EVALUATION FORMAT FOR FIRST CONCURRENT EVALUATION OF FOREST DEVELOPMENT AGENCY PROJECTS SANCTIONED UNDER

NATIONAL AFFORESTATION PROGRAMME (NAP) SCHEME

Executive Summary

¨ Brief summary of the report, cross-linking relevant portions in the main text.

¨ Evaluation findings summarised as overall grading of the project in the following table.

GRADING OF PROJECT ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10

Quantitative Aspect
	Physical
	Financial

Qualitative Aspect
	Survival
	Health Of Plantations
	Maintenance
	Sustainability

JFM
	Degree Of People's Participation
	Satisfaction over perceived benefits by the local population

FDA Mechanism
	Composition of General and Executive Bodies of the FDA
	Role of FDA in Administrative, Supervisory and Monitoring Mechanism of the project
	Flow of funds from FDA to VFCs
	Planning, Implementation and Maintenance of Assets Directly by VFCs/EDCs

Overall Grading of the Project

Outstanding (8-10)

Very Good (5-<8)

Good (3-<5)

Poor (<3)

Note: The evaluator will provide a clear consistent, concise and coherent justification for assigning scores (1-10) for the various parameters listed for grading the FDA Project
PROJECT EVALUATION PROFORMA FOR NAP

The information and data required for the project evaluation, as detailed below, have strong bearing on the ‘Approved Project Proposal’ and ‘Periodic Progress Reports’ submitted by the project implementing FDAs to the NAEB. Therefore, first task of the evaluating agencies would be to secure relevant information from the FDAs and conduct the evaluation in the light of the following criteria :

A. GENERAL (Project Profile and Proposed Activities)

The evaluating agencies should provide the background information and salient features of the project, which should include :

A.1 Project Title

1. Project Title

2. Project Implementing FDA : District, Forest Division, Forest Circle, State etc.

3. Project Location (s) : Sub-watersheds, Development Blocks, Forest Ranges, Villages associated, etc.

4. Project Cost, Duration and Area

A.2 Project Proposal

1. Introduction

2. Project areas & locations

3. Any previous project

4. On-going Project: Socio-economic profiles of villages covered, land holding and distribution, land-use pattern, watershed features, forests covered, degree of pressure on forest resources, etc.

5. Project objectives

6. Project components

7. Salient features including proposed strategies for treatment

8. Creation of Joint Forest Management Committee & Development Funds

9. Implementing Agencies : Composition and constitution of FDA and field implementing units.

10. Micro-planning & JFM

11. Entry Point Activities

12. Approved programme of works

B. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

B.1 Classification of Area Covered/Treated

· Provide separate Table for each FY (Financial Year) from year of sanction

· Total coverage (Table) so far.

Category	Added Natural Regene ration	Artificial Regene- ration	Silvi- pasture	Bamboo Plantation	Cane Plantation	Mixed Plantation	Regene ration of Perennial Herbs / Shurbs	Total	% of Total Project Area
Forest Land
Community Land
Revenue Land
Govt. Wasteland
Private land
Others
TOTAL

B.2 Physical & Financial Achievements

The data should be compiled in sub-heads below in the following format :

· The coverage (Table) so far from the date of sanction.

· Table for each FY from year of sanction.

Sl.No.	Item	Physical (Area in ha)		Financial (Rs. in lakhs)
		Target for the year	Achieved in the year	Target for the year	Achieved in the year
1.	Natural Regeneration
	a) Advance Work
	b) Creation
	c) Maintenance
	Sub Total
2.	Management Intervention
	a) Advance Work
	b) Creation
	c) Maintenance
	Sub Total
3.	Pasture/Silvipasture Development
	a) Advance Work
	b) Creation
	c) Maintenance
	Sub Total
4.	Soil & Moisture Conservation
5.	Extension/Awareness/JFM / Training
6.	Fencing
7.	Monitoring & Evaluation
8.	Improved Technologies
9.	Overheads
	TOTAL

· Component-wise summary of physical area (sites) treated in different Forest/ranges/sub-watersheds in each year.

· Adequacy of the planting stock raised or available in each year : Summary either Forest range or nursery-wise.

B.3 People’s Participation

The data should be compiled in the following sub-heads :

B.3.1 Participatory Rural Appraisal/Micro-planning

1. Inspection of records and comments whether process of Micro-planning in the project is “to be initiated, on-going or completed”.

2. Expenditure incurred on the preparation of micro-plans (Rs. in lakh), as also percentage of the total approved project outlay.

B.3.2 Entry Point Activities

What assets have been created under entry point activities? Provide a list of Entry Point Activities Village-wise. The expenditure incurred in each FY on Entry Point Activities should be presented as below :

Name of Village

Assets Created under FDA

No. of Assets

Expenditure incurred

Peoples Contribution towards expenditure

Inspection of entry point assets created in the project area and brief comments on their quality, effectiveness and usefulness to the project along with their impact on the local people including motivating them to willingly participate in the protection of forest areas.

B.3.3 Joint Forest Management

Comments on the JFM approach adopted in the project :

Provide the following information:

JFM Committee

a) No. of villages where formation initiated in the Division

b) No. of villages where formal committees established in the Division

c) Total number of committees established so far in the project area

d) Total membership in terms of households/families

e) Percentage of women, SCs, STs in the JFM committees

	Male	Female	Total
Scheduled Caste
Scheduled Tribe
Others
TOTAL

f) Establishment of Village Development Fund : Yes / No

If yes, Quantum of Fund available as on 31.03.2002

g) Joint Forest Management Committee Meetings/ Forest Development Agency (FDA) Meetings:

	JFMC Meetings	FDA Meetings
Number of General Body meetings held
Number of Executive Body Meeting held

h) Micro-Planning

Prepared/Discussed/ratified by VFC/Under Implementation

i) List of important Registers/Records maintained by and available with :

a) JFMCs

b) FDAs

B.3.4 Capacity Building : Training of JFMC/Community Participation Conducted

• Provide separate Table for each FY from year of sanction

Coverage (Table) so far :

Training programme conducted

Staff :

Number Trained

Topics covered

Community :

Number Trained

Topics covered

Organisations involved (Trainers)

Year-wise Expenditure (Rs. in lakh) incurred on training activities

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Total

B.3.5 Monitoring and Evaluation:

Number of inspection by :

i) Chief Conservator of Forests

ii) Conservator of Forests

iii) Deputy Conservator of Forests

Whether FDA conducted by the regular Monitoring & Evaluation of project activities :

Year-wise Expenditure incurred on Monitoring & Evaluation

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Total

Where any independent agencies involved in the above monitoring process ? Yes/No

If yes,

• Provide the list of agencies & copies of reports, and list of main

Findings/recommendations

• Frequency of monitoring and /or evaluation
• Number of such activities carried out in each FY

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Total

B.4 FDA Mechanism

1. Outline the constitution of FDA, i.e., composition of general & executive bodies, along with deviations, if any, reasons therefore, and concurrence of MoEF thereto

2. Highlight the strengths and weakness, if any, pertaining to mutual responsibilities assigned to FDA (Administrative, Supervisory & Monitoring) and VFCs/EDCs (execution of field works)

3. Comment on whether the project implementing VFCs/EDCs are also being benefited through any other forestry/community development project from State/Central Government. If no, then what role and initiatives the FDA proposes in regard to the overall rural/eco-development of the project areas

4. Provide the brief outline of FDA bank account, its mode of operation, auditing status supported with progress of works as envisaged in the guidelines. Comment on the flow of funds to the VFCs/EDCs. Disbursement of funds by JFMCs for works executed. If delayed, reasons thereof

5. Similar details should also be provided for the individual VFC/EDC whose works were assessed and interactions held with. Details of statement of account and progress reports sent by VFC/EDC to the FDA. Comment on the receipt of funds by VFCs/EDCs.

C. Qualitative Analysis

Sampling Design : The evaluator will compile information of socio-economic profile and forest/afforestation details of all NAP – JFMCs in the FDA, and randomly select statistically significant number of JFMCs for in-depth study based on a stratified-random sample. The whole design should be statistically sound, so that there is least human-bias. The sampling design shall be described in detail, in addition to the information in the prescribed format for evaluation report.

C.1 Assessment of Plantations, SMC Works and their Output

1. Brief comment on the suitably of areas selected for project implementation

2. Assessment of work as seen in the field including quality of work

3. Survival rate (estimated statistically, indicating the methodology adopted and average height of plants)

4. Assessment of regeneration/rehabilitation status of degraded lands treated

5. Technology used in the project : Technology or methodology adopted under each of the components sanctioned by NAEB. An analysis of the technology used and its effectiveness in brief.

6. Increase in availability of biomass (fuelwood, fodder, other NTFPs, Small Timber etc.)

7. Improvement in quality of life of people in project area (status of health & education, availability of drinking water, increase in per capita income)

C.2 People’s Participation

1. Whether the choice of species has been decided in consultation with the local people. Also please comment briefly whether these are in consonance with the local needs.

2. Briefly comment on the suitability of species taken up for NTFP and medicinal plants(perennials) from economic point of view.

3. Whether the project has created awareness along the local population about the responsibilities they expected to discharge and the benefits that are likely to accrue from the project.

4. Approach adopted by the project authorities for motivating the public?

5. Whether the means of communication adopted have been successful and have there been a favourable response?

6. Whether the village communities have been involved in :

a) Project planning

b) Project implementation

c) Usufructs sharing mechanism

d) Are the people aware of the G.O. issued (if any) with regard to JFM/usufructs sharing mechanism

e) Has any formal arrangement been evolved for sharing the intermediate and final produce of the project activities

f) Evaluation and comments on the effectiveness of the mechanism evolved and the equitableness of the same

g) What role has been played by the local communities/committee in arriving at the mechanism.

C.3 Assets : Protection & Maintenance

What measures have been used for protecting the assets created in the project? State the quality and quantity of measures adopted and their effectiveness. The evaluator may state whether in spite of measures the plantations are subjected to grazing or other abiotic damages. Whether these issues were placed before the Village Forest Committee. If so, with what results. If not, why? Whether the VFC has been effective in sorting out these issues.

C.4 Maintenance of Records

a) Whether record of nurseries indicating the number and species of seedlings raised has been maintained?

b) Whether these are adequate and posted from time to time. If not, the reasons and effect of un-posted records on the implementation of project

c) Whether plantation journals have been maintained and posted up to date. Whether a surveyed sketch of the plantation has been pasted on the register

d) Whether inspecting officials of the implementing agency like DFO, CF or CCF has recorded their observations/comments, if any.

e) Whether record/ register of VFC/VDA General Body and Executive Body meetings maintained.

C.5 Project Benefits

Comment on whether implementing authorities have quantified the tangible and intangible benefits, which the regenerated areas would be able to offer to the local people? Or else, a suitable and appropriate system to forecast, evaluate and monitor such benefits is being developed. If not, then reasons thereof.

Provide a brief outline of the employment generated (man-days) by the project activities, especially Afforestation, SMC works and entry point activities in each VFC/EDC. Also comment on the extent of such benefits having gone directly to the local women/SCs/STs.

C.6 Project Reporting Activities

a) What returns (reports) have been submitted by the implementing agency to the State/Central Govt. Whether these reports were sent regularly on due dates. If not, the reasons therefore.

b) Whether any State level agency has monitored project activities. If so, the outcome of such monitoring/evaluations and the comments, if any.

c) If no agency evaluated project activities, reasons therefore.

C.7 Project Constraints /Limitations

a) What constraints/limitations were faced by the project authorities, if any.

b) Whether the fund flow was smooth and without delays

c) If flow was not smooth, where did the delay arise? This must be checked with records

d) Whether the project authorities made adequate efforts to get the funds released in time.

C.8 Suggestion for Improvements

C.8.1 From Implementing / Supervising Agencies

a) Whether there is any scope for improving the project output

b) Whether the project authorities have felt any need for improving upon any particular activity or methodology.

c) Whether the people of the area feel any need to improve any particular aspect of the project.

C.8.2 From the Evaluating Agency/Consultants

a) Whether the project should be continued/modified/discontinued (give reasons)

b) Any other relevant recommendation (s)

c) The evaluator will discuss the evaluation design and draft outcomes with functionaries of FDA (DCF, CF and CCF) before the start, and upon conclusion of the study. Names and designation of functionaries of FDA (DCF, CF, CCF) with whom evaluator has interacted for evaluation along with date and appraisal summary of discussions with the officers to be given.