The Government of Belize (GoB), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) co-financed the Community-initiated Agriculture and Resource Management Project (CARD) in Southern Belize. In 2007, the IFAD Office of Evaluation (OE) conducted a Completion Evaluation of the CARD project. The evaluation was conducted in line with the IFAD evaluation Policy and the general provisions contained in the evaluation Approach Paper. A close collaboration was maintained with the Evaluation and Oversight Division of the CDB throughout the evaluation. After a preparatory mission in April 2007, evaluation field work was conducted in Belize in May 2007. A workshop to present the initial findings was presented in Punta Gorda on 24 May 2007. A final National Roundtable Workshop was held in Belmopan on 8 November 2007.

As per usual practice for OE evaluations, a Core Learning Partnership¹(CLP) was established providing critical input at key stages in the evaluation, including towards the preparation of the Agreement at Completion Point (ACP).

The ACP reflects an agreement between the GoB and IFAD management (represented by the Programme Management Department/Latin America and the Caribbean Division) on the main findings of the evaluation, as well as the evaluation recommendations that they agree to adopt and implement. The ACP builds on the evaluation's results as well as the discussions that took place during the workshop.

Main evaluation findings

Relevance of project design. The design of the CARD project was found to be relevant to the target group and the Belize National Poverty Elimination Strategy focusing on the poverty "hotspot" of the Toledo District; supporting ecologically sustainable agricultural practices and addressing concerns with the traditional Milpa agricultural system. The focus on areas of highest poverty, on small farmers operating at subsistence level and indigenous people was also consistent with the policy directions of GoB and the IFAD Strategic Framework. The CARD project was designed to build from the activities of previous projects and it aimed to respond to the stated interests of the communities that had participated in the design. The project's design was based on the community-initiated approach that in theory allowed the communities to have a say in their own development.

Unfortunately, due to both the context in Southern Belize, and difficulties experienced in implementation, the potential of the design was not fully realized.

Implementation and outputs. The project targeted coverage of 50 community sub-projects (one per community²) and 2 000 households. In addition, credit access was to be improved for a targeted 2 600 borrowers through the Rural Financial Services (RFS) component. Although the project reached out to 50 communities, few community sub-projects were successful. Community planning activities rarely led to implementation of preferred sub-projects and so few sub-projects were continuing at the time of the evaluation. Nevertheless, ten detailed community profiles were generated through a community-based planning process. Several are now being actively used by the communities.

The total number of active borrowers in the RFS was only about 26 per cent of the revised mid-term target. However, two local credit unions (CUs) were strengthened through the project and will continue to lend to project participants beyond the project period.

The most successful component in terms of output was the Technical and Marketing Services where producer groups were assisted. The Toledo Cacao Growers Association (TCGA) generated the greatest outputs with 300 000 cacao grafted plants transplanted, expanding the total organic cacao acreage by about 800 acres. TCGA has expanded from 130 to 937 members. In 2006, TCGA exported 96 000 lbs of cacao, its highest production to date. Market demand is high and, as the transplanted trees mature, production is expected to increase substantially by 2010.

Strengths. There were several initiatives that were rated as highly satisfactory and which have far reaching potential for Southern Belize. Project success was seen where suitably qualified staff members with practical experience in field-based rural development were appointed, where community interests were supported, and where ready markets were available. CARD has left an institutional legacy amongst the IFIs and TCGA that is likely to be sustained. Long term inputs to producers' organisations, particularly the TCGA, yielded multiple benefits in social capital generation as well as in economic and institutional development. The cacao production and the complementary organic production system is an improved traditional process that is now being replicated by most of the TCGA members. There is potential for using the system for other organic crops. The CUs were an effective mechanism for developing rural financial services for small farmers in the south and have potential for further growth.

Weaknesses. Overall, the CARD design was assessed as valid, but there were several gaps in project implementation that contributed to the project's weak performance including: (i) poor human resource management; (ii) a fragmented, externally driven approach, rather than the recommended strategic, phased approach; (iii) poorly implemented training and skills development activities; (iv) lack of timely and sustained follow-up on project interventions; and (v) ineffective monitoring and evaluation. There were other weaknesses in the project, but if these five aspects had been adequately addressed, most of the other challenges could have been more easily overcome.

Lessons learned. The project started slowly in terms of both implementation and disbursements. Only 58 per cent of IFAD funding had been used by loan closing. As identified during the project design process, the limited availability of key human resources was a major constraint to project implementation. Experienced and capable staff are known to be difficult to attract and retain in projects in Southern Belize. The risk became reality in implementation. Long periods without key staff such as the Project Director (PD), Accountant and Monitoring and Evaluation Officer meant that internal project processes were inadequately installed, new staff members were insufficiently oriented, vital management information was not generated, and decision-making was not strategic. Delayed recruitment of staff, poor installation of basic procedures and lengthy procurement procedures meant that the project started badly and was never able to recover. A greater investment in human resource development would contribute to improved effectiveness.

Recommendation 1

Continued investment in the southern districts of Belize. Investment is required across all Belize but the level of poverty in the south is still recorded as the highest in the country. The view that CARD was not successful could prevent further investment in the south. Yet, advances made through CARD show that Southern Belize has potential in niche export marketing and ecotourism which is realizable with technical support.

There are a number of initiatives developed through the project such as livestock development and bee keeping which still require support to ensure that the full benefits from project investments can be realized. There is a need for detailed negotiations with the European Union's BRDP and other sources of funds to definitively assess whether or not, and how, these priorities can be accommodated.

It is important to make sure that the communities can access national programmes. Thus, investment needs to be more targeted in relation to the lessons learned regarding greater involvement of local leaders in decision-making, building local capacity and longer term investments.

Responsible institutions: The lead institution for this recommendation is Ministry of National Development (MND), in collaboration with other Ministries (such as the MAF; Ministry of Human Development; Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment; Ministry of Works). IFAD will explore ways to consolidate the rural financial services experiences with credit unions under CARD in the southern region as well as its scaling-up in other areas of Belize. BRDP should consider and incorporate lessons learned from CARD as far as possible. There are also opportunities with Beltraide Network Brokerage Program.

Time frame: On-going focus of the agencies in line with the GoB's National Poverty Elimination Strategy.

Recommendation 2

Continuing support for rural finance. Reflows from the Rural Credit Fund need to be quarantined for continued support to the two participating credit unions. The GoB can assist in further development in the southern districts of Belize by ensuring that the funds are available to the south in perpetuity.

There is still a need for additional credit funds throughout Belize. Current projects are supporting investment but not working capital. Marketing support, recognition of collateral (particularly land) and decreasing delinquency need improved strategies.

The Belize Credit Union League (BCUL), with the Central Bank, is likely to play a major role in future nurturing of the CUs. Investment is required in capacity building of the CUs to develop a stable financial market for rural financial services. Policy reviews are required of broader financial processes such as taxes, incentives, trade finances, rural credit policies, etc. to support the microfinance sector.

Responsible institutions: The DFC and the Central Bank to identify how the CARD re-flow funds can be used. The options for expanding credit funds and a wide range of rural financial services will be considered in the preparation of a new potential IFAD project. The Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), through the Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF), is planning to support the BCUL, the 2nd tier institution of the CU movement. GoB has expressed its interest in supporting the Small Farmers and Business Bank.

Time frame: IFAD, the MND, MAF, Ministry of Finance (MoF) will jointly explore the opportunities for collaboration in developing rural financial services during 2008.

Recommendation 3

Realistic implementation. There are a number of recommendations in relation to improved support to development projects in Southern Belize. These include:

• Involve participants in design, implementation and review³ with particular recognition of the influence of culture (traditional and political)
• Intensive support at the commencement of a project to ensure that the design is effectively translated into implementation and that the appropriate capacity is built
• Recognition of the long time frame required for community development
• Institute procurement processes that are cognizant of the limited markets and which have appropriate levels of bureaucracy for small contracts
• More emphasis at the commencement of the project to install and operationalize an appropriate monitoring system
• There is a need in future initiatives for projects to clearly state their intentions and potential time frames, gauge and manage the level of expectations generated
• There should be a clear counterpart required by project participants in terms of cash and labour equity for specific sub-projects
• The groups to be financed need to either be in existence prior to the project and/or have specific self-generated objectives and a common cause. The methodology of requiring communities to form small groups specifically to access funds is not recommended; support to individuals may also be appropriate
• Long term investment is recommended, similar to that provided to the TCGA, to develop local institutions both local governance structures and specific interest groups
• Project processes need to be sufficiently flexible to respond to changes in project situation, particularly after the mid-term review (MTR).

Responsible institutions: These recommendations will be considered as lessons learned by MAF and be incorporated in the development of subsequent projects, particularly in the design of the proposed IFAD-funded project.

Time frame: Commencing immediately, MND and MAF to provide oversight to ensure that projects, particularly a potential IFAD follow-on project, adequately consider these recommendations in project design.

Recommendation 4

Investment in people. The project highlighted aspects important to targeting, recognition of ethnic diversity and local leadership development. Improved communication mechanisms and opportunities for cultural exchange need to be encouraged so that there is an increased mutual understanding of the different cultures that comprise the national identity of Belize. Supporting cultural initiatives like the deer dancers and the community-based national park management initiatives contribute to economic benefits as well as transforming cultural differences into an advantage rather than a challenge.

Targeting needs to focus on the poor but specifically those people with commitment to participate. The mechanism for targeting needs to consider cultural/area specifics and not just formal poverty indicators. Criteria that are too rigid can exclude people with capacity e.g. community leaders who can support others in achieving change. There is a need for local organizations to be made aware of their roles and responsibilities in the project so that there is greater likelihood of them being able to take full advantage of available opportunities. Projects must include personnel to work with project participants to link participants effectively into required project processes.

Policy level review and practical support for decentralization is needed to assess the representation of different ethnic groups in decision-making for their own development. The connection of indigenous people to land and other forms of self-determination is a sensitive yet highly important issue. It is not an issue that was addressed by CARD, yet it is an issue that continues to face many of the communities that it aimed to assist. There is a need for community leaders, both traditional mayors and local councils to receive more orientation, training and basic tools for leadership.

Responsible institutions: MND and MAF need to consider the targeting of projects to make sure they are appropriate. Within the framework of its overall targeting policy, IFAD needs to carefully consider targeting mechanisms within the proposed project to better tailor future project activities to the needs of the rural poor. There are opportunities to increase collaboration with local NGOs to assist in targeting and implementation.

Time frame: Already commenced with the implementation of the National Poverty Elimination Strategy and preparation of potential IFAD follow-on project but could be refined in formulation of a Rural Development Policy as part of the Vision 2025 planning process.

Recommendation 5

Professionalizing project processes. Project procedures were too complex and cumbersome. The processes were not appropriate to the capacity of the local community e.g. language, style, culture. The allocation for appropriate procurement procedures needed to be aligned with the expected type of sub-projects. There has been a recurring theme in project evaluations for Belize that poor recruitment processes and human resource management compromise project effectiveness.

Experienced rural development implementers at the management and field level are needed to serve as mentors and provide proper orientation and on-the-job training for local project staff. M&E needs to be given greater importance as a management tool rather than just reporting. This requires dedicated resources at the project level and within Government to oversee monitoring. Political interference tends to lead to reports being too positive.

So, aide-memoires (for example of supervision missions) that openly and explicitly highlight concerns with projects would help to overcome political influence. 

Responsible institutions: GoB needs to take greater ownership and responsibility to hold donors, projects and themselves more accountable.

IFAD will produce aide-memoires to highlight concerns as clearly as possible and will follow up with technical assistance to implement its recommendations, when needed. Civil society can take a stronger role in holding government, donors and projects more accountable and promoting transparency. Establishing fully operational Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (M&E) systems at project commencement is an important action that is the responsibility of both the responsible implementing agency and the financing institution.

Time frame: To be considered in design of next IFAD-funded project, as well as other projects of the GoB.

Recommendation 6

Productive partnerships. The partnership between CDB, IFAD and GoB was an appropriate arrangement that brought together expertise and resources towards a common objective.

Some amendments in the implementing arrangements may have been of assistance to make the partnership more productive, for instance, clearer distinction in the roles and responsibilities, particularly for CDB fulfilling a dual role as a financing partner of CARD, and as a cooperating institution for IFAD supervision and implementation support activities.

There is a need for GoB and donors to consider more public/private partnerships in project management and implementation. The mechanism of a Project Steering Committee (PSC) is a critical partnership for project implementation and at this regard, issues such as selection of members, conflict of interest, incentives, etc. must be realistically addressed. The GoB should make election to PSC/Boards more transparent. There is a need to orientate and strengthen the Steering Committee/Board at an early stage in the project so all members understand the culture, responsibilities and requirements as a member and to make sure that they are capable of making the necessary decisions. Better communication mechanisms and practices are required at all levels to expedite critical correspondence, exchange views more regularly, increase mutual understanding of the challenges faced by the project and lead to more rapid identification of solutions.

Responsible institutions: MND to provide more coordination between agencies. Donors should actively seek more opportunities for inter-agency input to project design and implementation. The Beltraide Network Brokerage Program expressed interest in being more involved with coordination activities to assist with strengthening public-private partnerships.

Time frame: To be considered in design of next IFAD-funded project, as well as other GoB projects.

---

1/ Members of the CLP include: Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF); Ministry of National Development (MND); Ministry of Finance (MoF); Development Finance Corporation (DFC); Belize Credit Union League (BCUL); Toledo Teachers Credit Union (TTCU); Citrus Growers and Workers Credit Union (CGWCU); Belize Rural Development Programme (BRDP); Evaluation and Oversight Division of the CDB; Director of the CARD project and the IFAD Country Programme Manager (CPM).

2/ The number of 50 communities in the Project Logframe differs from the appraisal estimate of 54 communities.

3/ This did occur in CARD during design processes but was not continued through into implementation.