Decentralized Evaluation: End-Term Evaluation of Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation (PRRO) in Dhading, Gorkha and Nuwakot districts of Nepal - April, 2016 to December 2018 Evaluation Report

Evaluation and Lessons Learned
Originally published
View original


Executive Summary

Evaluation Context

Two devastating earthquakes struck Nepal on the 25th of April and the 12th of May, 2015. The earthquakes caused estimated damage and loss of USD 7 billion- which is a third of Nepal’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nearly 9,000 lives and over half a million homes had been destroyed.

Thirty-one districts were affected, out of which 14 were declared ‘crisis-hit.’ The production and service sectors were disrupted, with estimated losses of USD 280 million in agriculture, USD 100 million in livestock, USD 60 million in tourism and additional losses in trade and industry. Rural areas, in particular, were devastated and further isolated due to road damage and obstructions, increasing the vulnerability. In this context. In 2016 World Food Programme (WFP) launched the Earthquake Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation (PRRO) in three of the “Crisis Hit” districtsDhading, Gorkha and Nuwakot to help commuinities recover from the loss and build back better.

WFP’s EQ-PRRO was an operational implementation that aligned with the GoN’s livelihood recovery strategy. This strategy centered around restoring food and nutrition security, increasing resilience, and rebuilding infrastructure in communities affected by the earthquake. The PRRO was developed with the idea to support the GoN in its transition from emergency response to reconstruction by enhancing the government’s capacity to prepare, monitor and respond to food security and natural disasters.

With the main focus of asset creation, WFP conducted its operation in 20 highly food insecure, disaster hit Village Development Committes (VDCs) of three districts, in three phases from November 2016 to December 2018. The operation’s outcomes and strategies were aligned with the following two strategic objectives (SO) of the WFP and also the Millennium Development Goals 1,3,4 & 5.

i) SO2: Support or restore food security and nutrition and establish or rebuild livelihood in fragile settings and following emergencies.

ii) SO3: Reduce risk and enable people, communities, and countries to meet their food and nutrition needs.

The operation provided food assistance for assets (FFA) and cash assistance for assets (CFA) to support the poorest and the most vulnerable communities in these areas to plan, build and maintain community infrastructure to ensure resilient livelihoods. WFP’s community-led planning approach focused on participation in the decision making of women, elderly people, and marginalized groups. With three phases of implementation, the project was able to reach out to 107,180 beneficiaries.

This evaluation was carried out in three project intervention districts, Dhading, Gorkha, and Nuwakot. This evaluation is a follow up for the baseline study conducted in 2017. It compares the findings from the baseline and end-term to analyze and draw conclusions.

The end term evaluation was conducted with the following specific objectives:

• To measure outcome level results

• To understand the extent to which needs have been met through a timely and transparent process

• To understand what factors and how they contributed to achieving the results; this will help to build an evidence base on the project’s implementation successes

• To understand the impact of the project in

• To draw conclusions on the sustainability aspect as envisioned by the program

• Assess the project results analyzed to understand current gender roles, interests and issues.

• To draw lessons for learning

In addition to the aforementioned objectives, this evaluation aimed to evaluate the end of the project results or changes seen in the lives of the beneficiaries as a result of the programme implementation. The evaluation also seeks to provide an opportunity to learn and replicate the good practices of the project and also identifying the areas of improvement to contribute to designing a more effective programme for the future. Furthermore, the evidence generated by the end term evaluation is expected to be used by the Government of Nepal, WFP, and other stakeholders at the national and international levels while designing/undertaking similar operations. The evaluation will also be vital in continuing WFP’s commitment to accountability and transparency, to both internal and external stakeholders listed in the Stakeholder Analysis (Annex 2).