
o
h

a

d
e
t
t
o

l
l

a

s
a
w

t
n
a
t
i
b
a
h
n

i

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

e
h
t

s
s
a

,
t
u
h

d
e
n
o
d
n
a
b
a

n
a

n

i

d
e
y
a
t
s

y
e
h
T

l

.
s
s
e
e
m
o
h
m
e
h
t

i

g
n
v
a
e

l

i

g
n
b
m
o
b

y
b

d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

e
s
u
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

,
0
1
0
2

n

i

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y
e
h
t

n
e
h
w

,
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

i

g
n
k
a
m
k
c
o
b

l

a

h
t
i

w
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

s
a
w
C
R
V

.
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
g
n
n
a
t
b
o
n

i

i

s
g
n

i
l

b
i
s

9

g
n
o
m
a

d
e
d
v
d

i

i

b
u
s

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

i

h
c
h
w

,
y

l
l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
d
n
a

l

s
e
r
c
a

4

d
a
h
o
h
w

r
e
h
t
o
m
m
o
r
f

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

s
a
w

t
a
h
w

s
a
w
h
c
r
e
p
0
2

,
y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

f
o
m
r
e
t

.
e
t
i
s

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t
o
t

y
t
i

i

m
x
o
r
p

n

i

n

I

i

l

u
f
p
e
h

l

s
a
w
C
R
V

.
e
g
r
a

l

s
a
w
e
t
i
s

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

s
a
m
o
o
r

i

g
n
n
o
d
a

j

i

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
g
n
o
a

l

d
e
d
n
e
t
x
e

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

;
n
a
p

l

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
m
o
r
f

h
t
g
n
e

l

n

i

t
e
e
f
2

y
b

s
e
i
r
a
v

e
s
u
o
H

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

l
i

e
v
u
h
t
u
P

n

i

d
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

e
r
e
w

s
e

l
i
t

f
o
o
r

d
n
a

r
e
b
m
T

i

.

C
R
V
y
b

l

s
k
c
o
b
0
0
0
1

d
n
a

r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
t
s
a
c

e
r
e
w

l

s
k
c
o
b
0
0
0
2

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

r
o
F

i

.
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

r
o
f

d
e

i
l

p
p
u
s

e
r
e
w

s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

d
e
r
i
h

e
r
e
w

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a

l

o
w

t

i

e
n
h
c
a
m

m
o
r
f

h
s
a

l

5
.
5
e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
s
s
e
c
o
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

n

i

l

d
e
p
e
h
o
h
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
b

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
m
o
r
f

s
r
e
t
n
e
p
r
a
C

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

y
b
r
a
e
n
m
o
r
f

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

s
a
w
n
o
s
a
M

.
s
s
e

l

d
e
t
s
a
o
c

d
n
a

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

n

i

r
o
i
r
e
p
u
s

i

s
a
w
h
c
h
w
e
t
i
s
o
t

d
e
t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t

d
n
a

g
n
o
a

l

e
s
n
e
p
x
e

n
w
o
t
a
m
o
o
r
h
t
a
b

a

d
e
d
d
a

e
c
n
e
h

e
m
e
h
c
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

s
a
w

t
e

l
i

o
T

.
r
e
t
a

l

d
e
d
d
a

e
b
o
t

s

m
o
o
r
o
w

t

–

s
e
i
t
i
l

a
m
r
o
f

n
o
i
s
n
e
t
x
e

n
o
t
n
e
p
s

n
e
e
b

s
a
h
0
0
0

,
0
5
.
s
R

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

,
g
n
v
a
s

i

y

l
i

m
a
f

m
o
r
f

s
h
k
a

l

2
d
n
a
U
E

.
e
c
n
e
t
s
i
s
b
u
s

r
o
f

n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
H
d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

y
d
d
a
p

r
o
f

d
n
a

l

f
o
s
e
r
c
a
2

s
i

e
r
e
h
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
g
n
o
A

l

s
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

.
k
n
a
t

r
e
t
a
w
a

h
t
i

w

.
y
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o
e
m
o
c
n

i

o
n

e
c
n
e
h

d
n
a

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
s
i
d

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

i

s
e
n
h
c
a
m

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

s
a

e
s
u

n

i

t
o
n

t
u
b

i

,
e
n
h
c
a
m
g
n
w
e
s

i

d
e
c
n
a
v
d
a

n
a

h
t
i

w
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

e
h
t

f
o
e
n
O

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

b
o

j

e
h
t

h
s
i
n
fi

d
n
a

r
i
a
p
e
r
o
t

d
e
r
e
f
f
o
s
a
h
C
R
V

.
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

e
s
u

n

i

t
o
n

s
i

l
l

e
w
e
h
t

d
n
a

d
e
s
p
a

l
l

o
c

d
n
u
o
r
a

e
c
a
f
r
u
s

e
h
t

l
l

a
w
e
h
t

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

e

l
i

h
w
d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
v
a
c
x
e

e
h
t

l
l

a

d
d

i

y
e
h
T

i

.
d
a
m

i
l
s
u
M
d
n
a
C
R
V
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l
l

e
w
a

r
o
f

d
a

i

n
a

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

s
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

y
r
t

l

d
u
o
h
s

s
n
o
s
a
e
s

y
r
d

n

i

t
u
b

s
l
a
n
a
c

l

d
e
fi

e
h
t

n
o
d
n
e
p
e
d
o
t

d
e
e
n

y
e
h
t

s
d
e
e
n

c
i
t
s
e
m
o
d

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
F

.
l
l

e
w
e
b
u
t

y
b
r
a
e
n

a

e
b
o
t

s
n
e
p
p
a
h

r
e
t
a
w
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

i

r
o
f

e
c
r
u
o
s

e
h
T

l

.
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

169

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

6
1
0
2

L
I
R
P
A
1
0

u
p
p
u
r
r
i
i

d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

,
i
a

l
l

i

a
p
p
a
n
a
r
I

4
1
0
2
e
n
u
J

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

3
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

–

5
2
0
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M
–

n

i
l

a
s
o
R
y
r
a
M
n
a
r
a
p
a
y
a
h
T

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
1
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

170

s
a
w
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

e
h
T

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

d
e
l
t
t
e
s

d
n
a

d
e
i
r
r
a
m

t
o
g

s
r
e
h
t
o
e
e
r
h
T

.
e
m
o
h

t
a

l

d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

a

d
n
a

p
m
a
c

a
n
f
f
a
J

n

i

l

d
o
s
r
a
e
y

6
2

n
o
s

a

,

w
o
d
w

i

r
a
w
a

-

f
l
e
s

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
3
f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
h
t

n

I

.
d
e
d

i

d
n
a

g
n

i
l
l

e
h
s

b
m
o
b

a

n

i

t
h
g
u
a
c

s
a
w

r
e
h
c
a
e
t

a
o
s
l
a

d
n
a
b
s
u
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

8
0
0
2

n

I

.
d
n
a
b
s
u
h

d
e
s
a
e
c
e
d

d
n
a

f
l
e
s

e
h
t

r
o
f

n
o
i
s
n
e
p

i

s
e
v
e
c
e
r
o
s
l
a

d
n
a

e
m
o
h

t
a

n
o
i
t
i
u
t

i

g
n
v
g

i

g
n
v

i

i
l

a

s
e
k
a
m
w
o
n

d
n
a

r
e
h
c
a
e
t

e
c
n
e
c
s

i

a

e
h
t

n
e
h
W

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
r
e
w
o
h
w

s
t
n
e
r
a
p

y
b

t
l
i

u
b

e
s
u
o
h

k
c
i
r
b

a

n

i

e
t
i
s

e
h
t

n
o
d
e
v

i
l

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

r
a
w
e
r
o
f
e
B

.
s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

e
s
o
c

l

s
r
e
h
t
o
m
o
t

y
t
i

i

m
x
o
r
p

n

i

s
i

d
n
a

l

e
h
T

.
t
n
e
r
a
p

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
n
a

l

f
o
e
r
c
a

e
n
o
d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

a
o
t

i

g
n
v
o
m

l
l
i
t

e
c
a
p

l

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

r
i
e
h
t

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

d
n
a

i

a
y
n
u
v
a
V

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

o
t

d
e
t
f
i
h
s

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

r
e
t
a
L

.
9
0
0
2

f
o
r
e
b
m
e
v
o
N
o
t

y
a
M
m
o
r
f

s
h
t
n
o
m
6

r
o
f

m
r
a
f

i

k
n
r
a
M
o
t

d
e
v
o
m
n
e
h
t

l

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

u
M
o
t

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

t
o
g

y
e
h
t

,

9
0
0
2
h
c
r
a
M
n

I

.
t
s
a
b

l

l
l

e
h
s

a

n

i

e
f
i
l

s
i
h

t
s
o

l

e
g
e

l
l

o
c

g
n
i
r
e
t
n
e

t
s
u

j

,
n
o
s

r
i
e
h
t

r
a
e
y

i

g
n
w
o

l
l

o
f

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
e
g
a
v
a
s

l

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
t

l
l

a
m

s

a

t
l
i

u
b

,
2
1
0
2
.
v
o
N
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
v
o
m
y
e
h
t

n
e
h
W

.
t
n
e
m
o
m

t
a
h
t

t
a

t
c
a
t
n

i

g
n
h
t

i

l

y
n
o
e
h
t

s
a
w

t
e

l
i

o
T

.
r
a
w
n

i

d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

e
m
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f

y
e
h
t

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

g
n
e
b

i

r
e
t
f
a

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y

l
i

m
a
f

.
e
s
u
o
h

y
d
r
u
t
s

a

t
l
i

u
b

y
e
h
t

l
l
i
t

e
s
u
o
h

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
M
0
1

.
e
s
u
o
h

l

d
o
e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

e
h
t

n
o

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
i
c
n
a
n
fi
d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

i

h
c
h
w
a
s
o
g
r
a
M

f
o
e
d
a
m

r
o
o
d

h
t
i

w
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

s
a
w
m
o
o
r

e
n
i
r
h
s

e
h
T

.
s
r
o
o
d

e
v
i
t
a
r
o
c
e
d

l
l

a

e
r
e
w
m
o
o
r
d
e
b

e
h
t

f
o
t
a
h
t

d
n
a

e
c
n
a
r
t
n
e

r
a
e
r

,
e
c
n
a
r
t
n
e

i

n
a
m
e
h
t

r
o
f

s
r
o
o
D

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
5
5

f
o
a
e
r
a

l

d
e
t
a
u
p
i
t
s

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
0
1
y
b

d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
a
e
r
a

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
T

.
t
a
t
i
b
a
H
N
U
h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
a
i
t
o
g
e
n

e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
e
v
e
h
c
a

i

n
e
e
b

s
a
w

s
i
h
T

.
t
e
e
f
9
2
o
t

t
e
e
f

7
2
m
o
r
f

h
t
g
n
e

l

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

,
n
a
p

l

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
r
e
t
l
a

y
l
t
h
g
i
r

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
C
e
h
T

e
t
a
d

l
l
i
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n
o
t
n
e
p
s

y
e
n
o
m
e
h
T

.
t
e
e
h
s

d
e
t
a
g
u
r
r
o
c

h
t
i

w
e
n
o
d

e
c
n
a
r
t
n
e

t
n
o
r
f

e
d
i
s
t
u
o
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

a

d
a
h

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
s
e

l
i
t

d
e
z
a
g

l

f
o
s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
r
i
t
n
e

f
o
g
n
i
r
o
o
fl

d
n
a

g
n

i
l
i

e
c

e
s
l
a
f

d
i
r
g

d
a
h
m
o
o
r

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
h
T

.
e
t
a
n
r
o
o
s
l
a

s
a
w

t
o
n

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
n
o
d
n
o
L

n

i

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

d
n
a

d
n
a

l
l

o
H
n

i

n
o
s

e
n
O

-

d
a
o
r
b
a

s
n
o
s

r
i
e
h
t

y
b

n
e
v
g

i

y
e
n
o
m
y
b

d
n
a

h
t
a
e
d

s
’
d
n
a
b
s
u
h

n
o
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g
m
o
r
f

t
n
e
m
y
a
p

e
h
t

y
b

y
l
t
r
a
p

d
e
c
n
a
n
fi

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
T

.
s
h
k
a

l

6
1
.
s
R

d
n
u
o
r
a

s
i

e
s
u

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
u
b

l

,
e
b
a
t
o
p

s
i

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

r
e
t
a
W

.

0
0
0
0
7

,

.
s
R

d
n
u
o
r
a

s
a
w
d
e
r
r
u
c
n

i

t
s
o
c

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
T

.
f
l
e
s

y
b

d
e
c
n
a
n
fi

l
l

e
W

.
t
f
7
1

a

t
l
i

u
b

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p

0
5
8
.
s
R

d
n
u
o
r
a

s
i

l
l
i

b

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

e
g
a
r
e
v
a

e
h
t

d
n
a

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

.
c
t
e

,

m
o
o
r

h
t
a
b

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

h
t
i

w

s

m
o
o
r

r
o
f

g
n

i
l
i

e
c

,
t
e

l
i

o
t

w
e
n

e
h
t

r
o
f

e
k

i
l

s
k
r
o
w
g
n
d
n
e
p

i

s
a
h

t
i

l

,
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.
h
t
n
o
m
/
0
0
0

,

8
4

.
s
R

f
o
n
o
i
s
n
e
p

h
t
a
e
d

s
’
d
n
a
b
s
u
h

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

w
o
N

;
s
h
k
a

l

0
1
–

s
r
a
e
r
r
A

;
s
h
k
a

l

6
–

e
c
n
a
r
u
s
n

i

r
e
c
ffi
o
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

;
s
h
k
a

l

5
.
1

–

e
c
n
a
w
o

l
l

a

s
s
o

l

h
t
a
e
D

;
s
h
k
a

l

5
.
3

–

y
t
i
u
t
a
r
g

h
t
a
e
D

i

.
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

r
o
f

d
e
t
t
fi
w
o
n

r
o
f

,
y
k
r
u
m

s
t
e
g

r
e
t
a
w
e
h
t

i

g
n
p
m
u
p

r
o
f

r
o
t
o
m

f
o

w
o
e
b

l

e
h
t

r
o
f

g
n
i
t
i
a
w
A

e
c
n
a
v
e
i
r
G

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 13 – PRESENTATION OF CASE STUDIES

6
1
0
2

y
a
M
1
0

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

u
p
p
u
r
r
i
i

d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

,
i
a

l
l

i

a
p
p
a
n
a
r
I

–

2
0
0
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M

-

)

d
e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c

y
l
l

a
c
i
s
y
h
P
(

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
2
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

a
s
a
r
a
y
a
h
t
U
a
a
m

l

r
i
N
n

i
l

o
r
a
K

t
n
e
t
x
e

f
o

l

e
c
r
a
p

d
n
a

l

a

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
r
a
w
e
h
t

r
e
t
f
a

d
e
d

i

d
n
a
b
s
u
h

r
e
H

.
n
o
s

a

d
n
a

r
e
t
s
i
s

r
e
d
e

l

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
f

r
e
h

h
t
i

w
g
n
o
a

l

)
y
t
l
a
u
s
a
c

r
a
w

(

d
e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c

y

l
l

a
c
i
s
y
h
p

–

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

4
1
0
2
e
n
u
J

:

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
C
-

3
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A

:

d
e
c
n
e
m
m
o
C

-
i
d
n
a
h

e
h
t

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

t
u
b

s
s
e
r
t
s

m
a
e
s

a

s
i

e
h
S

.
s
n
r
u
t
e
r

e
l
t
t
i
l

y
r
e
v

s
a
h

i

h
c
h
w

,
e
m
o
c
n

i

r
e
h

r
o
f

s
r
a
e
r

e
h
s

t
a
h
t

i

s
n
e
k
c
h
c
w
e
f

e
h
t

n
o
t
n
e
d
n
e
p
e
d

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
h
T

.
s
g
n

i
l

b
i
s

g
n
o
m
a

i

d
e
d
v
d
b
u
s

i

i

.
g
n
w
e
s
o
t

k
c
a
b
o
g

r
e
h

l

e
k
a
m
d
u
o
w
e
n
h
c
a
m
d
e

i

d
n
a

l

e
r
c
a

1

e
g
r
a

l

f
o
t
r
a
p

s
a
w

t
I

.
’
0
4
x

’
0
7

l
l

a
d
e
p

d
n
a
h

a

–

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c
o
t

l

e
b
a
n
u

s
i

p
a
c

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

9
2
o
t

t
e
e
f

7
2
m
o
r
f

h
t
g
n
e

l

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

y
b

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
r
e
t
l
a

e
r
e
w

s
t
n
e
m
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
t

e
s
a
c

s
i
h
t

n

i

t
u
B

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
5
5

a
e
r
a

f
o
n
a
p

l

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

e
r
e
h
d
a

l

d
u
o
h
s

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
b
o
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

,

U
E

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

s
A

.
y
n
a
g
o
h
a
M
n

i

e
c
n
a
r
t
n
e

r
a
e
r

d
n
a

i

n
a
m
h
t
o
b

s
r
e
h
t
o

l
l

a

d
n
a

a
s
o
g
r
a
M

f
o
e
d
a
m
n

i

r
o
o
d

e
n
i
r
h
s

e
h
T

.
f
o
o
r

d
e
p
p
h
o
t

i

d
e
g
n
a
h
c
o
s
l
a

s
a
w
n
g
i
s
e
d

f
o
o
r

e
h
T

.

m
o
o
r

a
r
t
x
e

n
a

d
e
d
d
a
o
s
l
a

d
n
a

s
n
o
s
a
e
r

u
t
h
s
a
V
r
o
f

t
e
e
f

e
h
t

t
n
a
r
g
e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

r
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

n
o
t
n
e
p
s

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

s
h
k
a

l

3
1

.
s
R

,
e
t
a
d

l
l
i

T

.
e
g
n
a
h
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

i

e
d
v
o
r
p

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

n
o
i
t
a
u
t
i
s

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

r
i
e
h
t

w
o
n

t
u
b

,
r
e

i
l
r
a
e

d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

f
i

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
t
n

i

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

l

d
u
o
c

s
e
r
u
t
a
e
f

e
s
e
h
T

o
t

s
i

e
r
u
s
s
e
r
p
w
o
N

i

.
d
a
p

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

e
h
t

s
a

y

l
l

a
u
n
n
a

n
a
o

l

l

e
w
e

j

e
h
t

w
e
n
e
r
o
t

l

e
b
i
s
s
o
p

s
i

t
I

.
r
a
e
y

a

r
o
f

l

y
n
o
s
i

n
a
o

l

e
h
t

d
n
a

t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

i

g
n
y
a
p

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

e
h
S

.
k
n
a
b

t
a

y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
b

n
a
o

l

s
h
k
a

l

3

n
e
k
a
t

s
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

.
e
e
r
f

r
e
i
r
r
a
b

t
o
n

e
r
a
m
o
o
r
h
t
a
b

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
h
t

e
c
n
a
d
u
g

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
k
c
a

l

e
h
t

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
B

.
s
d
e
e
n

e
h
t

e
t
a
d
o
m
m
o
c
c
a
o
t

d
e
n
g
i
s
e
d

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
t
s
o
m

,
d
e
g
n
e

l
l

a
h
c

y

l
l

a
c
i
s
y
h
p

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

s
a

,
n
g
i
s
e
d

e
e
r
f

r
e
i
r
r
a
b

f
o
s

m
r
e
t

n

I

.
s
h
k
a

l

4
.
s
R

r
o
f

y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

l

a
t
n
e
r
a
p

r
e
h

d
e
g
a
g
t
r
o
m

s
a
h

e
h
s
o
s
l
A

.
y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

d
e
n
w
a
p
m
e
e
d
e
r

i

d
e
v
e
c
e
r

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

l

p
e
h
o
N

.
e
m
o
h

l

a
t
n
e
r
a
p

e
h
t

r
o
f

n
e
k
a
t

s
t
b
e
d

e
s
o
h
t

e
l
t
t
e
s
o
t

f
l
e
s
m
h

i

n
o
t
i

n
e
k
a
t

s
a
h

s
t
n
e
r
a
p

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

s
e
v

i
l

o
h
w

r
e
h
t
o
r
b

e
h
T

.
s
n
a
o

l

r
e
h
t
o
g
n
k
a
t

i

y
b

s
t
n
e
r
a
p

r
i
e
h
t

r
o
f

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

g
n
e
b

i

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

a

y
l
s
u
o
e
n
a
t
l
u
m
S

i

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
i
c
n
a
n
fi
d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

l

i

a
c
r
e
m
m
o
c

a

d
n
a

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

U
E

r
o
f

d
e

i
l

p
p
a

d
a
h

y
e
h
T
.
M
0
1

y
b

d
e
t
a
n
o
d

t
n
e
t

a

n

i

g
n
v

i

i
l

e
r
e
w
d
n
a

r
e

i
l
r
a
e

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

d
a
h
o
h
w

s
g
n

i
l

b
i
s

r
i
e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
v

i
l

y
e
h
t

,
e
t
i
s

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y
e
h
t

r
e
t
f
A

.
2
1
0
2
n
a
J

l
l
i
t

s
r
a
e
y

3
r
o
f

9
0
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
n

i

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.

m
o
o
r
h
t
a
b

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
t
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

d
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

e
v
a
h

l

d
u
o
w

t
i

s
a

n
o
i
t
c
e
r
i
d

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

n

i

r
o
d
i
r
r
o
c

e
h
t

d
e
g
n
a
h
c

e
v
a
h

y
a
M

.
d
o
o
g

s
i

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

c
i
t
s
e
m
o
d

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

i

g
n
k
n
i
r
d

r
o
f

y
t
i
l
i

b
a

l
i

a
v
a

r
e
t
a
w
d
n
a

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

i

g
n
d
n
a
t
s
t
u
o

l
l
i
t

t
b
e
d

t
r
a
p

,
t
i
d
e
r
c

n
o
y

l
l

a
i
t
r
a
p

d
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

e
r
e
w

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
h
t

d
n
a
C
R
V
m
o
r
f

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

171

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6
1
0
2

y
a
M
1
0

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

u
p
p
u
r
r
i
i

d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

,
i
a

l
l

i

a
p
p
a
n
a
r
I

-

7
2
2
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M

-

A
K
I
S
M
A

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
3
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

172

-
n
a
b
a
o
h
w

r
e
h
t
a
f

e
h
T

.
d
e
b

h
t
a
e
d

e
h
t

l

n
o
d
o
r
a
e
y

5
1

n
e
h
t

s
a
w
o
h
w

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

r
e
h
o
t

d
n
a

l

e
h
t

d
e
t
f
i
g

d
a
h

e
h
s

d
n
a

s
s
e
n

l
l
i

e
m
o
s

f
o
d
e
d

i

)

d
e
t
a
r
a
p
e
s
(

r
e
h
t
o
m

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
d

l
i

h
c

a

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

e
r
e
h
w
e
s
a
c

r
a

i
l

u
c
e
p

a

s
i

s
i
h
T

r
o
f

e
g
a

r
e
d
n
u

d
n
a

i

r
o
n
m
a

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

S
A

.
r
e
b
m

i
t

l

e
g
n
u

j

g
n

i
l
l

e
s

d
n
a

s
e
i
r
e
h
s
fi
m
o
r
f

e
m
o
c
n

i

l

a
n
o
s
a
e
s

a

s
a
h

e
H

.
e
s
u
o
h

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y

l
l

a
i
t
r
a
p

e
h
t

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

d
e
r
e
f
f
o
s
a
h

e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

d
e
i
r
r
a
m

t
e
g
o
t

y
l
s
u
o
v
e
r
p

i

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

d
e
n
o
d

.
r
o
o
d

t
x
e
n

e
s
u
o
h

s
’
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

i

k
a
y
a
n
a
y
a
h
t
u
r
I

r
e
h
t
o
m
n

i

e
v

i
l

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

l
l

a

y
e
h
T

l

.
y
e
v
i
t
c
e
p
s
e
r
9

d
n
a

0
1
s
r
e
h
t
o
r
b

r
e
g
n
u
o
y
o
w

t

d
n
a

)

4
1

(

r
e
h
t
o
r
b

l

r
e
d
o
e
n
o
s
a
h

l

d
o
r
a
e
y
3
1

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

,
n
o
i
t
a
c

i
l

p
p
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

f
o
e
m

i
t

e
h
t

t
a
2
1
0
2

n

I

i

.
n
a
d
r
a
u
g

e
h
t

s
a

d
e
t
a
n
m
o
n

i

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

r
a
m
u
k
a
y
e
J

i

i

n
h
t
n
e
r
u
S

.
r

M
n
i
s
u
o
c

r
e
h

,
s
n
o
i
t
c
a
s
n
a
r
t

i

g
n
k
n
a
b

s
i

a
e
r
a

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

w
o
N

.

m
o
o
r

a

e
d
u
c
n

l

i

o
t

r
e
h
t
a
f

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
r
e
t
l
a

e
r
e
w

s
t
n
e
m
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
e
h
t

e
s
a
c

s
i
h
t

n

i

t
u
B

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
5
5

a
e
r
a

f
o
n
a
p

l

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

e
h
t
o
t

e
r
e
h
d
a

l

d
u
o
h
s

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
b
o
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

,

U
E

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
b
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

s
A

.
r
e
h
t
a
f

e
h
t

y
b

n
e
v
g

i

e
b

l
l
i

w

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

d
n
o
y
e
b

d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

s
s
e
c
x
e

e
h
t

,
s
h
k
a

l

8

.
x
o
r
p
p
a

g
n
i
t
s
o
c

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
5
7

t
u
o
b
a

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

d
n
a

l

e
r
c
a

4
/
1
e
h
t

-
t
e
y

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

i

s
e
v

i
l

e
n
o
o
N

.
e
n
o
d

e
b
o
t

g
n
i
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

l
l

a
w
d
n
a

i

g
n
d
n
e
t

r
o
o
fl

–

k
n
a
t

c
i
t
p
e
s
o
t

d
e
t
c
e
n
n
o
c

–

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c

i

g
n
p
p

i

t
e

l
i

o
t

,
d
e
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

e
b
o
t

d
e
e
n

s
l
l

a
w
n
e
h
c
t
i
k

e
h
t

,
t
a
h
t

h
c
u
s

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
s
u
t
a
t
s

e
h
T

.
d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

e
b

y
a
m
0
0
0

,

5
2

.
s
R

f
o
m
u
s

a

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

I

.
3
0
0
2

n

i

S
D
e
h
t

y
b

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
o
t

d
e
r
r
e
f
s
n
a
r
t

y

l
l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
s
a
w

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

/

A
N

/

A
N

/

A
N

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

g
n
i
t
n
a
p

i

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
E

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

e
h
t

d
n
a

n
w
o
r
i
e
h
t

h
t
i

w

.
y
e
n
o
m

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

I

o
n

e
r
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
h
t

d
e
s
u

r
e
g
n
o

l

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

/

A
N

/

A
N

h
g
h

i

y
r
e
v

l
l
i
t
S

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

–
1
0

i

h
t
a
w
a
g
a

l
i

h
T
P.

.
s
r

M

-
p
e
V

/

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
M
3
2

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

7
1
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B

;
9
6
,
”
0
3
;
’
3
4
;
°
7
N
–

4
1
,
”
6
5
;
’
0
3
;
°
1
8

5
4
,
5
2

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p

-
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

n
a

:

h
c
u
s

s
a
d
e
s
u

r
e
g
n
o

l

o
n

e
r
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
h
t

l
l

a
m

s

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

y
b

d
e
r
e
v
o
c
(

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

e
h
t

,
y
l
e
t
a
n
u
t
r
o
f
n
U

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
h
t

s
e
r
a
h
s

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

d
n
a

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a
w
o
n

s
i

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s

–

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

e
g
r
a

l

a

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

l

e
b
a

s
a
w

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

,
s
g
n
v
a
s

i

n
w
o
r
i
e
h
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
 T
•

.
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

e
v
i
t
a
r
o
c
e
d

e
m
o
s

d
d
a

.
s
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

173

l

i

.
e
b
g
n
a
t

l
l
i
t
s

s
i

n
o
i
t

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
-

)

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
3
2

-

0
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a
(

6
1
0
2
-
1
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
P

–

4
1

x
e
n
n
A

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
-

)

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
3
2

-

9
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a
(

6
1
0
2
-
2
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

174

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

/

A
N

/

A
N

/

A
N

d
e
v
a
p
m
o
o
R

/

A
N

/

A
N

h
g
h

i

y
r
e
v

l
l
i
t
S

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

–
2
0

i

v
e
d
a
h
t
e
e
S

.
s
r

M

-
p
e
V

/

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
M
3
2

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

7
1
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p

,
”
7
3

;
’
3
4

;
°
7
N
–

.

m

:
l
s
a

h
5
2
,
”
6
5

;
’
0
3

;
°
1
8

E

;
0
9

5
6
,
7
2

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

-

d
e
v
a
p

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

,
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

t
s
r
fi

e
h
t

f
o
e
m

i
t

e
h
t

t
a

d
e
v
a
p

t
o
n
m
o
o
r
 A
•

-
c
n
u
f

e
r
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
 T
•

i

g
n
n
o
i
t

g
n
i
s
u

y
b

-

s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

m
u
m
n
m
o
t

i

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s
(

d
n
a
s

d
n
a

s
k
c
i
r
b

i

l

.
e
b
g
n
a
t

l
l
i
t
s

s
i

)

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H
w
o
d
W

i

(

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

e
c
n
 S
•

i

y
r
e
g
r
u
s

d
e
d
e
e
n

d
n
a

y
r
u
n

j

i

s
u
o
i
r
e
s

a

t
o
g

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

l

e
o
h
w
e
h
t

,
t
n
e
m
t
a
e
r
t

d
n
a

e
h
t

d
n
a

r
e
h

g
n
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

n

i

i

g
n
p
e
h

l

s
i

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–
H
R
–

3
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

t
o
g
s
r
u
o
b
a
L

–

s
k
r
o
w

0
0
0
,
7
8

(

m
u
s

p
m
u

l

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

)
l
a
e
m
+

R
K
L

-
e
D

l

a
r
u
R

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

y
t
e
c
o
S

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v

l

e
v
i
t
a
i
t
i
n

i

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

,
)
s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

d
e
t
i
b
a
h

r
i
e
h
t

y
b

R
K
L
0
0
0
0
2

,

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

n
w
o

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

,
s
r
e
t
f
a
r

;
s
e

l
i

T
(

Y

)

R
K
L

0
0
2
2

,

(

g
n
i
r
i

W

i

-
n
n
u

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

;

N

s
h
t
n
o
m
2
1

n
a
h
t
a
r
a

l
l

a
N

u
d
n
H

i

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

”
5
0
.
7
3
’
3
4
°
7
N

”
4
5
.
7
5
’
0
3
°
1
8

6
1
,
3
1

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p

h
g
8 H

i

i

a

l
l
i

p
a
n
h
s
i
r
K

.
r

M

-
p
e
V

/

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
3
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

–
3
0

i

y
l
e
t
a
d
e
m
m

i

o
t

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

d
e
n
r
a
w

,
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

y
p
u
c
c
o
-
e
r
o
t

n
o
i
t
c
a

e
k
a
t

r
e
h
t
o
n
a
o
t

t
i

n
g
i
s
s
a
-
e
r

N
G
e
h
t

i

d
o
v
a
o
t

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
-
n
U
m
o
r
f

r
e
c
ffi
O

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
 T
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

i

,
s
g
n
w
a
r
d

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

r
a

i
l
i

m
a
f

t
o
n

e
r
e
w

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
 B
•

l

-
e
p
m

i

y
l
r
e
p
o
r
p

d
n
a

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

k
o
o
b
-
g
o
 L
•

s
n
o
i
s
s
e
s

c

i
l

b
u
p

d
e
t
n
e
m

-
i
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
s

m
r
e
t

n

i

h
t
o
b

,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

g
n
o
r
t
s

e
v
a
g

d
n
a

l

y
k
e
e
w

s
k
r
o
w
e
h
t

d
e
t
i
s
i
v

s
O
 T
•

t
n
e
m
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
n
a
p
x
e

l

l

a
c

r
a

i
l
i

m
a
f

t
o
n

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

d
e
r
a
c
e
d

l

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
 B
•

s
k
c
i
r
b

h
t
i

w

t
u
b

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

t
n
e
m
e
c

h
t
i

w

175

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
o
g
s
r
u
o
b
a
L

–

s
k
r
o
w

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

0
0
0
,
0
5
1

(

m
u
s

p
m
u

l

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

)
l
a
e
m
+

R
K
L

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

)
s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

,
s
r
e
t
f
a
r

;
s
e

l
i

T
(

Y

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
s
e
s
s
a
g

l

:
d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

d
e
v
a
p

s
i

;

V
T

,
s
n
a
f

y

l
l

u
f

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

d
e
r
i

w

;
d
e
t
n
a
p

i

d
n
a

d
e

i
l

p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

)

R
K
L

0
0
0
2
2

,

(

y
b

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
0
2

,

-
e
s
u
o
h

(

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
a
p
o
t

s
e
p
o
h

l

d
o
h

e
r
o
m
e
n
o
n

i

k
c
a
b

)
r
a
e
y

;

Y

s
h
t
n
o
m
5

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

h
g
9 H

i

i
r
u
h
t
a
s
a
R

.
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

-
p
e
V

/

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
3
2

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

–
4
0

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

i

i

n
h
t
n
a
h
s
i
N

”
3
6
.
1
2
’
5
3
°
7
N

”
5
6
.
7
2
’
9
2
°
1
8

0
3
,
8
3

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p

-
i
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
s

m
r
e
t

n

i

h
t
o
b

,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

g
n
o
r
t
s

e
v
a
g

d
n
a

l

y
k
e
e
w

s
k
r
o
w
e
h
t

d
e
t
i
s
i
v

s
O
 T
•

t
n
e
m
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
n
a
p
x
e

l

l

a
c

r
a

i
l
i

m
a
f

t
o
n

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

d
e
r
a
c
e
d

l

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
 B
•

s
k
c
i
r
b

h
t
i

w

t
u
b

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

t
n
e
m
e
c

h
t
i

w

l

-
e
p
m

i

y
l
r
e
p
o
r
p

d
n
a

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

k
o
o
b
-
g
o
 L
•

d
e
t
n
e
m

:
S
E
T
O
N

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–
H
R
–

4
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

176

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

s
k
r
o
w
e
h
t
o
t

d
e

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

,
s
r
e
t
f
a
r

;
s
e

l
i

T
(

Y

-
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
r
e
b
m
e
m

)
s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

d
e
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

y

l
l

u
f

y

l
l

a
n

y
b

R
K
L
0
0
0
0
8

,

d
e
v
a
p

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

-
r
e
t
n

i

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

;

Y

s
h
t
n
o
m
6

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

”
8
3
.
0
5
’
4
3
°
7
N

”
6
5
.
6
4
’
8
2
°
1
8

9
6
,
3
4

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

n
a
w
u
d
d
e
v
a
p

h
g
8 H

i

y
n
o
h
t
n
A
u
J

.
r

M

-
p
e
V

/

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
3
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

–
5
0

r
o
f

i

g
n
k
o
o

l

d
n
a

g
n

i
l
l

e
m

s

,
t
n
a
h
p
e
e
d

l

l
i

w

a

y
b
d
e
g
a
m
a
d
y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
 H
•

m
o
o
r

e
n
i
r
h
s

e
h
t
o
t
n

i

d
e
r
o
t
s

e
s
i
r

:
S
E
T
O
N

177

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–
H
R
–

5
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–

)

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
2
2

-

1
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a
(

6
1
0
2
-
6
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

178

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

l

g
n
y
p
p
u
s

/

A
N

/

A
N

/

A
N

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
i

W

/

A
N

/

A
N

h
g
h

i

y
r
e
v

l
l
i
t
S

n
a
d
d
u

j
i

N

.

M

.
s
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
- A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

3
0
0
/
K
G
W
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B

;
2
0
,
”
4
1
;
’
5
3
;
°
7
– N

6
2
,
”
7
2
;
’
9
2
;
°
1
8

5
2
,
0
5

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

/

u
t
t
a
p
r
u
v
a
r
E

y
d
n
a
k
a
k

i
l

e
W

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
3
2

–
6
0

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

.
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

t
u
p

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h
m
e
t
s
y
s

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

l

s
’
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
e
c
a
p

l

n

i

g
n
i
r
i

l

w
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

 I
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

–

s
k
r
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
3
,
1

s
a
w
y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
l
a
e
m

s
u
p

l

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

)
s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

,
s
r
e
t
f
a
r

;
s
e

l
i

T
(

Y

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

,
s
e
s
s
a
g

l

:
d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

y

l
l

u
f

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

y
b

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
0
4

,

;

Y

d
e
v
a
p

s
i

t
i

;

V
T

,
s
n
a
f

A
D
H
N
m
o
r
f

i

g
n
n
a
o

l

d
e
r
i

w

;
d
e
t
n
a
p

i

d
n
a

d
e

i
l

p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

o
t

)
t
n
a
v
r
e
s

c

i
l

b
u
p

a

s
i

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

(

)

R
K
L

0
0
0
2
2

,

(

o
w

t

n

i

k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

e
b

)
s
r
a
e
y

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

-
n
o
N

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

-

h
g
9 H

i

n
a
h
t
a
n
a
h
u
m
u
S

.
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

a
m
m
a
y
r
a
N

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

a
h
t
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

/

.
.
.

r
a
g
a
N

E
”
3
2
.
7
1
’
4
2
°
0
8

0
6
,
5
4

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

”
7
1
.
8
2
’
1
2
°
9
– N

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
8
2

–
4
1

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

6
1
0
2
-
4
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

)
”
y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n

t
o
n
“
(

d
e
s
s
i

m
e
r
a

s
r
o
o
d

d
n
a

s
l
l
i
r
g

,
s

m
e
t
i

y
r
u
x
u

l

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

f
o
e
t
i
p
s

n

i

;
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T
•

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
G
•

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

h
t
i

w
d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

r
e
f
e
r
p

r
e
h
t
a
r

d
a
h

y
e
h
t

;
d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d

s
i

t
e

l
i

o
T
•

,
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
t
n
a
v
r
e
s

c

i
l

b
u
p

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
F
•

r
e
h
t
o
m
d
n
a
r
g

.
x
o
r
p
p
a
=
0
6
6
/

0
0
0
,
0
5
9

=

)

0
0
0
,
0
0
4

+
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

(

R
K
L
•

)

d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

t
o
n

(

k
n
a
b

l

s
i

k
o
o
b
-
g
o
L
•

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

9
3
4
,
1

s
s
e
c
c
a

:
S
E
T
O
N

179

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

’
s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

–

s
k
r
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
3
,
1

s
a
w
y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
l
a
e
m

s
u
p

l

)
s
e

l
i

T
(

Y

)

R
K
L

0
0
0
2
2

,

(

d
e
r
i

w

;
d
e
t
n
a
p

i

d
n
a

i

g
n
w
o
r
r
o
b

r
o
y
r
e

l
l

e

d
e

i
l

p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

m
o
r
f

d
e
v
a
p

s
i

;

V
T

,
s
n
a
f

-

w
e

j

e
m
o
s

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y

l
l

u
f

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

,
s
s
a
g

l

:
d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

y
b

R
K
L
0
0
0
0
0
4

,

;

Y

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

-

h
g
9 H

i

n
a
n
h
t
a
r
a
g
a
N

.
r

M

a
h
t
n
a
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

/

.
.
.

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
8
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
5
1

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

a
h
t
n
a
s
a
V

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

”
7
7
.
8
2
’
1
2
°
9
– N

”
6
3
.
5
1
’
4
2
°
0
8

2
8
,
8
5
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

r
a
g
a
N

-
r
o
p
m

i

w
e
f

a

;
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

)
l
i

a
t
e
d

e
e
s
(

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

h
t
w
o
r
g

e
r
u
t
u
f

r
o
f

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

t
n
a
t

i

g
n
k
o
o

l

t
s
l
i

h
w
k
o
o
c

n
a
c

r
e
h
t
o
m
“

e
c
n
i
s

d
o
o
g

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n
 I
•

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
 G
•

.
x
o
r
p
p
a
=
0
6
6

/

0
0
0
,
0
5
9

=

)

0
0
0
,
0
0
4

+
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

(

R
K
 L
•

d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c

s
i

k
o
o
b
-
g
o
 L
•

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L
9
3
4
,
1

”
d

l
i

h
c

r
e
t
f
a

n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

6
1
0
2
-
5
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

180

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
’
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

–

s
k
r
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
3
,
1

s
a
w
y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
l
a
e
m

s
u
p

l

)
s
e

l
i

T
(

Y

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y

l
l

u
f

s
i

e
h
t
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

-
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

m
u
m
n
m

i

i

y
r
u
x
u

l

o
n

:
t
n
e
m

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

6
1
0
2
-
6
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

N

-

h
g
8 H

i

n
a
r
i
h
t
n
e
n
e
v
u
P

.
s
r

M

a
h
t
n
a
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

/

.
.
.

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
8
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
6
1

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

i

a
n
m
u
S

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

N
”
4
8
.
9
1
’
1
2
°
9
– N

E
”
6
9
.
0
2
’
4
2
°
0
8

3
0
,
7
3

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

r
a
g
a
N

-
r
o
p
m

i

w
e
f

a

;
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

)
l
i

a
t
e
d

e
e
s
(

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

h
t
w
o
r
g

e
r
u
t
u
f

r
o
f

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

t
n
a
t

i

g
n
k
o
o

l

t
s
l
i

h
w
k
o
o
c

n
a
c

r
e
h
t
o
m
“

e
c
n
i
s

d
o
o
g

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n
 I
•

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
 G
•

n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

–

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
5
5

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
 5
•

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c

s
i

k
o
o
b
-
g
o
 L
•

”
d

l
i

h
c

r
e
t
f
a

181

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
’
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

–

s
k
r
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
3
,
1

s
a
w
y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

s
l
a
e
m

s
u
p

l

N

-

-

;

Y

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
o
n

l
l
i
t
S

-

w
e

j

e
m
o
s

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

i

g
n
w
o
r
r
o
b

r
o
y
r
e

l
l

e

y
b

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
0
2

,

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

m
o
r
f

w
o
5 L

n
a
r
i
h
t
n
e
e
v
a
R

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

”
9
2
.
6
2
’
1
2
°
9
– N

”
2
9
.
6
1
’
4
2
°
0
8

4
8
,
8
4

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

r
a
g
a
N

-
g
n
a
h
c

,
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

i

h
g
h
o
o
t

a

d
e
t
e
g
r
a
t

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

;

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
a
b
y
l
l

a
c
i
t
i
r
c
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a
d
n
a

t
e
y
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

t
o
n
s
i

e
s
u
o
h
e
h
 T
•

n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
n
o
s
a
m

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

s
i
h

d
n
o
y
e
b

h
c
u
m
y
r
e
v

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

i

g
n
m
a

i

d
n
a

n
g
i
s
e
d

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
t

g
n

i

e
b

d
n
a

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

s
r
a
e
y

e
k
a
t

l

y
e
r
u
s

l
l
i

w

t
I

.
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

b
i
s
s
o
p

s
’
y

l
i

m
a
f

.
s
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

m
u
m
n
m
o
t

i

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

l

e
b
a
t
i
b
a
h

g
n
i
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

;
g
n
i
s
s
i

m
e
r
a

s
e
h
s
a
s

i

w
o
d
n
w
e
m
o
s

d
n
a

s
r
o
o
 D
•

y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n
n
u

s
i

n
g
i
s
e
d

s
’
f
o
o
r

;
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
V
f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

d
e
s
u

t
o
n

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

;
y
d
a
b

s
k
n
i
t
s

t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

l

;
e
t
e
p
m
o
c
n

i

t
e
y

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
o
N
–

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

1
7
0
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
0
7

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
 7
•

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

t
o
n

k
o
o
b
-
g
o
 L
•

e
v
i
s
n
e
p
x
e

d
n
a

u
h
t
h
t
u
m
n
a
a
P

i

l

.
s
r

M

a
h
t
n
a
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

/

.
.
.

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
8
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
7
1

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

6
1
0
2
-
7
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

182

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

s
’
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

-
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
r
e
b
m
e
m

e
h
t

t
s
a
c
o
t

d
e
t
u

*

–

s
k
c
o
b

l

-

-

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y

l
l

u
f

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

y
b

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
5
1

,

y
a
M

l
l
i
t
4
1
0
2
r
e
b

;

Y

-

m
e
t
p
e
S
(

s
h
t
n
o
m
8

e
h
t
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

-
n
w
a
p

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
a
o

l

)

5
1
0
2

-
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

m
u
m
n
m

i

i

y
r
u
x
u

l

o
n

:
t
n
e
m

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

e
m
o
s

g
n

i

)
t
e
y

k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

t
o
n

(

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

”
8
9
.
7
5
’
3
2
°
9
– N

”
4
1
.
0
1
’
4
2
°
0
8

6
1
,
4
3
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

h
g
8 H

i

m
a
n
d
a
r
a
s
a
r
A

.
r

M

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
a
n
a
G

/

.
.
.

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
9
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
8
1

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

,
s
d
e
e
n

l

a
e
r

t
u
o
b
a

s
w
o
n
k

e
g
a

l
l
i
v

e
h
t

n

i

e
n
o
y
r
e
v
E
“
•

r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

t
n
a
r
g
a
g
n
v
e
c
e
r

i

i

t
o
n

n

i

l

m
e
b
o
r
p
o
n

s
i

e
r
e
h
t

t
a
h
t
o
s

,
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p
d
n
a

i

d
a
s

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

”
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t
d

l
i

u
b
o
t

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p
o
n

,
u
t
h
s
a
V
o
N
“

s
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
V
g
n
d
r
a
g
e
R
•

i

;
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T
•

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
V
•

i

d
a
s

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

”
e
s
u
o
h

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c
o
t

y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n

e
b

l

d
u
o
w
e
r
o
m
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
2
•

.
d
e
t
b
e
d
n

i

g
n
e
b

i

t
u
o
h
t
i

w

,
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n
e
h
t
(

s
l
a
e
m

s
u
p

l

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
3
,
1
s
a
w
y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
’
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

*
•

)

n
o
i
t
a
a
c
s
e

l

s
e
c
i
r
p

t
e
k
r
a
m
o
t

e
u
d

0
0
1
,
1
/
0
0
5
,
1
o
t

p
u

d
e
s
i
a
r

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
5
2
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
6
5

/
0
0
0
,
0
0
7

R
K
L
•

183

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

6
1
0
2
-
8
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

6
1
0
2
-
9
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

184

t
o
n

d
d

i

d
n
a
b
s
u
H

e
h
t

p
u

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

s
k
r
o
w

l

y
n
o

;
b
o

j

e
m

i
t

l
l

u
f

d
d

i

e
f
i

w

-

-

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

;

Y

-

m
e
t
p
e
S
(

s
h
t
n
o
m
8

l

.
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y

l
l

u
f

y
b

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
0
2

,

y
a
M

l
l
i
t
4
1
0
2
r
e
b

h
g
h

i

y
r
e
9 V

n
e
s
a
h
t
a
p
m
a
r
a
K

.
r

M

m
a
r
u
p
a
h
s
a
n
a
G

/

.
.
.

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
9
2

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
9
1

i

g
n
n
a
o

l

d
n
a

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

)
t
e
y

k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

t
o
n

(

)

5
1
0
2

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

”
2
3
.
9
5
’
3
2
°
9
– N

”
5
5
.
0
1
’
4
2
°
0
8

4
1
,
2
2
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y
l
t
c
e
r
r
o
c
o
t

y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n

e
b

l

d
u
o
w
e
r
o
m
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
0
 2
•

s
l
a
e
m

s
u
p

l

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
3
,
1

s
a
w
y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
’
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
 L
•

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
6
2
,
1
=
f
q
s
6
9
5

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
 7
•

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

2

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

;
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

-

-

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
i

W

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

i

l

g
n
y
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y

l
l

u
f

d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

;

N

y
r
a
u
n
a
J
(

s
h
t
n
o
m
6

)

5
1
0
2

l

y
u
J

l
l
i
t

h
g
h

i

y
r
e
V

0
1

i

a
k
p
o
K

.

K

.
s
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

u
d
n
H

i

.
.
.
/

I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

a
h
t
n
a
n
a
h
e
v
V

i

/

”
2
9
.
1
2
’
1
2
°
9
N

”
3
8
.
0
’
4
2
°
0
8

4
6
,
3
4
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

–

r
a
g
a
N

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
9
2

–
0
2

l

e
p
i
t
l
u
m

l

s
’
y
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
t

B
E
S
C
t
u
o
b
a

e
r
a
w
a

y

l
l

u
f

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
 B
•

;
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

t
n
e

l
l

e
c
x
e

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

s
k
c
o
b

l

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

n

i

d
e
p
e
h

l

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

y
n
a
 M
•

s
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l

e
b
a
s
i
 D
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

e
v
a
h
o
t

e
k

i
l

l

d
u
o
w
e
p
o
e
p

l

d
e
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

y
n
o
t
a
h
t

d
e
t
o
n

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
 B
•

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

n
o
m
m
o
c

t
o
n

,
e
s
u
o
h

l

”
a
t
n
e
m

i
r
e
p
x
e
“

n
a

h
c
u
s

185

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

l

y
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
t

l

s
k
c
o
b
B
E
S
C
h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
d
o
M

-

6
1
0
2
-
0
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

A
N

/

A
N

-

i

t
n
a
c
fi
n
g
i
s
o
N

;

Y

/

A
N

n

i

d
e
d
d
a

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

t
u
o

(

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
6

,

l
l
i
t
S

d
o
i
r
e
p

e
h
t

t
o
n

)

0
0
0

,

0
0
1

f
o

k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

)

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
5
1

-

3
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a
(

-

6
1
0
2
-
1
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

186

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

h
g
7 H

i

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

.
S

.
s
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

i

-
h
c
a
r
a
K
/
i
h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

/
L
I
K
u
d
n
H
a
h
t
i

i

m
u
S

m
a
r
u
p
a
a
y
a
a
M

l

l

/
i
h
c

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
M
9
2

–
1
2

–

1
2
0
0
/
M
P
M
/
R
A
K

;
7
5
,
”
9
2
;
’
0
2
;
°
9
N
–

;
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
r
i
a
p
e
R

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
2

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

3
7
,
”
7
3
;
’
3
2
;
°
0
8

5
5
,
7
4

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

y
l
r
e
p
o
r
p

d
n
a

y

l
i

a
d

d
e
s
u

e
r
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K
d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
T

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

;
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

f
o
o
r

m
o
r
f

i

g
n
k
a
e

l

o
 N
•

i

d
e
n
a
t
n
a
m

i

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

g
n
i
r
u
c

,
g
n
i
t
n
a
p
o
t

i

g
n
y
a

i

l

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

e
v
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
e
r
p

d
o
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
5
,
1

–

y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
n
o
s
a
m

d
n
a

s
i
h
t

n

i

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

y

l
l

u
f

s
r
e

i
l

p
p
u
s
o
s
l
a

i

d
b
o
t

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n

-
d
r
o
c
c
a
(

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

i

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t
o
t

g
n

i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

)

i

g
n
h
s
i
n
fi

c
i
s
a
b

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
b

y

l
l

u
f

t
o
n

i

,
g
n
n
a
o

l

t
e
y

i

d
a
p
e
r

)

4
1
0
2
t
s
u
g
u
A

l
l
i
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

n
e
m
o
W

-
p
u
s

y

l
l

a
e
r
C
R
V

;

Y

-
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
5
2

,

;

Y

y
r
a
u
n
a
J
(

s
h
t
n
o
m
8

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

”
7
4
.
5
1
’
6
4
°
8
– N

”
6
9
.
0
4
’
7
5
°
9
7

2
9
,
7
2
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

m

i
l
s
u
M

6
3
0
/
T
U
P
/
S
U
M
N
A
M

/

h
g
8 H

i

r
e
e
s
a
B

.

M

.
I

.
r

M

l

y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

/

i
l

a
s
u
M

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
1
3

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

R
A
N
N
A
M

–
2
2

f
e

i
l

e
b
m

i
l
s
u
M
e
h
t
o
t

e
u
d

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

t
o
n

s
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
V
•

h
t
n

i
l

p

e
h
t

r
e
v
o
s

w
o
r

k
c
o
b

l

0
3

,
”
5
1

,
h
g
h

i

l

y
e
v
i
s
s
e
c
x
e

s
i

e
g
d
 R
•

i

s
n
o
s
4

,
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

l

e
v
e

l

s
i
h
t
(

n
o
i
t
i
s
o
p
x
e

l

r
a
o
s

e
h
t
o
t

e
u
d

,
l
l

a
w
e
b
a
g

l

e
h
t

n
o
s
i

r
o
o
d

i

n
a
 M
•

)

h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

r
e
t
a

l

a
o
t

l

a
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
f

d
n
a

l

e
b
a
t
p
e
c
c
a

s
i

m
e
e
s

s
r
e
t
f
a
r

e
m
o
s

t
u
b

,
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

i

-
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

i

,
t
n
e
c
ffi
u
s
n

i

l

y
e
t
i
n
fi
e
d

e
r
a

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
 5
•

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
V
•

d
e
r
i
a
p
m

i

d
n
a

d
e
t
a
r
o
i
r
e
t
e
d

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

h
t
i

w

(

t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

h
t
o
 B
•

t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
s

’
s
e

i

i

i

n
a
t
n
a
m
d
n
a

e
s
u
o
t

y
s
a
e

e
r
a

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s

–

.
x
o
r
p
p
a

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
5
3
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
0
6

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
0
8
•

187

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

r
a
n
n
a
M

-

6
1
0
2
-
2
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

n
e
m
o
W

d
e
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
C
R
V

;

Y

-
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
5
2

,

;

Y

y
r
a
u
n
a
J
(

s
h
t
n
o
m
8

g
n
i
r
u
c

,
g
n
i
t
n
a
p
o
t

i

g
n
y
a

i

l

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

e
v
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
e
r
p

d
o
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
5
,
1

–

y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
n
o
s
a
m

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n

-
d
r
o
c
c
a
(

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

i

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t
o
t

g
n

i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

)

i

g
n
h
s
i
n
fi

c
i
s
a
b

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
b

y

l
l

u
f

t
o
n

i

,
g
n
n
a
o

l

t
e
y

i

d
a
p
e
r

)

4
1
0
2
t
s
u
g
u
A

l
l
i
t

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

r
a
n
n
a
M

-

6
1
0
2
-
3
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

188

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

h
g
8 H

i

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

.
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

m
a
m

I

.

.

M
A
M

.

l
l

u
F
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

m

i
l
s
u
M

i
l

a
s
u
M

/

R
A
N
N
A
M

/

l

N
A
M
y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

/

N
–
0
3
0
/
T
U
P
/
S
U
M

E

”
0
2
.
5
1
’
6
4
°
8

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
1
3

–
3
2

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
0
5
5

;
e
s
u
o
h

h

E
”
3
9
.
1
4
’
7
5
°
9
7

0
1
,
8
2

.

m

:
l
s
a

f
e

i
l

e
b
m

i
l
s
u
M
e
h
t
o
t

e
u
d

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

t
o
n

s
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
 V
•

h
t
n

i
l

p

e
h
t

r
e
v
o
s

w
o
r

k
c
o
b

l

0
3

,
”
5
1

,
h
g
h

i

l

y
e
v
i
s
s
e
c
x
e

s
i

e
g
d
 R
•

i

s
n
o
s

2

,
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

l

e
v
e

l

s
i
h
t
(

n
o
i
t
i
s
o
p
x
e

l

r
a
o
s

e
h
t
o
t

e
u
d

,
l
l

a
w
e
b
a
g

l

e
h
t

n
o
s
i

r
o
o
d

i

n
a
 M
•

m
e
e
s

s
r
e
t
f
a
r

e
m
o
s

t
u
b

,
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

)

h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

r
e
t
a

l

a
o
t

l

a
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
f

d
n
a

l

e
b
a
t
p
e
c
c
a

s
i

i

-
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

i

,
t
n
e
c
ffi
u
s
n

i

l

y
e
t
i
n
fi
e
d

e
r
a

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
 5
•

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

.
t
u
o
n
r
o
w
d
n
a

l

d
o

-

w
o
h
s

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

h
t
i

w

(

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

h
t
o
 B
•

t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
s

’
s
e

i

.
x
o
r
p
p
a

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
5
3
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
0
6

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
0
 8
•

i

i

n
a
t
n
a
m
d
n
a

e
s
u
o
t

y
s
a
e

e
r
a

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s

–

r
e

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r

e
t
a
D

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

-
o
e
G

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

r
a
n
n
a
M

-

6
1
0
2
-
4
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

g
n
i
r
u
c

,
g
n
i
t
n
a
p
o
t

i

g
n
y
a

i

l

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

e
v
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
e
r
p

d
o
o
w

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
1
/
0
0
5
,
1

–

y
r
a
a
s

l

y

l
i

a
d

s
n
o
s
a
m

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n

-
d
r
o
c
c
a
(

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

i

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t
o
t

g
n

i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

)

i

g
n
h
s
i
n
fi

c
i
s
a
b

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
b

y

l
l

u
f

t
o
n

i

,
g
n
n
a
o

l

t
e
y

i

d
a
p
e
r

)

4
1
0
2
t
s
u
g
u
A

l
l
i
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

n
e
m
o
W

d
e
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
C
R
V

;

Y

-
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

c
i
s
a
b

e
h
T

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
8
2

,

;

Y

y
r
a
u
n
a
J
(

s
h
t
n
o
m
8

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
0
5
5

;
e
s
u
o
h

h

E
”
2
6
.
7
3
’
7
5
°
9
7

l
l

u
F
2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

E

”
9
2
.
1
1
’
6
4
°
8

m

i
l
s
u
M

N
–
3
5
0
/
T
U
P
/
S
U
M

2
9
,
0
2

.

m

:
l
s
a

h
g
8 H

i

r
e
e
h
t
a
n
a
S

.

M
.
R
.
A

.
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

i
l

a
s
u
M

/
R
A
N
N
A
M

/

l

N
A
M
y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

/

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
1
3

–
4
2

f
e

i
l

e
b
m

i
l
s
u
M
e
h
t
o
t

e
u
d

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

t
o
n

s
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
 V
•

h
t
n

i
l

p

e
h
t

r
e
v
o
s

w
o
r

k
c
o
b

l

0
3

,
”
5
1

,
h
g
h

i

l

y
e
v
i
s
s
e
c
x
e

s
i

e
g
d
 R
•

i

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

l

e
v
e

l

s
i
h
t
(

n
o
i
t
i
s
o
p
x
e

l

r
a
o
s

e
h
t
o
t

e
u
d

,
l
l

a
w
e
b
a
g

l

e
h
t

n
o
s
i

r
o
o
d

i

n
a
 M
•

)

h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

r
e
t
a

l

a
o
t

l

a
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
f

d
n
a

l

e
b
a
t
p
e
c
c
a

s
i

t
o
n

e
r
a

s
r
e
t
f
a
r

e
m
o
s

t
u
b

,
s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

e
b

l

d
u
o
w
R
K
L

0
0
0
,
0
0
8

,
t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
s

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
 A
•

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

t
n
a
r
g

r
e
r
i
a
f

a

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

h
t
i

w

(

t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

h
t
o
 B
•

.
d
e
r
i
a
p
m

i

d
n
a

i

d
e
n
a
t
n
a
m

i

l
l

e
w

i

i

n
a
t
n
a
m
d
n
a

e
s
u
o
t

y
s
a
e

e
r
a

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s

–

.
x
o
r
p
p
a

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
9
3
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
0
6

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
3
 8
•

189

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

n
e
m
o
W

s
k
r
o
w
e
h
t
o
t

;

Y

-

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

m
o
r
f

R
K
L
0
0
0
0
0
3

,

;

Y

y

l
l

u
f

d
n
a

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

-
e
b

l
l

e
w
d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

e
h
t
o
t

n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

n

i
(

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t

i

d
n
o
y

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

d
n
a

t
n
a
r
g

t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

m
o
r
f

R
K
L
0
0
0
3
8
2

,

)
s
d
n
u
f

H
N
U

-

)

b
a
l
s

r
e

l
l

fi

,
r
e
t
s
a
p

l

d
u
m

,
s
e
m
a
r
f

s

i

w
o
d
n
w
d
n
a

s
r
o
o
d

t
s
a
c
-
e
r
p

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

d
e
c
a
f

r
i
a
f
(

e
s
u
o
h

l

e
d
o
M
–

6
1
0
2
-
5
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

r
a
n
n
a
M

190

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

y
l
i

m
a
f

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

-

h
g
h

i

y
r
e
V

0
1

s
e
e
n
A

.

H
.
S

.
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

i
l

a
s
u
M

/
R
A
N
N
A
M

/

l

N
A
M
y
e
v
u
h
t
u
P

/

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
1
3

–
5
2

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

:
l
s
a

h

”
3
2
.
7
3
’
7
5
°
9
7

E

”
5
8
.
1
1
’
6
4
°
8

0
1
,
7
1
.

m

m

i
l
s
u
M

N
–
0
3
0
/
T
U
P
/
S
U
M

,
n
e
h
c
t
i
K

,
s

m
o
o
r

3

,
d
r
a
y
t
r
u
o
c

,
e
c
n
a
r
t
n
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

:
p
u

t
e
s

e
s
u
o
 H
•

s
n
o
s
3

,
s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

2

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

g
n
v

i

i
l

,

m
o
o
r
h
t
a
b

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
T

-

w
o
h
s

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

h
t
i

w

(

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

h
t
o
 B
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

w
e
n

e
h
t

y
a

l

d
n
a

l

e
v
e

l

o
t

d
e
s
u

e
s
u
o
h

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

s
i
r
b
e
 D
•

l

e
p
i
t
l
u
m

r
i
e
h
t

f
o
s
a

l
l

e
w

s
a

,
d
e
s
u

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
n
a

i

s
e
u
q
n
h
c
e
t

e
v
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
l
a

e
h
t

f
o
d
u
o
r
p

d
n
a

e
r
a
w
a

y

l
l

u
f

e
r
a

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
 B
•

i

g
n
v
a
p

d
n
a

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s
(

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

s
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a

R
K
L

0
0
0
,
3
3
1
,
1

)

=
0
0
0
,
0
0
3
+
0
0
0
,
3
8
2
+
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

(

R
K
 L
•

i

i

n
a
t
n
a
m
d
n
a

e
s
u
o
t

y
s
a
e

e
r
a

)
e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s

–

r
e

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

6
1
0
2
-
6
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

l
l

A

d
e
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
C
R
V

;

Y

-
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

g
n
i
r
a
e
b

s
n
m
u
o
c

l

e
h
T

o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
k
r
o
w

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n

e
r
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
5
1

,

;

Y

t
o
n

i

,
g
n
n
a
o

l

y
b

t
e
y

i

d
a
p
e
r

-
e
D

(

s
h
t
n
o
m
0
1

l
l
i
t
3
1
0
2
r
e
b
m
e
c

)

4
1
0
2
r
e
b
o
t
c
O

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

i

l

a
e
h

4
2
2
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P
/
L
U
M

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

”
0
4
.
7
4
’
9
1
°
9
N
–

”
7
1
.
9
5
’
1
4
°
0
8

6
0
,
9
1
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

h
g
8 H

i

-
k
u
p
n
A
r
a
m
u
k
a
y
a

j
i

V

i

a

l
l
i

i

p
a
n
a
r
I

/

u
p
p
u
r
i
d

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
1
0

.
s
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

-
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

/
R
A
N
N
A
M

–
6
2

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

3

h
t
i

l

w
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
w
o
d
W

i

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

e
b

l

d
u
o
w
R
K
L

0
0
0
,
0
0
8

,
t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
s

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
 A
•

t
n
a
r
g

r
e
r
i
a
f

a

s
e

l
i
t

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

,
d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

e
r
a

t
r
o
f
m
o
c

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
 V
•

d
o
o
g

s
i

t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d
o
s
l
a

;
d
o
o
g

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n
 I
•

.
x
o
r
p
p
a

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
7
2
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
5
5

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
0
 7
•

e
n
e
g
y
h

i

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

n
o
d
e
n
a
r
t

i

e
r
e
w

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

,
e
s
a
h
p

n
o
i
t
p
e
c
n

i

e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
 D
•

s
e
u
s
s
i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

s
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
 V
•

191

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

l
l

A

d
e
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
C
R
V

;

Y

-
r
e
t
x
e

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
V

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

e
g
r
a

l

y
r
e
v
A

o
t

d
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
k
r
o
w

r
e
w
o
h
s

l

a
n

e
v
i
t
a
r
o
c
e
d

h
t
i

w

t
e
p
a
r
a
p

R
K
L
0
0
0
0
0
3

,

;

Y

i

d
a
p

i

,
g
n
n
a
o

l

y
b

k
c
a
b

l

y
l
r
a
u
g
e
r

-
e
D

(

s
h
t
n
o
m
0
1

l
l
i
t
3
1
0
2
r
e
b
m
e
c

)

4
1
0
2
r
e
b
o
t
c
O

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

6
1
0
2
-
7
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

192

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

2
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

/
L
U
M

i

a

l
l
i

i

p
a
n
a
r
I

N
–

8
2
2
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P

E

”
7
4
.
5
’
0
2
°
9

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

h

”
3
4
.
2
3
’
2
4
°
0
8

3
8
,
0
1

.

m

:
l
s
a

h
g
8 H

i

y
n
a
r
l
u
r
A
o
t
i
r
P

t
e
p
A

l

/

u
p
p
u
r
i
d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
1
0

.
r

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

–
7
2

e
r
o
m
e
b

l

d
u
o
w

l

e
d
o
m
a

,
d
n
a
t
s
r
e
d
n
u
o
t

t
l
u
c
ffi
d

i

e
r
e
w

i

s
g
n
w
a
r
 D
•

p
u

t
e
s

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

e
h
t

f
o
g
n
i
t
a
t
s
r
e
d
n
u

e
s
i
c
e
r
p

a

r
o
f

l

e
b
a
r
i
s
e
d

e
d
i
s
n

i

l
l

a

t
a

e
k
o
m

s
o
n

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
v

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
 V
•

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

d
o
o
g

n

i

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
 T
•

i

t
n
e
c
ffi
u
s
n

i

s
a
w

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

,
t
n
e
m
e
t
a
t
s

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b
o
t

i

g
n
d
r
o
c
c
 A
•

o
s
l
a

;
n
o
s
a
e
s

y
n
a
r

i

g
n
i
r
u
d

y

l
l

i

a
c
e
p
s
e

,
d
o
o
g

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n
 I
•

e
n
e
g
y
h

i

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

d
o
o
g

s
i

t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d

o
s
l
a

;
)
’
s
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

e
s
u

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y
l
i

m
a
f
(

d
e
s
u

t
o
n

s
i

t
e

l
i

o
 T
•

n
a
o

l

e
h
t

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

r
e
f
f
u
s
o
t

d
a
h

y
e
h
t

d
n
a

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

3

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

d
e
w
o

l
l

o
f

s
n
o
i
t
p
i
r
c
s
e
r
p

u
t
h
s
a
 V
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

e
l
t
t
o
b
s
a
g
h
t
i

w
d
e
p
p
u
q
e

i

s
i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K
s
a

,

d
e
s
u

t
o
n

s
i

y
e
n
m
h
c

i

d
e
g
n
o
o
r
p

l

b
a
l
s

e
h
t

s
a

h
c
u
s

,
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

y
r
u
x
u

l

y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n
n
  U
•

.
x
o
r
p
p
a

.
t
f

.

q
s
/
R
K
L

0
5
3
,
1
=
f
q
s
0
3
6

/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
 8
•

;
)
”
y
t
u
a
e
b

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b
“
(

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 14 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2012

-
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
r
e
b
m
e
m

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

y
n
a
M

s
k
r
o
w
o
t

d
e

C
R
V

,
e
s
a
c

l

i

a
c
e
p
s

y
n
a
m
n

i

d
e
p
e
h

l

e
h
t
o
t

e
u
D

;

Y

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

-

a

,
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

r
e
t
f
A

R
K
L

0
0
0
0
0
3

,

;

Y

y

l
l

i

a
c
ffi
o
s
k
r
o
W

n
w
o
d

t
l
e
f

e
e
r
t

l

m
a
p

f
o
t
r
a
p

i

g
n
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

i

d
a
p

i

,
g
n
n
a
o

l

y
b

e
n
u
J

n

i

d
e
t
a
n
m
r
e
t

i

k
c
a
b

l

y
l
r
a
u
g
e
r

e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
e
s
(

5
1
0
2

f
o
o
r

e
h
t

)

w
o
e
b

l

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

r
i
a
6 F

.
S

.
s

M

i

:
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
B

r
a
m
u
k
a
y
e
J

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

2
1
0
2

P
U
A

;
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
F

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
5
5

/

u
p
p
u
r
i
d
u
k
u
h
t
u
P

/
L
U
M

i

a

l
l

i

a
p
a
n
n
a
r
I

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

–
7
2
2
0
/
P
R
I
/

H
T
P

”
5
0
.
5
1
’
0
2
°
9
N

”
0
2
.
2
4
’
2
4
°
0
8

3
3
,
0
3

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
1
0

–
8
2

s
e
o
d

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

,

-

H
N
U
y
b

d
e
t
a
t
s

n
o
i
t
a
n
m
r
e
T

i

l

i

a
c
ffi
o
e
h
t

e
t
i
p
s

n
 I
•

f
o
r
u
o
v
a
f

n

i

i

n
a
d
r
a
u
g

s
a

s
t
c
a

r
a
m
u
k
a
y
e
J

.
s

M

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

)
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

d
e
n
o
d
n
a
b
a

l

e
c
n
u

d
n
a

d
e
d

i

t
n
u
a
(

s
n
i
s
u
o
c

r
e
h

:
S
E
T
O
N

.
h
c
u
s

s
a

l

e
b
a
s
u

t
o
n

s
i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t

i

h
c
a
e
r

t
o
n

-
h
c
t
i
k

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
g
n
i
s
s
i

m
e
r
a

s

i

w
o
d
n
w
d
n
a

s
r
o
o
d

e
m
o
s

:
g
n
v

i

i
l

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

l

e
b
a
t
i
u
s

a

n

i

t
o
n

s
r
a
e
p
p
a

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

,
l
l

a
r
e
v
 O
•

t
e
y

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

t
o
n

e
r
a

n
e

193

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

)
e
s
a
c

l

a
i
c
e
p
S
(

-

)

4
1
0
2
/
9
0
/
9
1

-

9
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

:
s
a

d
e
v
r
e
s
b
o
y
d
a
e
r
l
a
(

-

6
1
0
2
-
8
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o

l

e
b
a
T

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex 15 – New Proposed Type plans 
(from MTE evaluation)

Proposed New Expandable Type Plans

All  three  proposed  type-plans  illustrate  fully  functional  lockable  houses  that  have  the 
same rooms but different surface areas: 264 sq. ft., 276 sq. ft. and 361 sq. ft. respec-
tively (1). These are to be understood as house types to be further suited to local norms, 
regulations, and cultural sensitivities. For the time being they can be considered as al-
ternatives which can be incorporated within the existing programme as a cost-effective 
solution  for  those  few  households  belonging  to  the  most  vulnerable  categories,  such 
as widows/widowers living alone or with 1-2 children, childless parents and parentless 
children  who  have  not  obtained  sufficient  scoring  to  be  eligible  for  housing  support. 
There are possibilities to expand all house types in the future, as the proposed gable roof 
allows this. The principle of an expandable house, which underlies these type plans, can 
be extended beyond vulnerable groups as a possible general model in any future housing 
programme.

Figure 1:  
Three proposed new 
Expandable Type-plans – 
comparative table 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

Type 1

The 264 sq. ft. type-plan consists of only one bedroom (shrine), a living room, kitchen 
with chimney and an attached but external toilet.

(1) All room surface areas are close to, adjustable, or greater than the minimum area of rooms in residential buildings – 
Guidelines for Housing Development in Coastal Sri Lanka – NHDA, 2005

194

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 15 – NEW PROPOSED TYPE PLANS (FROM MTE EVALUATION)

Figure 2:  
New proposed type plan 
264 sq. ft. – perspective  
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

Figure 3:  
New proposed type plan 
264 sq. ft. – plan, section, 
elevations 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

195

Type 2

The 276 sq. ft. type-plan displays optimal separation between rest area and kitchen, and 
is best suitable for typical lands having stretched shape.

Figure 4:  
New proposed type plan 
276 sq. ft. – perspective 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

Figure 5:  
New proposed type plan 
276 sq. ft. – plan, section, 
elevations 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

196

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 15 – NEW PROPOSED TYPE PLANS (FROM MTE EVALUATION)

Type 3

The 361 sq. ft. type-plan allows a range of flexibility, according to the beneficiary’s pref-
erences, such as: the veranda can be closed, resulting in a storage space or it can be left 
open and used as an external roofed space for livelihood purposes (as displayed below).

Figure 6:  
New proposed type plan 
361 sq. ft. – perspective 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

Figure 7:  
New proposed type plan 
361 sq. ft. – plan, section, 
elevations 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

197

Figure 8:  
New proposed type plan 
361 sq. ft. – potential 
internal modification, 
according to households’ 
preferences  
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

All three new proposed type-plans consider all good qualities of larger house (proposed 
IPs Type-plans), so far implemented: external wall 6” thickness (a 9’ height is considered 
in  the  BOQ),  internal  walls  4”  thickness,  two  lockable  external  doors  (main  and  back 
door), a decent toilet (4’x5’) with soakage pit, a 3’ roof overhang to protect external 
walls from sun rays and rain, a >25° pitch-roof; bedroom, kitchen and toilet are plastered 
and cement floor rendered.

According to existing updated BOQs and grants amount, both 264 sq. ft. (1) and 276 sq. 
ft. (2) type plans would cost some 350,000 LKR (meaning some 200,000 LKR less than 
the currently agreed grant), whereas the 361 sq. ft. (3) type plan would raise the cost 
to 450,000 LKR. Further cost reductions are also possible through full family member 
contribution of labour, use of local resources (trees, sand), or by bulk purchasing and 
recycling materials.

Type plan 276 sq. ft. has a potential expansion up to 451 sq. ft. (one more room and a 
veranda, to be potentially walled off in the future) as shown below.

(1) 264sqf Type plan and BOQ: refer to Type plan 264sqf.pdf, Type plan 264sqf BOQ.xlsx

(2) 276sqf Type plan and BOQ: refer to Type plan 276sqf.pdf, Type plan 276sqf BOQ.xlsx

(3) 361sqf Type plan and BOQ: refer to Type plan 361sqf.pdf, Type plan 361sqf BOQ.xlsx

198

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 15 – NEW PROPOSED TYPE PLANS (FROM MTE EVALUATION)

Figure 9:  
Type plan 276sq. ft. 
potential incremental 
growth 
(Source: architect Mario 
Martelli, on behalf of the 
Evaluation team)

199

Annex 16 – The Beneficiary Selection & 
Payment Process

200

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 17 – BIBLIOGRAPHY

Annex 17 – Bibliography

Books and Published Papers

Cernea, M. M. (1997). The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced populations. World 

Development, 25(10), 1569–1587.

Cernea, M. M. (2000). Risks, safeguards and reconstruction: A model for population displacement and 

resettlement. In M. M. Cernea, & C. McDowell (Eds.), Risks and reconstruction: Experiences of 
resettles and refugees (pp. 11–55). Washington, DC: The World Bank (chap. 1).

Gunasekara, G, N. Najab and M. Mohammed (2016), No Silver Bullet: Can Financial Counselling Help 

Reduce Indebtedness?, Colombo: CEPA

Imparato, I. and J. Ruster (2003), Slum Upgrading and Participation. Lessons from Latin America, World 

Bank, Washington, June.

Lankatilleke, L., (2009) Reconstruction: a Community-Based Approach through the People’s Process of 

Development, UN-Habitat.

Lankatilleke, L., (2009), Keynote Address, Conference and Workshop on “Development From Disasters: 

Scaling Up Owner-Driven Reconstruction”, London, South Bank University, 19th-20th March.

Lyons, M. (2009), “Building Back Better: The Large-Scale Impact of Small-Scale Approaches to 

Reconstruction”, World Development, 37:2, 385-398.

Meindertsma, J.D. and C. Nixon (2012), Mid-Term Evaluation (Contract DCI-ASIE/2011/279-236) of the 

programme “Support to Conflict-Affected People through Housing in Sri Lanka” (Contract DCI-
ASIE/2010/256-210), August.

Ministère des Travaux Publics Transports et Communications de Haïti (2012), Guide de Renforcement 

Parasismique et Paracyclonique des Bâtiments, Port au Prince : MTPTC, (with the collaboration of 
the World Bank, UNOPS, Build Change, Miyamoto, Coopération Suisse and Degenkolb Engineers.

Miranda, S. AER (2009), “NEHRP Technical Guidelines”, page 5-6: chapter 1.5 “Minimum requirement”

National Building Research Organisation (2013), Engineering in Disaster Resilience, Colombo: NBRO.

National Housing Development Authority (2005), Guidelines for Housing Development in Coastal Sri 

Lanka, Colombo: NHDA.

National Physical Planning Department (2011), Sri Lanka 2011-2030. Project Proposal, Colombo: NPPD.

OECD (2008), Evaluating Development Co-operation. Summary of Key Norms and Standards, 
OECD-DAC Network on Development Co-operation. Web publication. www.oecd.org/dac/
evaluationnetwork.

Oliver-Smith, A. (1991). Successes and failures in post-disaster resettlement. Disasters, 15(1), 12–23.

Roberts & Williams (2008), Sustainability of Services for Young Children and Their Families: What 

Works? Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth, West Perth www.aracy.org.au

Romeshun, K. V. Gunasekera and M. Munas (2014), Life and Debt. Assessing Indebtedness and Socio-
Economic Conditions of Conflict-Affected Housing Beneficiaries in Jaffna, Kilinochchi and 
Mullaitivu Districts, Colombo: CEPA (Centre for Poverty Analysis). Study Series, No.7.

Schilderman, T. (2004). Adapting traditional shelter for disaster mitigation and reconstruction: Experiences 
with community-based approaches. Building Research and Information, 32(5), 414–426.

201

Skinner, R. and M. Rodell, eds. (1983), People, Poverty and Shelter. Problems of Self-Help Housing in the 

Third World, Methuen, London.

Sri Lanka Urban Multi-Hazard Disaster Mitigation Project (SLUMDMP) (2003), Guidelines for Settlement 
Planning and Construction in Flood Prone Areas, Colombo: Centre for Housing Planning and 
Building (CHPB).

UN (2014), Mission to Sri Lanka: Comments by the State on the Report of the Special Rapporteur, 

Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, Mr. Chaloka 
Beyani, Addendum, Human Rights Council, Twenty-Sixth session, Agenda Item 3, Promotion and 
protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right 
to development, June.

UN-Habitat & UNCHR (2009), The Right to Adequate Housing, Nairobi, UN-Habitat and Office of the UN 

Commissioner for Human Rights, Fact Sheet No. 21 (rev. 1).

UN-Habitat (2007), People’s Process in Post-disaster and Post-conflict Recovery and Reconstruction, 

Nairobi & Fukuoka.

UN-Habitat (2010e), Reconstruction: Through the People’s Process of Development, by Lalith 

Lankatilleke, UN-Habitat Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Fukuoka, 30 September, PowerPoint 
presentation.

UN-Habitat (2013), A Home of Our Own. Rebuilding Houses in the North of Sri Lanka, UN-Habitat, 

Nairobi.

UN-Habitat (2013), Operations Manual, Colombo: UN-Habitat.

UN-Habitat (2014), Quarterly Progress Report (No. 6) April-June 2014, Colombo: UN-Habitat, August.

UN-Habitat (2016), Improving Living Conditions in Returnee Areas of Sri Lanka through Housing, Final 

Report: January 2013 – June 2015, May.

UN-Habitat (no date), The Indian Housing Project. Construction Guide 01, Colombo: Seya Print, Borella.

Documents and Papers

HfH & WVL (2015), Developmental Housing Reconstruction Support to Sri Lanka Internally Displaced 

People, Habitat for Humanity International and World Vision Sri Lanka grant application form to EU, 
June.

UN-Habitat (2011), Beneficiary Payment Process, 1 page flow-chart.

Websites

http://www.internal-displacement.org/south-and-south-east-asia/sri-lanka/2014/almost-five-years-of-peace-

but-tens-of-thousands-of-war-displaced-still-without-solution/

Other

LinkedIn, Monitoring and Evaluation Discussion Group

WASH, FIETS sustainability approach and principles. These appear only on the Dutch WASH Alliance website: 

http://www.washalliance.nl/fiets-strategy/

Balachandran, P.K. Compromise on Housing Construction Leaves War Displaced Tamils High And Dry, 

The New Indian Express,: 29th March 2016.

202

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 18 – SCHEDULE OF QUESTIONS FOR OBSERVATIONS (AUP-2012)

Annex 18 – Schedule of Questions 
for Observations (AUP-2012)

Beneficiary 

Programme AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION Notes

1

2

3

4

Name (B); sex; age; marital status and relatives living in the house; profession; 
religious group

New house or Repaired house? Grant?

Site; district; village; house geo-ref; height on sea level; exposure to main 
environmental risks

Legal status? Did the householders held regular tenure titles in their past 
ownership?

5 Who introduced and explained the construction programme? Through 

community participatory meetings or face-to-face with the householder? FDG had 
been organized at the very beginning?

6

7

Village Reconstruction Committee VRC (or any other Committee) role?

According to your experience, are members of field-staff familiar with the 
technical guidelines?

8 Were the drawings and the technical specifications duly explained by IPs’ 

Technical Officers?

9

Is your family happy with the design? Was it clear on the paper? Did the donor 
show a real house (model 1:1 or 1:10)?

10 Were the works regularly implemented or repeatedly stopped and restarted?

11 Were both the design and the construction implemented following local 
cultural/religious beliefs or was it guided by IP representatives? Vasthu 
Sasthram?

13

Is the grant amount sufficient to complete the works?

How much extra-money have people spent on their houses? Where is this money 
coming from?

14 Comfortable with bank account and money withdraw? Any fear? Robberies, 
losses? Are families subject of harassment, extortion or corruption? If so, by 
whom?

15 Was the cash-flow regular? Were the instalments released at the expected time?

17

Site book to record: progress, expenses, accidents, visits from local/external 
Authorities, stops?

203

Beneficiary 

Programme AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION Notes

18 Was a clear Bulk purchases put in place during the works (e.g. following 

instructions given by the householders? Separate or public session with Suppliers? 
Any pre-assessed supplier? Were IPs encouraging beneficiaries to coordinate 
purchases?

19 How labours were identified and hired? Already known? Introduced by whom?

20 Were women contributions during the construction phase: what? When? 

How? Managing money? Organizing/carrying purchases out? Preparing meals for 
workers? Religious obstacles?

21 How closely supervised the construction? Frequently is a house visited by 

qualified TO?

24

Jealousy from non-beneficiaries’ side? Struggles? Obstacles?

25 Was B forced to follow a pre-determined techniques OR explained  

understood  put in place?

26 How many skilled labour (experienced masons, carpenters, electricians, plumbers, 
etc. (……) and unskilled (……..) and family components (….)? Daily wages in Rps 
for S/uS workers? Meals

27 Doubts on house results? Fears (both emotional and physical)?

28 Use of alternative materials in house construction? Y/N? What? Satisfaction 

level?

31 Most interesting technique (never known, very performing!!!)? NOTHING new?

32 Was the household trained in construction techniques AND/OR in maintenance?

Is maintenance manageable and affordable to the family?

33

34

Is there cross-ventilation and protection from rain and sun to ensure 
comfortable conditions?

Internal Kitchen and Cooking arrangements: is there adequate ventilation or 
smoke extraction methods used? Are both Toilette and Kitchen daily used? Are 
they in good conditions?

35 Would you rather appreciate external attached or detached Toilette? Are Toilette 

used by the female and male family members? Feelings or comment?

36 How will the users operate, care for and maintain the water and sanitation 

systems?

37 What methods are used for disposal of waste water, sewage and solid wastes? 
Are they acceptable practices? How close are the septic tanks (if any) to ground 
water sources (if any?)

38 Which are the closest flanking measures provided by the project (or any other 

donor)?

204

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 18 – SCHEDULE OF QUESTIONS FOR OBSERVATIONS (AUP-2012)

Beneficiary 

Programme AUP-2012 FINAL EVALUATION Notes

39 After some time from the house completion, did you note any crack, roof 

settlement, and in general building components can be still considered in good 
physical condition?

40 Non-conventional practices in the construction? Innovative cost saving 

techniques? Use of damp proof courses above foundations? Use of lintels to 
support super structure above door and window frames? Use of wall-plates to 
support the roof (rafters resting directly on the walls)?

41

Structural design appropriate to withstand natural hazards? e.g. (existence of 
plinth and ring beam, walls proportion, distances between doors, windows and 
corners, fixation of roof)?

42 Did you agree with the proposed ODA? What do you think about housing 

programme through DDA?

43

Your free comments/suggestions/complains?

NOTES:

205

Annex 19 – Logical Framework and 
Achievement of Results (AUP-2012)

206

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 19 – LOGICAL FRAMEWORK AND ACHIEVEMENT OF RESULTS (AUP-2012)

Source: UN-Habitat (2016:27).

207

PART II
BASELINE STUDY OF THE PROGRAMME
Developmental Housing Reconstruction 
Support to Sri Lankan Internally Displaced 
Persons

Programme funded by the EU’s Aid to Uprooted People (AUP) 2014 

Action titled: Homes not Houses: Building a Sustainable Future Together 

Contract No DCI-ASIE/2015/369-395

Implemented by Habitat for Humanity and world Vision Lanka

1 

Introduction

In the terms of reference for the present evaluation it was intended that a baseline survey 
be carried out for AUP-2012 during the first mission. As it was, by the time the mission 
took place, in September 2014, AUP-2012 was already well underway and it was agreed 
with the EU Delegation that a mid-term evaluation be carried out instead. The baseline 
study would be carried out for the next AUP programme, if there was one. Such a pro-
gramme was approved in 2015 which is known as AUP-2014. This is the programme 
which is the subject of the present baseline study.

It is called a baseline study rather than survey because it consists of more than a house-
hold survey and includes documentary analysis, the results of focus group discussions, 
semi-structured interviews, case studies and observations, as is explained in Chapter 2 
below (“Methods”).

Grants and the changing context of AUP-2014

The  AUP-2010  and  AUP-2012  offered  beneficiary  households  grants,  each  worth 
Rs.500,000 to 550,000 to construct 550 sq. ft. houses. Recently, the GOSL decided to 
implement a programme of 65,000 prefabricated steel houses of the same size costing 
Rs.2.1 million each. The 10,000 owner-driven housing programme being implemented 
by local governments has also set a grant level of Rs.800,000 for a 550 sq. ft. house1. The 
Indian Housing Project has similarly raised its grant from Rs.550,000 to Rs.950,000. The 
present evaluation argues that a figure of around Rs.700,000 is sufficient to complete a 
standard house assuming that beneficiaries will always add more, regardless of whether 
they  are  obliged  to  or  not2.  But,  in  any  case,  the  AUP-2014  grant  amount  should  be 
re-assessed  and  fixed  at  a  more  realistic  level  than  it  now  is.  It  should  also  consider 
whether equity is better served by raising the grant from the current Rs.550,000 level: 
if the other programmes are providing a significantly higher grant it would be unfair for 
AUP  grantees  to  receive  the  far  smaller  amount.  The  implications  of  this,  in  terms  of 
numbers of beneficiaries, should be calculated. If grants are Rs.150,000 -250,000 higher 
the budget will require that there be 25%-45% fewer of them.

1 This is expected to reduce debt levels because, it is believed, grantees will not need to resort to loans. However, it is still 
possible that they will continue to borrow in order to further improve their houses.

2 Costs can also be held down below Rs.800,000 because of a number of improvements in procurement which have been 
made during the successive AUPs such as with bulk purchase and the greater availability of experienced/skilled masons.

210

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAINTRODUCTION

Figure 1:  
Rearing goats as a livelihood, Kithul village, Batticaloa district (Observation  
no. 12 – AUP2014)

Scope of the baseline study

AUP-2014 is being implemented by Habitat for Humanity (HFH) and World Vision Lanka 
(WVL). At the time of the mission in March–April 2016 they were preparing their own 
baseline survey which they would use to help them monitor performance regularly and 
to evaluate it. The question then arises why the evaluation team should carry out a seem-
ingly duplicate survey.

First, the team’s study was not only a survey but employed additional methodological 
tools which could provide data to enrich that of the survey. The survey data itself can be 
used by the IPs to complement their own findings.

211

Figure 2:  
Focus group discussion in Karadiyanaaru village, Batticaloa as part of baseline study (24th March 2016)

Secondly, the baseline study carried out by the evaluation team was intended to con-
tribute to the IPs’ own baseline survey design. During the mission meetings were held 
between the team and  responsible IP monitoring and evaluation staff to discuss  their 
survey design and methodology. The baseline survey used by the evaluation team was 
given  to  the  IPs  before  they  started  their  own  survey  so  that  they  could  incorporate 
whatever contents they considered of value. The evaluation team’s survey questionnaire 
appears in Annex 1.

The monitoring and evaluation system

Although it was not part of its terms of reference the team considered it important to 
discuss with the implementing partners how they would monitor the AUP1. This is be-
cause the mid-term and final evaluations will benefit from good monitoring data. While 
the IPs are aware that this exercise was not part of the ToR they were keen to receive 
independent suggestions from the team.

Details of the team’s recommendations are given in Chapter Three.

1 In their proposal to the EU the IPs stated that they intended to carry out their own mid-term and final evaluations in 
addition to the independent external evaluations which the Delegation of the European Union will require.

212

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMETHODS USED FOR THE BASELINE STUDY

2  Methods used for the baseline study

The baseline study employed four main tools: a household survey, focus group discus-
sions, semi-structured interviews, case studies and observations.

2.1  Documentary analysis

Before  the  baseline  study  was  undertaken  key  project  documents  were  read,  in  par-
ticular the Grant Application (the concept note and project proposal). This allowed the 
evaluation team to inform itself of the programme scope (number of beneficiaries, geo-
graphical location, etc.), the intended results (e.g. income opportunities, financial skills 
and the strengthening of organisational capacity as well as housing) and implementation 
methodology and procedures for monitoring and evaluation.

2.2  Semi-structured interviews

Six interviews were carried out with HfH and WVL staff between 16th March and 8th April. 
Their purpose was obtaining information on the programme’s design and implementa-
tion methodology especially insofar as these had been developed since the proposal sub-
mitted to the EUD. One example of this is the methodology to be employed for carrying 
out the baseline survey and project monitoring.

2.3  Household Survey

A local survey team was sub-contracted to carry out a household survey. It carried out a 
total of 259 household interviews. These comprised 99 in Mullaitivu, 97 in Kilinochchi, 
and 63 in Batticaloa.

The purpose of the survey was to collect information on the condition of houses before 
the start of AUP-2014, potential beneficiaries’ perception of a ‘good house’, feelings of 
security, priority house improvements and livelihoods.

At the time the baseline was carried out the beneficiary lists had not yet been drawn 
up by the IPs. It was, therefore, impossible to carry out a random survey of beneficiar-
ies as was done for the final evaluation of AUP-2012. The same applies, of course, for 
non-beneficiaries.

Instead, quota sampling was carried out in the GN divisions where it was known that the 
AUP-2014 would be implemented.

The Sampling Frame

The evaluation team had been requested by the EUD to carry out 250 surveys for the 
baseline study.

213

The sample was selected by calculating the percentage of all intended beneficiaries in 
each district and surveying households in each district in proportion to this distribution. 
Households were subject to quota sampling. It was decided that the total number of 
villages  which  could  be  surveyed  in  the  time  available  was  twelve.  The  proportion  of 
villages to be covered in each district was calculated in the same way.

Baseline Sampling Frame

Pilot

Full

Total surveyed:

50

250

300

Benefi-
ciaries per 
District (%)

No. 
Villages 
(GN) to 
Visit

District

Mannar 

Vavuniya

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Ballicaloa

Total

AUP 2014 (Baseline Survey)

Survey

FGDs

SSIs

Observa-
tions

Case 
studies

0

0

37

37

25

99

0

0

5

4

3

0

0

93

93

63

12

249

0

0

2

2

1

5

0

0

4

4

2

0

0

3

4

3

10

10

0

0

2

1

2

5

The questionnaires used by the survey team are attached to this report (Annex 1) and the 
way in which the survey sample was drawn is described in Annex 2.

The  results  of  the  household  survey  are  presented  at  several  points  in  the  following 
chapters and headings.

A pilot study of 50 households was carried out to test the questionnaire’s usability which 
are apart from the sample for the full survey which appears in the table. The pilot study 
resulted in the removal of a question on caste membership which was too awkward to 
ask and could possibly jeopardise the rapport between respondent and surveyor.

2.4  Focus Group Discussions

Focus group discussions were held with community members in groups which, accord-
ing to usual practice, would ideally have numbered 10-12 persons. In reality, the number 
and composition of discussants was usually much larger than this. The experience of the 
evaluation mission in September 2014 was that it was all but impossible to control the 
number of participants. Anyone who had heard about it could present themselves, as 
well as those specifically invited, and it would be difficult to turn them away. Further-
more, the discussions were being held at the start of a housing programme in which 

214

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMETHODS USED FOR THE BASELINE STUDY

every villager wanted to participate. The major benefits which earlier programmes had 
delivered were well-known. The focus group meetings were probably seen as an oppor-
tunity to learn more. It is unsurprising then that meetings were over-subscribed.

Figure 3:  
focus group discussion in Suthanthirapuram, Mullaitivu on 5th April 2016

It was decided that it would be possible to carry out five focus group discussions for the 
baseline study in the time available. The number per district was determined in the same 
way as the household survey: in proportion to the number of beneficiaries there would 
be in each: two in Kilinochchi, two in Mullaitivu and one in Batticaloa. In the event, two 
were held in in Mullaitivu, two in Batticaloa and one in Kilinochchi. Attendances ranged 
from twenty to ninety with an average of approximately fifty1.

The purpose of the focus groups was to identify the type of existing community based 
organisations in potential beneficiary villages, existing social infrastructure and villagers’ 
priorities for additional infrastructure, attitudes to alternative building materials and vil-
lagers’ livelihoods.

Those attending included representatives of community based organisations and other 
key actors in each of the villages as well as ordinary village members. These included rep-
resentatives of such organisations as Rural Development Societies, Women’s Rural De-
velopment Societies, elderly citizens groups, and fishermen’s and farmers’ associations.

1 Exact figures were impossible to obtain in the larger gatherings where people would come in and out throughout the 
meeting. In the open-air meetings it was also sometimes difficult to know who was attending and who just happened to be 
in the vicinity!

215

Figure 4:  
Focus group discussion in Mullaivakai East village, Mullaitivu District (05th April 2016)

The discussions were open-ended but guided by the evaluator using a list of question 
topics. This list appears as Annex 1 to this report.

2.5  Case studies

It was decided that at least five case studies would be carried out for the baseline study 
in the time available. The number of case studies per district was determined in the same 
way as the household survey: in proportion to the number of beneficiaries there would 
be in each.

It was, in fact, possible to carry out 7 case studies. These were distributed across dis-
tricts as follows: Batticaloa (3), Kilinochchi (2) and Mullaitivu (2). There were none done 
in Mannar as the AUP-2014 did not include this district.

The  purpose  of  the  case  studies  was  to  gain  an  in-depth  understanding  of  villagers’ 
opinions about housing and their preferences by learning about their life histories and 
current situations. While those interviewed were yet to be selected for a housing pro-
gramme (the selection of beneficiaries for AUP-2014 had not commenced at the time 
of the evaluation and the interviewees were seen only as potential beneficiaries) it was 
also an opportunity to find out why these households had not been included in any of 
the previous programmes,  how they  felt about missing  out and  how  they had  coped 
with the situation till now. The way in which the information was gathered was through 
open-ended discussion.

216

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMETHODS USED FOR THE BASELINE STUDY

Figure 5:  
Kulal village in Karadiyanaru, Batticaloa (Case Study 4). While waiting for the formal housing 
programmes to reach them, households had mobilised scrap material brought along with them  
from the refugee camps to build temporary houses for themselves.

Figure 6:  
The use of scrap material from refugee camps in Suthanthirapuram Village in Puthukudiruppu, 
Mullaitivu(Case Study 17)

All case studies carried out for the baseline study appear in Annex 4.

217

2.6  Observations

It was decided that it would be possible to carry out ten observations for the baseline 
study in the time available. The number of case studies per district was determined in the 
same way as the household survey: in proportion to the number of beneficiaries there 
would be in each.

In fact, it proved possible to carry out twenty-three observations.

Observations were intended to show the conditions of houses (actually, all of the po-
tential applicants visited, are currently living in shacks) before the start of AUP-2014 
which have not been subject to any previous AUP. They show how the houses have been 
constructed,  the  materials  used  and  the  labour  involved.  They  also  reveal  occupants’ 
preferences with regard to building materials and house design which it is hoped that 
the AUP-2014 Implementing Partners will find useful to take up.

The houses chosen for observation were randomly selected and as many were covered 
as possible in the time available which exceeded the intended number.

A format was devised in which the technical findings have been recorded for each case 
which  allows  easy  comparison  between  them.  Results  have  been  analysed  and  some 
significant pictures included in each case to illustrate the findings. The observations are 
presented in Annex 8 of this part of the report.

Figure 7:  
Discussion with villagers and potential beneficiaries in Maruthanagar village, Kilinochchi District  
(04th April 2016)

218

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) SYSTEM

3  Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) 

System

The  team  discussed  Habitat  for  Humanity  International’s  and  World  Vision  Sri  Lanka’s 
proposed monitoring system with staff responsible in each organisation.

3.1  The M&E framework

The team found that the structure for collecting monitoring data is generally well thought 
out. HfH will focus on housing aspects while WVL will concentrate on flanking (livelihood 
support) measures. It will be important for the two partnering organisations to coordi-
nate  their  two  M&E  systems  effectively  within  the  combined  programme  framework. 
For example, HfH has developed a baseline survey which the evaluation team reviewed 
and commented upon and later found a “BL Tool” which had been developed by World 
Vision (WVL) which is different and much more extensive. The former has good, detailed 
questions  about  livelihoods  and  face  sheet  data  about  respondents  but  also  contains 
questions about houses which overlap with the HfHI survey.

The IPs summarise the monitoring and evaluation framework they will use in their grant 
application  (p. 24).  Amongst  the  various  procedures  two  planned  activities  are  worth 
singling out. The first is: “HFHSL will facilitate a monthly meeting of the District Steering 
Committee  between  representatives  of  beneficiaries,  relevant  CBOs  (VRC/RDS/WRDS), 
GN, DS or his/her nominee and any other government agencies”. As the IPs say: “This will 
enable speedy resolution to matters related to the project which requires government 
approval or intervention as well as accountability and feedback”. But it will also bring 
beneficiaries  and  their  organisations  into  the  decision  making  process  and  strengthen 
their self-confidence, legitimacy and credibility in further development actions outside 
AUP-2014 and beyond it once it has ended. Another creditable activity is described thus: 
“HFHSL  will  also  organise  periodic  community  meetings  for  accountability  reporting” 
(ibid.)

It is suggested that this element of the M&E system be closely monitored by manage-
ment as it is one which could fall by the wayside under pressures of implementation.

The  team  suggests  that  learning  reviews  also  be  carried  out  in  which  lessons  learnt 
can be identified and fed back into the management system. The reviews could include 
“most significant change” (MSC) experiences from communities which can be used as 
inputs into the mid-term and final evaluations. World Vision already has experience with 
the MSC methodology so is well–placed to implement it in this programme.

Given  the  number  of  monitoring  activities  which  are  envisaged  by  the  Implementing 
Partners it is suggested that they consider carefully the number of field monitoring staff 
they will require to implement it. Their framework is a good one but will suffer if staff are 
too few and actions are hurried.

219

The  two  partners  intend  to  carry  out  mid-term  and  final  evaluations  with  their  own 
staff. This is very good: it can only facilitate internal learning and promote buy-in to the 
process and its results. Furthermore, it will be carried out by staff who have knowledge 
of the available data and are experienced in accessing it. Of course, the EU will contract 
external evaluators to carry out independent mid-term and final evaluations. The lead 
final evaluator should certainly be external and possibly the mid-term too. This is in order 
to provide an independent, external perspective and to ensure credibility of the findings 
to third parties. However, this is an initiative that is to be encouraged.

There are some specific aspects of the proposed M&E system which deserve mention:

First,  it  incorporates  more  qualitative  measures  than  the  preceding  AUP.  For  example, 
in addition to survey, focus group discussions will be held to elicit community opinions 
and expectations. They intend to carry out learning reviews amongst staff and commu-
nities. The partners are familiar with community based tools such as the most significant 
change approach.

Secondly, the monitoring will be broader than in the previous AUP as it will contain a 
significant qualitative dimension. As mentioned above this means it will be important to 
have sufficient field staff. Reliance on university volunteers, rather than paid researchers, 
may be risky unless the IPs already have sufficient experience to show that this approach 
works. The evaluation team did not have time to look at this.

The IPs, especially WVL, has developed a monitoring tool with which they are familiar. 
This  is  the  living  standards  ranking  survey  (PLSR)  which  can  be  used  for  the  baseline 
survey as well as for monitoring. Another has been developed specifically for this pro-
gramme which is the Financial Literacy tool to assess and monitor indebtedness.

Finally, it is recommended that the IPs look at the electronic monitoring system employed 
by  UN-Habitat  /  SDC  in  AUP-2010  and  AUP-2012  which  may  provide  experience  on 
which they can build, especially if it is possible to discuss with personnel responsible for 
management of the system and managers who used the data it produced1.

3.2  The Logical Framework and Performance Tracking Matrix

The evaluation team analysed the logical framework with HfH staff responsible for coor-
dinating the M&E activities and discussed it, to a lesser extent, with the corresponding 
coordinator on the side of WVL. The team has only one recommendation in this respect:

Regarding indicators, it is suggested they be further developed to better reflect the in-
tention to increase social cohesion and other qualitative changes (“outcomes”). This in-
cludes developing a measurement tool for social cohesion.

1 It may be difficult to do this as staff from the earlier AUPs will have dissipated and there may some discomfort in their 
discussing with the new IPs how to continue the work they had intended to do themselves had UN-Habitat’s proposal been 
successful. However, this does not mean that there should be no attempt made.

220

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAMONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) SYSTEM

3.3  The Implementing Partners’ Baseline Survey

3.3.1 

Comments on the implementing partners’ survey

The evaluation team discussed the HfH baseline survey format with its monitoring and 
evaluation  coordinator  and  suggested  a  number  of  modifications.  The  Implementing 
Partner’s survey included questions about the condition of the respondent’s house, land 
ownership, sanitation, water, sanitation, road access and “other information”. All infor-
mation was to be gathered by the enumerator through observation with the household-
er verifying his/her assessment at the end of the survey.

The  evaluation  team  suggested  additional  questions  which  would  be  put  to  the 
householder.  One  of  these  was  to  ask  about  the  cost  of  the  water  the  householder 
obtains; another is their opinion about alternative sanitation options including the ex-
isting toilet. Additionally, there should be a question about solid waste disposal by the 
household.

It was also suggested to include questions about what features householders thought a 
‘good’ house would have (e.g. sturdiness, security, comfort, perceived status and space).

The team thought it important to measure existing levels of social cohesion as part of 
the baseline survey the IPs would carry out, such as the extent they collaborated with 
neighbours and participated in community based organisations.

3.3.2 

Comments on the evaluation team’s survey: limitations of the data

The evaluation team took the HfH survey format, added its own suggestions and tested 
the modified questionnaire in the field as its own baseline survey, the results of which 
are reported in various parts of this report. In this section the evaluation will make a few 
comments on its own baseline format which the IPs may find useful in its own baseline 
survey design.

The  first  comment  of  the  evaluation  team  on  its  own  survey  is  that  some  questions 
were  not  asked  correctly  by  the  enumerators.  For  example,  question 2.2.23  looks  for 
explanations to the answer in the previous question (whether they would accept com-
pressed  earth  blocks  as  a  walling  material).  The  answer  recorded  was  “not  relevant” 
for  all  respondents  whereas  what  was  expected  was  a  range  of  explanations  such  as 
“not durable” or “low status”. This shows that the enumerator did not understand the 
question  him/herself.  A  thorough  pilot  of  the  survey  instrument  would  have  detected 
this; unfortunately the evaluation’s pilot survey failed to pick this up. The same applies 
to question 2.2.25.

Another comment relates to whether questions should be closed or open-ended. Some 
of the questions are closed but will only give useful answers if they are open-ended. For 
example,  question 2.2.26  asks  respondents  whether  they  consider  “strength”  to  be  a 
feature of a ‘good’ house. Similarly the following questions ask the same about comfort, 
protection from the elements and animals, hygiene and privacy. It is unsurprising that all 

221

respondents answered that these features were either “important” or “very important”. 
These results tell us little. It would have been more useful to ask what respondents con-
sidered to be the main features of a ‘good’ house1.

1 There were some other shortcomings in the survey tool and/or the data obtained from it. For example, there is some 
overlapping of categories (namely for age and educational level in questions 2.2.4 and2.2.6 respectively. 

222

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

4  Results of the baseline study

Notwithstanding some of the weaknesses of the data identified above, the household 
survey produced some useful information to complement data produced by the other 
methods used in the baseline study. The following findings have been assembled from 
the baseline survey, focus group discussions, case studies and observations.

Beneficiary Selection (AUP-2014)

Anecdotal evidence that the AUP selection process had been somewhat unfair emerged 
during the Baseline Study for the AUP-2014 programme. One in particular, a young fam-
ily in Mullaitivu (see Case Study 16) who had a four year old child suffering from blood 
cancer  had  been  denied  a  house  since  2010  despite  their  applications  being  strongly 
endorsed  by  medical  practitioners  treating  the  child.  Their  anger  and  frustration  were 
heightened by the fact that another family member and his wife (a two member family) 
had been supported through the Indian Housing Programme to build their house in an 
adjoining property. The yet-to-be-beneficiary family is still hopeful that support would be 
coming their way very soon. Similarly, despite being injured in the war, a family, also from 
Mullaitivu, has still not received a housing grant (Case Study 17).

Figure 8:  
Anomalies in the Selection Process – While a sister and her family with two young children, 
one seriously ill, languish in a make-shift shack (top) the brother and her wife, with no other 
family members, benefitted from the Indian Housing Programme (bottom) in Suthanthirapuram, 
Puthukudiruppu, Mullaitivu (Case Study 16).

In yet another case, a female-headed household, in which the male head of household 
had  gone  missing  after  the  military  forces  had  taken  him  for  interrogation  in  2008, 
was denied a house in the AUP-2010 programme, but was successful in the AUP-2012 
programme when the application was made along with documentary evidence of the 
missing head of household (Case Study 3).

223

At the time of this evaluation, it appeared that there has been a genuine attempt by the 
newly  selected  Implementing  Partners  (Habitat  for  Humanity/World  Vision)  to  take  on 
board  the  recommendations  made  in  the  MTE  with  respect  to  selection  criteria  being 
revised to reflect a higher degree of fairness. In particular, the MTE was critical of the se-
lection criteria used in AUP-2012 (which had been adopted from the Indian Housing Pro-
gramme) where households with unmarried female members above 18 could not count 
these members towards the criterion determining the size of the household and thereby 
being discriminated against. The recommendation was for these members to be counted 
towards determining the household size. However, the new selection criteria to be used 
in AUP-2014 has positively discriminated with respect to unmarried females over 18 in the 
household by including a special criterion giving additional points for those families with 
unmarried females over 18 and also counting them towards the size of the household.

4.1  Community Based Organisations—CBOs

There are plenty of CBOs with which to work. Those present at focus group discussions 
were RDSs, WRDS, women’s groups, sports clubs, elders’ societies, youth societies, Com-
munity  Centre  Groups,  Dairy  Farm  Cooperative  Society,  Farmers’  Society,  Fishermen’s 
Society, Disabled Society, Samurdhi Society and Coconut Development Society.

The baseline survey shows membership of village organisations is extremely high with 
membership at 96-100% in the three districts of Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu and Batticaloa. 
For example, 26% of respondents were in both the WRDS and Samurdhi Society and 
another 26% in the Samurdhi Society alone and 12% in the WRDS alone. 21% of re-
spondents were members of the RDS in their village.

CBOs are a potential partner for the IPs and any development partner. In the focus group 
discussions CBO members demonstrated great enthusiasm to work in development pro-
jects for their villages but lacked financial resources. Nevertheless they have undertaken 
or contributed to efforts in their villages such as repair of roads, clearing sites for drain-
age and road construction and maintenance of public and community buildings.

The focus group discussions revealed that CBOs were aware of the relevant government 
development partners but less of those belonging to the NGO sector. Where the latter 
had worked in a village it was at the NGO’s initiative.

The evaluation team recommends that as part of a CBO capacity building component 
in their activities the IPs include:

•  mapping of potential NGOs and other sources of support and disseminating the re-

sults to CBOs

•  providing training in proposal writing
•  preparing an inventory of community assets and ascertaining priority needs, ensuring 

that flanking measures are adapted to the needs expressed in each village.

224

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

4.2  Needs Identified at Village Level

The types of needs mentioned in our FGDs are the following. However, it should be not-
ed that this represents a quick brainstorming exercise which can be improved upon by 
the IPs carrying out deeper consultations. This list is presented simply to show the wide 
range of needs identified in the five villages in which FGDs were held.

•  Training for pre-school teachers
•  Construction of paddy drying platforms
•  Toilets and safe drinking water facilities
Internal road renovation
• 
• 
Individual wells
•  Land ownership
•  Evening school classes for primary & secondary pupils
•  Dengue awareness
•  Renovation of culverts
•  Seeds and fertilisers for farmers
•  Clinic for pregnant and lactating mothers.
•  Skill development centre: language, vocational education and training (VET)
•  Small library
•  Renovation of tank for irrigation farming.
•  Renovate tanks in village to provide water in dry season
• 
•  Houses

Irrigation

The  baseline  survey  provides  more  pointers  to  key  improvements  desired  by  villagers. 
When  asked  what  physical  infrastructure  improvements  needed  to  be  made  34%  of 
respondents,  who  were  only  allowed  one  answer  each,  answered  “water  supply  and 
internal roads”. Results varied significantly between districts with Batticaloa respondents 
more concerned about internal and external roads (24%) than those in Kilinochchi (0%) 
and Mullaitivu (1%). It is possible that there are significant differences between villages 
in the same district too.

As for social infrastructure needs health, education and child care proved the most pri-
oritised at 28%, 22% and 22% respectively with all districts listing it as their first priority. 
Within health, 18% wanted a dispensary and 10% a “midwife medical centre”. Within 
education 19% wanted improvements to existing schools; only 3% gave pre-schools as 
their priority. Within the category of child care 19% of the 22% was accounted for by 
those who prioritised a day care centre or nursery. Other significant responses were for a 
playground (10%) and repairs to water reservoirs (ponds), also at 10%.

4.3  House Design

29% of all respondents in the baseline survey considered their house “permanent” rather 
than “temporary”. This will presumably be taken into account in the beneficiary selection 
process.

225

The most important improvement wanted from proposed housing programme was more 
space (36%), more security / safety (26%) and more privacy (18%). Interestingly, 10% 
gave “better relationship between family members” as the most important improvement 
wanted and one in twenty (5%) a “better relationship with neighbours”. This may reflect 
how temporary housing strains the social fabric of communities.

Regarding sanitation facilities 57% of respondents stated that they had a toilet, all wa-
ter-sealed pit latrines. However, approximately 60% of them needed repair.

Unsurprisingly, no respondent had piped water in their houses. Although 22% had their 
own wells, over 60% depended on water from a well which was over 30 feet from the 
house. (That’s not far!)

Rather more surprisingly, 48% of households had electricity connections.

60%  of  respondents  felt  “unsafe”  or  “very  unsafe”  in  their  current  houses.  38%  felt 
“fairly safe” and 2% “very safe”.

Toilets  have  been  one  very  significant  improvement  in  the  housing  programme  AUP-
2012. The Mid-Term Evaluation noted:

In Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu districts (full and repair houses) detached toilets 
have often been built many metres away from the house (a paradox, taking 
into consideration the danger of snakes and overall insecurity, especially during 
the night). This choice is due to the perception, rooted in the traditional thinking 
mainly among rural Sri Lankans, particularly of the Tamils and especially in the 
northern districts, that a toilet in any form is “dirty” and hence needs to be de-
tached and located at a distance from the main house (1) (only the urban elites 
are comfortable with internal toilets).

However, during the observations many potential applicants of the future AUP-2014 said 
that detached toilets would be preferable for hygienic reasons - due to a scarcity of water.

On the other hand, several potential AUP-2014 applicants were confused: regarding the 
toilet set-up in the envisaged new house, some said they would prefer an “internal toilet” 
(for security reasons, especially during the night), some preferred it “attached with ex-
ternal access” (such as the AUP-2012 type design), for reasons of proximity but avoiding 
problems of hygienic and some also preferred “external and detached” for the reason 
given in the Mid-Term Evaluation.

Three other interesting options were observed, as built within AUP-2012, and should be 
considered as lessons learnt within AUP-2014 (the first two positive, the third definitely 
negative).

1 A new house with an attached toilet should be introduced to new applicants through thorough capacity building sessions; people 
are now used to that and the presence of a Public Health Inspector would help in winning over people’s potential resistance

226

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

1.  In Puthuvely village (Observations nos. 22, 23, 24 - Mannar district) where an ex-
ternal, attached toilet is combined with an external washroom with shower. This is 
a good improvement indeed, as it provides family members with a larger and more 
practical set up to manage domestic and personal needs.

Figure 9:  
Toilet in an AUP-2012 implemented house attached with external access and combined with a 
washroom (Observation no. 22, Puthuveli village, Mannar District).

Figure 10:  
Toilet in an AUP-2012 
implemented house, 
attached with external 
access and combined with 
a washroom (Observation 
no. 23, Puthuveli village, 
Mannar District)

2.  Also in Puthuvely village (Observation nos. 25 - Mannar district), the Model House 
is set up with an external, attached, separate toilet and washroom; this is an even 
better  improvement  than  above,  but  too  expensive  (because  it  was  of  too  high  a 
standard) to be used as a standard solution.

227

Figure 11:  
Toilet in an AUP-2012 
implemented model 
house, attached with 
external access with 
an adjacent washroom 
(Observation no. 25, 
Puthuveli village, Mannar 
District)

3.  In Vivehantha Nagar village (Observation no. 17 - Kilinochchi district) and in Iranaipil-
lai village (Observation no. 28 - Mullaitivu district) two houses were found with inter-
nal toilets with a corridor. These two observations were very negative: both houses 
are far from completion (in spite of official documents to the contrary) and the toilets 
stink inside the house and are almost never used. In addition to this, both corridor 
and toilet add, unnecessarily, many costs and construction items (such as walls, foun-
dations, plastering, slabs and frameworks).

Figure 12 (above): 
Observation no. 17 
(Vivehantha Nagar village, 
Kilinochchi District) 
Internal toilets in  
AUP-2012 implemented 
but houses not yet 
completed. Note the 
unnecessary sizes.

228

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

As a result of the above observations the evaluation team strongly recommends that an 
awareness campaign be carried out for future AUP-2014 beneficiaries regarding attached 
toilets with external access, since this is the most suitable and reasonable arrangement in 
terms of hygiene, security, proximity and construction item optimisation (digging trench-
es, foundations, walls, etc.)1. In this regard, AUP-2014 houses with an attached toilet 
will no longer be exceptions and so it will be very easy for the Implementing Partners to 
physically show the beneficiaries the pros and cons of the different options.

In order to suggest a potential incremental element to the AUP-2014 housing scheme 
(especially in case of an increased grant), we step back to the abovementioned “wash-
room” in addition to the standardly required toilet. It can be with or without roof, more 
or less refined (with simple tin-sheets or with concrete slab: in the latter case also could 
be partially used as a storage, with shelving; simply floored or tiled, plastered or simply 
polished; with shower and/or washbasin; etc.); the costs actually would significantly vary 
because of the above choices, but in any case it would not cost more than the required 
toilet.

Figure 13: Potential 
expansion to increase 
sanitary facilities: a 
washroom 
(to be alternatively used 
as: shower; laundry; …) is 
placed before the toilet

Habitat for Humanity has drawn up an alternative house design which uses sun-dried 
clay bricks. This appears in Annex 7.

1 The mid-term evaluation report (page 68) states that: “Even in Batticaloa district, where the Evaluation Team found practical 
and recommendable attached toilets, they were external. According to the existing BOQs, stretching the toilet out of the 
squared (or rectangular) shell significantly raises the cost: more external walls obviously mean more foundations and more 
elevated structures, a larger roof, more plastering, more 6” walls, more time, and so on. On the other hand, it seems that – in 
spite of cultural traditions – people are now ready to accept a (conceptually speaking) “new” house with toilet, detached or 
attached (and beneficiaries definitely love it and recognize the great benefits for all family members)”.

229

A final point about house design is that it is recommended that physical models of 
adequate scales should be available during the initial session, when qualified ap-
plicants are expected to choose their own future house; despite models being available 
(the roof is movable, so that there is a perfectly clear view of the house interior), many 
beneficiaries stated that they made their choice on the basis of banners and 3D images.

Figure 14:  
Example of a model house

4.4  Sanitation

Surprisingly, during our way to Mannar (March 31st, 2016) we noted well-shaped, im-
pressive and huge clay-reservoirs (estimated capacity > 1,000 litres), nearby many hous-
es, surely not brand new tools to harvest rain water (we never saw something similar 
across the thousands of kilometres driven during many visits to Sri-Lankan northern and 
eastern provinces).

The above changes the entire approach to this important element of sanitation in the 
housing scheme, as 1) it displays a traditional use in many places within the AUP-2014 
targeted districts, 2) is a physical sample, useful to be touched, commented by users, 
replicable and whose manufacturing is well known in those areas, 3) could be included in 
the proposed “partially assisted ODA” approach to AUP-2014, as those reservoirs might 
be purchased in large quantity and delivered to households once the house works are 
coming to an end, 4) this creates an innovative new market in the area, aiming to save 

230

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

a traditional and peculiar skill, 5) as a traditional tool, it surely does not mismatch with 
Vashtu prescriptions, etc.

Designing an improved traditional version of the clay-reservoir is a well-worth exercise, 
aiming to stimulate designers within AUP-2014 and Local Authorities to promote system-
atic awareness campaigns across the targeted villages to convince future beneficiaries to 
seriously keep into due consideration this interesting addition to their new house.

According to the typical meteorological local conditions, an estimate about the water 
factually harvestable makes no sense, as the showers are sometime very abundant (a lot 
of water is harvested in a few minutes) or completely absent; anyhow, there is no doubt 
that during the rainy season the jar will be recharged daily, whereas during the dry sea-
son it will provide benefits for a more limited period of time. The below drawing samples 
an improved traditional clay-reservoir, having some facilities like: water level pipe, sealed 
cover, taps and valves, in order to update and improve the technical performances and 
provide a traditional system with more tools for hygienic whole purposes.

Figure 15:  
Traditional rain-water harvesting system for non-drinkable use (Northern province, between Kilinochchi 
and Mannar)

Figure 16:  
Proposed re-use of a traditional rain-water harvesting system for non-drinkable use

231

4.5  Building standards

Not all the recommendations in the AUP-2010 FTE and AUP-2012 MTE have been adopt-
ed in the design of the new AUP-2014. One which the team feels strongly should be 
taken up is the height of the spine wall as well as – consequently - that of the external 
walls. The reasoning for this is given in detail in the mid-term evaluation (pages 50-51). 
It is a technically reasonable and money-saving recommendation1.

4.6  Building Materials

Focus  group  discussions  revealed  a  high  degree  of  conservatism  regarding  accept-
able,  alternative  materials.  There  was  an  overwhelming  preference  for  cement  blocks 
for  walling  because  of  their  perceived  durability.  Soil  blocks  were  similarly  rejected  as 
their durability was questioned. They are seen as a temporary building material when a 
permanent house is what is wanted. The earth blocks may also be considered to reflect 
low status and backwardness when the newly returned refugees are looking for social 
advancement. The baseline survey confirms the a priori rejection of compressed earth 
blocks with a rejection rate of 100% in all three districts. However, this is probably be-
cause of the nature of the survey instrument: it simply asks a question and does not allow 
discussion. In eight of the observations, on the other hand, beneficiaries were found to 
be open to the use of compressed stabilized earth block (CSEB) technology as long as 
they could count on the close support of project engineers, were instructed how to use 
it and received a full explanation of about its benefits and durability and so on.

4.6.1 

Public sand mining

There is a debate about the potential environmental impact of AUP-2014 regarding the 
use of river sand. Opinions about this were expressed during the workshop held in Kilin-
ochchi (see next section), the programme’s Steering Committee meeting in Colombo and 
later in media and academic statements. It is the opinion of the evaluation team that this 
is not as dramatic an issue as sometimes portrayed2 considering the total volume of sand 
expected  to  be  used3,  which  is  relatively  small  when  compared  with  massive  building 
initiatives across the country.

It is the evaluators’ opinion that a housing programme such as AUP-2014 cannot serve 
as an experiment to develop new techniques and materials on a large scale. A reliable 

1 With special reference to the return visit to Puthuvely village (Observation nos. 22, 23, 24 - Mannar district) implemented 
houses, we still observed an unnecessary height of wall, meaning more materials, frameworks, working days, technical 
troubles and so on.

2 “Formed by erosive processes over thousands of years (John, 2009), they are now being extracted at a rate far greater than 
their renewal” in “Sand, Rarer Than One Thinks”, at http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_GEAS_March_2014.pdf.

3 In order to give readers an idea of the relatively small magnitude of the entire AUP-2014 housing programme impact on, 
in particular, river sand, we compared the proposed (roughly) 3,500 houses expected to be built under AUP-2014 with the 
newly proposed, huge, offshore Colombo City Port. AUP-2014 proposes approximately 3,500 houses which will each use 12 
cubic metres of sand which comes to a total for the entire programme of roughly 42,000 cubic metres of river sand for some 
105,000 cubic metres of cast concrete. Considering a regular design plan (4x4 metre floor area and 4 metre height) and a 
plot surface of 1 hectare (10,000 square metres), the entire volume of concrete used in AUP-2014 (including sand) would be 
equivalent to what it takes to build just one 29-storey building.

232

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

and prompt solution is due to war-affected people, some having suffered thirty years of 
displacements and having lost all their means of livelihood and many family members.

There are some burning questions to be discussed at donor and IPs’ level such as:

•  Are beneficiaries expected to be limited in using non-renewable materials, by exploit-

ing raw materials such as sand or Palmyra’s trees excessively?

•  Are they to be obliged to reduce sand mining, from both coastal and riverbed sites?1
•  Should they be made aware of coastal erosion and refrain from using raw materials 

because of that?

The evaluation team do not think so. Beneficiaries, who spontaneously live in adequate 
harmony with their environment, should be made aware of environmental risks, but they 
should be given the right to build their “once in a lifetime house” without being subject 
to broader, major environmental constrains. A greater environmental burden should be 
placed on those with greater capacity to bear it, who are not the project beneficiaries. 
The AUP-2014 house should be a solid and traditional one, built according to agreed 
national  and  local  technical  rules,  matching  beneficiaries’  needs  and  beliefs,  although 
sometimes contradicting certain reasonable technical approaches.

Figure 17:  
AUP Steering Committee Meeting, Colombo, 8th April 2016.

1 See: http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_GEAS_March_2014.pdf

233

4.6.2 

Alternative Building Materials

Throughout the observations, it was noted that no potential AUP-2014 applicants were 
neither aware of nor interested in the appropriate techniques and materials which the 
programme  is  considering  to  use.  They  said  that  they  would  only  be  confident  with 
alternative  materials  if  they  received  a  building  engineer’s  recommendation  and  then 
only if the house was sure to last longer than the present generation’s expected lifetime. 
The latter is important because housing is a non-replicable economic investment and is 
expected to serve a second family generation either through dowry or maintaining social 
status. This implies that significant effort will be required to ensure acceptability.

The evaluators agree with the EU-Delegation’s stance whereby beneficiaries should not 
be exposed to experimentation with alternative materials. Hence, the importance that 
materials and construction techniques be consolidated and well established. Further, the 
underlying reason for promoting their use in this case should primarily be for local em-
powerment (e.g. local income generation) rather than for global environmental reasons 
(e.g. vulnerable war-victims should not pay a higher cost to reduce CO2 emissions).

Rammed earth is foreign to local construction traditions and it will be very difficult to 
mainstream its use, even for the 30 proposed houses. We consider the target set by HfH 
of 2/3 of houses being in CSEB overambitious and will need to be reviewed based on 
specialist feasibility studies on the viability of production, quality assurance in production 
and construction and in beneficiary acceptance. Acceptance of techniques such as CSEB 
and filler-slabs can only be tested through genuine efforts by the implementing partner 
in mainstreaming these alternatives. However, no beneficiary should be forced to adopt 
a material or technique they do not trust and hence the donor should both be demand-
ing of the efforts but also show flexibility in adapting set targets to ensure appropriate 
materials are not imposed upon people.

Advantage should be taken of the few houses already built with CSEB: other households 
should be invited to view the houses and discuss the construction process and benefits 
with the occupants. Through discussion converts might be made to the CSEB technology.

This percentage target to be attained should be sufficient to ensure potential multiplier 
effects from the use of local materials (e.g. using CSEB would mean 100% of spending 
being made locally instead of approximately 80% ‘leaking’ out of the village when other 
materials  are  purchased)  while  minimising  rejection  by  the  community.  Much  will  be 
determined by the viability of production too. The programme should target a sufficient 
market for potential micro-entrepreneurs to flourish.

This  operational  structure  would  create  more  impact  by  managing  sand  procurement 
in bulk to the whole of AUP-2014 – not only the appropriate materials component – 
including housing and flanking measures activities. Nowadays, the GAs’ offices have a 
predetermined  allowance  (very  limited,  on  a  monthly  basis)  to  mine  and  sell  riverbed 
sand,  leaving  in  turn  a  large  amount  of  land  vulnerable  to  illegal  mining  throughout 
the  programme’s  targeted  districts.  However,  the  evaluation  team  was  told  by  public 

234

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

officers  that  more  generous  allowances  of  sand  could  potentially  be  permitted  under 
certain  circumstances,  such  as  an  obviously  large  housing  programme  like  AUP-2014. 
Such permission would offer numerous benefits given that 1) GAs’ offices (in Batticaloa, 
Mullaitivu, Kilinochchi districts) would have full supervision of the actual quantities and 
quality of materials mined in their respective districts, 2) private companies would enjoy 
transport to the housing scheme’s targeted villages at agreed rates and 3) beneficiaries 
and  IPs  would  reduce  time  and  money  expenditures,  assured  of  the  quality  and  the 
source. Moreover, sand procurement in this way could be a powerful tool to stabilize 
raw materials prices, as the whole chain is well known by the public and transparent to 
all stakeholders.

Carrying  out  procurement  in  this  way  would  turn  AUP-2014  into  a  partially  assisted 
Owner Driven Approach (ODA). The argument for providing this assistance to what is 
supposed to be owner-driven is extensively argued in the MTE1 and the evaluation team 
restates its earlier arguments here.

If a “partially assisted ODA” approach were adopted it could include reviewing the pro-
ject management plan to reduce the time taken in construction2 and consequently the 
loss of income for those beneficiaries involved in building on a daily basis.

4.6.3  Workshop with implementing partners

The  evaluation  team  held  a  one-day  workshop  for  implementing  partners  halfway 
through  their  fieldwork  which  was  intended  both  as  a  capacity  building  exercise  and 
an opportunity to verify the team’s findings to date. The list of the participants to the 
workshop is presented in Annex 3.

The workshop was entitled Promoting Beneficiary Acceptance of Alternative Low-Cost 
and  Environmentally-Friendly  Construction  Methods  and  Materials3.  The  day  started 
with a presentation by the team and a brainstorming session on Beneficiary Resistance 
and Acceptance in Housing Programmes. This was followed by a series of group exercis-
es and presentations on:

(i)  current attitudes to appropriate low-cost methods and materials in N. and E. Sri Lan-

ka,

(ii)  gaining acceptance of appropriate low-cost methods and materials in AUP-2014 and
(iii) building acceptability into AUP-2014.

According to the feedback received from the workshop participants at the end of the 
day, it was well received and considered of value. Figures 18-21 show some moments 
from the workshop.

1 MTE, 9.10 Recommandations, page 70

2 MTE, 9.2 Construction timing, pages 54-55

3 The PowerPoint presentation is reproduced in Annex 5 below.

235

Figures 18-21:  
(left to right, top row first): working group discussion; introduction to context of workshop by EUD; 
presentation of working group findings; AUP-2012 beneficiary prior to explaining how a house can be 
fully built with the 550,000 LKR grant.

The key messages of the workshop were:

1.  Alternative technologies need to meet social needs (e.g. status, aesthetics) as well as 

be technically sound;

2.  It is important to understand the reasons for resistance to change;
3.  There is a range of approaches and techniques which may be employed to overcome 

resistance (e.g. incentives to use new technologies, demonstration houses);

4.  Changing beliefs and attitudes is a long-term strategy but we need to develop short- 

and medium-term approaches too (within the lifetime of the project).

A special guest at the workshop was Ms Arulambikai (affectionately referred to as Thevi 
Akka). A beneficiary of the AUP-2012 programme completed her house within 70 days 
and  within  budget.  Project  officials  were  so  impressed  by  her  performance  that  they 
began to refer other beneficiaries facing difficulties in their own construction to her. She 
claims that she helped 30 such beneficiaries to complete their houses. In the same way, 
beneficiaries  who  have  used  alternative  technologies  could  help  by  demonstrating  to 
others what the benefits and costs are.

236

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKARESULTS OF THE BASELINE STUDY

4.7  The construction process

Regarding construction skills 22% of interviewees in Kilinochchi claimed that they had 
such  skills  (two-thirds  of  these  were  masons  with  the  rest  carpenters  or  electricians); 
the  corresponding  figure  was  14%  in  Mullaitivu  (all  but  one  masons)  and  only  6%  in 
Batticaloa (two masons and one electrician). If the IPs of AUP-2014 decide that these 
figures are not high enough it should be noted that the National Housing Development 
Authority (NHDA) has funds for hundreds of training courses and is ready to collaborate 
with the programme.

However, it should be noted that the MTE found that very few of the beneficiaries’ family 
members used the construction skills they acquired during the AUP-2010 and AUP-2012 
programmes.  Almost  all  of  them  returned  to  traditional  employment  (mostly  farming) 
and did not start a new career in construction. This may partly be because farming has a 
higher social status than being an unskilled construction labourer. In any case, it seems 
as if acquired construction skills do not necessarily translate into new employment. Al-
though untested as a hypothesis, it may be that a higher level of training to semi-skilled 
proficiency will have more impact as status rises and the potential for higher incomes 
prove attractive.

There are exceptional cases of (women) builders who have managed to complete their 
houses within the grant limits which many beneficiaries have claimed they could not do. 
It is useful for the AUP-2014 IPs to analyse these cases and whether their experience can 
be scaled up. One such case was reported in the MTE report1. Another was discovered 
during the baseline study. The case of “Devi” was presented in person to the workshop 
participants in Kilinochchi and explained to the Steering Committee held in Colombo. 
This beneficiary acted as a contractor for other households and somehow managed to 
build within time and budget. How precisely she did this needs research but includes op-
timizing procurement, efficient use of labour and maximising beneficiaries’ responsibility.

4.8  Employment

The household survey found that farming was the largest employment sector covering 
31%  of  respondents  with  fishing  and  livestock  rearing  accounting  for  another  10%. 
The next largest group was unskilled labour at 13% with skilled labour at 11%. 12% of 
respondents claimed to be self-employed with another 7% owning small businesses. 7% 
of those interviewed were employed in public service and 8% of household heads were 
reported as working abroad.

99% of respondents claimed to be in full-time employment (i.e. working more than 50% 
of the working week) with 36% stating that they were able to save regularly. Batticaloa 
respondents were the highest in the latter category at 44%.

1 A woman (FHH – see Observation no. 30; in this current FTE Observation no. 01) saved some 50,000 LKR, by using sand for 
plastering from her plot and casting all blocks by herself

237

4.9  Borrowing and indebtedness

The  MTE  and  the  Final  Evaluation  of  AUP-2012  showed  the  serious  consequences  of 
pursuing housing construction without some discipline with expenditures. If it were prac-
tical to use a household’s propensity to borrow as a criterion in the beneficiary selection 
process  it  would  perhaps  be  possible  to  reduce  indebtedness.  However,  past  studies 
have shown that this would not be possible as almost all beneficiaries in AUP-2010 and 
AUP-2012 were inclined  to  borrow at some stage. This being said, families with  high 
levels of debt prior to being selected in the programme need to be closely monitored 
and guided through difficult situations. In the Baseline Study for AUP-2014 a particular 
case was found to be heavily indebted, yet was in urgent need of housing assistance 
(Case Study 14).

In the household survey for the final evaluation, when respondents were asked where 
they would obtain money in times of need or emergency 49% said they would only turn 
to a family member, friend, neighbour or a Samurdhi Society. Only 13% gave bank, pawn 
shop  or  money  lender  as  their  sole  recourse  though  38%  included  them  as  possible 
sources along with family, friends or neighbours.

The survey of potential beneficiaries also found that there is a widespread practice of 
borrowing informally (Annex 2 – Table 2.2.40), which suggests that in any given difficult 
circumstance in the construction process there would be a tendency to reach out to local 
money lenders who would be quick to exploit the situation. As for saving practices, only 
a third of those surveyed responded positively (Table 2.2.39)

Surprisingly,  however,  the  non-participant  observations  found  that  100%  of  potential 
applicants to AUP-2014 seemed to dislike the idea of acquiring debts for a new house. 
They seemed very prudent and conscious of the risk of entering into a vicious circle of 
borrowing (or pawning) and having to pay unmanageable rates of interest1. This contra-
diction with the findings of the household survey is worth the IPs investigating further.

4.10  Dependency

Almost all those interviewed during the observation process believe that externally fund-
ed  help  for  similar  housing  programmes  will  continue  indefinitely  beyond  AUP-2014. 
One response to a question whether the non-selection of some villagers might affect 
social cohesion negatively was “No problem at all, since if we or others in the village do 
not qualify for this programme, we will keep waiting for the next one”.

1 In detail, they appeared shocked about past experiences (got indebted building their shacks after resettlement) and 
definitely not willing repeat similar experiences; “we do not care about luxury items, priorities are schooling our children and 
health”, many said

238

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKACONTINUITY BETWEEN AUP-2012 AND AUP-2014

5  Continuity between AUP-2012 

and AUP-2014

In an interview the Batticaloa Government Agent Mrs. P.S.M. Charles pointed out the 
different approaches used by different housing programmes in her district. She referred 
to the very good implementation by UN-Habitat and other supporting agencies during 
AUP-2012 and contrasted it with the Indian Housing Project (as largely implemented by 
other agencies) during its first phase of implementation1 (though this later improved).

The GA advocated a much stronger focus on fully integrated implementation (housing, 
flanking measures, strong social components and community empowerment) and rec-
ommended the IP for the coming AUP-2014 focus on the needier villages (which she 
estimated at some 35) where vulnerable people are still lacking help after resettlement.

5.1  Recommendations of the AUP-2012 Mid-Term Evaluation

Many of the recommendations made by the evaluation team in the AUP-2012 mid-term 
evaluation are taken up in the design of AUP-2014. Examples of this are in the areas of:

Beneficiary  selection.  However  it  should  be  pointed  out  that,  with  regard  to  the  pro-
posed  scoring  system  for  AUP-2014,  a  sense  of  complete  unfairness  was  observed  in 
Mullaitivu (Mullivaikai East village) where a group of potential applicants2 to AUP-2014 
explained their mistrust of selection systems. In the past they suffered because the IHP 
scoring system did not take into account both Divisional Secretary lists and the actually 
more vulnerable families. In particular, a group of widow-headed potential applicants3 
to  AUP-2014  complained  about  the  scoring  system  they  experienced  in  the  past  and 
claimed they had not been scored appropriately, having also been disqualified from pre-
vious housing programmes. Opinions found in the observations and the interview held 
with the Karachchi Divisional Secretary (Kilinochchi district) were in favour of a dedicated 
scoring system for special cases which would allow the inclusion of the most vulnerable 
applicants.

Incremental housing

•  Livelihoods
•  Alternative building materials
• 
•  Creation of affordable sources of borrowing
•  Financial literacy training
•  Strengthening CBOs

1 She noted in detail “a lack of explanation from Technical Officers and bad quality materials”

2 See Observations nos.: 35, 36, 37

3 See Observations nos.: 12, 38, 39, 40

239

The MTE of AUP-2012 included a chapter on “The Spread of Benefits”. It has been es-
timated that when AUP-2014 has ended there will be a remaining 135,000 houses in 
need of repair or rebuilding. On average, if house costs are €4,000 for the AUP-2014 
programme,  the  elimination  of  this  deficit  would  require  €540,000,000.  This  is  many 
times  more  than  what  will  have  been  spent  in  AUP-2010,  AUP-2012  and  the  future 
AUP-2014. Therefore the evaluation team still believes and strongly recommends that for 
future programmes to reach their maximum breadth of housing production, costs need 
to be examined and cheaper options found. The team has already carried out an exer-
cise1 which sought to do this and believe these proposed alternative plans are still valid2.

It is hoped that IPs within AUP-2014 will evaluate the proposed type plans (or any simi-
lar), taking into account local religious beliefs and official regulations and revise the new 
proposed plans accordingly.

Not  all  recommendations  have  been  taken  up  and  the  team  considers  that  they  are 
worth reconsideration on the part Habitat for Humanity International as the implement-
ing partner responsible for the housing component of the programme. These are in the 
areas of building materials and building standards (discussed above in sections 4.4. and 
4.5.) However, it should be noted that the evaluation team’s terms of reference did not 
include assessment  of the programme design and so these comments remain only  as 
suggestions.

5.2 

Institutional Memory

The same point about the scope of the team’s terms of reference applies to its concerns 
about the possible loss of institutional memory which was accumulated by implementing 
partners of previous AUPs. This applies in particular to UN-Habitat which had the lead 
role in AUP-2010 and AUP-2012. The organisation accumulated an enormous amount 
of capacity and knowledge during these programmes and possessed many experienced 
and skilled staff. The evaluation team suggest that HfH and WVL look for a way to incor-
porate as much of this capability as possible such as through the recruitment of UN-Hab-
itat data experts, engineers, Technical and Social Officers who have become available in 
June 2016 on termination of AUP-2012.

Where relevant the EUD could facilitate the transfer of data and network information 
from UN-Habitat to the new Implementing Partners.

1 See MTE, pages 26-34

2 If qualified, a single, widow household applicant in Kithul village (Batticaloa district) would just claim for a “one room 
house” (plus internal Kitchen, Toilet and veranda) as her dream-house (see Obs. No. 12). Such a condition, with only one 
vulnerable family member, should be considered within the proposed special cases dedicated scoring system, as it will 
increase the impact of the programme and the spread of benefits with relatively little disbursement of grants.

240

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAPART II - ANNEXES

Annex 1 – AUP-2014-Household Survey 
Questionnaire – Format

Introduction: The introduction should be read CLEARLY and ExACTLY by the enumer-
ator:

“Good morning/afternoon. My name is …………………………………………….., and 
I represent the {Mohammed Jiffry} company. We are carrying out a survey to help imple-
ment a housing and infrastructure rehabilitation project in this village which is financed 
by the European Union.

We are conducting a survey to identify and measure the housing and infrastructure 
situation at the start of the project so that later we can measure progress.

We do not know whether you will be a beneficiary of this project or not.

Are you willing to answer questions about this? Your answers will be confidential.

WAIT FOR A VERBAL RESPONSE and

If they said YES, thank them and begin

If they said NO, thank them and move on

1. FACE SHEET

Beneficiary or non-beneficiary 
household

Beneficiary

Non-
Beneficiary

This cell to be filled in when 
selection process is completed

District:

Respondent number 

(survey code number)

Name of respondent

Relationship of the respondent  
to the applicant (if different)

Female headed household

Children over 18 living in the house?

Aged (60 years and over)

242

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – AUP-2014-HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – FORMAT

Relationship

Age

Religion

Name of 
Family 
Member

Education

Caste
Question 
removed at 
pilot stage

2. HOUSING

2. Condition of the damaged house

2.1 Interviewer’s assessment of the house (place an “x” next to the appropriate boxes)

2.1.1 The house is

Damaged

Not Damaged

2.1.3 Presently the respondent

Lives in the identified  
house

Does not live in the identified 
house

2.1.4 The house is a

Permanent house

Temporary house

2.1.5 The house has been

Repaired

Not Repaired

2.2 Present condition of the damaged house / The approximate total floor area 

of the house that is being assessed (Place an “X” in the correct place

Description

None  1 – 20% 21 – 40% 41 – 60% 61 – 80% 81 – 100%

Damage to the roof

Damage to the walls

Plastering (internal/ external)

Windows/ doors

Floor

Damage to the foundation

201 – 300 sq. ft.

301 – 400 sq. ft.

401 – 550 sq. ft.

551 to over 551 sq. ft.

243

2.3 Current building materials used

2.5 Foundation

Rubble/Mud

Rubble/Cement

Brick/Mud

Brick/Cement

2.6 Flooring

Gravel

2.7 Walls

2.8 Roofing 

Brick

Tiled

Cement

Block

Tiled

Mud 

Other

Other

Cadjan

Tin sheet Asbestos

Concrete Slab Other

2.4 Attitudes to alternative building materials

Would you use any of the following building materials to build or repair your house?

Yes  No

Please explain your answer

Compressed earth walls

Clay roofing tiles

Salvaged materials (doors, 
windows, rafters, …)

2.5 Selection criteria

Would you agree with a scoring system, whatever the outcome (favourable; unfavour-
able) will be?

Yes

With some 
doubt

No

Not at all

Please explain your answer

2.6 Concept of a good house

What are the most important features of a house for you?

(Respondent should give own answers and the rate how important each feature is)

Very 
important

Important

Of some (but 
not much) 
importance

Strong structure (will not fall down)

Comfort

Protection (from weather, dust, animals, etc.) 

244

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – AUP-2014-HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – FORMAT

Very 
important

Important

Of some (but 
not much) 
importance

Hygiene (easily cleaned, etc.)

Privacy

Security, safety

Beauty (social appreciation)

Makes me proud

Other (please specify)

Do  you  know  about  –  or  have  you  visited  –  houses  built  within  other  Housing  Pro-
grammes?

No

Yes

If Yes

Did you like?

Any comment?

Too basic?

2.7 Feeling of security in house

How safe do you feel at present in your house?

Very safe

Fairly safe

Unsafe

Very unsafe

Please explain your answer

How safe do you would feel in a house made with cement blocks?

Very safe

Fairly safe

Unsafe

Very unsafe

Please explain your answer

245

2.8. Priority house improvements

What are the most important improvements the proposed housing programme should 
provide?

(Please read out and mark any which apply)

More privacy

More space / rooms

Better relationships between family members

Better relationships with neighbours

Enhanced social admiration

More security / safety

Better hygiene

Others (please specify):

3. LAND

3.1 Is the applicant the land owner?

3.2 If not, the name of the owner

3.3 Relationship of owner to the applicant

3.4 Is copy of the letter consenting to applicant’s use 
provided?

Yes

Yes

3.5 Does applicant have title documents (ask to see them)? Yes

3.6 If not, has ownership been certified by DS?

Yes

No

No

No

No

3. If “No” to 3.6, who owns the land where you live?

State

Private

Land belonging to a place 
of worship

3.8 Is the site suitable for construction?

3.9 If NO, Please Explain

3.11 Is this land flood prone?

3.12 Is this land wild animal prone?

3.13 Is this land big enough to fence and rent a portion?

3.14 if yes, Would you be willing to do so?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

246

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – AUP-2014-HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – FORMAT

4. SANITATION

4.1 Do you have a toilet?

Yes

No

(If “yes”)

Simple pit toilet

4.2 What type of 
toilet is it?

Water sealed pit toilet

Water sealed septic toilet

Public toilet

Other (please specify)

4.3 Distance between toilet closest well

< 30 feet

≥ 30 feet

4.4 If individual, 
condition of the 
existing toilet

Damaged

Not damaged Need Improvement No need of 

improvement

4.5 How did you get 
it?

Through 
humanitarian 
organization

Through GoSL 
/ Div.Sec.

Using own self’s 
savings

Using relatives’ 
savings

4.6 In a dream future 
house, where would 
you like to place the 
toilet?

As far as 
possible from 
house

Detached, but 
close to the 
house

Attached to the 
house, through an 
external door

Attached to 
the house, 
through an 
internal door

5. WATER

Where do you get you water from?

Piped water in my house

My own well

Shared well (within 30 feet of my house)

Shared well (more than 30 feet from my house)

Water vendors

Own water tank

River

Other (please specify)

247

6. ELECTRICITY

Do you have electricity 
in your house?

If yes, how did you 
get it?

Yes

No

Through hu-
manitarian 
organization

Through 
GoSL / Div.
Sec.

With own 
savings

With 
relatives’ 
savings

By 
borrowing 
money / 
pawning 
jewellery

7. PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

(Do not read list; ask respondent open-endedly and indicate those which apply below)

What physical infrastructure do you think needs to be 
provided or improved in this village?

Type of Physical Infrastructure

Drainage

Roads (internal)

Roads (external)

Street lighting

Solid waste disposal (only for environmental reasons)

Solid waste disposal (also for economic reasons – direct/
indirect incomes)

Other (please specify)

8. SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE

(Do not read list; ask respondent open-endedly and indicate those which apply below)

What social infrastructure do you think needs to be 
provided or improved in this village?

Type of Social Infrastructure

Education (type, location, cost)

Health facilities (type, location, cost)

Recreational facilities (type, location, cost)

Child care

Other (please specify)

248

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – AUP-2014-HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – FORMAT

9. LIVELIHOODS

9.1 Employment

What work do you and your family do?

(Fill in all family members living in the same house who work and what they do)

Family member 
(relationship to 
respondent)

Name of Respondent

Nature of work

Full- or Part-Time

Full-Time  
(more than 50%)

Part-Time  
(50% or less)

9.2 Disposable income

Are you or your family members regularly able to save any money?

Yes 

No

9.3 Access to finance

If you have an emergency and need money where do you get it from?

(Read out to respondent and indicate all applicable)

Another family member

A neighbour

A friend (who is not a neighbour)

A money lender

A bank

A pawn shop

249

Other (please specify):

9.4 Construction skills

Do you have any construction skills?

Yes

No

What are they?

Carpentry

Masonry

Other (please specify):

10. SOCIAL COHESION

Are you a member of any 
organization in this village?

Yes

No

(If “yes” please ask respondent which organization they are a member of)

Name of organisation

(If “yes” ask the respondent what they do in this organisation)

Name of organization

What respondent does

Interviewer certification

I certify the damaged assessment for the above house was carried out correctly

250

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 1 – AUP-2014-HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – FORMAT

________________________ 
Name of Interviewer 

_________________ 
Signature 

________________ 
Date

Survey Coordinator

The procedure for the collection of data for the Housing Project has been correctly car-
ried out.

________________________ 
Name of Coordinator 

_________________ 
Signature 

________________ 
Date

Respondent

I accept the damage assessment indicated above. This was removed at the pilot sur-
vey stage

I DO NOT accept the damage assessment indicated above.

________________________ 
Name 

_________________ 
Signature 

________________ 
Date

251

Annex 2 – Household Survey AUP-2014: 
Report

2.1 AUP-2014 Baseline Survey Distribution in Three Districts

The Baseline Survey for AUP-2014 potential beneficiaries was conducted for 259 house-
holds in 12 Grama Niladari Divisions in only the three Districts Kilinochchi, Mullativu and 
Batticaloa where the AUP-2014 is to be targeted. Table 1.2 illustrates the GN Division 
wise distribution for the Baseline Survey.

Table 2.1 - AUP-2014 Baseline Survey Distribution in Three Districts

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

GN Divisions

Dharmapuram

Maruthanagar

Mavadiamman

Kilinochchi Town

Punnaineeravi

Suthanthirapuram

Mulliwaikkal-East

Theravil

Mulliwaikkal-West

Karadiyanaru

Koppaweli

Veppawattuwan

18

20

18

20

21

23

24

23

29

Total

97

99

18

20

18

20

21

23

24

23

29

13

25

25

259

13

25

25

63

252

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

2.2 AUP-2014 Baseline Survey Analysis

Table 2.2.1 - Respondent Family Category /Vulnerability

District 

Kilinochchi Mullaitheevu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

Respondent 
Category

Female Headed 
Household

28

29

15

15

Aged 
(Over 60 years)

Disabled

None of above

14

14

16

16

2

53

97

2

55

100

6

62

99

6

63

100

Total

8

9

1

45

63

13

51

20

14

39

15

2

9

71 160

3

62

100 259

100

Table 2.2.2 - Education Level of Family Members

Education of Family Member

Frequency

Percentage

Valid 
Percentage

Cumulative 
Percentage

Valid

Child/under 05

No Education

Grade 01- 05

Grade 05-09

Up to O/L

Up to A/L

Graduate

Total

87

47

220

274

202

96

14

940

9.3

5.0

23.4

29.1

21.5

10.2

1.5

9.3

5.0

23.4

29.1

21.5

10.2

1.5

100.0

100.0

9.3

14.3

37.7

66.8

88.3

98.5

100.0

253

Table 2.2.3 - Presently House Damaged on Not

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

Was the house 
damaged in 
the war?

Damaged

96

99

97

98

63

100 256

99

Not Damaged

No house - 
newly married

1

0

1

0

0

2

0

2

0

0

0

0

1

2

0

1

Total

97

100

99

100

63

100 259 100

Note: - Enumerators were instructed to visit more damaged houses to get more possible 
beneficiaries to the baseline

Table 2.2.4 - The Identified House in Occupation

District 

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

77

20

79

21

91

94

6

6

40

23

63 208

81

37

49

19

Does the 
respondent 
currently live in 
the identified 
house?

Lives in the 
identified house

Does not live in 
the identified 
house

Total

97

100

97

100

63

100 257 100

Table 2.2.5 - State of the House

District 

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No % No %

Is the house 
permanent or 
temporary?

Permanent house

Temporary house

31

66

32

68

31

67

32

68

14

49

22

76

78 182

29

71

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100 258 100

254

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.6 - Floor Area of the House

Approximate 
total floor 
area

201-300 sq. ft.

301-400 sq. ft.

401-550 sq. ft.

551 to over 551 
sq. ft.

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

66

26

5

0

68

27

5

0

60

25

12

1

61

26

12

1

44

19

0

0

70 170

30

0

0

70

17

1

66

27

7

0

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100 258 100

Table 2.2.7 - Roof Damage Assessment

District

Kilinochchi Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No % No

% No % No %

Roof Damage Percentage (This 
is an estimate of replacement 
requirement rather than 
physical damage - Most of 
the roofs are temporary (tin, 
sheets, cadjan and asbestos).

None

21-40%

41-60%

61-80%

1

1

0

7

1

1

0

7

Total

81-100%

88

97

91

100

0

2

1

17

78

98

0

2

1

17

80

100

1

3

5

6

48

63

2

5

8

2

6

6

10

30

76 214

1

2

2

12

83

100 258 100

Table 2.2.8 - Walls Damage Assessment

Walls Damage 
Percentage – Again, 
it’s the replacement 
that’s been assessed – 
mud, tin sheets, cadjan 
walls considered as 
“damaged”

None

21-40%

41-60%

61-80%

81-100%

Total

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

% No % No %

1

1

0

13

82

97

1

1

0

13

85

100

0

1

11

13

73

98

0

1

11

13

74

100

1

2

5

10

45

63

2

3

8

16

2

4

16

36

71 200

1

2

6

14

78

100 258 100

255

Table 2.2.9 - Assessment of Doors and Windows Damage

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

Windows and doors 
damage Percentage

Total

21-40%

41-60%

61-80%

81-100%

0

1

15

81

97

0

1

15

84

100

0

7

14

77

98

0

7

14

79

100

2

4

16

41

63

3

6

25

65

2

12

45

199

1

5

17

77

100

258

100

Table 2.2.10 - Floor Damage Assessment

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

0

2

8

23

64

97

0

2

8

24

66

100

0

3

18

17

60

98

0

3

18

17

61

100

2

4

3

17

37

63

3

6

5

27

2

9

29

57

59 161

1

3

11

22

62

100 258

100

Floor Damage 
Percentage

Total

1-20%

21-40%

41-60%

61-80%

81-100%

256

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.11 - Foundation Damages Assessment

Foundation Damage Percentage * District Cross tabulation

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

Foundation 
Damage 
Percentage

Total

None

1-20%

21-40%

41-60%

61-80%

81-100%

1

1

5

10

33

47

97

1

1

5

10

34

48

100

Table 2.2.12 - Materials Used for Foundation

0

1

12

12

15

58

98

0

1

12

12

15

59

100

District

0

4

3

4

16

36

63

0

6

5

6

25

57

100

1

6

20

26

64

141

258

0

2

8

10

25

55

100

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

Foundation 
Materials

Rubble/Mud

Rubble/Cement

Brick/Mud

Brick/Cement

Total

27

24

7

39

97

28

25

7

40

100

18

19

13

48

98

18

19

13

49

100

19

10

3

31

63

30

16

5

64

53

23

49

118

25

21

9

46

100

258

100

Table 2.2.13 - Flooring Materials Used for Housing

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

Flooring 
Materials

Total

Gravel/Clay

Cement

39

58

97

40

60

100

21

77

98

21

79

100

18

45

63

29

71

78

180

30

70

100

258

100

257

Table 2.2.14 - Wall Materials Used for Housing

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No

%

34

10

24

29

97

35

10

25

30

100

40

2

15

41

98

41

2

15

42

19

9

12

23

30

14

19

37

93

21

51

93

36

8

20

36

100

63 100

258

100

Walls materials Brick

Block

Mud

Tin sheets

Total

Table 2.2.15 - Roofing Materials Used for Housing

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

Roofing 
materials

Tiled

Cadjan

Tin sheets

Asbestos

Concrete Slab

3

22

67

5

0

3

23

69

5

0

4

6

4

6

86

88

2

0

2

0

12

7

42

0

2

19

11

19

35

67 195

0

3

7

2

7

14

76

3

1

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100 258

100

Table 2.2.16 - Respondent views on Strong Structure

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

81

84

82

84

53

84 216

84

16

97

16

100

16

98

16

100

10

63

16

42

16

100 258

100

How important is a 
strong structure  
(will not fall down) 
for house?

Very 
important

Important

Total

258

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.17 - Respondent View of Comfort in the House

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

How important 
is Comfort for 
the house?

Very 
important

Important

Total

75

22

97

77

23

100

77

21

98

79

21

100

50

13

63

79 202

78

21

56

22

100 258

100

Table 2.2.18 - Respondent Views on House Providing Safety and Security

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

87

90

89

91

45

71 221

86

10

97

10

9

9

100

98

100

18

63

29

37

14

100 258

100

How important is 
Protection from 
weather, dust, animals 
etc. for the house?

Very 
important

Important

Total

Table 2.2.19 - Respondent Views on Hygiene in the house

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

% No % No %

How important 
is Hygiene (easily 
cleaned, etc) for the 
house?

Very 
important

Important

Total

63

34

97

65

66

67 40

63 169

66

35

100

32

98

33 23

37

89

34

100 63

100 258

100

259

Table 2.2.20 - Respondent views on Privacy in the Housing

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

67

69

70

71

42

67

179

69

30

97

31

100

28

98

29

100

21

63

33

79

31

100

258

100

How important 
is Privacy for the 
house?

Very 
important

Important

Total

Table 2.2.21 - Respondent Views on Personal Value of Housing

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

80

82

85

87

44

70

209

81

17

97

18

100

13

98

13

100

19

63

30

49

19

100

258

100

How important is 
Being proud of the 
house?

Very 
important

Important

Total

Table 2.2.22 - Respondent View about Safety in the Present House

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

How safe do you 
feel at present in 
your house?

Very safe

Fairly safe

Unsafe

Very unsafe

Total

0

37

40

20

97

0

38

41

21

100

0

47

36

15

98

0

48

37

15

100

5

13

23

22

63

8

21

37

35

5

97

99

57

2

38

38

22

100

258

100

260

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.23 - Most Important Improvement the Proposed Housing Should Address

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

More privacy

More space/rooms

Better relationship 
between family 
members

Better relationship 
with neighbours

More security /safety

Better hygiene

What are 
the most 
important 
improve-
ments the 
proposed 
housing 
programme 
should 
consider?

Total

18

26

7

19

27

7

25

22

9

26

22

9

6

6

5

5

34

6

97

35

6

100

32

5

98

33

5

4

44

10

3

2

0

6

70

16

47

92

26

18

36

10

5

14

5

3

0

68

11

26

4

100

63

100 258

100

Table 2.2.24 - Land Ownership of the Applicant

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

Is the applicant the 
land owner?

Yes

No

Total

86

11

97

89

11

100

98

0

98

100

0

100

63

0

63

100

247

0

11

95

5

100

258

100

11 respondents are currently residing on Government land in Kilinochchi Town Grama 
Niladari  Division.  The  Divisional  Secretary  had  permitted  temporary  occupation  of  the 
land but has not issued any document to validate the decision.

Table 2.2.25 - Land Title Document Availability of the Applicant

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

Does applicant have 
title documents

Yes

No

Total

86

11

97

89

11

100

98

0

98

100

0

100

63

0

63

100

247

0

11

96

4

100

258 100

261

Table 2.2.26 - Flood Prone Land

Is this land 
flood prone?

Yes

No

Total

Table 2.2.27 - Availability of Toilet

Do you have a 
toilet?

Yes

No

Total

Table 2.2.28 - Type of Toilet

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

1

96

97

1

99

100

0

98

98

0

100

100

1

62

63

2

98

100

2

256

258

1

99

100

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

52

45

97

54

46

100

62

36

98

63

37

100

33

30

63

52 147

48 112

57

44

100 257

100

What type of toilet * District Cross tabulation

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

What type of 
toilet?

Water sealed 
pit toilet

52

100

62

100

33

100

147 100

Total

52

100

62

100

33

100

147 100

Table 2.2.29 - Distance Between Toilet and Well

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

30

67

97

31

69

100

43

55

98

44

56

100

4

59

63

6

77

94

181

30

70

100

258 100

Distance between 
toilet and closest well

< 30 feet

> 30 feet

Total

262

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.30 - Existing Condition of Individual Toilets

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

1

4

31

16

2

8

60

31

1

6

34

18

2

10

58

31

0

1

6

23

0

3

20

77

2

11

71

57

1

8

50

40

If individual, 
condition of 
the existing 
toilet

Damaged

Not damaged

Need improvement

No need of 
improvement

Total

52

100

59

100

30

100

141 100

Table 2.2.31 - Water Source of the Household

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

1

1

0

0

24

19

25

20

28

14

29

14

0

6

7

0

1

0

10

11

58

40

22

16

53

55

56

57

50

79

159

62

Where do 
you get you 
water from?

Piped water in my 
house

My own well

Shared well (within 
30 feet of my house)

Shared well (more 
than 30 feet from my 
house)

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100

258 100

Table 2.2.32 - Electricity Availability in the House

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

Do you have 
electricity in your 
house?

Yes

No

Total

55

42

97

57

43

100

53

45

98

54

46

100

17

46

63

27 125

73 133

48

52

100 258

100

263

Table 2.2.33 - Physical Infrastructure Needs for the Villages

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

25

14

8

10

40

0

0

26

14

8

10

41

0

0

22

14

16

10

35

0

1

22

14

16

10

36

0

1

7

4

1

10

13

11

6

2

16

21

54

32

25

30

88

13

21

13

15

24

16

21

12

10

12

34

5

6

What physical 
infrastructure 
do you think 
needs to be 
provided or 
improved in 
this village?

Roads (internal)

Roads (external)

Street lighting

Water

Water supply and 
internal roads

Water Internal 
Roads and 
External Road

Internal roads and 
external roads

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100

258

100

Table 2.2.34 - Educational Facilities Needs of the Villages

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

16

16

12

12

21

33

49

19

2

79

97

2

81

100

1

85

98

1

87

100

4

38

63

6

7

60

202

3

78

100

258

100

What 
educational 
facilities are 
needed for 
the Village

Total

School 
(Development)

Pre-school

Not Answered

Schools are available and they are expecting more development in the schools

264

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.35 - Health Facilities Needs in the Village

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

What health 
facilities are 
needed -type

Dispensary

Midwife medical 
centre

Not Answered

Total

14

9

74

97

14

9

76

100

13

6

79

98

13

6

81

100

19

10

34

63

30

16

46

25

18

10

54

187

72

100

258

100

Table 2.2.36 - Recreational Facilities Needed for the Villages

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

What 
recreational 
facilities-type

Play ground

Children park

Not Answered

Total

7

2

88

97

7

2

91

100

4

1

93

98

4

1

95

100

15

7

41

63

24

11

65

26

10

222

10

4

86

100

258

100

Table 2.2.37 - Child Care Needs of the Villages

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

15

15

11

11

22

35

48

19

1

81

97

1

84

100

1

86

98

1

88

100

5

38

63

8

7

60

203

3

79

100

258 100

What child 
care-type

Day care centre/
Nursery 

MOH clinic centre

Not Answered

Total

265

Table 2.2.38 - Other Common Needs of the Villages

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

Other 
Common 
Needs?

Total

Repair water reservoir/
ponds 

10

10

Elephant Fence

Public Market

Not Answered

0

0

87

97

0

0

90

100

Table 2.2.39 - Regular Saving Practices of the family

8

0

0

90

98

8

0

0

92

100

District

8

13

26

10

10

2

43

63

16

3

10

2

4

1

68

220

89

100

248

100

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

35

61

1

36

63

1

31

67

0

32

68

0

28

35

0

44

56

0

94

163

1

36

63

0

Are you or your 
family members 
regularly able to 
save any money?

Yes

No

Not 
Answered

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100

258 100

266

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.40 - Emergency Money Source of the Respondent/Household

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

Another family 
member

10

10

10

10

A neighbour

10

10

19

19

If you 
have an 
emergency 
and need 
money 
where do 
you get 
from

Total

A friend (who is not 
a neighbour)

A money lender

A bank

A pawn shop

A neighbour, 
Samurdhi society

Another family 
member, A pawn 
shop

A friend (who is 
not a neighbour), 
A money lender, A 
pawn shop

A neighbour, 
Samurdhi society, A 
bank (pawning)

Not Answered

6

6

4

3

6

6

4

3

5

4

3

4

5

4

3

4

4

3

1

3

3

3

6

5

2

5

5

5

24

9

32

12

13

10

10

59

12

5

5

4

4

23

24

25

21

21

14

22

13

13

13

13

17

27

43

17

5

5

5

5

11

17

21

8

15

15

14

14

4

6

33

13

1

97

1

100

0

98

0

100

0

63

0

1

0

100 258 100

Table 2.2.41 - Construction Skills of the Household

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

21

75

1

97

22

77

1

100

14

83

1

98

14

85

1

100

4

59

0

63

6

39

94 217

0

2

15

84

1

100 258

100

Do you have any 
construction skills?

Yes

No

Not Answered

Total

267

Table 2.2.42 - Type of Construction Skills

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

% No %

4

15

2

76

97

4

15

2

78

100

1

12

0

85

98

1

12

0

87

100

0

2

1

60

63

0

3

2

5

29

3

95 221

2

11

1

86

100 258

100

What type of 
construction skills 
do you possess?

Carpentry

Masonry

Electrician

Not Applicable

Total

Table 2.2.43 - Organization Membership of the Household Members

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No %

97

100

94

96

62

98

253

98

0

0

0

0

3

1

3

1

0

1

0

2

3

2

1

1

Are you a 
member of any 
organization in 
this village

Yes

No

Not 
Answered

Total

97

100

98

100

63

100

258

100

268

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 2 – HOUSEHOLD SURVEY AUP-2014: REPORT

Table 2.2.44 - Organization Represented by Household Members

District

Kilinochchi

Mullaitivu

Batticaloa

Total

No

%

No

%

No

%

No

%

22

11

0

2

25

2

23

11

0

2

26

2

19

12

1

0

19

5

19

12

1

0

19

5

31

32

31

32

0

0

4

0

97

0

0

4

0

100

7

0

2

2

98

7

0

2

2

100

13

8

1

0

24

7

7

1

1

0

1

63

21

13

2

0

38

11

54

31

2

2

68

14

21

12

1

1

26

5

11

69

27

2

2

0

2

8

1

6

3

3

0

2

1

100

258

100

RDS

WRDS

Fisheries 
Organization

Sports club

Samurdhi

Farmer 
organisation

Samurdhi, 
WRDS

Kovil/Temple 
Society

School 
Development 
Society

Village 
Development 
Society/Centre

Not Answered

Organization 
represented 
by household 
member

Total

269

Annex 3 – List of Participants at Building 
Materials Workshop

Name

Position

Organisation

Address

GoSL

T. Syammakhrishna

Public Officer

Div. Sec. Mullaitivu

V. Muhunthan

Assistant Director

Div. Sec. Mullaitivu

HfHSL

22/5 Station Road, 
Dehiwala

Desiree Bartosiak

A.I. Chief of Party

HfHSL

Nurlan Moldosherip Manager Construction & 

HfHIAP

Apprep. Techs.

H.Christian Sujith

Manager, M&E

HfHSL

J. S. Jeyamaran 
(Maran)

Amila de Mel

Anjalie Page

Senior Project Manager

HfHSL

Architect, volunteer - 
Board Member

HfHSL

Senior Manager Strategic 
Partnership 

HfHSL

T.M. Collins

Admin officer

S. Pushpa

P. Kaandepaan

Project Manager 
Batticaloa

Project Manager 
Kilinochchi

HfHSL

HfHSL

HfHSL

K. Pathmarasa

Technical Officer

HfHSL

WVL

A. Lesley Jesurajan

Zonal Director - Field 
Operation

Alex Benyamin

Project Manager

G.A. Dias

Field Accountant

WVL

WVL

WVL

Evaluation Team

Reinhard Skinner

Evaluation Team Leader

STEM VCR / IBF 
Consortium 

270

619/8 Dr. Damister Silva 
Mawatha - Colombo 09

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKAANNEx 3 – LIST OF PARTICIPANTS AT BUILDING MATERIALS WORKSHOP

Name

Position

Organisation

Address

Mano 
Kumarasuryiar

Evaluation Team member STEM VCR / IBF 

Consortium 

Mario Martelli

Evaluation Team member Baa / IBF 

Consortium 

Support 

T. Vasanthagumar

Interpreter

271

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
4
2

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
s
e
d
u
t
S

i

e
s
a
C
–

4

x
e
n
n
A

272

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
4
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

l

l

a
u
K

,
r
u
n
a
y
i
d
a
r
a
K
N
G

-

i

l

h
t
a
v
a
a
m
a
K
&
m
a
g
u
m
n
a
h
S

s
n
r
a
e

d
n
a

e
m
o
h
m
o
r
f

s
e
r
t
e
m
o

l
i

k

e
e
r
h
t

y
r
r
a
u
q

a

n

i

s
k
r
o
w
d
a
e
h

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

d
e
l
t
t
e
s

d
n
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

f
o
t
u
o
d
e
v
o
m

,
e
g
a
i
r
r
a
m

t
s
o
p

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

e
h
T

.
n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

r
u
o
f

d
n
a

l

e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
6

f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

l

.
s
s
e
e
m
o
h
m
e
h
t

i

g
n
v
a
e

l

s
t
n
a
h
p
e
e

l

y
b

d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

n
e
e
b

d
a
h

e
m
o
h

y

l
i

m
a
f

r
i
e
h
t

t
a
h
t

t
u
o
d
n
fi
o
t

l

y
n
o

,

7
0
0
2
n

i

s
r
a
e
y
o
w

t

r
e
t
f
a

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

l

e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

,
r
a
w

t
s
o
P

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

.
d
e
s
a
e
c

r
a
w
e
h
t

l
i
t
n
u

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

a

n

i

y
a
t
s
o
t

e
d
a
m

s
a
w
d
n
a
5
0
0
2

n

i

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p
0
0
0
,
5
1

t
u
o
b
a

f
o
g
n
v

i

i
l

a

-
l
a
u
t
e
p
r
e
p

l
l

e
w
a

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

e
h
t

r
o
f

i

g
n
d
n
u
f

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
a
h

P
M
a

r
e
t
a
w
o
t

s
d
r
a
g
e
r

h
t
i

W

.
y
t
i

i

m
x
o
r
p

e
s
o
c

l

n

i

l

a
t
i
p
s
o
h

d
n
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

s
a
h

l

t
e
m
a
h

s
i
h
T

.
e
m
e
h
c
s

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

a

n
o
B
E
C
y
b

d
e

l
l

a
t
s
n

i

g
n
e
b

i

t
s
u

j

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

.
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.
r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u

r
o
f

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

s
i
h
t

n

i

l

e
p
o
e
p

h
g
u
o
n
e

e
r
a

e
r
e
h
t

t
u
b

,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

r
o
f

s
n
o
s
a
m
n
o
i
t
a
t
s
t
u
o
n
o
y
e
r
o
t

l

d
e
e
n

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

s
r
e
h
t
o

l
l

a

e
k

i
l

,
y
e
h
t

d
e
t
a
g
u
r
r
o
c

g
n
i
s
u

d
n
a

l

r
i
e
h
t

n

i

t
u
h

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

n
a

t
l
i

u
b

f
o
o
r

d
e
p
p
h

i

h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h

y
r
n
o
s
a
m
e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
b

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
d
e
g
r
a
h
c

g
n
e
b

i

t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

y
n
a

t
u
o
h
t
i

w

s
e
g
a
t
s

n

i

e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

t
l
i

u
b

d
n
a

p
o
h
s

n
w
o
n
k

a
m
o
r
f

t
i
d
e
r
c

n
o

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

t
e
g
o
t
d
e
g
a
n
a
m
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l

e
h
t

,
t
u
h

e
h
t

n

i

i

g
n
y
a
t
s

e

l
i

h
W

.
n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

a

d
n
u
o
f

y
e
h
t

l
i
t
n
u

y
a
t
s

l

d
u
o
c

s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
f

n
e
v
e
s

l
l

a

i

h
c
h
w
n

i

t
u
h

a

-

r
e
t
l
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
e
d
v
o
r
p
C
R
H
N
U

i

,
e
s
o
p
r
u
p

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

r
o
F

.
s
h
k
a

l

5
.
1
.
s
R

t
u
o
b
a

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

d
e
r
r
u
c
n

i

t
s
o
c

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
T

.
e
c
n
e
t
s
i
s
b
u
s

r
o
f

y
l
t
s
o
m

s
i

i

h
c
h
w
n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

d
o
o
g

y
r
e
v

a

e
v
a
h
o
s
l
a

y
e
h
T

.
s
d
e
e
n

r
i
e
h
t

y
f
s
i
t
a
s
o
t

s
t
e
e
h
s

i

m
u
n
m
u
a

i

l

.
t
i
b
a
h
n

i

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
n
o
d
n
a

l

f
o
e
r
c
a
¼
h
t
i

l

w
e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

i

g
n
v
a
e

l

x
i
s
o
t
n

i

i

d
e
d
v
d
b
u
s

i

r
e
h
t
r
u
f

s
a
w
y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

e
h
T

.
r
e
h
t
o
m
e
h
t

d
n
a

s
r
e
t
s
i
s
o
w

t

e
h
t

t
s
g
n
o
m
a

d
e
r
a
h
s

i

s
a
w
h
c
h
w
y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

l

a
n
r
e
t
a
m
e
r
c
a

3

a

f
o
d
r
i
h
t

a

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

e
f
i

w
e
h
T

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

l

.
e
b
a
t
o
p

l
l
i
t
s

t
u
b

d
o
o
g

e
t
s
a
t

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

r
e
t
a
w
e
h
T

.
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l

5
2
y
e
t
a
m
x
o
r
p
p
a

i

–

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
s
u

y

l

t
e

l
i

o
t

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h
m
o
o
r

d
e
b
o
w

t

a

e
v
a
h
o
t

s
e
r
i
p
s
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
i
p
s
A

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 4 – CASE STUDIES AUP-2014

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

l

l

a
u
K

,
r
u
n
a
y
i
d
a
r
a
K
-

7
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B
–

i

h
s
e
n
a
g
n
a
h
T
&

i

m
a
s
a
h
d
n
a
K

i

b
m
a
h
t
a
y
i
r
e
P

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
5
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

m
o
r
f

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

t
n
e
t

a

d
e
t
c
e
r
e

y
e
h
T

.
d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

d
u
m

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

,

7
0
0
2

n

i

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y
e
h
t

n
e
h
w

,
r
a
w

t
s
o
P

.
t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

e
r
o
f
e
b

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

a

d
n
a

f
o
o
r

d
e
h
c
t
a
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
u
h

d
u
m
m
o
o
r

l

e
g
n
i
s

a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

e
r
i
t
n
e

e
h
T

.
e
c
a
p

l

t
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

a

n

i

d
e
l
t
t
e
s
o
w

t

r
e
h
t
o
e
h
t

d

l
i

h
c

a

s
a
h
o
h
w

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

e
n
o
r
o
f

t
p
e
c
x
e

d
n
a

d
e
i
r
r
a
m
e
r
a

e
e
r
h
t

e
h
t

l
l

A
s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

e
e
r
h
t

d
n
a

e
f
i

w

s
i
h

,
f
l
e
s

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
5
f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
d
e
s
a
e
c

r
a
w
e
h
t

l
i
t
n
u

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

a

n

i

y
a
t
s
o
t

e
d
a
m

s
a
w
d
n
a

5
0
0
2

n

i

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

r
i
e
h
t

r
o
f

y
r
r
a
u
q

a

n

i

s
k
r
o
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
h
T

.
e
s
o
p
r
u
p

i

g
n
d
d
a
c

l

d
n
a

g
n
fi
o
o
r

r
o
f

m
e
h
t

d
e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

s
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
t
i
b
a
h
n
n
u
m
o
r
f

i

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
e
g
a
v
a
s

l

y
e
h
T

.
e
d
i
s
t
u
o
m
o
r
f

n
o
s
a
m
a

g
n
i
r
i
h

e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

r
i
e
h
t

t
l
i

u
b

y
r
r
a
u
q

e
h
t

n

i

i

g
n
k
r
o
w
e
d
a
m
y
e
h
t

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
r
a
e
y

a

t
u
o
b
a

r
o
f

r
e
t
l
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

r
o
f

d
n
a

l

e
r
c
a
4
/
1

e
h
t

n

i

d
e
h
c
t
i
p

d
n
a

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
i
c
n
a
n
fi
d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d

s
a
w

t
e

l
i

o
t

e
h
T

.
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

a

,
d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

h
t
i

w

s

m
o
o
r
o
w

t

f
o
g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

.
t
f

.
q
s

0
0
5
o
t

.
t
f

.
q
s
0
0
4

n
e
e
w
t
e
b

e
g
n
a
r

l

d
u
o
w
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
t
n
e
t
x
e

e
h
T

.
s
y
a
d

6
-
5

t
u
o
b
a

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

d
n
a

0
0
0

,
5
6
.
s
R

t
u
o
b
a

e
b

l

d
u
o
w
e
m
o
c
n

i

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
T

.
y
a
d

r
e
p
0
0
5

.
s
R

f
o
t
fi
o
r
p

e
g
a
r
e
v
a

n
a

l

s
d
e
y

i

p
o
h
s

e
h
T

.

0
0
0

,

0
5

.
s
R

e
u
a
v

l

f
o

’
t
i
h
c
‘

i

s
g
n
v
a
s
o
r
c
m
d
e
n
n
a
p

l

i

y
b

p
o
h
s

y
t
t
e
p

a

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

d
e
g
a
n
a
m
o
s
l
a

y
e
h
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
e
s
u
o
h

i

n
a
m
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

r
i
e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
d
c
n

i

i

g
n

i
l
i

a

j

e
h
t

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
t
i
s

y
c
n
e
g
n
i
t
n
o
c

e
g
a
n
a
m
m
e
h
t

d
e
p
e
h

l

s
a
h

l

e
v
e

l

o
r
c
m

i

t
a

t
n
e
m

t
s
e
v
n

i

d
n
a

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

d
e
n
n
a
P

l

.
e
m
o
c
n

i

r
i
e
h
t

f
o
%
0
5

t
s
o
m
a

l

,
0
0
0
,
0
3
.
s
R

s
a

h
c
u
m

s
a

s
e
v
a
s

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

s
e
s
n
e
p
x
e

r
e
t
f
a

l

d
e
y

i

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

d
n
a

y
a
M
n

i

p
u

s
e
i
r
d

y

l
l

a
u
s
u

t
i

s
a

l

i

a
n
n
e
r
e
p

t
o
n

s
i

t
i

t
u
b

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
s
d
e
e
n

r
e
t
a
w
g
n
k
n
i
r
d

i

e
h
t
o
t

s
r
e
t
a
c

y
a
w
a
m
0
3

t
u
o
b
a

d
e
t
a
c
o

l

l
l

e
w
A

.
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s

s
i
h
t
o
t

y
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

r
e
t
a
w

r
e
p
o
r
p
o
N

l

.
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

.
h
t
a
b

a

r
o
f

i

s
g
n
n
e
v
e

e
h
t

n

i

l

k
a
w
a

e
k
a
t
o
t

l

e
p
o
e
p

e
h
t

r
o
f

l

a
u
t
i
b
a
h

e
m
o
c
e
b

s
a
h

t
i

d
n
a

y
a
w
a

e
r
t
e
m
o

l
i

k

a

f
l
a
h

s
i

e
c
r
u
o
s

r
e
t
a
w
e
h
t

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
F

.
n
o
o
s
n
o
m

r
e
b
o
t
c
O

l
i
t
n
u

.
d
e
s
a
e
e
r

l

r
e
h

t
e
g
o
t
0
0
0
,
0
3

d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

h
c
h
w
y
m
r
a

e
h
t

y
b

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.

m
e
h
t

i

e
v
e
c
e
r

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

l
l

a

s
s
e
n
u

l

s
e
s
u
o
h

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
2
.
s
R

i

e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t

e
m
e
h
c
s

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

e
h
t

i

t
s
n
a
g
a

y

l
l

a
t
o
T

t
e

l
i

o
t

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h
m
o
o
r

d
e
b
o
w

t

a

e
v
a
h
o
t

s
e
r
i
p
s
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
i
p
s
A

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
D

273

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

r
a
g
a
N
a
y
d
o
v
r
a
S

,
l
u
t
t
i
K
N
G

-

j

a
r
a
d
n
u
o
S

i

m
a
s
a
y
i
r
e
P
&

i

m
a
s
a
h
d
n
a
K

i

g
a
y
a
n
a
v
l
e
S

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
6
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

274

d
e
y
a
t
s

d
n
a

7
0
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
n

i

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.

9

e
m
o
c
e
b

s
a
h
w
o
n

i

h
c
h
w
n
e
h
1

t
h
g
u
o
b

-

s
t
a
o
g

5

e
v
a
h
w
o
n

,
t
a
o
g

l

e
a
m
e
f

1

t
h
g
u
o
b

–

e
m
o
c
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
a

r
o
f

k
c
o
t
s
e
v

i
l

s
r
a
e
r

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

s
i
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p

0
0
0
,
5
1
.
s
R

t
u
o
b
a

s
i

e
m
o
c
n

i

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
)
l
a
g
e

l
l
i
(

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

n
a
b
r
u
o
t

t
s
e
r
o
f

m
o
r
f

-

e
d
a
r
t

d
o
o
w
e
r
fi

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

n

i

r
e
h
t
a
f

s
i
h

h
t
i

w

s
k
r
o
w
d
o
s
r
a
e
y

l

8
1
n
o
s

t
s
e
d
e

l

e
h
T

.
n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

x
i
s

d
n
a

l

e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

s
e
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

s
i
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

n

i

l

e
g
n
u

j

p
u

d
e
r
a
e
c

l

e
c
n
e
u
q
e
s
n
o
c

a

s
a

d
n
a

d
e
t
p
u
r
e

e
t
u
p
s
i
d

y

l
i

m
a
f

n
o
e
r
e
h
T

.
y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

e
r
c
a

3

a

n

i

w
a
l
-
n
i
-
r
e
h
t
o
m
h
t
i

w
e
v

i
l

o
t

d
e
t
p
o
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

m
o
r
f

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y
e
h
t

n
e
h
w
d
n
a

r
a
w
e
h
t

e
r
o
f
e
b

l

s
s
e
d
n
a

l

s
a
w
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

e
h
T

.
s
h
t
n
o
m
x
i
s

t
x
e
n

e
h
t

r
o
f

s
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

n

i

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

.
)
s
l
l
i

h

t
n
a
(

e
t
i
s

e
m
a
s

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

s
a
w
e
m
a
s

e
h
t

r
o
f

y
a
c

l

e
h
t

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

b
u
a
d

d
n
a

e
l
t
t
a
w

f
o
s
i

t
u
h

e
h
T

.
e
f
i

w
d
n
a

d
n
a
b
s
u
h

y
b

l

y
e
r
i
t
n
e

t
l
i

u
b

s
a
w
h
c
h
w

i

,
t
u
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
e
d
v
o
r
p
o
s
l
a

i

n
e
h
t

d
n
a

t
n
e
t

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
C
R
C

I

e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

e
r
c
a

i

1
g
n
n
o
d
a

j

i

t
u
o
b
a
o
t

r
e
t
a
w
e
b
a
t
o
p

l

i

s
e
d
v
o
r
p

y
a
w
a
m
0
5
1
d
e
t
a
c
o

l

l
l

e
w
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c
A

.
n
o
o
s

n
o
i
t
c
e
n
n
o
c

e
t
a
r
a
p
e
s

a

r
o
f

i

g
n
n
n
a
p

l

.
t
e

l
i

o
t

’
a
y
d
o
v
r
a
S
‘

d
n
a

a
d
n
a
r
e
v

a

s

m
o
o
r

l
l

a
m

s
o
w

t

f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

)

8
0
0
2

n

i
(

s
y
a
d
8

n
a
h
t

s
s
e

l

n

i

d
e
h
s
i
n
F

i

s
i

d
n
a

y
t
r
e
p
o
r
p

s
’

w
a
l
-
n
i
-
r
e
h
t
o
m

s
i
h

n

i

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

l

y
p
p
u
s

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

i

g
n
p
p
a
t

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.
e
m

i
t

n
o
t
i

e
k
a
m
o
t

m
a

0
3
5

:

y
b

e
m
o
h

e
v
a
e

l

l

d
u
o
h
s

d
n
a
m
a

0
0

:

6
t
a

s
e
s
s
a
c

l

n
o
i
t
i
u
t

r
o
f
o
g

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

x
i
s

l
l

A

.
r
u
o
h
-
n
a
-
f
l
a
h

f
o
e
m

i
t

e
g
a
r
e
v
a

n
a

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
e
h
c
a
e
r

e
b

n
a
c

l

o
o
h
c
s

e
h
T

.
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

5
1
r
o
f

s
r
e
t
a
c

y
a
w
a

s
r
e
t
e
m
0
0
4

d
e
t
a
c
o

l

l
l

e
w
n
o
m
m
o
c

a

i

g
n
h
t
a
b

r
o
F

.
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

n

i

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
6
-
0
5

t
e

l
i

o
t

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h
m
o
o
r

d
e
b
o
w

t

a

e
v
a
h
o
t

s
e
r
i
p
s
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
s
t
n
a
h
p
e
e
m
o
r
f

l

t
a
e
r
h
t

e
h
t

s
i

y
t
i
l

a
c
o

l

s
i
h
t

n

i

s
t
n
e
d
i
s
e
r

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
c
a
f

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

j

r
o
a
m
A

s
t
a
e
r
h
T

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
i
p
s
A

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
l
i

K

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
O

i

h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

,
t
s
e
w

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

-

7
2
0
0
/
P
P
V
/
P
R
E
/
T
A
B
–

i
v
e
d
a
k

i
l
l

a
M
n
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
S

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
4
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

-
n
e
b

e
h
t

-

0
0
0
,
8
1
.
s
R

d
n
u
o
r
a

s
i

e
m
o
c
n

i

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

l

.
d
e
b
a
s
i
d

e
m
a
c
e
b

e
n
o
d
n
a

r
a
w
n

i

e
f
i
l

s
i
h

t
s
o

l

e
n
o

,
s
n
o
s

r
u
o
f

e
h
t

f

O

.
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

a

d
n
a

s
n
o
s

r
u
o
f

,
e
f
i

w

s
i
h

,
f
l
e
s

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
7
f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

.
r
u
o
b
a

l

l

a
u
s
a
c

a

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

i

i

g
n
n
m
e
d

n

i

e
n
o

,
d
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

e
r
a

s
’
g
n
i
r
p
s
f
f
o
e
h
t

,
e
v
o
b
a

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
t
fi
o
r
p

h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p

0
0
0
4

.
s
R

i

s
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

h
c
h
w
p
o
h
s

l
l

a
m

s

a

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

s
a
h

d
n
a

h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p
0
0
0
,
4
1
.
s
R

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

d
r
a
u
g

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

a

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
r
e
t
s
i
g
e
r
o
s
l
a

s
i

d
n
a

5
1
0
2

r
e
b
m
e
v
o
N
n

i

r
e
e
n
g
n
e

i

n
o
i
t
a
g
i
r
r
i

y
b

d
e
u
s
s
i

s
a
w
e
m
a
s

e
h
t

r
o
f

t
i

m
r
e
P

.
d
n
a

l

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
e
r

k
n
a
t

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
o
t

i

g
n
g
n
o
e
b

l

‘
7
2
x

’
5
3
1

d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
n
a

l

e
h
t

d
n
a

r
e
h
t
a
f

m
o
r
f

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

s
a
w
y
t
r
e
p
o
r
P

e
h
T

ANNEx 4 – CASE STUDIES AUP-2014

0
2

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
S
D

.
n
o
s
a
m
a

f
o
e
c
v
r
e
s

i

e
h
t

h
t
i

w

s
k
c
o
b

l

0
5
8
1

g
n
i
s
u

l

p
e
h
-
f
l
e
s

y
b
3
1
0
2

n

i

t
l
i

u
b

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
C
e
h
T

.
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

s
a
w
e
g
a
k
c
a
p

l

e
y
t
s
e
f
i
l

a
o
s
l
a

d
n
a

r
e
t
l
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

r
o
f

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
e
d
v
o
r
p
C
R
H
N
U

i

.
t
c
e
f
f
e

t
c
e
r
i
d
n

i

o
t

e
u
d

d
e
s
p
a

l
l

o
c

t
u
b

,
g
n

i
l
l

e
h
s

f
o
t
c
a
p
m

i

t
c
e
r
i
d
o
t

e
u
d

t
o
n

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
i
l

o
m
e
d

e
h
T

.
t
e

l
i

o
t

a

e
v
a
h

t
o
n

d
d

i

y
e
h
T

.
n
e
h
c
t
i
k

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

n
a

d
n
a

l
l

a
h

a

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

f
o
d
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
e
b
o
d
a

d
n
a

e
l
t
t
a
w

f
o
e
d
a
m
y

l
l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o
d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

e
s
u
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f

,

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
n

i

s
r
a
e
y

7

t
s
o
m
a

l

r
e
t
f
a

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

n
e
h
w

,
r
a
w

t
s
o
P

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

.
d
e
s
a
e
c

r
a
w
e
h
t

l
i
t
n
u

s
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

–

d
n
a

9
0
0
2

y
r
a
u
n
a
J

n

i

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
t
i

m
r
e
p

y
n
a

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
y

l
i

m
a
f

s
i
h

d
n
a

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

y
b

s
r
a
e
y

0
5

e
c
n
i
s

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
o
n

i

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

d
n
a

l

e
h
T

.
e
c
ffi
o
d
n
a

l

f
o
n
a
o

l

A

i

.
s
g
n
n
r
a
e

n
w
o
h
t
i

w
y
l
t
n
a
n
m
o
d
e
r
p

i

e
n
o
d

s
a
w

t
i

s
a

y

l
l

a
u
d
a
r
g

d
e
s
s
e
r
g
o
r
p

k
r
o
w
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
T

i

.
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

s
a
w

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
t
s
e
r

t
a
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
b

,
f
o
o
r

r
o
f

s
t
e
e
h
s

i

m
u
n
m
u
a

i

l

d
e
t
a
g
u
r
r
o
c

.
t
f

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

t
u
B

.
t
n
e
r

y
a
p
o
t

i

g
n
v
a
h

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
d
n
a

l

e
r
c
a
0
1
d
e
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

e
v
a
h

y
e
h
t

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

5
1

h
t
i

w
g
n
o
a

l

e
v
i
t
a
i
t
i
n

i

d
o
o
h
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n

i

a

s
A

.
t
n
e
m

t
r
a
p
e
d

n
o
i
t
a
g
i
r
r
I

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
z
i
n
a
g
r
o
e
m
e
h
c
s

n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

e
h
t

i

g
n
d
i
s
e
r
p

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
e
l
t
t
a
c

y
a
r
t
s

y
b

d
e
g
a
m
a
d

s
a
w
e
m
a
s

e
h
t

s
a

i

n
e
v

n

i

t
n
e
w

.

,

0
0
0
0
4
.
s
R

f
o
t
n
e
m
y
a
p

i

g
n
d
n
a
t
s
t
u
o
s
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p
0
0
8
8
.
s
R

f
o

I

M
R

h
t
i

w
k
n
a
b

l

i

a
c
r
e
m
m
o
c
m
o
r
f

i

d
e
n
a
t
b
o
o
s
l
a

s
a
w
0
0
0
,
0
8
.
s
R

l

.
d
e
u
a
h
r
e
v
o
d
n
a

d
e
n
a
e
c

l

e
b
o
t

s
d
e
e
n

t
I

.
r
e
t
a
w
e
b
a
t
o
p

l

i

e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t

m
e
e
s

t
’
n
s
e
o
d

t
i

t
u
b

l
l

e
w
n
w
o
r
i
e
h
t

e
v
a
h

y
e
h
T

.
t
e

l
i

o
t

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

h
t
i

w
e
s
u
o
h
m
o
o
r

d
e
b
o
w

t

a

e
v
a
h
o
t

s
e
r
i
p
s
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
i
p
s
A

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

275

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
l
i

K

6
1
0
2

h
c
r
a
M
3
2

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
5
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

i

h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

,
t
s
e
w

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

r
e
t
e
P

y
n
o
h
t
n
A

276

e
m
o
s

e
n
o
g
r
e
d
n
u

s
a
h

e
m
o
h

t
a

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
i

o
h
w
n
o
s

e
h
T

.
e
r
e
h
w
e
s
l
e

d
e
l
t
t
e
s

d
n
a

d
e
i
r
r
a
m

t
o
g

e
n
o

,
s
n
o
s
o
w

t

e
h
t

f

O

.
s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

e
e
r
h
t

d
n
a

s
n
o
s
o
w

t

,
e
f
i

w

s
i
h

,
f
l
e
s

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
7
f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

.
n
u
n

a

e
b
o
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

s
i

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

e
h
t

f
o
e
n
O

.
a
e
r
a

t
a
h
t

n

i

k
r
o
w

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

t
u
b

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
7
-
6

(

o
b
m
a
g
e
N
n

i

k
r
o
w

l

a
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

n

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

a

d
a
h
o
s
l
a

s
a
h

e
H

.
e
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

d
e
t
a
e
r

l

i

g
n
n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

r
o
f

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

-
d
n
a
t
s
t
u
o
s
i

0
0
0
,
0
5

l
l
i
t
s

,
k
n
a
b

l

s
e
p
o
e
p

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

t
h
g
u
o
s

s
a
w
p
e
h

l

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
F

i

.
n
o
s
a
m
a

f
o
p
e
h

l

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
e
n
o
d

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
T

.

2
1
0
2

n

i

e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

d
e
g
a
n
a
m
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

e
h
t

t
n
e
t

n

i
l

u
a
p
r
a
t

e
h
t

n

i

i

g
n
y
a
t
s

e

l
i

h
W

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

n

I

.
y
d
d
a
p

g
n
i
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

r
o
f

d
e
s
u

s
i

s
e
c
a

2

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

d
n
a

i

n
a
t
n
a
p

l

g
n
i
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

d
n
a

l

l

e
b
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

f
o
s
e
r
c
a

5

.

2

a

n
o
s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
l
l

a
h

a

d
n
a

s

m
o
o
r
o
w

t

h
t
i

w

t
u
h

d
u
m
a

n

i

g
n
v

i

i
l

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

,
9
0
0
2

n

i

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

e
r
o
f
e
B

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
s
i
d
r
a
W

.
n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

a

d
n
u
o
f

y
e
h
t

l
i
t
n
u

d
e
v

i
l

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
n

i

s
r
e
t
l
e
h
s

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

s
a

t
n
e
t

n

i
l

u
a
p
r
a
t

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

R
C
H
N
U

.
d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
a
p

l

e
h
t

l
l

a

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

e
h
t

m
o
r
f

d
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

y
e
h
t

n
e
h
w
0
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A

.
s
h
k
a

l

2

s
a
w

t
s
o
c

l

a
t
o
t

e
h
t

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

b
u
a
d

d
n
a

e
l
t
t
a
w

f
o
s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

t
e

l
i

o
t

a

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

,
l
l

a
h

a

,
s

m
o
o
r

d
e
b
o
w

t

f
o
d
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
h
t
n
o
m
/
0
0
0
2
-
0
0
0
1
.
s
R

f
o
e
g
n
a
r

e
h
t

n

i

l

e
b
a
y
a
p

g
n

i

.
n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p
m

i

n
a

s
i

t
i

l

e
e
f

y
e
h
T

.
h
c
u
m
w
o
n
k

t
o
n

s
e
o
d

t
u
b

t
i

t
u
o
b
a

d
r
a
e
h

e
v
a
h

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

e
h
t

y
b

e
m
e
h
c
s

s
e
m
o
h

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
2

e
h
t

e
k

i
l

t
o
n

s
e
o
D

i

.
g
n
h
t
a
b

d
n
a

i

g
n
k
n
i
r
d

h
t
o
b

r
o
f

i

s
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

h
c
h
w

r
e
t
a
w

l
l

e
w
n
w
o
s
a
H

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
D

y
a
d

r
e
p

0
0
5
.
s
R

f
o
e
m
o
c
n

i

d
e
r
u
s
s
a

r
o
f

i

s
e
d
v
o
r
p

t
n
e
t
x
e

r
e
g
r
a

l

n

i

n
o
i
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

i

n
a
t
n
a
P

l

.

m
h

i

n
o
d
e
t
c
a
p
m

i

s
a
h

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

e
h
t

t
c
e
t
o
r
p
o
t

i

g
n
v
a
h

t
u
b

d
e
t
c
e
f
f
a

y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d

t
o
n

s
a
w
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

,
n
o
i
t
a
u
t
i
s

r
a
w
y
b

d
e
t
c
e
f
f
a

g
n
e
b

i

t
n
e
m
t
a
e
r
t

i

c
i
r
t
a
h
c
y
s
p

i

g
n
k
a
t

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
i

r
e
t
e
P

y
n
o
h
t
n
A

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 4 – CASE STUDIES AUP-2014

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

I

P
K
T
P

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

-

r
a
m
u
k
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
S
m
a
n
a
m
a
r
b
u
S

i

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
6
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

o
w

t

f
o
d
e
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

d
n
a

f
o
o
r

d
e
h
c
t
a
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
u
h

d
u
m
a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

s
d
k

i

r
i
e
h
t

h
t
i

l

w
e
p
u
o
c

e
h
t

,
r
a
w
o
t

r
o
i
r
P

.
s
s
e
n
s
s
e
e
m
o
h

l

f
o
h
s
i
u
g
n
a

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
b

l

x
e
p
m
o
c

e
r
o
m
e
f
i
l

r
i
e
h
t

i

g
n
k
a
m

s
i

i

h
c
h
w

r
e
c
n
a
c

d
o
o
b

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
t
a
e
r
t

r
e
d
n
u

s
i

s
’
g
n
i
r
p
s
f
f
o

m
o
r
f

d
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

d
n
a

l

f
o
s
e
r
c
a

0
1

d
e
n
w
o
r
e
h
t
a
f

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
y
t
i
l

a
c
o

l

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
n
e
d
i
s
e
r

e
h
t

y
b

s
t
s
e
t
o
r
p

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

e
t
i
p
s
e
d

n
e
k
a
t

s
a
w
n
o
i
t
c
a
o
n

d
n
a

i

,
g
n
d
o
o
fl
o
t

j

t
c
e
b
u
s

s
a
w
d
e
t
i
b
a
h
n

i

y
e
h
t

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
T

.
n
e
h
c
t
i
k

a

d
n
a

l
l

a
h

a

,
s

m
o
o
r

e
h
t

f
o
e
n
O

.

w
o
n

s
h
t
n
o
m

r
u
o
f

e
c
n
i
s

r
a
t
a
Q
n

i

r
e
r
u
o
b
a

l

a

s
a

i

g
n
k
r
o
w

s
i

s
e
c
n
a
t
s

m
u
c
r
i
c
o
t

e
u
d

t
u
b

,
n
o
i
s
s
e
f
o
r
p

y
b

n
o
s
a
m
a

s
i

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

f
o
d
a
e
h

e
h
T

.
s
n
o
s
o
w

t

d
n
a

e
f
i

w

s
i
h

,
f
l
e
s

e
h
t

g
n
i
s
i
r
p
m
o
c

,
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
4

f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

y
e
h
t

i

h
c
h
w
n

i

e
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

.
e
.
i

e
s
u
o
h

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a

r
o
f

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

d
a

i

i

n
a
g
e
w
r
o
N

.
s
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

m
o
r
f

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

s
t
n
e
t

n

i
l

u
a
p
r
a
t

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

d
e
y
o
r
t
s
e
d

e
m
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f
1
1
0
2

n

i

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

i

g
n
n
r
u
t
e
r

n
o
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
s
t
n
e
d
i
s
e
r

e
h
t

r
o
f

y
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

t
e

l
i

o
t

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
a
h
C
R
H
N
U
e
v
o
b
a

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
t
u
H

-

e
d
i
s
t
u
o
g
n
k
o
o
c

i

h
t
i

w
m
o
o
r

l

e
g
n
i
s

a

f
o
g
n
i
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

,
t
i
b
a
h
n

i

i

.
n
e
v

n

i

l

y
n
o
d
e
d
n
e

t
u
b

,
r
e
c
n
a
c

d
o
o
b

l

s
r
e
f
f
u
s

n
o
s

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

s
a

e
m
o
h

r
o
f

s
e
c
n
a
v
e
i
r
g

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
o
t

s
r
o
t
c
o
d
m
o
r
f

s
r
e
t
t
e

l

d
e
s
u

e
v
a
h

,
2
1
0
2

e
c
n
i
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

r
o
f

i

g
n
y
p
p
a

l

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

y
e
h
T

l

y
n
o
s
a
w
d
o
i
r
e
p

g
n
i
r
u
t
r
u
n

e
h
t

d
n
a

r
e
t
a
w
h
c
u
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

t
o
n

d
d

i

n
o
i
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

f
o
e
p
y
t

s
i
h
T

.
f
l
a
c

a

d
n
a

s

w
o
c
o
w

t

-

k
c
o
t
s
e
v

i
l

r
a
e
r
o
s
l
a

d
n
a

d
n
a

l

f
o
e
r
c
a

1
n

i

s
t
u
n

d
e
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

d
a
h

y
e
h
t

i

,
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

y
b

r
u
o
b
a

l

m
o
r
f

e
m
o
c
n

i

e
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

.
s
r
a
e
y

2
t
s
o
m
a

l

r
o
f

p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

d
n
a

9
0
0
2

n

i

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

t
o
g

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
s
t
n
e
r
a
p

e
h
t

d
n
a

s
g
n

i
l

b
i
s

4

e
h
t

t
s
g
n
o
m
a

i

d
e
d
v
d
b
u
s

i

n
e
h
w

,
e
r
a
h
s

a

d
e
t
i
r
e
h
n

i

d
n
a

y
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
i
c
n
a
n
fi
d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

o
t
o
g
o
t

d
a
h

y
e
h
T

.
s
c
i
t
s
i
g
o

l

i

y
l
t
n
a
n
m
o
d
e
r
p

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

l

a
t
i
p
s
o
h

’
s
n
o
s

n
o
t
n
e
p
s

s
i

d
n
a
b
s
u
h

y
b

t
n
e
s

y
e
n
o
m
e
h
t

f
o
t
s
o
M

.
n
o
s

s
i
h

g
n
i
t
a
e
r
t

n
o
d
e
r
r
u
c
n

i

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
d
e
p
m

i

y
l
t
a
e
r
g

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

a

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

f
o
s
s
e
c
o
r
p

e
h
T

.
y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
s
u

n

i

t
o
n

s
i

i

h
c
h
w

l
l

e
w
a

g
u
d

s
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

w
o
N

.
l
l

e
w
y
b
r
a
e
n

a
m
o
r
f

s
i

i

g
n
k
n
i
r
d

d
n
a

e
s
u

c
i
t
s
e
m
o
d

r
o
f

r
e
t
a
W

l

.
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

s
i

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
E

l

.
n
o
i
s
u
f
s
n
a
r
t

d
o
o
b

l

r
o
f

k
e
e
w
y
r
e
v
e

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
o
t

d
n
a

i

t
h
g
n
t
r
o
f

y
r
e
v
e

a
n
a
f
f
a

j

,
h
t
n
o
m
y
r
e
v
e
o
b
m
u
o
C

l

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

I

.
e
m

i
t

t
h
g
n

i

g
n
i
r
u
d

i

g
n
p
e
e
l
s

r
o
f

y
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

’
s
r
e
h
t
o
r
b

r
i
e
h
t

e
s
u

y
e
h
T

.
t
h
g
n

i

g
n
i
r
u
d

e
m
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

t
a

p
e
e
l
s

t
o
n
n
a
c

y
e
h
t

i

,
g
n
d
o
o
fl

f
o
t
a
h
t

s
i

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

g
n
i
t
s
i
x
e

e
h
T

l

m
e
b
o
r
P

.
s
t
u
n

f
o
g
n

i
l
l

a
f

e
r
u
t
a
m
m

i

s
e
s
u
a
c

i

h
c
h
w
n
a
r

i

d
n
a

d
n
w

i

s
i

s
t
u
n

g
n
i
t
a
v
i
t
l
u
c

n

i

t
a
e
r
h
t

l

y
n
o
e
h
T

.
h
t
n
o
m
e
n
o

.
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
r

j

r
o
f

n
w
o
n
k

n
o
s
a
e
r

r
e
p
o
r
p
o
n

s
t
i
s
i
v

d
r
a
o
b

e
c
n
a
v
e
i
r
g

l

a
r
e
v
e
s

e
t
i
p
s
e
d

d
n
a

2
1
0
2

e
c
n
i
s

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

r
o
f

i

g
n
y
p
p
a

l

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

y
e
h
T

.
e
s
u
o
h

a

r
o
f

d
e
e
n

n

i

l

y
e
t
a
r
e
p
s
e
d

s
i

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

s
n
o
i
t
a
t
c
e
p
x
E

.
e
c
ffi
o
S
D
–

r
a
f
o
s

l

p
e
h
o
n

t
u
b

,
l
e
v
a
r
t

l

a
t
i
p
s
o
h

s
n
o
s

r
o
f

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t

d
e
t
s
e
u
q
e
r

e
v
a
H

277

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

)
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
P
(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

.
7
1
Y
D
U
T
S

E
S
A
C

I

P
K
T
P

,

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

-

r
a
m
u
K
h
s
e
r
u
S

h
a

i
l
l

e
S

278

s
’
r
e
h
t
o
m
d
n
a
r
g

r
e
h

n

i

p
u

t
h
g
u
o
r
b

s
a
w
d

l
i

h
c

e
h
T

.

o
b
m
o
o
C
n

l

i

i

p
h
s
n
o
i
t
a
e
r

l

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

n

i

e
v

i
l

o
t

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

t
f
e

l

r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

e
a
m
e
h
t

;
d
e
t
a
r
a
p
e
s

s
i

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
d

l
i

h
c

l

d
o
s
r
a
e
y

5
.
3

a

d
n
a

f
l
e
s

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
s
i
s
n
o
c

y

l
i

m
a
f

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

d
n
u
o
r
g
k
c
a
B
d
n
a

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

f
o
d
a
o

l

a

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c

f
o
g
a
b

a

g
n
i
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

y
b

s
k
c
o
b

l

t
n
e
m
e
c

e
d
a
m
y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

e
h
t

,
t
n
e
m
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

e
h
t

l

l

fi
u
f
o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

I

.
r
e
t
e
m
e
h
t

g
n
x
fi

i

r
o
f

l
l

a
w
y
r
n
o
s
a
m
a

e
v
a
h
o
t

y
r
o
t
a
d
n
a
m

s
i

t
i

,
n
o
i
t
c
e
n
n
o
c

i

e
c
v
r
e
s

y
t
i
c
i
r
t
c
e
e

l

i

n
a
t
b
o
o
T

l

e
b
i
s
a
e
f

t
o
n

s
a
w
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
A

.
s
t
c
e
s
n

i

d
n
a

s
e
k
a
n
s

y
b

i

d
e
p
u
c
c
o
e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

n

i

s
t
i
p

e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f

d
n
a

,
s
e
t
i

m
r
e
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
t
s
e
f
n

i

s
a
w

f
o
o
r

d
e
h
c
t
a
h
t

e
h
t

t
u
b

t
c
a
t
n

i

e
b
o
t

e
s
u
o
h

r
i
e
h
t

d
n
u
o
f
1
1
0
2

n

i

e
v
i
t
a
n

r
i
e
h
t
o
t

i

g
n
n
r
u
t
e
r

n
o
y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.

w
o
n

t
l
i

u
b
e
r

n
e
e
b

s
a
h

d
n
a

r
a
e
y

t
s
a

l

d
e
s
p
a

l
l

o
c
o
s
l
a

e
s
u
o
h

s
i
h
T

.
e
m
o
h

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

d
a

i

i

n
a
g
e
w
r
o
N

l
l
i
t

t
n
e
t

a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

d
n
a

n
w
o
d

t
i

d
e

l
l

u
p

y
e
h
t

,
n
o
i
t
a
t
i
b
a
h

r
o
f

.
r
a
e
y
2

t
s
o
m
a

l

r
o
f

s
p
m
a
c

e
e
g
u
f
e
r

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

d
n
a

r
a
w
o
t

e
u
d
9
0
0
2

n

i

d
e
c
a
p
s
i
d

l

t
o
g

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
f
o
o
r

d
e
h
c
t
a
h
t

i

s
t
n
a
r
t
s
n
o
c

l

a
i
c
n
a
n
fi
d
n
a

e
m
o
H
e
h
T

e
h
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
o
t

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
i

r
a

l
l
i

p

n
e
d
o
o
w
a
o
s
l
A

.
e
r
u
s
s
e
r
p

i

d
n
w
h
g
h

i

r
o
f

e
k
a
h
s

d
n
a

k
a
e
w

l
l

a
w
e
h
t

i

s
e
k
a
m
h
c
h
w
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

y
r
a
r
o
p
m
e
t

a

n
o
o
s

e
n
o
d

s
i

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

l
l

a
w
e
h
T

.
l
l

a
w
e
h
t

t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
o
t

r
e
n
w
o
r
o
t
c
a
r
t

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
n
a
s

t
r
o
s

t
a
h
t

f
o
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

y
n
a

r
o
f

d
e
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c

e
b

t
o
n

y
a
m
y
e
h
t

n
e
h
t

,
t
i

r
o
f

t
p
o
t
’
n
o
d

d
n
a

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

n
o

l

a
c
i
t
i
r
c

e
r
e
w
y
e
h
t

f
i

t
a
h
t

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
h
t

f
o
r
a
e
f

e
v
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

a

i

t
i
b
h
x
e
o
s
l
a

y
e
h
T

i

.
s
e
c
n
e
n
e
v
n
o
c
n

i

i

g
n
d
o
o
fl
o
t

e
u
d

d
a
b

y
r
e
v

s
i

n
o
i
t
a
u
t
i
s

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

e
h
t

s
a
m
e
h
t
o
t

d
e
t
t
o

l
l

a

e
b
o
t

e
s
u
o
h

a

d
n
a

n
e
p
p
a
h
o
t

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

r
o
f

g
n
i
t
i
a
w
y
l
r
e
g
a
e

e
r
a

y
e
h
t

,
t
u
B

.
s
r
a
e
y
5
1

n
a
h
t

e
r
o
m

t
o
n

r
o
f

t
s
a

l

l

d
u
o
w

t
i

e
v
e

i
l

e
b

d
n
a

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

t
u
o
b
a

s
s
e

l

y
r
e
v
w
o
n
k
o
t

m
e
e
s

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

e
m
e
h
c
s
g
n
i
s
u
o
H
–

s
e
s
u
o
h

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
2

e
h
T

.
n
e
h
c
t
i
k

a

d
n
a

l
l

a
h

a

,
s

m
o
o
r
d
e
b

e
e
r
h
t

h
t
i

w
e
m
o
h

a

e
o
f

s
e
r
i
s
e
d

y

l
i

m
a
f

e
h
T

.
p
u

e
m
o
c

y
a
m

t
a
h
t

s
n
o
i
t
a
t
c
e
p
x
E

.
0
0
0
0
3
.
s
R

f
o
t
n
e
t
x
e

e
h
t
o
t

i

g
n
n
r
a
e
m
r
a
f

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

a

n

i

s
k
r
o
w
d
n
a
b
s
u
h

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
b
o
t

n
o
i
t
a
c

i
l

p
p
a

e
h
t

r
o
f

h
g
u
o
n
e

e
r
o
c
s

t
o
n

d
d

i

d
e
r
u
n

j

i

r
a
w
g
n
e
b

i

h
g
u
o
h
t

,
t
n
a
r
g

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

r
o
f

d
e

i
l

p
p
a

d
a
h

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
T

.
d
a

i

i

n
a
g
e
w
r
o
N
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

f
o
o
r

t
u
o
h
t
i

w
n
e
p
o
-
i

m
e
s

a

d
n
a

r
o
o
d
t
u
o
d
n
a

d
e
t
a
r
a
p
e
s

n
e
h
c
t
i
k

h
t
i

w

s

m
o
o
r
o
w

t

l

y
n
o
s
a
h

e
s
u
o
h

g
n
i
t
s
i
x
e

e
h
T

.
f
o
o
r

e
h
t

r
o
f

d
e
s
u
e
r

n
e
e
b

e
v
a
h

s
t
e
e
h
s

g
n
fi
o
o
r

l

d
o
d
n
a

l
l

a
w

.
e
c
n
e
t
s
i
s
b
u
s

r
o
f

s
e
o
t
a
m
o
t

d
n
a

l

j

a
n
i
r
b

,
s
e

i
l
l
i

h
c

s

w
o
r
g

t
a
h
t

n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

a

i

i

n
a
t
n
a
m
d
n
a

n
e
k
c
h
c

i

r
a
e
r

y
e
h
t

s
i
h
t

s
e
d
i
s
e
B

h
t
i

w

t
u
h

d
u
m
a

n

i

d
e
v

i
l

y
e
h
t

r
a
w
o
t

r
o
i
r
P

.
d
n
a

l

f
o
e
r
c
a

e
n
o
f
o
n
o
i
s
s
e
c
o
r
p
o
t

e
m
a
c

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
h
t

s
u
h
t

d
n
a

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d
o
w

t

r
e
h

g
n
o
m
a

s
r
a
e
y
0
5
n
a
h
t

e
r
o
m

r
o
f

d
e
n
w
o
e
h
s

t
a
h
t

d
n
a

l

e
h
t

i

d
e
d
v
d
b
u
s

i

r
e
h
t
o
m
d
n
a
r
g

e
h
T

.
e
s
u
o
h

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – LOGICAL FRAMEWORK BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AS PER ORIGINAL GRANT AGREEMENT - AUP-2014

r
e
p

s
a

y
t
i
n
a
m
u
H

r
o
f

t
a
t
i
b
a
H
y
b

k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
F

l

i

a
c
g
o
L

–

5

x
e
n
n
A

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
-

t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
A
t
n
a
r
G

l

i

a
n
g
i
r
o

i

c
m
o
n
o
c
e

s
a

h
c
u
s

s
t
n
e
m

t
s
e
v
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
l

a
n
r
e
t
x
 E

.

7

l

a
c
o

l

e
t
a
t
i
l
i

b
e
d

t
o
n
o
d

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

.
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

d
e
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
U
E

r
e
p
m
a
h

t
o
n
o
d

d
n
a

s
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

d
e
d
n
u
f
-

U
E

e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f
o
t

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
 A

.

8

.
s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

g
n
i
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

f
o
f
f
a
t
s

,
s
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

f
o
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

r
o
f

l

e
b
i
s
s
o
p

i

s
n
a
m
e
r

l

d
e
fi

e
h
t
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
 A

.

9

.
y
r
e
v

i
l

e
d

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m
d
n
a

i

s
e
c
n
e
g
a

.
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

s
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

r
o
f

y
e
v
r
u
s

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

”
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
S

i

g
n
v
L
“

i

R
S
L
P

.
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

y

l
l

a
i
t
n
a
t
s
b
u
s

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

.
g
.
e
(

t
b
e
d

y
a
p
e
r
o
t

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
 H

)

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
t
r
o
m
a

t
b
e
d

l

y
h
t
n
o
m

,
h
t
n
o
m

r
e
p

.
s
s
e
n
d
e
t
b
e
d
n

i

f
o
e
e
r
g
e
d

l

’
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
 H

.
)
.
c
t
e

,
s
r
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

i

e
c
v
r
e
s

,
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

.
6

.
7

s
p
a
m
R
R
D
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
o
f

0
0
0

,

0
6
d
e
t
a
m

i
t
s
e

n
A

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

r
o
f

s
n
o
s
r
e
p

5
4
3
5
1

h
t
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
1
4
3

n
o
i
t
a
g
i
t
i

m

r
o
f

0
0
0
5
1

,

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

0
6

n

i

l

a
c
o

l

n

i

:
.
g
.
e
(

y
m
o
n
o
c
e

l

a
c
o

l

e
h
t
o
t

y
l
t
c
e
r
i
d

g
n
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

s
t
n
e
m

t
s
e
v
n

i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

f
o
e
r
a
h
 S

.
5

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

i

n
h
t
i

w

,
n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

h
t
9

a

f
o
s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v
w
e
f

a
&
s
n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

8

e
h
t

n

i

s
n
o
s
r
e
p
0
0
0

,

7
8
2

r
e
v
o
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

i

l

a
n
F

i

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

3

n

i

s
n
o
i
t
p
m
u
s
s
A

s
n
a
e
M
d
n
a

s
e
c
r
u
o
S

n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
i
r
e
V
f
o

f
o
s
r
o
t
a
c
i
d
n

I

l

e
b
a
fi
i
r
e
V
y
l
e
v
i
t
c
e
b
O

j

)
s
I
V
O

(

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
A

i

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

c
i
g
o
L

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

i

c
m
o
n
o
c
e

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

n
o
i
t
a
u
t
i
s

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

e
h
 T

.

2

l

.
e
b
a
t
s

i

s
n
a
m
e
r

l

a
r
u
t
a
n

r
o
s
e
s
i
r
c

n
a
i
r
a
t
i
n
a
m
u
h

e
g
r
a

l

o
n

e
r
a

e
r
e
h
 T

.

3

t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n
o
t
c
a
p
m

i

h
t
i

w

s
r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d

.
s
y
e
v
r
u
s

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
O

.
l
e
v
e

l

)
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d
-
b
u
s
(

t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

e
r
u
c
e
s

d
n
a

t
n
e

i
l
i
s
e
r

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
 F

i

.

2

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
b

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

s
d
e
e
n

s
i
v
-
à
-
s
i
v

s
s
e
r
g
o
r
 P

.
2

.
t
s
a
E

d
n
a

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

n
o
s
t
n
e
m

t
s
e
v
n

i

s
e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
 G

.

1

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
A

l

a
c
o
L

,
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
 G

.

1

l

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D

i

t
a

s
u
s
n
e
c

y
t
r
e
v
o
p

f
o
t
c
a
p
m

i

d
e
t
a
m

i
t
s
 E

.
1

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

b
a
h
e
r

,
f
e

i
l

e
r
n
e
e
w
t
e
b
p
a
g
e
h
t

e
g
d
i
r
b
o
T

h
t
r
o
N
e
h
t

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

r
o
f

s
s
e
c
c
a

s

w
o

l
l

a

L
S
o
 G

.

4

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
fi

d
n
a
m
r
e
t
-
d
 M

i

.
t
s
a
E

d
n
a

d
n
a

e
n

i
l
-
e
s
a
b

g
n
i
r
a
p
m
o
c
(

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
-
t
c
a
p
m

 I

.

1

.

2

)

i

g
n
k
n
a
fl

i

c
fi
c
e
p
s

h
t
i

w

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h

y
l
t
s
o
m

(

t
c
e
r
i
d
n

i

d
n
a

)
s
e
s
u
o
h

t
o
g

(

t
c
e
r
i
d

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

l

a
t
o
 T

.
3

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

d
n
a

l

e
b
a
d
r
o
f
f
a
o
t

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

t
s
o
h

d
n
a

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

f
o
s
s
e
c
c
a

e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f
o
T

r
i
e
h
t

i

n
a
t
n
a
m

i

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
c
o
L

d
n
a

l

a
r
t
n
e
 C

.

5

r
a

l
i

m

i
s

d
n
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

e
s
o
h
t

,
d
n
e

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

.
)
f
/

m

(

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p
w
o
h
s

s
l
a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

i

d
n
a

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

d
e
t
c
e
e
 S

l

.

6

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

i

d
e
v
e
c
r
e
p

.
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

s
d
r
a
w
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

’
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

n
o

)
t
u
o
h
t
i

w

r
e
d
i
s
n
o
c
o
h
w

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
e
r
a
h
s

d
e
t
a
m

i
t
s
 E

.
4

n
o
i
s
e
h
o
c

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

g
n
v

i

i
l

r
i
e
h
t

.
n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

d
n
a

(Goal)
Objective
Overall 

(Impact)
Specific Objective

279

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.
E

d
n
a

.

N
e
h
t

n

i

s
e
g
n
a
h
c

l

a
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

j

r
o
a
m
o
 N

.

4
1

t
e
k
r
a
m

l

a
r
u
t
a
n

n
a
h
t

r
e
h
t
o
s
r
o
t
c
a
f

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

o
t

e
u
d

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

f
o
s
e
g
a
t
r
o
h
s

j

r
o
a
m
o
 N

.

5
1

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

e
h
t

l

g
n
i
t
a
u
m
r
o
f
e
r

g
n
i
r
i
u
q
e
r

i

.
r
u
o
v
a
h
e
b

s
s
e
c
o
r
p

d
e
e
r
g
a

e
h
t

t
r
o
t
s
i
d

t
o
n
o
d

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
 A

.

6
1

.
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

t
s
o
m
e
h
t

r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
e
t
e
g
r
a
t

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
 A

.

3
1

i

.
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

o
t

e
v
i
t
c
a
r
t
t
a

s
s
e

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

s
i
h
t

i

g
n
k
a
m
y
b
e
r
e
h
t

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
fi

d
n
a
m
r
e
t
-
d
M

i

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

t
o
n
o
d

s
r
o
n
o
d

r
e
h
t
 O

.
d
e
t
p
u
r
s
i
d

t
o
n

s
e
t
i
s
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
A

i

.
d
e
n
a
t
n
o
c

n
o
i
t
a
a
c
s
e

l

e
c
i
r
P

.

0
1

.

1
1

.

2
1

s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

i

m
u
m
n
m
e
h
t

i

r
o
e
s
u
o
h

r
e
p

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

n
o
i
s
s
i

m
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
U
 E

a
t
a
d

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
S

l

a
t
a
d

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

j

t
c
e
o
r
 P

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
 D

.

1

.

2

.

3

.

4

.

5

g
n
i
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

’

d
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
x
e
‘

f
o

.

o
 N

.
5

;
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p
m
o
r
f

;
l
a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p
h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

d
e
s
i

i

m
x
a
m

:
h
t
i

w

s
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
%
d
n
a
o
 N

.
6

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

h
t
i

w

t
l
i

u
b
s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o

.

o
 N

.
4

.
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

n
g
i
s
e
d

;
)
)
1
(

l

i

s
t
n
e
a
v
u
q
E
-
e
s
u
o
H

-
l
l

u
F

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

b
a
s
i
d

h
t
i

l

w
e
p
o
e
p

l

,
s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

g
n
i
t
e
e
m
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p
m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

n

i

d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

(

r
e
t
s
a
s
i
d

i

r
o
t
c
fl
n
o
c

y
b

d
e
g
a
m
a
d

y
l
s
u
o
v
e
r
p

i

d
e
r
i
a
p
e
r

r
o
t
l
i

u
b

s
e
s
u
o
h

f
o

.

o
 N

.
3

.
s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

d
e
d
a
e
h
-
n
e
m
o
w

f
o

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

r
e
b
m
u
 N

.
2

l

.
e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

t
s
o
m
e
h
t

(Outcomes)
Expected Results

s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t

g
n
i
t
e
e
m
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
t
fi
e
n
e
b

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

d
n
a

l

e
p
o
e
p

f
o

.

o
 N

.
1

i

g
n
d
u
l
c
n

i

,
s
P
D

I

t
e
g
r
a
t

r
o
f
g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
n
e
n
a
m
r
e
p

l

l

a
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
A

1
s
I
V
O

1
t
l
u
s
e
R

280

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
h
t

r
o
f

l

y
g
o
o
d
o
h
t
e
m
d
e

i
l

p
p
a

e
h
t

n
o
d
e
s
a
b

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

y
t
i
l
i

b
g

i

i
l

e

d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

l

e
b
a
t
i
u
q
e

,
d
e
s
a
b

e
c
n
e
d
v
e

i

,
y
r
o
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

s
i

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
S

l

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
i
r
e
v

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

l

r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
 S

.

7

e
h
t

r
e
d
n
u

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

y
l
t
c
i
r
t
s

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

f
o
 %

.
4

1
.
1

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
A
1

t
l
u
s
e
R

i

.
s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o

l

a
u
q
e

,
y
c
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t

r
o
f

g
n
i
t
a
g
i
t
i

m
e

l
i

h
w
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

e
c
a
e
p

s
e
t
o
m
o
r
p

d
n
a

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
n
u
o
c
c
A
n
a
i
r
a
t
i
n
a
m
u
H

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
fi

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
P

.

8

.

9

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

e
v
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

h
t
i

w

s
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

f
o
 #

.
5

d
e
t
c
e
r
i
d

a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

y
t
i
l
i

b
g

i

i
l

e

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

g
n
i
t
a
d
p
 U

.
1

.
s
s
e
c
c
a

r
i
a
f

d
n
a

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

h
t
i

w

s
k
n

i
l

g
n
i
r
u
s
n
e

d
n
a

s
s
e
n
d
e
t
b
e
d
n

i

y
d
u
t
s

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

R
S
L
P

e
h
t

f
o
s
t
l
u
s
e
R

.

0
1

n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

e
h
t

n

i

O
B
C
e
t
a
m

i
t
i
g
e

l

d
n
a
P,

I

,
S
D

f
o

n

i

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

P
D

I

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

t
s
o
m
e
h
t

s
d
r
a
w
o
t

s
s
e
c
o
r
p

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

,
s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
a
t
l
u
s
n
o
c

l

,
d
e
b
a
s
i
d

,

H
H
W

(

d
e
t
c
e
e
s

l

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

t
s
o
m

f
o
o
 N

.
6

.
)
.
c
t
e

T
E
G
R
A
T

d
n
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

(

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

f
o
w
e
v

i

n

i

s
y
e
v
r
u
s

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

y

l
i

m
a
f

R
S
L
P

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
 B

.
2

,
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

f
o
e
v
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

t
s
o
m
e
h
t

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

,
n
o
i
t
a
n
m

i

i
r
c
s
i
d
o
n

h
t
i

W

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s

l

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
i
t
n
e
d

I

y
r
o
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
 P

i

.
3

0
1
4
3
=
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o
#

l

a
t
o
T

i

)
c
m
o
n
o
c
e

a

d
n
a

,
s
n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

n
e
s
o
h
c

e
h
t

n

i

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

O
B
C
h
t
i

w
a
i
r
e
t
i
r
c

y
t
i
l
i

b
g

i

i
l

e

r
e
p

s
a

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

s
s
e
c
o
r
p

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
fi
s
i
t
a
s

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

s
u
o
g

i

i
l

e
r
-
n
o
n

d
n
a

s
u
o
g

i

i
l

e
r

l
l

a

i

:
g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

S
D
d
n
a

e
t
o
m
e
r

t
s
o
m

l

,
d
e
b
a
s
i
d

;
d
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
x
e

,

H
H
y
l
r
e
d
e

l

;
)

H
H

(

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
e
d
a
e
h
-
n
e
m
o
w

;
s
p
u
o
r
g

.
s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

.
E
H
F

1

=

s
e
s
u
o
h

r
i
a
p
e
r

2

,
E
H
F

1

=

e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
f
1

:
s

w
o

l
l

o
f

s
a

l

d
e
t
a
u
c
a
c

l

s
i

)
E
H
F
(

i

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
-
e
s
u
o
h
-
l
l

u
F

)
1
(

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – LOGICAL FRAMEWORK BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AS PER ORIGINAL GRANT AGREEMENT - AUP-2014

s
k
o
o
b
g
o

l

y

l
i

m
a
f

,
s
t
r
o
p
e
r

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
F

i

l

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
e
F

i

l

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
M
d
e
F

i

l

e
h
t

r
o
f

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

f
o
t
n
u
o
m
 A

.
7

2
.
1
A

n
a
p

l

e
s
u

d
n
a

l

a

h
t
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o
t
n
u
o
m
 A

.
8

,
y
l
i

m
a
f

h
c
a
e

h
t
i

w
d
e
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
i

l

s
i
s
y
a
n
a

i

c
m
o
n
o
c
e

d
n
a

n
a
P

l

e
s
U
d
n
a
L
A

T
E
G
R
A
T

t
b
e
d

d
n
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

,
l
a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i
(

d
n
a

r
u
o
b
a

l

n

i

e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c
0
0
5
6
2
t
s
a
e

,

l

t
a

i

h
c
h
w

f

O

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

e
h
t

e
s
o
o
h
c
o
t

y

l
i

m
a
f

h
c
a
e

g
n
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

e
h
t
o
t

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

u
n
e
m
a
m
o
r
f

s
e
v
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
l
a

r
i
a
p
e
r

r
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

0
1
4
3
=
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o
#

l

a
t
o
T

i

t
n
e
m
n
a
p
m
o
c
c
A

)

i

g
n
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
g

,
t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

y

l
i

m
a
f

r
i
e
h
t

h
t
i

w

t
n
e
r
e
h
o
c
m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

f
o
w
e
v

i

h
t
i

w

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

d
n
a

s
l
e
v
e

l

t
b
e
d

,
n
a
p

l

t
c
e
e
s

l

n

i

d
n
a

,
s
n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

8

l
l

a

n

I

s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
c

e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e

d
n
a

s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
C
s
s
e
r
d
e
R

e
c
n
a
v
e
i
r

G

,
d
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
k
r
o
w
d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
z
i
l
i

b
o
m
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

n
o
i
t
a
r
o
b
a

l
l

o
c

;
)
g
n
i
t
s
i
x
e

e
r
e
h
w

(

C
R
V
d
n
a

,
S
D
R
W

s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
C
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
S

l

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

,
S
D
R

h
t
i

w

,
t
c
i
r
t
s
i
d

h
c
a
e

n

i

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
l
i

b
o
m
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

n
o
i
s
i
v
d

i

h
t
9
e
h
t

f
o
s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
r
a

s
e
r
u
d
e
c
o
r
p

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
n
u
o
c
c
A
n
a
i
r
a
t
i
n
a
m
u
H

e
h
t

n

i

i

s
t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

f
o
e
p
y
t

d
n
a

r
e
b
m
u
 N

.
9

3
.
1
A

p
o
h
s
k
r
o
w
e
h
t

n

i

i

s
t
n
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

f
o
e
p
y
t

d
n
a

r
e
b
m
u
N

;
d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

4
.
1
A

i

s
e
u
q
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

s
n
g
i
s
e
d

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

r
o
f

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

d
n
a

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

r
o
f

n
e
k
a
t

e
r
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
M

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
 M

)

1

,
s
l
a
u
n
a
m
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
d
n
a

;
e
c
n
a
r
u
s
s
a

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

y

l
i

m
a
f

f
o
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
h
t
i

w

s
k
o
o
b
g
o

l

d
n
a

d
n
a

s
d
r
a
d
n
a
t
S

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

I

f
o
t
h
g

i
l

n

i

:
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

E
H
F
8
6
0
3

h
t
i

w

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
1
4
3

e
h
t

h
t
i

w
d
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

e
r
a

s
r
i
a
p
e
r

d
n
a

g
n
i
s
u
o
H

T
E
G
R
A
T

5
.
1
A

h
t
i

w
p
o
h
s
k
r
o
w

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

,
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

f
o

l

a
v
o
r
p
p
a

,
s
n
g
i
s
e
d

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
c

i
l

p
m

i

e
h
t

n
o
t
l
i

u
b

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c

i

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

f
o
k
c
a
b
d
e
e
f

,
s
n
o
i
t
p
o

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
u
n
e
m
a

h
t
i

w

s
n
g
i
s
e
d

.
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

d
n
a

s
r
o
n
o
d

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

y

l
l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
 P

)

2

s
n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

.
q
s

0
0
4

t
a

0
0
5

,
s
r
i
a
p
e
r

0
5
2

d
e
t
a
m

i
t
s
e

n
a

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

I

l

y
g
o
o
d
o
h
t
e
m
n
e
v
i
r

D

r
e
n
w
O
e
m
o
H
d
e
n
a
p
m
o
c
c
A

i

e
m
o
s

t
s
a
e

l

t
a

e
v
a
h

0
9
2
2

t
s
a
e

l

t
a

i

h
c
h
w

f
o
d
n
A

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

l

,
e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v

l

t
s
o
m

r
o
f

s
e
s
u
o
h

l
l

u
f

;
.
t
f

.
q
s

0
5
6

t
a

0
2

d
n
a

.
t
f

.
q
s

0
5
5

t
a

0
9
7
1

i

i

g
n
d
v
o
r
p

,
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

,
.
t
f

.
q
s

0
0
5
t
u
o
b
a

t
a

0
5
8
,

,
.
t
f

-
f
l
e
s

l

a
i
t
r
a
p

h
t
i

w
d
e
n
b
m
o
c

i

g
n
i
t
n
a
r
g
-
b
u
s

f
o

)
k
c
i
r
b

d
e
i
r
d
-
n
u
s

r
o
B
S
C
s
a

h
c
u
s
(

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e

r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

,
s
r
i
a
p
e
r

,
)
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o

(

s
e
s
u
o
h

-
t
s
o
c

r
o
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

y

l
l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

f
o
n
o
i
t
r
o
p

e
v
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
l
a

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

e
g
r
a

l

r
o
f

s
e
s
u
o
h

r
e
g
r
a

l

,
s
e
s
u
o
h

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

n
e
h
w
h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

281

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.
s
r
o
t
c
a
f

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

y
b

d
e
r
e
d
n
h

i

t
o
n

s
i

i

g
n
k
a
m

s
e
s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

r
o
f

S
D

r
o
s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
C

n
o
i
s
i
c
e
d

y
r
o
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

d
e
s
a
b

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
 C

.

2
2

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
e
R

e
g
a

l
l
i

V
/
e
c
r
e
m
m
o
C
f
o
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
 C

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v
 L

i

.

2

.

3

o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

i

e
v
g
o
t

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

s
C
E
R
 V

.

1
2

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

h
t
i

w
g
n
k
r
o
w

i

/

s
d
r
o
c
e
r

s
t
r
o
p
e
r

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
T

i

l

.
s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

m
o
r
f

e
m
o
c
n

i

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

#
d
n
a

s
d
o
h
t
e
m
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

s
e
s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
e
r
u
t
a
n

d
n
a

.

o
 N

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

t
s
o
c
w
o

l

n
o
#

d
n
a

d
e
h
s
i
l

b
a
t
s
e

s
e
s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b

d
e
d
a
e
h

n
e
m
o
w

f
o
o
N

i

.
s
e
c
v
r
e
s

s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

s
e
s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b

l
l

a
m

s

f
o

.

o
 N

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

r
o
n
a
h
c

i

l

y
p
p
u
s

,
R
R
D
m
o
r
f

d
n
a

t
i

.
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

r
o
s
e
c
r
u
o
s

s
e
e
n
a
r
t

i

d
e
t
i
d
e
r
c
c
a
A
T
I
A
N

f
o

.

o
N

.
2

.
3

.
4

.
5

,
s
e
i
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o
e
m
o
c
n

i

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

l

e
b
a

i
l

e
r

e
h
t

n

i

s
e
v
i
t
a
i
t
i
n

i

i

p
h
s
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

d
n
a

e
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

i

,
n
a
h
c

l

y
p
p
u
s

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

.
n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o
s
n
a
e
m
a

e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c
n

i

t
a
h
t

s
e
m
o
h

f
o
o
 N

f
o
o
 N

.
6

.
7

)

0
0
0
1

r
e
v
o

(

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

n
o
g
n
k
r
o
w

i

s
n
o
s
r
e
p

s
e
d
a
r
t

l
l

A

,
R
R
D

,
h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

i

,
s
e
u
q
n
h
c
e
t

r
o
f

)

0
1
4
3

(

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

h
t
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l
l

A

n
o
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

d
n
a

e
t
i
s

n
o
h
t
i

w

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l
l

a
o
 t

)

1

E
M
S

r
o
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
n
e
g

e
m
o
c
n

i

T
E
G
R
A
T

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
C
1
.
2
A

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

t
s
o
c
w
o

l
(

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

)

h
t
u
o
y

y

l
l

i

a
c
e
p
s
e
(

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

d
e
t
i
d
e
r
c
c
a

h
t
i

w
0
0
1
d
n
A

d
n
a

n
g
i
s
e
d

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

y

l
l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

t
s
o
c
w
o

l

,
e
v
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
l
a

n

i

i

d
e
n
a
r
t
0
0
1

n
a
h
t

e
r
o
M

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
i
t
n
e
d

i

,
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

n

i

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

d
n
a

s
d
o
h
t
e
m
e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

l

y

l
l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

r
o

d
n
a

i

s
e
n
a
p
m
o
c

t
n
e
m
e
c

,
)
s

l

m
e
b
o
r
p

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

.
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

l
l

a
o
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

d
n
a

r
e
h
s
e
r
f
e
 r

)

2

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
A
D
C

I

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
r
i
h

s
r
e
k
r
o
w

s
e
d
a
r
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

d
e
t
i
d
e
r
c
c
 A

d
n
a

l

i

s
e
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
t

e
v
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
l
a

n

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
T

i

)

3

)

4

6
5
2

n
a
h
t

e
r
o
m

r
o
f

,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

t
n
a
r
g
-
b
u
s

h
t
i

w
E
M
S
4
6

-
t
r
a
t
s

d
n
a

s
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e
o
t

s
t
n
a
r
g

h
t
i

w

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

s
n
o
s
r
e
p

n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
p

d
n
a

E
M
S

n
r
u
t
o
t

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
d
n
a

,
s
p
u

T
E
G
R
A
T

s
E
M
S

i

d
n
a
o
r
c
m
m
r
o
F

2
.
2
A

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

i

n
a
h
c

l

y
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

i

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s
o
t
n

i

s
e
r
t
n
e
c

i

,
p
h
s
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
p

e
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

d
n
a

o
t

e
v
i
t
i
s
o
p

r
o

l

a
r
t
u
e
n

i

n
a
m
e
r

s
c
i
t
i
l

o
p

l

a
c
o
 L

.

0
2

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

l

a
c
o

l

,
s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

h
t
i

w

s

i

w
e
v
r
e
t
n
 I

.

1

n

i

d
e
fi
i
t
r
e
c
#

,
d
e
n
a
r
t

i

)
f
/

m

(

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o

.

o
 N

.
1

l

a
c
o

l

o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

:
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
n
a
F

l

i

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

)

i

l

d
A
a
g
e
L

s
a

h
c
u
s
(

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s

t
n
e
r
r
u
 C

.

9
1

l

y
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e

e
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

d
e
t
a
m

i
t
s
e

d
n
a

,
d
e
n
a
r
t

i

d
n
a

d
e
t
s
i
s
s
a

0
1
4
3

t
e
g
r
a
T

e
r
o
m

r
o
n
o
i
t
u
o
s
e
r

l

i

t
c
fl
n
o
c

e
t
u
p
s
i
d

d
n
a

l

0
5
3

.
e
r
u
n
e
t

h
t
i

w
e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

e
s
n
e
t
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

l

a
n
F

i

.

3

.
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
h
t

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

,
e
r
u
n
e
t

e
r
u
c
e
s

r
o
f

n
o
i
t
u
o
s
e
r

l

i

t
c
fl
n
o
c

,
s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l
l

a
o
t

s
e
r
u
d
e
c
o
r
p

n
o

.
s
e
t
u
p
s
i
d

d
n
a

l

l

d
e
v
o
s
e
r
o
h
w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o
o
 N

.
2

.
s
n
o
i
t
a
u
g
e
r

l

i

g
n
d
r
a
g
e
r

y
c
a
c
o
v
d
a

d
n
a

,
s
e
t
u
p
s
i
d

d
n
a

l

.
2
s
I
V
O

2
t
l
u
s
e
R

.
e
r
u
n
e
t

e
r
u
c
e
s
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

g
n
i
t
i

m

i
l

,
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

e
h
t

y
b

d
e
c
u
d
o
r
t
n

i

s
i

n
o
i
t
a
l
s
i
g
e

l

d
n
a

l

w
e
n
o
 N

.

7
1

d
n
a

l

g
n
i
t
a
c
o

l
l

a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

t
n
e
r
r
u
 C

.

8
1

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G
e
h
t

f
o
s
d
r
o
c
e
r

n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l
l

a

d
n
a
 L

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
d

s
’
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

.

1

.

2

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

l

s
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

d
n
a

n
e
m
o
w

,
n
e
m

f
o

.

o
 N

.
1

6
.
1
A

f
o
s
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d
/
s
d
e
e
d

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

m
o
r
f

h
t
i

w

i

s
e
i
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

282

t
n
e
g
A

o
t

d
e
t
s
i
s
s
a

r
e
b
m
u
n

d
n
a

i

p
h
s
r
e
n
w
o
d
n
a

l

l

a
g
e

l

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
u
c
o
d

y

l
i

m
a
f

h
t
i

w

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 5 – LOGICAL FRAMEWORK BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AS PER ORIGINAL GRANT AGREEMENT - AUP-2014

e
s
u
o
h

d
n
o
y
e
b

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
a
fl

i

l

a
i
t
n
e
s
s
e

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
u

l
l
i

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
c
e
p
S

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
 T

.
s
l
i

a
v
e
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
r
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
A

l

a
c
o
 L

s
d
r
o
c
e
r

p
u
o
r
G

i

’
g
n
v
a
S

d
n
a

I
F
 M

.
t
l
i

u
b

s
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

o
t

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

i

e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
ffi
 O

.

3
2

;
s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
 M

e
s
u
o
h

d
n
o
y
e
b

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
a
fl

i

l

a
i
t
n
e
s
s
e

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
u

l
l
i

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
c
e
p
S

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
 T

.
s
l
i

a
v
e
r
p

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

.
t
l
i

u
b

s
a

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

d
n
a

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C

.

5
2

s
r
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
A

l

a
c
o
L

o
t

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

i

e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
ffi
 O

.

4
2

;
s
t
r
o
p
e
r

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
M

.

1

.

2

.

3

.

4

.

5

.

6

.

7

d
n
a

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

d
n
a

l

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
1
4
3

l
l

a

T
E
G
R
A
 T

.
8

d
n
a

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

y

l
i

m
a
f

,
g
n
i
r
o
t
n
e
m

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
T

i

3
.
2
A

s
t
u
p
n

i

d
n
a

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
e
r
o

l
i

a
t

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
0
5
1

,
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

l

e
b
a
t
s

a

i

g
n
m
r
a
f

e
k
a
m
d
n
a

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

d
o
o
f

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

e
r
u
s
n
e

,
y
t
i
v
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
p

e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
t

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
o
t

s
t
u
p
n

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

y
c
a
r
e
t
i
l

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
fi

i

i

g
n
v
e
c
e
r

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

h
t
i

w

l

,
e
p
o
e
p

3
s
I
V
O

f
o
 #

f
o
 #

.
9

.
1

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
y
l
i

m
a
f
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

l

e
v
e

l

t
b
e
d
d
n
a

e
c
n
a
n
fi
-
o
r
c
i
m

.
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
p

y
r
e
h
s
fi

d
n
a

k
c
o
t
s
e
v

i
l

e
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

3
t
l
u
s
e
R

d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

,
n
o
i
t
a
g
i
r
r
i

i

,
g
n
n
e
d
r
a
g

e
m
o
h

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

s
r
i
a
p
e
r
/
h
t
w
o
r
g

l

a
t
n
e
m
e
r
c
n

i

r
o
f

s
n
a
o

l

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

t
b
e
d

y
a
p
e
r
o
t

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

s
n
a
o

l

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

h
t
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o

;
)
x
e
s

y
b

d
e
t
a
g
e
r
g
g
a
s
i
d

(

d
n
a

e
m
o
c
n

i

o
t

n
o
s
i
r
a
p
m
o
c

n

i

s
t
s
o
c

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

l

y
h
t
n
o
m
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

h
t
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

f
o
o
 N

.
2

.
3

.
4

s
s
e
c
c
a

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

e
r
u
t
u
f

i
(

s
t
n
u
o
c
c
a

k
n
a
b

t
n
o

i

j

f
o
o
 N

.
5

.
)
n
e
m
o
w

f
o
s
t
h
g
i
r

t
i
d
e
r
c

l

e
b
a
d
r
o
f
f
a
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

h
t
i

w

s
e
e
n
r
u
t
e
r

f
o

.

o
N

.
6

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

e
r
a
o
h
w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
1
4
3

l
l

A
T
E
G
R
A
T

1
.
3
A

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

y
c
a
r
e
t
i
l

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
F

i

o
t

s
k
n

i
l

d
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

h
t
i

w

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

0
1
4
3

l
l

a

:
T
E
G
R
A
T

r
e
e
p

d
n
a

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

r
o
f

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
S
2

.
3
A

O
B
C
4
6
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

t
i
d
e
r
c
-
o
r
c
m
d
e
r
o

i

l
i

a
T

o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

d
n
a

s
e
t
a
r

t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

I
F
M
d
n
a

s
p
u
o
r
g

i

g
n
v
a
s

d
e
c
u
d
e
r

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
i
t
o
g
e
n

,
s
k
n

i
l

,
s
p
u
o
r
g

e
e
t
n
a
r
a
u
g

f
o
2
e
s
a
h
p

r
o
f

n
a
o

l

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

a

h
t
i

w
0
3
3
1
m
u
m
n
M

i

i

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

d
n
a

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

r
o
f

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s

I
F
M
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

1

r
a
e
y

t
r
a
t
s

n
a
o

l

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

a

n

i

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l
l

A

.
n
a
o

l

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

l
l

a
m

s

y
r
e
v

a

h
t
i

w

.

3

r
a
e
y

y
b

e
s
u
o
h

s
e
d
a
r
g
p
u
/
s
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

4
s
I
V
O

4
t
l
u
s
e
R

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

e
h
t
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a

h
t
i

w

l

,
e
p
o
e
p

f
o

.

o
 N

.
7

,
e
c
i
v
r
e
s

l

a
i
c
o
s

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
S

i

:
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
k
n
a
F

l

i

d
e
i
r
r
a
c

s
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

l

e
a
c
s
-
l
l

a
m

s

f
o

.

o
 N

.
8

l

a
c
o

l

d
e
c
u
d
e
r

m
o
r
f

g
n
i
t
fi
e
n
e
b

l

e
p
o
e
p

f
o

.
 #

.
9

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

i

y
r
a
c
fi
e
n
e
b

f
o

.

o
N

;
t
u
o

n
a
p

l

d
n
a

p
a
m
R
R
D
a

h
t
i

w

s
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

f
o
O
N

.
0
1

.
s
t
s
o
c

n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
o
f

s
n
o
i
t

;
)
x
e
s

y
b

d
e
t
a
g
e
r
g
g
a
s
i
d

(

l

-
u
o
s

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

l

a
i
c
o
s
d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
z
i
n
a
g
r
o

y
a
d

e
n
o
f
o
s
n
o
i
s
s
e
s

4
4
1

t
e
g
r
a
T

,
r
e
d
n
e
g

,
R
R
D

f
(

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

l
l

a
o
t

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

l

i

a
c
o
S
1
.
4
A

-
c
e
t
o
r
p

l

a
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

,
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

e
c
a
e
p

,
y
t
i
l
i

b
a
s
i
d

)

n
o
i
t

283

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
g
n
i
r
o
t
n
e
m
d
e
r
o

l
i

a
t

d
n
a

t
s
a
e

l

t
a

s
n
o
i
s
s
e
s
4
4
1

T
E
G
R
A
T

s
p
u
o
r
g

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

d
e
s
i
n
a
g
r
o
f
o
o
N

)

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b

e
c
a
e
p

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
p

y
t
i
u
q
e

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
e
c
i
r
p

d
e
c
u
d
e
r

:
t
e
g
r
a
T

y
b

e
c
i
r
p

d
n
a

i

n
a
h
c

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
t
t
e
b

e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
F

3
.
4
A

T
E
G
R
A
T

d
n
a

t
n
e
m

s
s
e
s
s
a

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
C
y
r
o
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
P

i

4
.
4
A

l

k
u
b

t
n
o

i

j

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

r
o
f

y
c
a
c
o
v
d
a

d
n
a

g
n
i
t
a
i
t
o
g
e
n

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c
0
6

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

d
n
a

s
p
a
m
d
r
a
z
a
h

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

,
s
n
a
p

l

s
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

n
o
i
t
a
g
i
t
i

m
5
1

e
t
a
m

i
l

c

,
t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e

n
o
s
i
s
a
h
p
m
e

h
t
i

w

(

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s

T
E
G
R
A
T

-
a
r
f
n

i

r
o
f

O
B
C
t
c
e
e
s
o
t

l

s
t
n
a
r
g

h
s
a
c

l
l

a
m
S

5
.
4
A

)

d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

&
R
R
D
d
n
a

n
o
i
t
a
g
i
t
i

m

O
B
C
n

i

r
e
d
n
e
g

,
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

i

p
h
s
r
e
d
a
e

l

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

,
g
n
n
n
a
p

l

s
r
e
r
a
e
b

e
c
ffi
o
s
a

d
e
t
c
e
e

l

n
e
m
o
w

f
o
%
d
n
a

.

o
N

o
t

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a

h
t
i

i

w
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s
O
B
C
2
.
4
A

284

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEx 6 – PRESENTATION AT BUIDING MATERIALS WORKSHOP, KILINOCHCHI

,
p
o
h
s
k
r
o
w

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
g
n
d
u
b

i

i

t
a

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
P

–

6
x
e
n
n
A

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K

285

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
286

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
     
 
ANNEx 7 – HOUSE DESIGN OPTION USING SUN-DRIED CLAY BRICKS

287

s
k
c
i
r
b

y
a
c

l

d
e
i
r
d
-
n
u
s

g
n
i
s
u

n
o
i
t
p
o
n
g
i
s
e
d

e
s
u
o
H
–

7
x
e
n
n
A

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
288

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
s
n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
o
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
P

–

8
x
e
n
n
A

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
7
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

g
n
i
r
u
d

s
e
k
a
n
s

i

d
o
v
a

t
h
g
n

i

e
h
t

o
t

l

i

y
n
a
m

,
s
g
n
v
a
s

i

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
t

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

l

s
e
v
i
t
a
e
r
o
s
l
a

,
s
e
Y

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

y
e
h
t

l

:
y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
P

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

e
v
a
g

F
E
C
N
U

I

l

p
e
h

l
l
i

w

,

R
K
L
0
0
0
8
1
t
n
e
p
s

n
w
o
r
i
e
h
t

m
o
r
f

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

a
y
d
o
v
r
a
S

;
k
c
a
h
s

e
h
t

,
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

/

s
e
h
c
r
e
p
0
1

-
i
l

a
K

i

i

h
a
s
a
R

.
r

M

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
h
t
u
m

u
d
n
H

i

/

d
a
o
R

i

h
c
h
c
n
U

i

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

”
0
2
.
5
5
’
1
4
°
7
N

”
7
8
.
5
2
’
2
3
°
1
8

8
9
,
6
1

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
7
0

y
l
t
r
a
p

n
a
c

r
e
h
t
a
f

e
c
n
i
s

l

e
b
a
d
r
o
f
f
a

s
i

A
D
 O
•

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

e
m

i
t

e
t
a
c
d
e
d

i

y
l
t
r
a
p

d
n
a

k
r
o
w

,
)
r
u
o
b
a

l

y

l
i

a
d

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

:
S
E
T
O
N

289

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
r
u
o
b
a

l

e
s
i

i

m
n
m

i

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

,
s
e
Y

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

r
e
t
a
w
e
b
a
k
n
i
r

l

D

)
y
a
w
a
m
k

5
1

.

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
8
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

290

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

e
v
a
g

F
E
C
N
U

I

/

e
r
c
a
½

n
a
h
t
n
a
n
a
h
t
a
L

.
s
r

M

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

e
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

y
b

;
k
c
a
h
s

,
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

e
h
t

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c

y
e
h
t

)
t
s
o

l
(

y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

e
s
i

m
e
r
p

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

a
h
t
n
a
s
a
V

u
d
n
H

i

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

/

d
a
o
R

i

h
c
h
c
n
U

i

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

”
0
0
.
7
5
’
1
4
°
7
N

”
4
4
.
9
1
’
2
3
°
1
8

7
2
,
1
2

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
8
0

l

a
t
o
t

,
h
t
n
o
m
/
R
K
L

0
0
6

(

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

,
)
r
e
m
r
a
f

y

l
i

a
d

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
i

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
 P
•

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d
2

,
n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

)

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
4

:
S
E
T
O
N

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
9
0

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
s
i

i

m
n
m

i

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

e
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

k
c
a
h
s

,
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

a
k
e
r
u
S

u
d
n
H

i

o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

,
s
e
Y

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

e
v
a
g

F
E
C
N
U

I

/

s
e
h
c
r
e
p
0
2

r
a
m
u
k
h
s
e
r
u
S

.
r

M

/

d
a
o
R

i

h
c
h
c
n
U

i

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

”
8
4
.
5
5
’
1
4
°
7
N

”
9
3
.
9
1
’
2
3
°
1
8

5
8
,
2
3

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
9
0

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
u
o
b
a

l

y

l
i

a
d

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m

y

l
i

m
a
F

y

l
i

a
d

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
n
o
s

l

a
t
o
t

,
h
t
n
o
m
/
R
K
L

0
0
6

(

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
i

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
 P
•

)

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
4

:
S
E
T
O
N

291

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
0
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

292

o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

,
s
e
Y

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

e
v
a
g

F
E
C
N
U

I

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
s
i

i

m
n
m

i

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

e
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

/

s
e
h
c
r
e
p
0
4

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

k
c
a
h
s

,
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

l

j

a
u
n
a
M
h
s
e
n
a
G

.
r

M

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
d
n
H

i

/

d
a
o
R

i

h
c
h
c
n
U

i

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

”
8
0
.
9
5
’
1
4
°
7
N

”
8
9
.
0
2
’
2
3
°
1
8

6
7
,
7
1

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

u
r
a
n
a
y
d
a
r
a
K

i

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
0
1

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
h
t
n
o
m
/
R
K
L
0
0
0
,
5
1

e
m
o
s

n
r
a
e

n
a
c

e
h

:
r
u
o
b
a
l
(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d
2

,
n
o
s

l

a
t
o
t

,
h
t
n
o
m
/
R
K
L

0
0
6

(

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
i

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
 P
•

)

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
0
4

:
S
E
T
O
N

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
1
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e

e
h
t

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

l

a
i
r
e
t
a
m

T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

t
h
g
u
o
b

y
e
h
t

;
k
c
a
h
s

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d

(

i

i

g
n
n
a
m
e
r

e
h
t

,
)
s
e
u
s
s
i

i

c
n
e
g
y
h

i

f
o

o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

,
s
e
Y

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

e
m
o
s

e
v
a
g

F
E
C
N
U

I

/

e
r
c
a

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
s
i

i

m
n
m

i

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

d
n
a
h

d
n
o
c
e
s

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

1

2

m
a
n
t
e
r
a
s
e
r
A

.
r

M

y
h
t
a
w
a
n
u
K

u
d
n
H

i

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
2
1
.
0
4
’
9
3
°
7
N

”
3
9
.
0
3
’
0
3
°
1
8

9
7
,
3
4
.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

l

u
h
t
i
K

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
1
1

t
e
y

t
o
n

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
3
2

(

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

,
)
n
a
m
r
e
h
s
fi
(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
i

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
 P
•

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d
2
,
s
n
o
s
2

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

)
k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

s
e
s
u
o
h

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

r
e
h
t
o
d
e
t
i
s
i
v

y
e
h
 T
•

l
l

a
m

s
o
o
t

r
a
e
p
p
a

s

m
o
o
r

,
)
?
P
U
A

(

y
b
r
a
e
n

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

l

e
b
a
r
e
f
e
r
p

s
i

s
e

l
i
t

h
t
i

w
g
n
fi
o
o
 R
•

e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e

d
n
a

n
w
o
n
k

l
l

e
w

s
i

A
D
 O
•

d
e
s
u

e
r
o
m
o
n

s
i

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
t

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
 E
•

l

e
b
a
t
p
e
c
c
a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

t
a
e
h

e
h
t

f
o

:
S
E
T
O
N

293

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
–

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
2
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

294

d
e
t
i

m

i
l

y
r
e
V

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

r
a

i
l
i

m
a
f

t
o
N

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

y
b

k
c
a
h
s

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b
e
R

/

e
r
c
a
½

i

n
a
m
a
n
n
a
V

.
s
r

M

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

r
e
h

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

,

m
o
o
r

1

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
–
K

i
r
a
m
u
a
y
a

l

j
i

V

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
1
1
.
0
5
’
9
3
°
7
N

”
6
8
.
4
1
’
0
3
°
1
8

2
7
,
0
2

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

l

u
h
t
i
K

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
2
1

;
r
e
m
r
a
f
(

w
o
d
W

i

:
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

y
l
t
r
a
p

R
K
L
0
0
0
,
3
2

(

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
i

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
 P
•

7
0
0
2

n

i

e
r
e
h

d
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

e
h
 S
•

)
k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

l

e
b
a
r
e
f
e
r
p

s
i

s
e

l
i
t

h
t
i

w
g
n
fi
o
o
 R
•

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

t
e

l
i

o
t
o
 N
•

t
a
e
h

e
h
t

f
o

w
o
d
w
a

i

r
o
f

l

e
b
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

t
o
n

s
i

A
D
 O
•

s
t
a
o
g
5
:
d
o
o
h

i
l

e
v

i
l

e
m
o
 S
•

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

)

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

f
o

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

l

a
o
a
c
i
t
t
a
B
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
3
1

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

y

l
l

a
e
r

t
o
N

w
o
n
k

t
’
n
o
D

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

-
p
u
s

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
P

e
h
t

l
l

a

t
h
g
u
o
b

y
e
h
T

/

e
r
c
a

e
v
i
t
r
o
p

d

l
i

u
b
o
t

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

1

2

k
c
a
h
s

r
i
e
h
t

T

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d

(

,
)
s
e
u
s
s
i

i

c
n
e
g
y
h

i

f
o

m
a
n
t
e
r
a
s
e
r
A

.
r

M

y
h
t
a
w
a
n
u
K

u
d
n
H

i

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A

e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
8
7
.
4
1
’
0
3
°
1
8

8
5
,
1
0
9

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

”
1
2
.
9
4
’
9
3
°
7
N

/

A
O
L
A
C
I
T
T
A
B

e
g
a

l
l
i

V

l

u
h
t
i
K

6
1
0
2
h
c
r
a
m
4
2

–
3
1

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
e
m
r
a
f

,
r
u
o
b
a
l
(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

0
0
0
,
5
3

(

i

h
d
r
u
m
a
S

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

s
i

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
 P
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

f
o
y
r
t
s
i
n
M
e
h
t

i

y
b

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
 E
•

)
k
c
a
b

i

d
a
p

t
e
y

t
o
n

R
K
L

s
e
m
o
c
n

i

t
c
e
f
f
a

l
l
i

w
A
D
 O
•

l
l

e
w

l

;
)
s
e
b
a
t
e
g
e
v

,
s

l

m
a
p

,
s
t
u
n

d
n
u
o
r
g

(

n
e
d
r
a
g

e
g
r
a
 L
•

)

3
1
0
2

(

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
R

295

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

t
i

a

f
i

t
i

o
t

n
e
p
o
d
n
a

d
e

s
a

d
e
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

s
i

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

l

e
b
a
r
u
d

d
e
c
n
e
i
r
e
p
x
e
o
N

-
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

t
u
b

,
a
e
d

i

o
N

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

s
r
u
o
o
c

l

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

S
D
R
W
d
n
a

S
D
R

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
t
e

l
i

o
T

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

.

0
1
0
2

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
6
6
.
7
5
’
4
2
°
0
8

0
1
,
3
5

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

”
1
1
.
4
’
4
2
°
9

n

i

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
m
o
s

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
A
O
Z

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

/

s
e
h
c
r
e
p
0
2

r
a
m
u
k
a
y
a

j
i

V

.
s
r

M

-
a
r
a
K
/
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
9
2

u
d
n
H

i

i

n
a
r
a
p
h
s
u
P

N

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

/

i

h
c

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
9
2

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

296

)
e
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

y
a
w

l
i

a
r
(

n
o
s

l

,
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
w
o
d
W

i

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

o
n

;
)
r
u
o
b
h
g
e
n
o
t

i

s
g
n
o
e
b

l

e
r
u
t
c
p

i

e
h
t

n

i

t
e

l
i

o
t
(

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
f
o
 N
•

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

P
H

I

e
h
t

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b
A
D
O
d
e
c
n
e
i
r
e
p
x
e

e
w

,
e
g
a

l
l
i
v

e
h
t

n
I
 “
•

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t
p
u

t
e
s
o
t

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b
a

s
w
o

l
l

a
A
D
O

;
y
b
r
a
e
n

i

d
a
s

e
h
s

,
”
s
d
e
e
n

s
’
y
l
i

m
a
f

e
h
t
o
t
g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a

i

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
0
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

,
s
l
a
e
m
g
n
i
r
a
p
e
r
p

l
l

a
r
e
v
o
g
n
g
a
n
a
m

i

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

g
n
i
r
u
C

-
l

w
o
n
k
c
a

f
o
k
c
a

l

l
l

u
F

n
e
p
o
t
u
b

,
t
n
e
m
e
g
d
e

-

m
o
c
e
r

s
i

t
i

f
i

t
i

o
t

t
n
e
m
e
r
u
c
o
r
p

l

e
b
a
r
u
d

a

s
a

d
e
d
n
e
m

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

s
r
u
o
o
c

l

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

S
D
R
W
d
n
a

S
D
R

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

n

i

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
m
o
s

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
A
O
Z

.

0
1
0
2

n
e
h
c
t
i
K
d
n
a

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
T

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

/

s
e
h
c
r
e
p
0
4

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
1
2
.
8
5
’
4
2
°
0
8

8
9
,
3
5

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

”
6
0
.
5
’
4
2
°
9
N

l

e
v
a
r
a
m
u
K

.
s
r

M

-
a
r
a
K
/
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
0
3

i

u
d
n
H
a
m
h
t
a
P

r
a
g
a
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

/
i
h
c

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

i

n
h
t
i

w
y
f
i
l

a
u
q
o
t

y
t
i
n
u
t
r
o
p
p
o
e
h
t

t
s
o

l

y

l
i

m
a
f

r
e
h

i

d
a
s

i

t
n
e
n
e
v
r
e
t
n
 I
•

r
e
h
t
o
m
d
n
a
r
g

,
s
n
o
s

3

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
e
m
r
a
f
(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

s
i

e
u
s
s
i

e
h
t

w
o
n

t
u
b

,
e
u
s
s
i

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
n
a

l

a

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

P
H

I

e
h
t

t
u
b

r
a
e
b
o
t

d
r
a
h

s
i

s
k
r
o
w
g
n
i
r
u
d

e
m
o
c
n

i

f
o
s
s
o

l

a

,

A
D
O
o
t

e
u
D
 “
•

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

e
r
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

,
t
e

l
i

o
t

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

l

o
o
t

j

e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
d
n
a

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

i

d
a
s

e
h
s

”
y
r
a
s
s
e
c
e
n

l

d
e
v
o
s
e
r

:
S
E
T
O
N

297

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

s
l
a
e
m
g
n
i
r
a
p
e
r
P

f
o
k
c
a

l

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
C

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

∑

s
r
u
o
o
c

l

;
n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

d
n
a

S
D
R
W

,
S
D
R

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
A
O
Z

/

s
e
h
c
r
e
p
0
5

-
o
L

n
a
g
u
K

.
s
r

M

/
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
1
3

f
i

t
p
e
c
n
o
c

e
h
t
o
t

n
e
p
o

s
a

d
e
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

s
i

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

l

e
b
a
r
u
d

t
i

a

,
t
n
e
m
e
g
d
e
w
o
n
k
c
a

l

d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

i

t
u
b

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

n
o
i
t

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

.

0
1
0
2

t
e

l
i

o
T

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r

u
d
n
H

i

n
e
h
c
t
i
K
d
n
a

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
7
9
.
1
5
’
4
2
°
0
8

3
6
,
0
3
.
m

:
l
s
a

E

h

”
7
3
.
7
’
4
2
°
9
N

r
a
g
a

i

-
a
c
o
s
s
a

’
s
r
e
m
r
a
f

n

i

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
m
o
s

-
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

3

i

h
a
y
a
n
a
g

-
n
a
h
t
u
r
a
M

/
i
h
c
a
r
a
K

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
1
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

298

t
u
b

r
a
e
b
o
t

d
r
a
h

s
i

s
k
r
o
w
g
n
i
r
u
d

e
m
o
c
n

i

f
o
s
s
o

l

a

,

A
D
O
o
t

e
u
D
 “
•

i

d
a
s

e
h
s

”
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

l

a
e
r

a

s
i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

a

h
c
u
s

g
n
i
r
e
t
n
e

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

e
r
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

,
t
e

l
i

o
t

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

,
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
u
o
b
a

l

y

l
i

a
d

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

r
e
h
t
o
m
d
n
a
r
g

c
i
t
s
a
p

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
M
e
t
s
a
W
d

i
l

o
S

i

t
n
e
c
ffi
e

n
a

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n
 I
•

y
n
a
p
m
o
c

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
s
i

e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

l

o
o
t

j

e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
d
n
a

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

y
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
s

S
D
R
W

l

a
c
o

l

s
i

i

t
n
e
n
e
v
r
e
t
n
 I
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:

d
e
s
u

n
a
o
L

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

N
/
Y

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
2
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

l

d
o
r
a
e
y

8

n
a

,
r
a
w
e
h
t

g
n
i
r
u
d

d
e
s
s
i

m

r
e
h
t
a
f

;
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
)
y
r
t
l
u
o
p

d
e
d

i

y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r

n
o
s

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
d

o
t

e
e
r
g
a
Q
H
y
a
w

l
i

a
r

d
n
a

t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l

i

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D
h
t
o
b

t
u
b

,
y
a
w

l
i

a
r

n

i

e
r
a

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
2
2

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

a
(

r
e
t
t
a
m
e
h
t

e
l
t
t
e
s

e
h
t
o
t

s
g
n
o
e
b

l

d
n
a

l

y

l
l

a
u
t
c
a

;
e
u
s
s
i

i

g
n
n
r
u
b

a

s
i

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
n
a
 L
•

)
t
n
e
m
a
c
d
e
r
p

i

e
m
a
s

e
h
t

t
u
b

r
a
e
b
o
t

d
r
a
h

s
i

s
k
r
o
w
g
n
i
r
u
d

e
m
o
c
n

i

f
o
s
s
o

l

a

,

A
D
O
o
t

e
u
D
 “
•

i

d
a
s

e
h
s

”
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

l

a
e
r

a

s
i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

a

h
c
u
s

g
n
i
r
e
t
n
e

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

e
r
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

,
t
e

l
i

o
t

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

o
s
l
a

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

;
l

o
o
t

j

e
v
i
t
c
e
b
o
d
n
a

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

r
e
b
m
e
m
S
D
R
W

l

a
c
o

l

s
i

i

t
n
e
n
e
v
r
e
t
n
 I
•

l

d
u
o
h
s

d
n
a

e
n

i
l

y
t
r
e
v
o
p

e
h
t

w
o
e
b

l

e
r
a

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

e
s
e
h
t

d
e
m
a
c

l

i

c
i
t
s
a
p

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
M
e
t
s
a
W
d

i
l

o
S

i

t
n
e
c
ffi
e

n
a

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n
 I
•

y
n
a
p
m
o
c

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
s
i

e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

d
e
s
i
t
i
r
o
i
r
p

e
b

299

;
r
e
c
u
d
o
r
p

s
k
c
o
b

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
(

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
w
o
d
W

i

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

g
n
i
r
a
p
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
s
a
m

i

g
n
g
a
n
a
m

,
s
l
a
e
m

s
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p

e
h
s

;
)
S
E
T
O
N

:
e
e
s
(

B
E
S
C
s
t
s
u
r
t

i

-
a
c
o
s
s
a

’
s
r
e
m
r
a
f

n

i

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
m
o
s

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

n
o
i
t

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

.

0
1
0
2

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

;
n
e
h
c
t
i
K

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
T

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

g
n
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
S

l

d
e
g
d
e
w
o
n
k
c
a

y

l
l

u
F

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

d
n
a

S
D
R
W

,
S
D
R

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
A
O
Z

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

/

-

i

h
a
y
a
n
a
g
o
L

l

a
a
k
i
s
a
S

m
a
n
t
a
r
a
n
u
K

.
s
r

M

u
d
n
H

i

n
w
o
T

i
l
i

K
/
i
h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

E
N
”
5
8

.
0
2
’
3
2
°
9
N

/
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

:
l
s
a

h

E
”
2
2

.
0
2
’
4
2
°
0
8

2
0
,
0
4

.

m

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

–
2
3

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

–

)

0
1

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

s
d
e
e
n

l
l

A

n
e
p
o
d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

d
n
a

S
D
R
W

,
S
D
R

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p
A
O
Z

/

-

a
n
a
h
t
a
V
c
h
t
r
a
a
K

i

.
s
r

M

/
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
3
3

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

l

y
n
o

,
t
i

o
t

w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n
g
n
e

i

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

d
n
a

p
u

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

i

-
a
c
o
s
s
a

’
s
r
e
m
r
a
f

n

i

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m
e
m
o
s

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

n
o
i
t

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

.

0
1
0
2

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

l

a
n
r
e
t
x
e

;
n
e
h
c
t
i
K

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

d
e
h
c
a
t
t
a

t
e

l
i

o
T

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

E

”
0
4
.
8
1
’
3
2
°
9
N

h

E
”
8
0
.
0
2
’
4
2
°
0
8

0
0
,
6
2
.

m

:
l
s
a

u
d
n
H

i

n
w
o
T

i
l
i

K
/
i
h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
3
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

300

,
y
a
w

l
i

a
r

e
h
t
o
t

s
g
n
o
e
b

l

d
n
a

l

y

l
l

a
u
t
c
a

;
e
u
s
s
i

i

g
n
n
r
u
b

a

s
i

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
n
a
 L
•

e
h
t

e
l
t
t
e
s
o
t

e
e
r
g
a
Q
H
y
a
w

l
i

a
r

d
n
a

t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l

i

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D
h
t
o
b

t
u
b

e
m
a
s

e
h
t

n

i

e
r
a

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
2
2
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

a
(

r
e
t
t
a
m

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

4

h
t
i

w

s
r
e
t
s
i
s

s
s
e
b
o

l

j

o
w
T

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

c
i
t
s
a
p

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
M
e
t
s
a
W
d

i
l

o
S

i

t
n
e
c
ffi
e

n
a

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n
 I
•

y
n
a
p
m
o
c

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
s
i

e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

e
r
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

,
t
e

l
i

o
t

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

l

o
o
t

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

)
t
n
e
m
a
c
d
e
r
p

i

:
S
E
T
O
N

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

d
o
i
r
e
p
e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

i

h
c
h
c
o
n

i
l
i

K
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
4
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

s
d
e
e
n

l
l

A

l

y
n
o
t
i

o
t

n
e
p
o
d
n
a

-
i
g
n
e

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

d
n
a

p
u
w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

l

e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

d
n
a

S
D
R
W

,
S
D
R

i

-
a
c
o
s
s
a

’
s
r
e
m
r
a
f

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

n
o
i
t

e
v
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

d
n
a

d
e
p
e
h

l

e
n
o
o
N

/

-

a
r
t
s
i
l

a
K
h
a
a
s
I

i

.
s
r

M

/
I

H
C
H
C
O
N
I
L
I
K

–
4
3

e
t
t
e

l
i

o
T

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

)
t
h
g
n

i

e
h
t

n

i

r
e
f
a
s
(

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

3

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

”
9
0
.
9
1
’
3
2
°
9
N

”
8
2
.
0
2
’
4
2
°
0
8

8
2
,
3
3

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

n
w
o
T

i
l
i

K
/
i
h
c
h
c
a
r
a
K

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
4
0

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

o
t

e
e
r
g
a
Q
H
y
a
w

l
i

a
r

d
n
a

t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l

i

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D
h
t
o
b

t
u
b

,
y
a
w

l
i

a
r

n

i

e
r
a

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f
2
2

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n

a
(

r
e
t
t
a
m
e
h
t

e
l
t
t
e
s

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
s
n
o
s

2

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
u
o
b
a
l
(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

e
h
t
o
t

s
g
n
o
e
b

l

d
n
a

l

y

l
l

a
u
t
c
a

;
e
u
s
s
i

i

g
n
n
r
u
b

a

s
i

e
r
u
n
e
t

d
n
a
 L
•

c
i
t
s
a
p

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
M
e
t
s
a
W
d

i
l

o
S

i

t
n
e
c
ffi
e

n
a

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n
 I
•

y
n
a
p
m
o
c

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
s
i

e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

i

d
a
s

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

,
d
e
e
n

c
i
s
a
b

l

y
e
t
a
r
e
p
s
e
d

a

s
i

r
e
t
a
w
e
b
a
k
n
i
r

l

 D
•

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

e
r
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

l

o
o
t

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

)
t
n
e
m
a
c
d
e
r
p

i

e
m
a
s

e
h
t

:
S
E
T
O
N

301

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
5
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

302

s
d
e
e
n

l
l

A

g
n

i
l
l
i

w
d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

d
n
a

p
u
w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n
g

i

-
n
e

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

l

y
n
o

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

l

,
e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

’
s
r
e
e
n
g
n
e

i

n
o
p
u

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

-

m
r
a
f

d
n
a

S
D
R
W

r
e
t
f
a

,

2
1
0
2
n

I

/

-

m
a
h
t
n
a
n
a
n
h
s
i
r
h
K

.
r

M

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

’
s
r
e

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

e
r
a

e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

A
O
Z

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

e
b

l

d
u
o
h
s

e
s
u
o
H

n
a
h
t
n
a
n
a
y
h
t
i

i

N

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
d

r
o
f

l

e
b
a
t
i
u
s

d
n
a

t
e
e
h
s

n
i
t

,
s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

l
l

a

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
T

;
n
o
s
r
e
p

l

y
b
a
r
e
f
e
r
p

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
d
n
H

i

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
f

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

d
n
a

t
e

l
i

o
t

s
a

h
c
u
s

l

.
y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

/
u
p
p
u
r
i
d
u
k
u
h
d
u
P

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

”
2
5
.
3
1
’
4
2
°
9
N

”
5
1
.
1
4
’
7
3
°
0
8
E

5
7
,
1

.

m

:
l
s
a

h

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

–
5
3

-
s
a
p

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
M
e
t
s
a
W
d

i
l

o
S

t
n
e
i
c
ffi
e

n
a

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n
 I
•

y
n
a
p
m
o
c

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
s
i

e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

c
i
t

;
s
r
e
v
i
r
d

l

e
e
h
w
e
e
r
h
t
(

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
D

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

e
m
a
n

s
i
h

n

i

s
i

d
n
a

l

f
o
e
c
e
p

i

e
g
r
a

l

 A
•

l

o
o
t

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s

g
n
i
r
o
c
 S
•

e
f
i

w
d
n
a

)
y
r
t
l
u
o
p

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
6
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

s
d
e
e
n

l
l

A

g
n

i
l
l
i

w
d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

d
n
a

p
u
w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n
g

i

-
n
e

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

l

y
n
o

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

l

,
e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

’
s
r
e
e
n
g
n
e

i

n
o
p
u

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

’
s
r
e
m
r
a
f

d
n
a

S
D
R

r
e
t
f
a

,

2
1
0
2
n

I

e
r
a

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

C
R
N

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

d
n
a

t
n
e
s
e
r
p

i

n
a
g
e
w
r
o
N

(

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

/

-

t
e

l
i

o
T

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

i

u
d
n
H
n
a
g
u
m
u
r
A

y
m
a
s
u
h
t
u
M

.
r

M

e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

)
l
i

c
n
u
o
C
e
e
g
u
f
e
R

-
r
u
d

l

a
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

e
r
o
m

(

e
m
o
s

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

)
s
t
h
g
n

i

y
n
a
r

i

g
n

i

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

/
u
p
p
u
r
i
d
u
k
u
h
d
u
P

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

”
4
2
.
2
5
’
3
2
°
9
N

”
8
0
.
0
’
8
3
°
0
8

7
9
,
3
1

.

m

:
l
s
a

E

h

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

–
6
3

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

,
l
u
f
e
m
a
h
s

t
o
n

s
i

e
s
u
o
h

a

t
e
g
o
t

y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

i

g
n
n
w
a
 P
•

n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
e
r
u
o
b
a

l

y
d
d
a
p

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

r
i
e
h
t

y
b

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

i

d
a
s

h
c
i
r

d
n
a

d
e
fi

i
l

a
u
q
s
i
d

t
o
g

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

y
d
e
e
n

,
d
n
e

e
h
t

n

i

;
s
n
o
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n

i

y

l
i
r
g
n
a

i

d
a
s

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

,
”
e
s
u
o
h

r
e
h
t
o
n
a

t
o
g

s
e

i
l
i

m
a
f

c
i
t
s
a
p

l

r
o
f

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
M
e
t
s
a
W
d

i
l

o
S

i

t
n
e
c
ffi
e

n
a

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n
 I
•

y
n
a
p
m
o
c

e
t
a
v
i
r
p

a

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
s
i

e
s
u
e
r

d
n
a

n
o
i
t
c
e

l
l

o
c

s
s
e
c
o
r
p
y
r
o
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p
a

t
u
b

l

o
o
t

r
i
a
f

a

s
i

m
e
t
s
y
s
g
n
i
r
o
c
S
 “
•

e
h
t

m
r
o
f
n

i

t
o
n

d
d

i

P
H

I

.
s
e
k
a
t
s
i

m
P
H

I

i

d
o
v
a
o
t
d
e
d
e
e
n

s
i

r
i
e
h
t

t
n
u
o
c
c
a
o
t
n

i

p
e
e
k

t
o
n

d
d

i

d
n
a

t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
S

l

a
n
o
i
s
i
v
D

i

303

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

t
n
e
m
e
c

g
n
i
r
u
c

d
n
a

-
n
e

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

l

y
n
o

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
a
f
u
n
a
M

,
g
n

i
l
l
i

w
d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

p
u
w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n
g

i

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

l

,
e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f

,
s
e
Y

’
s
r
e
e
n
g
n
e

i

n
o
p
u

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

s
i

S
D
R
W

d
e
p
e
h

l

e
n
o
o
N

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

n
a
g
u
m
u
r
A
r
a
m
u
k
a
r
i
h
t

/

-

-
n
a
S

i

a
r
u
h
t
a
s
a
R

.
s
r

M

d
e
h
c
a
t
e
d

;
n
e
h
c
t
i
K

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

(

t
e

l
i

o
T

)
s
e
s
o
p
r
u
p

e
n
e
g
y
h

i

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

u
d
n
H

i

/
u
p
p
u
r
i
d
u
k
u
h
d
u
P

m
a
r
u
p
a
r
i
h
t
n
a
h
t
u
S

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

”
3
1
.
9
1
’
4
2
°
9
N

”
5
7
.
7
3
’
7
3
°
0
8
E

3
0
,
9

.

m

:
l
s
a

h

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

–
7
3

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
n
o
s
a
m

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
7
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

304

r
a
f

e
r
a

s
k
n
a
b

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

,
h
s
a
c

y
b

t
n
a
r
g

g
n
i
t
t
e
g

r
e
f
e
r
p

l

d
u
o
w
e
W

 “
•

i

d
a
s

i

t
n
e
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

,
”
y
e
n
o
m
h
t
i

w

l

e
v
a
r
t
o
t

y
k
s
i
r

d
n
a

y
a
w
a

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

r
i
e
h
t

y
b

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

)

l

d
e
b
a
s
i
d

(

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

e
s
u
o
h

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

t
n
e
m
e
c

g
n
i
r
u
c

d
n
a

-
n
e

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

l

y
n
o

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
a
f
u
n
a
M

,
g
n

i
l
l
i

w
d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

p
u
w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n
g

i

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

t
n
e
d
fi
n
o
c

t
o
N

-
r
u
p

l

k
u
b

h
t
i

w

g
n
i
s
a
h
c

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

s
i

S
D
R
W

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

r
e
t
f
A

/

-

i

n

i
j

o
r
a
S

s
e
v
a
s
l
o
K

.
s
r

M

)
l
i

c
n
u
o
C
e
e
g
u
f
e
R

e
m
o
s

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

h
s
i
n
a
D

(

C
R
D

t
e

l
i

o
T

d
n
a

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d
n
a
r
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

e
h
t

n

i

r
e
f
a
s

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

(

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

n
a
i
t
s
i
r
h
C

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

)
t
h
g
n

i

/
u
t
t
a
p
e
m

i
t
i
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

i

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

u
M

”
6
1
.
6
’
8
1
°
9
N

”
8
6
.
3
1
’
7
4
°
0
8
E

9
8
,
0
.

m

:
l
s
a

h

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

–
8
3

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
8
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

,
n
o
s

,
)
r
e
n
w
o
p
o
h
s
(

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
w
o
d
W

i

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

:
S
E
T
O
N

i

g
n
n
a
o

l

d
e
e
n

,
l
l

a
m

s
o
o
t

s
i

t
n
a
r
g

e
h
t

t
u
b

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

g
n
i
s
u
o
h

r
e
h
t
o
y
n
a

r
o
P
H

I

m
o
r
f

e
s
u
o
h

e
h
t

s
e
k

i
l

e
g
a

l
l
i

v

e
h
t

n

i

e
n
o
y
r
e
v
 E
•

s
g
n
v
a
s

i

r
i
e
h
t

y
b

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

d
n
a

l
l

e
w

,
t
e

l
i

o
t

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

i

d
a
s

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

,
”
y
r
e

l
l

e
w
e

j

i

g
n
n
w
a
p

r
o
y
e
n
o
m

305

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t
0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

y
l
i

m
a
f

t
n
e
m
e
c

g
n
i
r
u
c

d
n
a

g
n
i
r
a
p
e
r
p

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

s
l
a
e
m

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
a
f
u
n
a
M

B
E
S
C
w
o
n
k

t
o
n
o
D

t
n
e
d
fi
n
o
c

t
o
N

-
r
u
p

l

k
u
b

h
t
i

w

g
n
i
s
a
h
c

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

y
n
a
M

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

r
e
t
f
A

/

-

:
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o

h
s
i
n
a
D

(

C
R
D

-
n
a
r
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

,
s
r
e
m
r
a
F

,
y
r
e
h
s
i
F

)
l
i

c
n
u
o
C
e
e
g
u
f
e
R

,
S
D
R

,
S
D
R
W

s
t
r
o
p
S

e
m
o
s

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

,
s
t
e
e
h
s

n
i
t
(

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

)

d
o
o
w

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

(

t
e

l
i

o
T

d
n
a

)
t
h
g
n

i

e
h
t

n

i

r
e
f
a
s

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
9
3

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

306

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

m
a
g
n

i
l

u
g
a
N

.
s
r

M

y
r
a
m
u
k
a
n
h
t
a
R

i

u
d
n
H

i

,
n
o
s

,
)
r
e
s
s
e
r
d
r
i
a
h

(

/
u
t
t
a
p
e
m

i
t
i
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

i

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

u
M

”
2
0
.
2
2
’
8
1
°
9
N

”
4
2
.
5
’
7
4
°
0
8
E

9
4
,
2
4

.

m

:
l
s
a

h

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

–
9
3

l

d
o
h
e
s
u
o
h
w
o
d
W

i

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

s
r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d
3

l
l

e
w

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

s

i

w
o
d
w
o
s
l
a

;
n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

n
w
o
r
g

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

P
H

I

h
t
i

w
d
e
fi

i
l

a
u
q
s
i
d

-
fi
n
o
c

f
o
k
c
a

l

d
n
a

e
d
u
t
i
t
t
a

s
i
h
t
(

i

d
a
s

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

,
”
s
s
e

l

d
e
r
o
c
s

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

l

e
o
h
w
e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
e
r
a
h
s

y

l
l

a
r
e
n
e
g

s
i

e
c
n
e
d

)
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

g
n
i
s
u
o
H
n
a
d
n

i

I

h
t
i

w

s
e
c
n
e
i
r
e
p
x
e

e
v
i
t
a
g
e
n

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

t
o
g

y

l
i

m
a
f

y
m

t
s
a
p

e
h
t

n

i

;

m
e
t
s
y
s
g
n
i
r
o
c
s

t
s
u
r
t

t
o
n
o
d

I
 “
•

EVALUATION OF THE EU-FUNDED HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAMMES IN SRI LANKA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/

s
r
e
r
u
o
b
a
L

n
e
m
o
W

/

n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c

r
o
f

e
g
a
w
y
l
i

a
D

d
e

l
l
i

k
s
n
u
/
d
e

l
l
i

k
s

:
e
s
a
h
c
r
u
p
k
u
B

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
fi
d
o
M

i

N
/
Y

n
o
s
a
e
R

)

N
r
o
Y
y
h
w

(

y
b
e
d
a
m

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

t
n
a
t
r
o
p
m

I

s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

r
o
d
e
d
d
a

,
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t

e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
d

d
o
i
r
e
p

)
s
h
t
n
o
m
8
1

(

n
a
o
L

;

N
/
Y

:

d
e
s
u

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
r

;

d
o
i
r
e
p

n
a
o

l

f
o
e
p
y
t

e
s
u
o
h
d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

–

)

0
1
o
t

0
m
o
r
f
(

f
o

l

e
v
e
L

s
’
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
b

y
l
i

m
a
f

n
o
i
t
c
a
f
s
i
t
a
s

/

e
m
a
N

/

n
o
g

i

i
l

e
R

/

e
d
o
C

–

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

I

t
n
a
r
g
d
n
a

n
e
k
a
t

e
m
T

i

l

e
t
e
p
m
o
c
o
t

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
l

a
r
e
v
O

/

y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B

/

n
o
i
t
a
c
o
L

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

:
y
r
a
i
c
fi
e
n
e
B
-
n
o
N

e
c
n
e
r
e
f
e
r
-
o
e
G

-
.
o
N

.
S
B
O

e
t
a
D

u
v
i
t
i
a

l
l

u
M

-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B
–
0
4

.

o
n

n
o
i
t
a
v
r
e
s
b
O

f
o
e
b
a
T

l

ANNEx 8 – PRESENTATION OF OBSERVATIONS AUP-2014

t
n
e
m
e
c

g
n
i
r
u
c

d
n
a

-
n
e

g
n
o
r
t
s

n
o
p
u

l

y
n
o

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
a
f
u
n
a
M

g
n

i
l
l
i

w
d
n
a

d
e
t
s
e
r
e
t
n

I

s
k
c
o
b

l

d
n
a

p
u
w
o

l
l

o
f

’
s
r
e
e
n
g

i

n
o
i
t
u
o
s

l

m
r
e
t

g
n
o

l

t
n
e
d
fi
n
o
c

t
o
N

-
r
u
p

l

k
u
b

h
t
i

w

g
n
i
s
a
h
c

n
o
i
t
a

l
i
t
n
e
V

e
v
i
t
c
a
o
r
p

y
n
a
M

t
n
e
m
e
l
t
t
e
s
e
r

r
e
t
f
A

/

-

n
a
h
t
a
n
a
m
h
t
a
P

.
s
r

M

s
t
r
o
p
S

,
S
D
R

,
S
D
R
W

e
m
o
s

i

d
e
d
v
o
r
p

,
s
k
c
o
b

l

,
s
t
e
e
h
s

n
i
t
(

s
l
a
i
r
e
t
a
m

)

d
o
o
w

,
s
r
e
m
r
a
F

,
y
r
e
h
s
i
F

)
l
i

c
n
u
o
C
e
e
g
u
f
e
R

n
e
h
c
t
i
K

l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

,
a
d

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

(

t
e

l
i

o
T

d
n
a

)
t
h
g
n

i

e
h
t

n

i

r
e
f
a
s

s
e
y

:
u
t
h
s
a
V
-

4
1
0
2
-
P
U
A
e
n

i
l

e
s
a
B

:
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
g
r
o

h
s
i
n
a
D

(

C
R
D

-
n
a
r
e
v

,
g
n
v

i

i
l

,
s

m
o
o
r

2

–

i

u
d
n
H
y
h
t
o
s
a
v
S

i

/
u
t
t
a
p
e
m

i
t
i
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

i

a
k
a
v

i

i
l
l

u
M

”
7
7
.
3
3
’
8
1
°
9
N

”
9
0
.
4
’
7
4
°
0
8
E

6
4
,
0
1
.

m

:
l
s
a

h

/

U
V
I
T
I
A
L
L
U
M

6
1
0
2

l
i
r
p
A
5
0

–
0
4

r
e
t
h
g
u
a
d

,
n
o
s

,
r
e
h
t
o
m

,
)
r
u
o
b
a

l

y
d
d
a
p

(

r
e
h
t
a
F

:
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
y

l
i

m
a
 F
•

l

y
p
p
u
s

r
e
w
o
p

,
t
e

l
i

o
T

:
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
 F
•

d
e
r
o
c
s

s

i

w
o
d
w
o
s
l
a

;
n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

n
w
o
r
g

e
s
u
a
c
e
b

P
H

I

h
t
i

w
d
e
fi

i
l

a
u
q

-
s
i
d

t
o
g

y

l
i

m
a
f

y
m

t
s
a
p

e
h
t

n

i

;

m
e
t
s
y
s
g
n
i
r
o
c
s

t
s
u
r
t

t
o
n
o
d

I
 “
•

:
S
E
T
O
N

s
i

e
c
n
e
d
fi
n
o
c

f
o
k
c
a

l

d
n
a

e
d
u
t
i
t
t
a

s
i
h
t
(

i

d
a
s

e
e
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

,
”
s
s
e

l

i

s
u
o
v
e
r
p

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b

,
e
g
a

l
l
i

v

l

e
o
h
w
e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i

w
d
e
r
a
h
s

y

l
l

a
r
e
n
e
g

)
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

g
n
i
s
u
o
H
n
a
d
n

i

I

h
t
i

w

s
e
c
n
e
i
r
e
p
x
e

e
v
i
t
a
g
e
n

307

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
COVER PICTURE
 UN-Habitat’s assisted Model House built with CSEB  
close to Killinnochchi under AUP-2012  
(Source: EU-Delegation, August 2016)

Paper 
PDF 

ISBN 978-92-9238-427-2  doi:10.2871/17485 
ISBN 978-92-9238-426-5  doi:10.2871/983749 

LK-06-16-009-EN-C
LK-06-16-009-EN-N