1.2 ព័ត៌មានលម្អិតពីបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ និងស្ថាប័នដែលចូលរួមក្នុងការវាយតម្លៃ និងចងក្រងឯកសារនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, Tajikistan (WB / PPCR)

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

World Bank (World Bank) - សហរដ្ឋអាមេរិក

1.3 លក្ខខណ្ឌទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈវ៉ូខេត

តើពេលណាដែលទិន្នន័យបានចងក្រង (នៅទីវាល)?

20/10/2006

អ្នកចងក្រង និង(បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ)យល់ព្រមទទួលយកនូវលក្ខខណ្ឌនានាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈ​ វ៉ូខេត:

បាទ/ចា៎

2.1 ពណ៌នាសង្ខេបខ្លីពីវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

Provision of technical and financial management assistance through Jamoat (“Sub-District”) level organizations to farmers in a large small grants programme.

2.2 ពណ៌នាលម្អិតពិវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ពណ៌នាលម្អិតពិវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ:

Aims / objectives: The Tajikistan - Community Agriculture & Watershed Management Project (CAWMP), aimed to use a sub-district level organization to provide more efficient, transparent and accountable services to farmers for the project duration. CAWMP financed small grants to farmer groups for agricultural production in environmentally sustainable ways in Tajikistan’s uplands. The sub-district level support for this initial six year period, together with support from other project partners, helped (a) enable project implementation, and (b) build farmer capacity to sustain the investments after the end of six-year project, even in the absence of continued outside support.

Methods: In four project sites 39 Jamoat (“sub-district”) Development Committees (JDCs) operated as NGOs with elected officers and helped organize 43,000 households into groups to implement 4,000 rural production investments that included varied SLM technologies in 402 villages. JDCs managed $7.4 million in small grants. Use of the JDC built upon existing initiatives to strengthen local governance. The JDCs collaborated and received support from a government-appointed Project Management Unit (PMU), field-based Project Coordination Units (PCUs), and four contracted Facilitating Organizations (FOs). These partners helped train JDCs in financial, organizational, and technical aspects (e.g. fund flow, participatory planning, SLM technologies), and assisted villages to form new JDCs where none existed.

Stages of implementation: JDCs, with FOs and PCU specialists, undertook activities including: 1) preparation of participatory village-based Community Action Plans (CAPs) that included proposed rural production investments and formation of Common Interest Groups (CIGs) of households [See TAJ046}; 2) participation in sub-district and project-site/watershed level screening and approval of rural production proposals from CIGs to ensure economic, environmental and social feasibility [See TAJ045]; 3) management and disbursement of grant funds from the PMU to CIGs [See TAJ 044]; 4) overseeing formal investment agreements with participating CIGs; 5) monitoring, evaluation and reporting; and 6) liaison with other villages and relevant government agencies to facilitate permissions, resource use agreements, issuance of land use rights, etc.

Role of stakeholders: JDCs comprised elected village representatives and the government’s sub-district officials. Generally, JDC members have relatively higher levels of education and relevant knowledge and experience than the local population. A JDC chairperson and secretary were elected and a qualified accountant/bookkeeper appointed. JDCs met monthly and established committees, (e.g., gender, environment, financial management and social). CAWMP paid an honorarium for the accountant and incremental travel costs for all JDCs. For newly established JDCs, CAWMP also provided funds for office facilities, plus an honorarium for the chairperson, and an additional honorarium for another officer if one was female.

2.3 រូបភាពនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

2.5 ប្រទេស/តំបន់/ទីតាំងកន្លែង ដែលវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយត្រូវបានអនុវត្តន៍

2.6 កាលបរិច្ឆេទនៃការចាប់ផ្តើម និងបញ្ចប់នៃវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយនេះ

2.7 ប្រភេទនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

• ផ្អែកលើគម្រោង/កម្មវិធី

2.8 គោលបំណង/ទិសដៅសំខាន់នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (Sub-district assistance, non-government organizations, farmer groups, facilitation support, technical advice, fund transfers to farmer groups, )

Efficient and responsible sub-district institutional arrangements for a fixed-term project that are able to assist upland farmers in adopting practices to increase agricultural production in sustainable ways.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Use of sub-district organizations provided an efficient, transparent and accountable way of providing essential services to farmers for the period of initial investment, i.e., the six-year period of project implementation. Alternatives ways of providing this support would have had disadvantages: such support at a village level would have been too expensive and faced human capacity constraints, while using the centralized government system or relying solely on large NGOs would have been less transparent, less participatory, and less accountable to the interests of local people.

2.9 លក្ខខណ្ឌអនុញ្ញាត ឬរារាំងការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសដែលស្ថិតនៅក្រោមវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

3.1 អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធដែលបានចូលរួមក្នុងវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ និងតួនាទីរបស់ពួកគេ

3.2 ការចូលរួមរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីក្នុងតំបន់/ សហគមន៍ក្នុងតំបន់ក្នុងដំណាក់កាលផ្សេងគ្នានៃវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

	ការចូលរួមរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីក្នុងតំបន់/សហគមន៍ក្នុងតំបន់	សូមបញ្ជាក់នរណាត្រូវបានចូលរួម ព្រមទាំងពណ៌នាសកម្មភាពទាំងនោះ
ការចាប់ផ្តើម/ការលើកទឹកចិត្ត	គ្មាន
ការរៀបចំផែនការ	អសកម្ម	Local communities consulted for social assessment during project design.
ការអនុវត្តន៍	អន្តរកម្ម	JDC members (village representatives) provided a range of services to villagers and other functions such as liaison with government for the purposes of CAWMP.
ការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃ	អន្តរកម្ម	JDCs and CIGs were signatories of formal agreements governing grants for rural production. JDCs released funds based on agreed benchmarks and with PCUs and FOs monitored and reported on environmental, economic and social aspects.
Research	គ្មាន

3.3 គំនូសបំព្រួញ (ប្រសិនបើមាន)

3.4 ការសម្រេចចិត្តលើការជ្រើសរើសបច្ចេកទេស SLM

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើអ្នកណាជាអ្នកបានសម្រេចចិត្តក្នុងការជ្រើសរើសបច្ចេកទេសដើម្បីយកមកអនុវត្តន៍:

• អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី ដោយមានការគាំទ្រពីអ្នកជំនាញឯកទេស SLM

ចូរពន្យល់:

CIG members and technical specialists made decisions on the choice of SLM technologies in any one small grant proposal. Within each JDC, the entire committee made decisions on acceptable proposals, with a technical committee often conducting the initial screening. On obtaining JDC approval, proposals were submitted for further review by a regional Watershed Devlelopment Committee

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. CIG members and technical specialists from the respective facilitating organisation and the project coordination unit made decisions on the method/s for implementing SLM technologies in any one proposal. However, CIGs undertook full responsibility for the implementation and management of the rural production investments.

4.1 ការកសាងសមត្ថភាព/ បណ្តុះបណ្តាល

តើវគ្គបណ្តុះបណ្តាលបានផ្តល់ឱ្យអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី/អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធផ្សេងៗទៀតដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើអ្នកណាត្រូវបានបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
• បុគ្គលិកចុះទីវាល/អ្នកផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាយោបល់

• JDCs

ទម្រង់នៃការបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• អនុវត្តន៍ជាមួយការងារ
• ពីកសិករទីកសិករ
• ទីតាំងបង្ហាញ
• ការប្រជុំជាសាធារណៈ

ប្រធានបទបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

Organisational Management, Book-keeping, Participatory rural appraisal, Participatory environmental planning and analysis, a range of SLM technologies, monitoring and evaluation, gender awareness.

4.2 សេវាផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាយោបល់

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីបានទទួលនូវសេវាផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាដែរ ឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

• informal information

ពណ៌នា/ពន្យល់:

Informal advice and facilitation support by JDCs, in collaboration with other project partners: Key elements: Project design and procedures, Technical, financial and institutional considerations of proposed investments for grant financing, fostering increased knowledge and changes in attitudes and practices among farmers to identify advice needed, and for ongoing learning during the post project period.;

Nominal government advisory services exist at district level, and even less in sub-districts. Technical capacities for SLM are lacking. Staff are poorly paid, positions are unfilled and finances are inadequate. Little orientation toward client service and governance problems are common. Conditions unlikely to change in foreseeable future. JDCs and project partners provided informal advisory services during investment period, created demand among farmers to seek advice in post-project period.

See comments in 2.4.2.1. for information on government advisory services

4.3 ការពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពស្ថាប័ន (ការអភិរឌ្ឍន៍អង្គភាព)

តើស្ថាប័នទាំងអស់ត្រូវបានបង្កើតឡើង ឬពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពតាមរយៈវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែរ ឬទេ?

• បាទ/ច៎ា បានខ្លាំង

សូមបញ្ជាក់ថាតើស្ថាប័នត្រូវបានពង្រឹង ឬបង្កើតឡើងនៅត្រឹមកម្រិតណា(ច្រើន)?

• ថ្នាក់មូលដ្ឋាន

សូមបញ្ជាក់ប្រភេទនៃការគាំទ្រ:

• ហិរញ្ញវត្ថុ
• ការកសាងសមត្ថភាព/ បណ្តុះបណ្តាល
• សម្ភារៈ

សូមផ្តល់ព័ត៌មានបន្ថែមទៀតឱ្យបានលម្អិត:

Support of sub-district local institutions is the focus of the Approach.

4.4 ការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃ

តើការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃគឺជាផ្នែកមួយនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

មតិយោបល់:

management of Approach aspects were None monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Quality of CIG proposals and implementation, rate of fund disbursement to CIGs, timeliness of report

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Poor initial attention to environmental aspects of SLM and other investments in CIG proposals led to increased training for JDCs, FOs, PMU, PCU and local government officials in participatory environmental analysis.

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Based on field observations and measurements in some cases, CIGs with the assistance of JDCs, FOs and project staff adjusted various SLM technologies that had been implemented as part of rural production investments during the course of implementation, e.g., composting procedures, irrigation techniques.

4.5 ការស្រាវជ្រាវ

តើការស្រាវជ្រាវ គឺជាផ្នែកមួយនៃវិធីសាស្រ្តដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

• Project evaluations

សូមផ្តល់ព័ត៌មានបន្ថែមទៀតឱ្យបានលម្អិត និងចង្អុលបង្ហាញនរណាដែលបានធ្វើការស្រាវជ្រាវ:

While the JDCs did not directly carry out formal research, they participated as respondents in the project evaluations that were carried out by the NGOs, and the PMU. These evaluations included findings from a variety of stakeholder perspectives about the JDC involvement.

5.1 ថវិកាប្រចាំឆ្នាំសម្រាប់ផ្សព្វផ្សាយ SLM

ប្រសិនបើចំនួនពិតប្រាកដនៃថវិកាប្រចាំឆ្នាំមិនត្រូវបានដឹងច្បាស់ សូមប្រាប់ពីចន្លោះនៃថវិកានោះ:

• > 1,000,000

មតិយោបល់ (ឧ. ប្រភពសំខាន់នៃមូលនិធិ/ម្ចាស់ជំនួយចំបង):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Opportunity cost of government officials’ time): 5.0%; international non-government (Estimate of co-financing ): 5.0%; government (Estimate of co-financing ): 90.0%; international (World Bank/International Development Assistance and Global Environment Facility); local community / land user(s) (Opportunity cost of land users’ time); other (Opportunity cost of JDC members’ time )

5.2 ការគាំទ្រផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថុ / សម្ភារៈដែលបានផ្តល់ទៅឱ្យអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីបានទទួលការគាំទ្រផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថ/សម្ភារៈសម្រាប់ការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសដែរឬទេ:

ទេ

5.4 ឥណទាន

តើឥណទានដែលបានផ្តល់នៅក្រោមវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយសម្រាប់សកម្មភាព SLM នេះយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច?

ទេ

6.1 ផលប៉ះពាល់នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

6.2 ការលើកទឹកចិត្តចម្បងៗរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីសម្រាប់ការអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស SLM

6.3 សកម្មភាពផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែលប្រកបដោយចីរភាព

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីអាចធ្វើឱ្យមានចីរភាពនូវអ្វីដែលត្រូវបានអនុវត្តន៍តាមរយៈវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែរឬទេ(ដោយពុំមានការគាំទ្រពីអ្នកខាងក្រៅ)?

• បាទ/ចា៎

ប្រសិនបាទ/ច៎ា សូមរៀបរាប់ថាធ្វើយ៉ាងម៉េច:

In accordance with the CAWMP design and the initial risk assessment, land users who have received CAMWP-financed grants are not necessarily dependent on the sustainability of JDC support during the post project period. These farmers should have the capacity, incentives, and the responsibility to sustain their investments on their own during the post-project period.

6.4 ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
To be added based on project evaluation due in late 2011

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស​ ទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ
Scale and scope of JDC mandates is effective for delivering services to upland, and often remote, farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Maintain a focus on strengthening sub-district level support to farmers.)
Sub-district level organisations can be an effective component of scaling-up strategies for SLM in a challenging physical landscape. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Scaling-up strategies will require investment in institutional arrangements.)
Participatory processes help ensure that organisations such as JDCs can work effectively with government units to deliver technical and financial resources to farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Ensure that participatory processes, including financial management mechanisms, are well integrated into SLM programmes.)

6.5 ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រ និងរកដំណោះស្រាយ

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យក្នុងទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ

តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?

Uncertain financial sustainability of JDCs during the post-project period in the absence of donor funding.

1. Continue to emphasize the importance of farmers having the capacity, incentives, and the responsibility to sustain their investments on their own, in the event that ongoing support from JDC is not available post-project. 2. Until more sustainable jamoat-level support system is established and proven to be effective in Tajikistan (i.e., meeting transparent, accountable, efficient, and capacity requirements), clarify fixed term nature of JDC support in order to avoid misunderstandings and unrealistic expectations. 3. Highlight JDC functions for the fixed term (6 years) under CAWMP and explore opportunities to include similar functions in current efforts of other donors to establish sub-district representative government bodies.

7.2 ឯកសារយោងដែលបានចេញផ្សាយ

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Operational Manual for Community Mobilization, Rural Production Investments and Research and Demonstrations Grants (2008)

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Operational Manuals for JDCs and CIGs in Financial Management and Procurement (2007)

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

CAWMP: Project Appraisal Document (2005)