3

EXTERNAL EVALUATION REPORT

“IMPROVING LIVELIHOODS AND FOOD SECURITY:

‘PROFESSIONAL KITS’ DISTRIBUTION FOR VULNERABLE

HOUSEHOLDS AND RETURNEES” IN ABKHAZIA/GEORGIA

DURING 2004-2007

A PROJECT BY PREMIERE URGENCE

SUPPORTED BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S HUMANITARIAN OFFICE (ECHO)

Sukhumi, Abkhazia

September 2007

4

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 5

I Acknowledgements 6

Preface 7

Premiere Urgence and ‘professional kit’ 8

II Work plan and methodology 9

MAP: Abkhazia and PU operational areas 11

III Beneficiaries according to the phases and sectors 14

IV Analytical synthesis of phase I and II 18

Broad issues with the previous assessment 22

V Analysis of Business programme 24

Community Social programme 26

VI Comparative Impact of Agricultural programme in three phases 29

VII Conclusion and recommendations 37

VIII Focus Groups Discussion at grass roots level 40

Tour of Gali business program 49

IX Interview key participants in the project: Staff of PU 53

X With the decision makers 66

XI Key stakeholders 75

XII Case studies 1-5 80-96

XIII Photographs from the project Focus group discussions, the project beneficiaries,

professional kits

97-98

XIV Annexure A About Abkhazia 99

Annexure B TOR of the evaluation work 102

Annexure C Work plan and implementation schedule of the evaluation study 106

Annexure D Detailed analysis of agriculture programme 109

Annexure E Detailed analysis of business programme Separate

zip file

5

Executive Summary

The project has successfully met its goals of improving food security and establishing a livelihoods base

for 1100 vulnerable households in target villages in five districts of Abkhazia/Georgia. However, these

achievements underscore a need for renewed resource mobilization and beneficiary support strategies to

meet anticipated, concrete expressions of demand. The main focus of future work should be strengthening

the project’s core interventions and continuing to provide support to existing beneficiaries to establish a

sustainable base of income-generating activities that will be able to flourish once the project exits

Abkhazia.

This evaluation found strong evidence for the need of an increase in emphasis on participatory approaches

to future community-level interventions, in particular by allowing beneficiaries to engage in the

development of the content, specifications, and deployment strategies of business/agricultural kits.

Harnessing local knowledge of agricultural practices and market conditions will allow the project to more

effectively leverage the assistance it provides to beneficiaries.

We identified several areas where current project design can be strengthened:

� Narrow the geographical focus of the project (current beneficiaries are too dispersed and outlying projects are therefore underserved by technical support and do not benefit from economies of scale that arise from targeting density)

� Demand/beneficiary-driven kit design and dissemination process (like freedom of choice to select ‘variety’ of crops/vegetables/livestock and other inputs)

� Increase levels of technical support and training after kit deployment � Increase engagement of private sector actors – existing farmers, buyers/traders of agricultural

produce – to generate an environment where agricultural kits will have a sustainable impact. � Reduce the number of beneficiaries for collective agricultural tools (3-4 person/mini- tractor

instead of 6-12 person/mini-tractor) � Facilitate inputs to develop cattle breeding and rearing, ensure feed availability for cattle during

off-season, availability of HYV seeds of vegetables, growing and marketing off-seasonal vegetables to neighboring countries

6

Acknowledgements Many thanks to PU top level decision makers, in general from the PREMIERE URGENCE’s HQ in Paris, and in particular Ms.Veronique MIOLLANY, Vincent and Pierre from PU- Abkhazia for full support provided in the office as well as in the field. I am indebted to Astik, Marlen, Nana-1 (Business agents) Astamur, Janshukh, Peter, Adgur (agronomists), Nana-2, Nana-3 (Gali), Bella, Xibla, Valia, Ilona, Irma, Aida (Social Workers) who have organized field trips, community and individual meetings, conducted surveys with beneficiaries, provided project documents, reports, for encouragement and who were interested in the results of this evaluation. I wholeheartedly express my gratitude to all of those beneficiaries who gave their valuable time to be interviewed for this evaluation and to share their opinion, experiences and openly participate in the survey, FGD and case studies. Dima, Uriy, Alyona and Marina deserve special thanks for providing all administrative and logistics support. Thanks are due to Gregory and Badra for their sincere help in completing data processing for this study. As always, Elena Bass-my better half, my beloved son Edward and lovely daughter Elizabeth have encouraged me to take up this complex but interesting & challenging assignment. It would not have been possible without their continued moral support and cooperation, kind words of appreciation and praise to finish this work timely. Finally, the comments and suggestions of my friend, Mukul Faruque, have been most useful and

acknowledged with particular gratitude.

Dhaka, 11 October 2007 Nizamuddin Al-Hussainy, PhD

7

Preface Since 2004 till date, three phases of a programme for improvement of food security and livelihoods of resource-poor households of Abkhazia mainly of small and marginal farmers and small artisans is being implemented by PREMEARE URGENCE (PU) under 3 grant contracts with European Commission Humanitarian Office (ECHO). The implementing agency was responsible for professional kit (technology) identification and dissemination by following step by step appropriate methods and procedures. PU also worked for capacity building of the farmers and small businesspersons (men and women), facilitated adoption of ‘professional kits’ at different levels in five districts of Abkhazia. This evaluation report tried to identify the effects, positive and negative, intended or not on Premeire Urgence’s humanitarian and development intervention on food security and livelihood programmes/ activity for the war affected people of Abkhazia during 2004-2007 which may help all concerned to better understand the extent of activities those reached the target groups and assess the magnitude of their effects on people’s welfare. This evaluation was based on random sample questionnaire surveys, participatory focus groups discussions with beneficiaries, questionnaire assessment with project management people and other stakeholders in which project beneficiary populations were compared before and after PU interventions, review of monitoring reports done by PU at several points during program intervention; case studies and analysis carried out of available other secondary data. What can we use it for? • Measuring outcomes and impacts of the activity, to what extent PU made and making a difference? What are the results on the ground? How can PU do better? • Helping to clarify whether costs for the project activity are justified, when decision- makers need information quickly. • Informing recommendations on whether to expand modify or eliminate any projects activity. • Drawing lessons for improving the design and management of future activities. Managers and policy- makers may get added confidence in decision- making. • Comparing the effectiveness of alternative interventions - whether some approaches are expensive or time-consuming. • Strengthening accountability of PU to the beneficiaries as well as to the donor for results.

8

Premiere Urgence and ‘professional kit’: From emergency to long-term development PREMIERE URGENCE (PU), an international humanitarian development NGO based in France, was established in 1992 to provide aid to the war affected civilian victims in former Yugoslavia. It is a non-profit organization, whose actions are independent, non-political and non-religious. PU provides assistance and protects people during the most traumatic moments in their lives; when they are frightened, lost, and uncertain about the future and possessing next to nothing. Whether it is in Iraq or Abkhazia/Georgia during or after the war or the Lebanon in the midst of fighting, the lives of ordinary women, girls, boys and men are disrupted — changed forever. PU is to lighten their load by ensuring that they receive the basic necessities of life and livelihoods. PU has provided aid in 29 different countries through emergency relief, reconstruction, rehabilitation and economic revival programmes with the objective to help vulnerable people regain self-sufficiency. To rebuild and create economic livelihoods programmes in different emergencies, PU is implementing an innovative Professional Kit programmes which is the appropriate ‘tool’ to revitalize the economy of the concerned countries of natural disasters, emergency programmes of development projects to enable the affected population to resume work and regain confidence. One such programme was in Abkhazia (ref: Annex A), population of which had been seriously suffered a 2 years long civil war with Georgia. The 1992-1993 civil war and subsequent several series of conflicts, blockades, protests in the following years in Abkhazia led to the displacement of over three hundred thousand persons and devastation of this once thriving agricultural centre and tourist destination situated between the Black Sea and the Caucasus mountains. Once emergency needs had been covered through the distribution of food aid, the country needs to be rebuilt. For reconstruction to take place, agricultural, business and other economic redevelopment is essential and to provide farmers, small craftsmen/ women with the tools they lost during the war. PU with partnership with ECHO came up with development projects to provide farmers, small business people with tools so that they resume their agricultural products production and income earning activities ‘to enable themselves physically and mentally, to regain their role in society and to generate income to provide for their families’. For the last three years PREMIERE URGENCE provided 1100 households of Abkhazia with their essential tools which they needed so as to able to live off the essential foods/income from those professional kits programmes. This beneficiary-based assessment evaluation was conducted which combines individual survey, focus groups discussions/ interviews, key informants, case studies and analysis of monitoring reports/secondary data gathered by PU during projects performance periods.

9

Work Plan and Methodology of the Evaluation Preparatory work began with mutually agreeing of the overall terms of reference (Annexure B) and preparation of the evaluation work plan and design matrix. (Annexure C). To make the scope of the evaluation timely manageable, the evaluation was organized under components as shown below: (i) Component 1 Conduction of questionnaire survey in the field (with 140 beneficiaries of three phases) was facilitated by the Agronomists and Social Workers of PU. (ii) Component 2 Gathering information from existing documents of three phases of ECHO supported projects, review the literature, review completed and ongoing PU monitoring reports, review of project documents, internal and external reports on PU, monthly and annual performance reports, facilitation of Focus Groups Discussions(FGD), interviewing/discussion of beneficiaries and later at home writings case studies on beneficiaries, conducting survey with questionnaire with project personnel, decision makers, stakeholders; random verification of questionnaire fillings at the field, report writing and presentation and finalize the report was carried out by the evaluator. It was based on relevant manuals, TOR guides, documentation, and interviews and/ or studies on actual experience where available through field visits, undertaking fieldwork in selected villages from all regions involved with projects. Scope and Methodology: The objective of this evaluation is to help improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of operations. The evaluation aimed to: • demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses in the Activity Cycle and modalities and identify the contributing factors; • identify and analyze the constraints that need to be addressed to improve efficiency in operations, including possible changes in procedures and systems; • provide recommendations to increase the efficiency and effectiveness. Before presenting the substance of the findings, it should be noted that this evaluation does not identify one primary cause or party responsible for the underperformance of any activity. If it is underperformance that may be caused by a multifaceted set of issues, linked to a complex series of events and involving many, if not all, actors in the PU. There is no scapegoat and no quick fix. The PU information management systems have been reliable in sharing information on project status and elapsed time, and reporting on this subject has been systematic and fully transparent. The recommendations in this document are based on analyses of survey data collected from beneficiaries (details in Annex D), focus group discussions, and PU staff interviews.

10

The evaluation methodology included reviews of key documents (as well as previous monitoring and evaluation), beneficiaries survey, focus groups discussions with beneficiaries of 3 phases, conducting case studies were carried out as per the following schedule:

Phase

Villages Beneficiaries Survey and Individual Visits

Focus Group Discussion

Case Studies

Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase I) 290

14 290 Bashlata,(27) Lower Babashira(40)

Eshera(30) 17/9/07

Machara(1+1) 13/9/07

Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase II) 260

33 260 Bashlata(6), Babashira(11+13),

Agubediya(14) Tamysh(30) 18/9/07

Arasadzikh(1+1) 19/9/07

Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase III) 430

27 430

Bashlata(18), Primosk(8), Mukhuri (28)

Primorsk(37) 10/9/07

Vulnerable Urban and Rural Artisans (Phase III)120

Business groups 52

117 17 groups visited (33%)

Gali (1+1) 10/9/07

TOTAL 1100

74 1100

140(15 %) Agriculture 29(33%)

Business

97(>1%) 6

The first draft evaluation report of the three projects was presented in a separate workshop on 26/9/07 in

Sukhumi, Abkhazia PU office participated by the program coordinators, Agronomists, Social workers and

other relevant professionals.

11

The suggestions of the workshop participants and comments of the relevant decision makers were

considered for the incorporation in this final report.

Worth mentioning that, all tables/ graphs/ analysis has been made/done on the basis of information

collected through different methods/received from the beneficiaries, staff-implementers, stakeholders and

this evaluation was a 'beneficiaries, plus peoples who are involved directly or indirectly'-based. Here the

evaluator only analyzed the data and drawn conclusions and made specific recommendations, the

evaluator had the any opportunity to ’generate’ own data and based on those 'own' data make own

conclusions/recommendations.

12

Political Map of Abkhazia

Operational areas of activities during the first and second phases

The project was implemented during first phase in two districts:

Sukhumi and Gulripsh districts in 14 villages to support 290 beneficiaries.

13

During the second phase in five districts:

- Ochamchira and Tkwarcheli: provided support to 70 new farmers (7 new groups), with specific orientations that are milk production (lowlands in Ochamchira, especially the newly mine-cleared lands), and mountainous production (goats, beekeeping, etc. in Tkwarcheli)

- Gali: Consolidation of agricultural activities, notably through the initiation of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) process.

- Sukhumi and Gulripsh: supported to former beneficiaries and coops, plus 40 new farmers (4 new groups).

Locations of the 3rd phase activities

The agriculture component took place in five districts during the third phase:

- Sukhumi and Gulripsh, where PU has implemented the two previous phases of the agriculture program, funded by ECHO. Special consideration given to isolated villages that are inland and never received assistance.

- Ochamchira and Tkvarcheli where PU has been working since November 2005. New assessments and meetings with local heads of administration revealed that needs remain very important in these two districts, notably in isolated villages.

Lachkindar

Atara

Aradu

B

a

Moku

Baslakhu

Reka

Elur

Labra Djal

I Bedia

Primorsk

Ganakhleba

Dikhazurga

Nabakevi

Tagiloni

Baslata

Tamish Adzubdjia

Retchri Gumrish

Mukhuri

Guada

14

- Gali where PU has been working since November 2005. Actions for the phase III included the distribution of individual and collective kits the value of which was higher than that of the previous phases I & II for Gali.

The artisan/small business component implemented in the following five districts: Sukhumi, Gulripsh,

Ochamchira, Tkvarcheli and Gali. Division of beneficiaries were needs based. In other words, though a

concerted effort was made to ensure a balanced number of beneficiaries in all districts Premiere

Urgence’s first priority was to support beneficiaries who fulfilled the selection criteria, including

presenting feasible applications for profitable business.

15

Beneficiaries according to the phases and sectors

As per the data furnished by the PU Abkhazia Project Coordinators and project personnel, the following compilation cum analysis of information has been made.

In 2004 Première Urgence launched the first program to improve the food security and livelihoods of the vulnerable population living in Abkhazia with the support of ECHO.

In the first two phases, Première Urgence targeted exclusively farmers; however, in the third phase, assistance to artisans and petty business persons/ traders was also incorporated into the program. Phase I: "Boosting of Agricultural Activities in Sukhumi" from Oct. 04 to Sept. 05 This program was aimed at increasing the income and food security of 290 families in the districts of Sukhumi, Gulripsh, Ochamchira and Tkvarcheli through the distribution of agriculture kits to farming families and collective agriculture equipment to groups primarily composed of 8 farmers.

1st PHASE

Number of beneficiaries according to sectors

Crop /

Garden

Animal

Husbandry TOTAL

115 114 229

95 101 196

210 215 290 BENEFICIARIES!

total beneficiaries-290

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Crop / Garden Animal Husbandry

Sukhumi

Gulripsh

16

Phase II: "Consolidation of Farming Activities for the Reinforcement of Food Security in Abkhazia" from Oct. 2005 – Oct. 2006 This program was aimed at increased the income and food security for 260 families in the districts of Gali, Sukhumi, Gulripsh, Ochamchira and Tkvarcheli through the distribution of individual agriculture kits and collective agriculture equipment to groups composed of about 8 farmers. PU also provided technical advice to 290 previous program beneficiaries. Eighty-five of these previous beneficiaries received additional agriculture kits to replace poultry kits affected by the "avian bird- flu" epidemic.

2nd PHASE

Number of beneficiaries according to sectors

Crops/garden

Animal

husbandry Mixed business TOTAL

195 0 0 195

20 35 0 55

19 43 1 63

14 18 11 43

13 19 1 33

261 115 13 389

total beneficiaries-389

0

50

100

150

200

250

Crops/garden Animal

husbandry

Mixed business

Gali

Sukhumi

Gulripsh

Ochamchira

Tkvarcheli

17

Phase III: "Improving Livelihoods and Food Security in Abkhazia: Professional Kit Distribution for Vulnerable Households and Returnees" from December 2006 to October 2007 The overall objective of the third phase is to provide food security and improved livelihoods to 550 poor families in 5 targeted districts (Sukhumi, Gulripsh, Ochamchira, Tkvarcheli and Gali) of Abkhazia.

3rd PHASE

Number of beneficiaries according to sectors

Crops/garden

Animal

husbandry Mixed business projects TOTAL

118 7 15 22 14 162

6 13 0 45 20 64

0 1 1 23 10 25

103 129 16 22 10 270

3 15 3 28 9 58

230 165 35 143 63 573

total beneficiaries-570

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Crops/garden Animal

husbandry

Mixed business

Gali

Sukhumi

Gulripsh

Ochamchira

Tkvarcheli

Total Number of Beneficiaries: Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase I) 290 Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase II) 389 Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase III) 430

Vulnerable Urban and Rural businesspersons /Artisans (Phase III) 143

18

Crop / Garden

Animal

Husbandry Mixed business Phase

210 215 Phase I

261 115 13 Phase II

230 165 35 143 Phase III

Phase wise beneficiaries according to the sectors

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Crop / Garden Animal Husbandry Mixed business

PHASE 1

PHASE 2

PHASE 3

Worth mentioning that among total beneficiaries of 3 phases, the ratio between female and male beneficiaries was 46:54.

19

Analytical Synthesis of phase I and II

The ECHO project aims to improve the food security situation of vulnerable households in the Abkhazia

through the delivery of small-scale farming support via agricultural and livestock kits. The operational

framework targets at-risk households that are identified as being most entrepreneurial and likely to

succeed in implementing the toolkits provided. The toolkits are designed to improve purchasing capacity

and alleviate severe limiting constraints on agricultural production and animal breeding faced by

vulnerable households in the target areas.

The project log-frame identifies the following quantitative results:

1. Increased agricultural production 2. Improved access to and consumption of food

a. Improved food affordability due to decrease in food prices in the local market b. Improved access to food due to income generation

3. Establishment of family farm concerns 4. Establishment of cooperative farming groups

The above benchmarks are broadly addressed by the indicators below {Source: Final Report ECHO I

(2005) and Final Report ECHO II (2007), PU}.

Key Indicators

ECHO I ECHO II

Start date Oct-04 Oct-05

Duration (months) 12 13

New Beneficiaries (HHs) 290 305

Previous Beneficiaries (HHs) - 290

Total Beneficiaries (HHs) 290 595

Total Beneficiaries (individuals) 1314 2320

No. of farming kits distributed to new beneficiaries 425 305

Market price impact market survey

20

Consumption impact consumption/diet survey

No. of family farm concerns established - 305

No. of cooperatives/village solidarity groups

established

28 13

Need for additional assistance (replacement kits) - 85

15 Villages were selected in the ECHO I round: all of them in the periphery of Sukhumi (maxi.15 km) because of the presence of a major market.

Sukhumi Region Gulripsh region

Achadara Babushera

Baslata Dranda

Dziguta Gulripsh

Eshera Machara

Guma Merhiul

Gumista Parnaut

Lechkop Pshap

Yashtuka

21

Round Village District No. of beneficiaries

ECHO II Arasadzich Ochamchira 10

Adzjubzha Ochamchira 10

Tamysh Ochamchira 13

Merkula Ochamchira 10

Tkvarchal Tkwarcheli 13

Agubedia Tkwarcheli 14

Bedia 2nd Tkwarcheli 6

Machara Gulripsh 2

Markhjaul Gulripsh 1

Dranda Gulripsh 3

Gulripsh Gulripsh 1

Babashira Gulripsh 8

Pshap Gulripsh 3

Uarcha Gulripsh 3

Agudzera Gulripsh 1

Baslata Sukhumi 3

Achadara Sukhumi 3

Upper Eshera Sukhumi 2

Lower Eshera Sukhumi 3

Lower Jashtukha Sukhumi 1

Shashikvara Gali 46

Repo Khumushkuri Gali 84

Zemo Bargebi Gali 65

22

ECHO II

Increased

Animal

% of increase

(distributed

+ offspring)

living

COWS 65 (55+10) 58%

PIGS 26 (7+19) 420%

PIGLETS 43 (51-8) 87%

SHEEP 20 (21-1) New

GOAT 9 (12-3) 90%

BEES (hives) 12 New

Global

Increased

surface (Ha)

% of increase Global

Increased

harvest (tons)

% of increase

POTATOE 5,3 735% 37 600%

MAIZE 3 100% 0,6 44%

ONION 0,5 New 0,4 New

Fodder crops 13 New

Result given per

beneficiary family

Average Monetary % % % of increased

income Former income Global

Income Increase Income

Increase

<10% 10- 50%

50-100%

>100%

COWS 20149 590 3% 5318 26% 22% 49% 15% 15%

PIGS 32530 1583 5% 2954 9% 50% 33% 17% 0%

PIGLETS 21814 87 0% 3742 17% 27% 53% 13% 7%

SHEEP 20298

GOAT² 17694

BEES (hives) 10188 0 0% 400 4% 100% 0% 0% 0%

POTATO 22944 3602 16% 6590 29% 15% 54% 13% 15%

MAIZE 25064 0 0% 4640 19% 33% 33% 0% 33%

ONION 17994 2563 11% 3750 16% 0% 100% 0% 0%

GI = MI + money saved + value of the asset growth

Replacement Pigs Sheep Bees Greenhouses Goats Fertili

zers

Poultry kits

Kits 48 6 6 23 1 1 85

ECHO I

23

176 potato kits

- 23 vegetable kits including 21 complete greenhouses

- 11 maize-bean kits

- 99 poultry kits

- 6 bee-keeping kits

- 24 piglets’ kits

- 20 sow kits

- 30 heifer kits

- 36 cow kits

Difficult to assess now…except for some of the kits:

- potato: 44t distributed, 143 t harvested = poor harvest due to delay in the plantation and bad weather conditions

Assumption: maybe due to variety or doze of fertilizer?

Result 2: improvement of the households’ food security situation via the auto consumption

Indicator2: quantity of farm products eaten by the household

Methodology to be determined in order to assess this result

Broad issues with the previous assessment:

1. The performance of the beneficiaries is not compared to a “control” group. The program’s impact (i.e. the impact of kit distribution on household income) should be estimated as the difference in incomes between the target and control groups at the end of the intervention. In the example below, the implementation of the kit increased average household income by 50%, but only 17% compared to the control. The true impact of the program is then 17%

Before After Difference (%)

Beneficiary $10 $15 +50%

Control (in the same village but did not receive kit)

$6 $8 +33%

2. There is no way to measure the impact of increased agricultural production on food security via a decrease in the market price of food (because there are other factors that affect market prices – such as the price of fuel/petrol, availability of roads, etc). Ideally, a survey of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries should be carried out to assess the impact of the

kits on their food consumption calories consumer per day, broken down by protein, fat, carbohydrate

sources, to investigate whether there is a sustainable improvement in the beneficiaries’ nutrition as a

result of the toolkit

24

3. Investment per beneficiary changed from phase to phase!

PHASE- wise Investment per beneficiaries in Roubles

I II III

15500 8100 10200

This might have some effect on the outcome, especially in agricultural products. In reply to a question, 88% majority of the project staff- implementing the projects activities opined that, “It would be good if it would have been long-term programs and budgets for beneficiaries would have

increased”.

25

Analysis of Business Programme

Business start-up kits were disbursed to individual vulnerable artisans or traders who are practicing small, weak business or who worked in business sector prior to war, but who are now unable to work due to socio-economic constraints.

- Business management training for beneficiaries of the business start-up kits. Simulation business games and interactive business modules are used as tools to impart key business management techniques to beneficiaries

During the review of documents/ existing reports it was found that the PU business section has conducted a detailed ‘Artisan profile and needs assessment’ research in Sukhumi, Tkvarcheli, Ochamchira, Gulripsh and Gali districts and market assessment. Later, PU sought applications from probable beneficiaries.

Selection of beneficiaries was conducted through individual field visits of the applicant and filling up of form-

A checklist to assess the income of the applicant, measurement of vulnerability, housing condition coefficient, children coefficient, elderly coefficient, dependency coefficient, debt coefficient, wealth penalty and filling up other factors for considerations. Then all coefficients/observations were summarized in a table and finally as per set criteria the beneficiaries were selected.

The evaluator visited 17 out of 52 business programs in four districts to learn from the experience of the mature to improve future performance. As business program is still young and, therefore, has not yet benefited from any evaluations the business part of the PU has been growing. As a matter of good stewardship of the funds entrusted to PU, an evaluation of some mature projects is timely to provide lessons and an overall assessment of the portfolio. As such, 17 of the mature projects which had the potential to provide lessons to the growing portfolio were randomly selected for the performance evaluation. This evaluation also provides a desk review of other noting progress on their achievements based on documents available.

It was planned that training will be provided to :(i) business group members in the project objectives, the objectives for group formation improving their access to services,

And

(ii) Business management training for beneficiaries of the business start-up kits. Simulation business games and interactive business modules would be used as tools to impart key business management techniques to beneficiaries.

And

(iii) In community participation for social projects.

PU was supposed to be responsible for training, as well as organizing technical training. However, during the interaction with the individual beneficiaries of the business program, it was found that some training was provided, but difficult to evaluate the impact of training, as when asked, most of them could not remember what sort of training was provided to them.

26

When asked whether the selection criteria for beneficiaries of the artisan professional kit program was followed or not, all of the beneficiaries told in affirmative.

PU artisan development agents helped them to fill out the business application form properly.

Detailed of the field visit report synthesized with PU monitoring reports and the outcome of analysis of the evaluator with the project coordinator and business agents reveals (details in Annexure E) that out of 52 business ‘professional kits’ facilitated by PU in different urban and rural areas, 15% are doing excellent, 60% -good, 8% satisfactory and rest are either ‘bad’ (4%) or ‘unknown’ (13%).See below the pi-chart.

Marking of business according to perfomance

good- 60%

excellent- 15%

unknown- 13% satisfactory- 8%bad- 4%

Artisan start-up kits were supplied to the individual vulnerable artisans who were practicing small, weak business or who worked as artisans or businesspeople prior to war, but who were unable to work due to socio-economic constraints, are most of them(75%, excellent + good ones) are now doing well.

However, time has not yet matured to give opinion whether these programmes would be ‘Success and

sustainable programs’. We will have to ‘wait and see’ the performance of these business programmes some more time.

Beneficiaries provided a 10% partial reimbursement of kit value. Using the funds from the 10% partial reimbursement of business kits, as per the project proposal, two community rehabilitation projects were supposed to be launched (i.e. irrigation, school, hospital, etc.). Projects will be identified in a participatory manner by the community and local administration.

In the business programme, beneficiaries provided a 10% partial reimbursement of kit value.

27

10% contribution till date (21Sept 07) was 4173 Euro. With the 10% contribution two (# 1 and 2 in the following table) community social projects were established and some projects are marked to be established, if fund for them could be generated.

While talking to the responsible person (for the implementation of the social community project) at the PU office, it has been revealed that 10% contribution from the business group was not enough for the establishment of ‘community social project’ as if there wasn’t any contribution from other donors like SDC or local government these projects would have been impossible to implement.

Though the ‘community social project’s philosophy/idea was appreciated by all and it seems to be extremely effective and appropriate but it was not enough, the 10% reimbursement money of the value of the business kits from the beneficiaries. Even the ‘business beneficiaries’ were proud to be the part of such community based social projects and felt to be participants of those projects.

While interacting with the beneficiaries of the ‘business’ groups and common beneficiaries of the community social projects namely, ‘Replacement of transformer and repairing transformer unit’ and

‘installation of garbage can in Gali town’, it was revealed that the selection of the community projects using the 10% reimbursement were most effective and participatory.

Community Social projects

10% Collection money for reinvestments from business projects as of on 21.09.2007

Is 4173 euro out of which 3818 Euro used, Euro 355 left.

Location Social projects Cost of the

project

(euro)

SDC

contribution

(euro)

PU

contribution

(business

projects)

Local

admin/Other

beneficiaries

contribution

Tkvarcheli Replacement of transformer

and repairing transformer

unit

9005 4580 (50%) 2232 (24,

78%)

2193(24, 35%)

Gali Installation of garbage can

in Gali town

7904 4580 (57%) 1586(20%) 1910(24, 17%)

28

Investment of the 10% reimbursment (PU ECHO funded artisan program)

in community projects cofinanced by PU's SDC funded program and

local administration/beneficiaries participation

01000

2000300040005000

600070008000

900010000

Replacement of

transformer and

repairing transformer unit

Installation of garbage

can in Gali town

Tkvarcheli Gali

Eu

ros

Admin/beneficiariescontribution

PU-ECHO contribution(business projects)

PU-SDC contribution(euro)

How many beneficiaries from the business component apply for micro-credit loans or do they intend to do so?

Nobody of the beneficiaries yet applied for Micro-credit. One of the decision makers of PU gave opinion that, PU does not have any micro-credit programme and there won’t be any in near future. Micro- credit issue should be discussed and coordinated with other organizations. Another decision maker told the evaluator that before initiating a micro-credit program for farmers, appropriate training with the artisans should be organized and will aim at presenting organizations dealing on this issue. These organizations will be incited to the training for business beneficiaries –till now; there is any plan for PU’s own micro-credit programme. Most of the field staff of PU and beneficiaries (> 85%) assumed/ eexpressed that micro-credit initiation in Abkhazia will help develop small business in all directions. From the literature review, it was found and observed that the socio-cultural conditions of Abkhazia’s households

do not use Banks on a regular basis either for loans or for savings; larger villages may have officers

for disbursal of pensions and other governmental payments but these officers do not take deposits.

Borrowing from neighbors or relatives is widespread but is static or declining due to the low

availability of cash and strong social requirement of pay back.

Usually, in rural areas, loans range from 500-15000 Roubles ($17-$500) and are mainly used for essential foods, agricultural inputs, health costs, education and local ceremonies. No interest is charged on these loans and the terms of the loan is rarely fixed but usually understood to be ‘short term’ and can be paid back on an intermitted basis. Repaying loans in kind, labour or services is possible but depends on the specific relationship, Defaulting on these loans in kind’, labour, services is possible but depends on the specific relationship, Defaulting on these loans is rear. Village shops also provide short-term credit but of much Smaller amounts 50-60 rubles and for shorter periods (days and weeks). The only other

29

Formal lenders active in the rural areas are the Abkhaz government, which provides two types of credits. Firstly, credit is provided to active state farms; loans are based on farm expenditure plans And have to pay back within 2 years and can even be written off altogether. Interest rate is 12%. Second credit is provided for starting up new agricultural enterprises from state Privatization fund. Loans can be up to $ 20000 and interest rate is 7%/year; repayment does not begin Until year 2 (UNDP-Abkhazia Agricultural report 2006). Still, most of the field Staff of PU and beneficiaries (> 85%) expressed that micro-credit initiation in Abkhazia will help develop small business in all directions. The decision making authority of the Project planning to conduct training with the artisans aiming at presenting dealing with micro-credit.

30

Impact analysis of three phases of agriculture programme

Survey conducted among a sample of beneficiaries using the (detailed results are in annex D, E) based on the sampling frame described in chapter II.

A survey comparing pre- and post-intervention average household asset holdings indicates that there is a significant degree of variation in the beneficiaries’ response to the distributions of the kits. A summary of key indicators is shown below:

The majority of survey respondents (98%) identify the kit materials as being of good quality, and interviews reveal that there were few concerns regarding the timeliness of kit delivery.

31

However, the impact of kit implementation on the asset holdings of beneficiary households has been broadly uneven, with survey data indicating that nuts and citrus tree (though not directly linked with the project activity) numbers only responding positively after Phase 3, while other trees actually declined after the first two phases. Poultry and cattle (cows and pigs) responded well after Phases 1 and 2, but by Phase 3, numbers declined. This may be due to the reason that farmers may sold out cows and pigs to buy new ones or as for pigs maybe the farmers sold out the piglets just before the survey and waiting now for buying other assets. Income generated through the process was not possible due to complicacy of calculations or record keepings by the farmers (see annex D).

Overall, these data paint an important picture. First, data collection remains incomplete and only provides a very rough estimate of the project’s impact. More importantly, the asset “portfolio” held by beneficiaries has changed significantly due to the introduction of the kits, although there is evidence that volatility in assets remains due to seasonal variations in crop yields. Field-based evidence indicates that cattle holdings declined by Phase 3 as people sold off pigs and cows in response to higher market prices and to supplement income. There is also evidence that beneficiaries not exposed to high levels of technical support fail to establish a sustainable income-generating base and sell-off livestock and poultry given to them as part of the kit.

Agricultural equipment (greenhouses, mini-tractors and trailers) are key to allowing beneficiaries to leverage their agricultural and livestock kits into income-generating streams and the project has been very successful in providing beneciciaries with these assets. One dimension that is not captured by these data is geographical dispersion. Field-based evidence indicates that physical assets are much more effectively used in communities that are close together (high density of beneficiaries) and therefore receive more frequent support visits.

Phase I

:

Gre

en H

ouse

Phase I

II:

Gre

en H

ouse

Phase I

I: M

ini

Tra

cto

r

Phase I

:

Tra

iler

Phase I

II:

Tra

iler

Before

0,000,100,200,300,400,500,600,70

0,80

Before

After

The kits delivered a significant boost to the availablity of farm equipment in both family farms and cooperatives, which further boosts their productivity. The targeting of family farms and coops by the project has been a very successful strategy achieving the greatest possible impact with scarce physical equipment.

32

Average household livestock and poultry counts improved after Phase 1 and 2, but declined significantly after Phase 3 – more evidence that households’ assets have improved but remain vulnerable.

33

Crop yields did not improve as a result of kit distribution, with the exception of vegetables in Phase 2 and 3. This indicates that agricultural kits need to be further tailored to the needs of beneficiary groups, with greater sensitivity to existing market conditions, variety selection, taking account of local micro- climate, and the community capacity. In particular, potential output gains can be achieved by expanding the seed variety and fertilizer dozes and other ‘envoronments’( needs to be determined by studies) incorporated in the kits.

34

What is the beneficiaries’ viewpoint?

The majority of beneficiaries consistently report a good match with the kit they received, in addition to complementary training and timeliness of program delivery. 77% of beneficiaries continue to use the kit at the end of Phase 3, and 84% report the ability to continue operating without additional PU support.

Broadly, all three phases have achieved marginal increases in the number of nut, citrus and other fruit/nut trees among the beneficiary population (Details of averages and sums of the survey: please see Annex D).

Impact

- Were the selection criteria of beneficiaries transparent and appropriate? Did Première Urgence follow up these criteria?

Yes

- Did the income and assets improve as a result of the program? To what extent?

Difficult to ascertain in monetary terms, but there has been an improvement in the asset holdings of beneficiary households

- Did beneficiaries improve their food security? To what extent?

35

Yes, which an improvement in household incomes generated by agricultural kits and a greater diversity of assets available to the household. However, agricultural production is still not sustainable and requires continued investment of technical support.

- Was collaboration improved amongst agriculture stakeholders in Abkhazia?

Partly successful.

- How did the beneficiaries perceive the programs and the activities of Première Urgence implemented? - Were the locations of intervention appropriate?

Yes

Efficiency and Effectiveness

- Was the organization of groups effective?

Under question. Mixed reaction from the respondents, depending on the gender of the beneficiary. Male participants were happy, female participants assessed that they were humiliated in sharing the group’s ‘opportunities’ as per their ‘different needs’.

There should have been “different needs but equal opportunities” for every one of the groups.

- Was the distribution of equipment timely?

98% yes

- Was technical training appropriate for beneficiaries (agriculture and business)?

>90% yes.

Sustainability

- Are the agricultural kits still used? Are the farms still functioning?

78% are still using.

- What is the local authorities view on the success and sustainability of the programs?

Very positive. It was revealed that farmers have vast opportunity to sell their agro-based products, any vegetable like tomato, cucumber, green leafs in the local market throughout the year, thus if the vegetable productions could be increased and diversified and further produced in off- seasons ( March- May, or October- November) and increased by supporting appropriate technical training and ensuring all agro-based inputs like high yielding varieties of demanding vegetables seeds, needed equipments , fencing, greenhouse facilities, pesticide/fungicide, fertilizer, fuel, agricultural tools, irrigation etc. then farmers will have the capacity to increase their yield and income and thus sustainability could be prevailed.

This issue is also applicable to the animal husbandry including pigs and poultry production.

It was distinctively found that cow rearing was the most popular and profitable kit especially for women.

Knowledge of beneficiaries on non-traditional trades, availability of raw materials, market situation on management of output, improved animal feed, artificial insemination, nursery rising, horticulture, innovative methods of vegetables or fruit processing/preservation or on preservation of seed, micro-credit, gender equality etc. are limited. Therefore, skill development training programmes on these issues has got better prospect in Abkhazia.

36

Future of the project

As the war affected, returnees, IDPs, rural vulnerable groups of Abkhazia- non-beneficiaries target people of PU, who accounts numerous, still waiting any sort of support from any quarter to start up their small businesses, agricultural works, it is advisable that PU continues their humanitarian-development works for the betterment of these groups. At the same time the project decision makers, who have accumulated substantial work experience in the 3 phases of their work in complex situation of Abkhazia opined to continue for farming and business programs because there are still lots of needs, but certainly with Adaptation as the context changed. Another decision maker told that PU shall have some legitimacy to work in Abkhazia and Georgia. A lot of things have shall to be done. But the approach should changed and be adapted. We are not any more in a “emergency situation”, but more in a “reconstruction and rehabilitation” Situation. A project coordinator has given his opinion that, “Can remain as long as frozen conflict situation exists

Approach, however, will need to evaluate steadily PU’s global strategy for the coming year: shall give or not to

the mission in Abkhazia the mandate to implement further projects”.

The senior project personnel like agronomist and social workers, have given the opinion regarding

the future activities that It would be good to have long - term projects. Financial assistance should be

more imposing as the short-term projects do not solve the main problems of the beneficiaries; they are

only emergency help to survive.

- I would like to see the continuation of the program in agriculture. Abkhazia needs “the PU ”. Especially

Ochamchirsky region. People hope on PU. They need PU’s help.

- The work, carried out in Abkhazia, helped the poor people to solve their problems, concerning

agriculture. To my mind the next step is to organize the work in the same field with the collective

groups, providing nominal help and giving micro-credits, covering all the territory of Abkhazia.

- The work in Abkhazia lends a helping hand to the poor people. It is essential to continue work in the

same regions, including several villages in Gudautsky region.

- The program should cover all the regions of Abkhazia, increasing financial flows.

The agronomist have some different opinions like Covering all the territory of Abkhazia with agricultural

programs, stock-raising, wine-growing, maize-growing, sheep-breeding, citrus-growing, nuts and tea-

growing.

“- Long-term projects directed not only to the development of agriculture, but also to the development of

the small business.

- A zone of activity– covers the whole territory of Abkhazia, as with PU’s help there is a perspective of the

development of the listed projects among the needed ones.

- As far as the humanitarian help is concerned, which is given away by PU, I would like to see either the

elements of the development in a new phase and it seems to me, that we have to increase our

beneficiaries’ budget for that purpose, so that they could overcome the achieved results and improve their

financial condition”.

37

Conclusion and recommendation:

The main findings of this evaluation are not surprising. There are no magical formulas for the success of community level agriculture projects in Abkhazia. There are however clear factors that contributed to success and those were identified and described in this report. Overall, the "Improving Livelihoods and Food Security in Abkhazia: Professional Kit Distribution for

Vulnerable Households and Returnees" project is ending smoothly in its project areas and all three phases have been rated by the beneficiaries as successful. The projects were relevant and efficient as the findings reveal that the overall condition of war affected rural Abkhazia is agrarian in nature and basic conditions of target groups/farmers are almost similar to that of other war affected/ ‘frozen’ after conflict/ reconstruction and rehabilitation conditions of the regions. The projects activities have increased the technical capacity and knowledge of the beneficiaries and partly in addressing the problem of food security and livelihood of Abkhazia. It is rated successful given the effectiveness of actual outputs, a program followed by an advanced monitoring plan. However, its sustainability is less likely because the program developed is not likely to be implemented without follow- up interventions. The evaluator is very much optimistic about the prospect of sustainability of the project if a proper design is made for the next phase of the project. A participatory/bottom- up approach to program/ project design and implementation is considered the best strategy to build community self- reliance and ownership of project activities by the beneficiaries and therefore sustainability. This is particularly relevant to Abkhazia where farming systems are diverse and strongly influenced by local socio-economic, agro-ecological, micro-climatic, soil and other conditions and knowledge. In this context it is necessary for farmers to be actively involved in problem identification and developing solutions combining their local knowledge with the ideas and technology options that the extension agent/ agronomist/ field facilitator of PU may have to offer. Consequently, evaluator recommends more participatory approaches to food security and livelihoods development. Special social awareness training may be conducted among the probable future beneficiaries before rendering support in the next phase. Main thrust may be given on nutrition, food security, and livelihoods management so as to strengthen their confidence. Simple, affordable, farmers friendly agricultural professional kits (technologies) should be identified among the existing and available ones to start the process for dissemination among the Abkhaz farmers through demonstration and training. Emphasis should be placed on an institutionalized process to develop program directions and strategies including the participation of representatives from the key stakeholder groups (both at national and district levels), farmer groups, staff of NGOs and other programs in agriculture. This process should also result in donors and NGOs developing their own programs in line with these directions and strategies as well as improved collaboration between/among them. All beneficiaries and decision makers/project personnel feel the need to reduce the number of beneficiaries for per mini- tractor (motto-block) from 6-12 to 3- 4 in future probable Projects. There should be flexibility of choice of varieties of crops/vegetables/dozes of fertilizer.

38

Kit's technologies should be transferred in such a way, so that beneficiaries can get package service facilities for implementation. Attempts should be made to involve women beneficiaries in the marketing process. Business agents may be oriented further on small business/ trade, production and marketing, micro-credit etc. preferably outside of the country, so that in near future they could be treated as trainers as well as guide of the beneficiaries. Lesson learned from stockholders opinions: A consultation with the public during the preparation of next phase is desirable to ensure that project design incorporates stakeholder participation. The need to consult with the public is particularly important for livelihoods related project involving many diverse stakeholders; often strong personal and emotional interests emerge. Continued consultation throughout the project cycle is also necessary. Early consultation with a wider range of stakeholders may have broadened the focus of the project to address the root causes of the problem rather than focusing narrowly on the effects. Use public awareness campaigns and mass media initiatives to market the project to the public and thus gain support for project activities. Transparency of intended project objectives and activities is essential. It is recommended that if the above observations are taken into considerations, the project may be extended or replicated in other places for similar target groups.

Specific recommendations:

i. The project’s success has revealed a substantial population of vulnerable potential beneficiaries in Abkhazia that are likely to benefit from future programming and should provide the basis for the project’s continued expansion.

ii. Emphasis should be placed on skill development/enhancement and quality of training enabling the participants to get employment/livelihoods in greater numbers/ involved in more income generating projects.

iii. A team of senior officers responsible for implementation of the project should be allowed to visit/ undergo training in those countries which have already been benefited by participatory development, for the purpose of obtaining first-hand information on the subjects of their practical and strategically needs.

iv. Narrow the geographical focus of the project (current beneficiaries are too dispersed and outlying communities are therefore underserved by technical support and do not benefit from economies of scale that arise from targeting density).

v. Demand/beneficiary-driven kit design and dissemination process (like freedom of choice to select 'variety' of crops/vegetables/livestock and other inputs)

vi. Increase levels of technical support, training and supervision after kit deployment

39

vii. Increase engagement of private sector actors – existing farmers, buyers/traders of agricultural

produce – to generate an environment where agricultural kits will have a sustainable impact.

viii. Reduce the number of beneficiaries for collective agricultural tools (3-4 person/mini- tractor instead of 6-12 person/mini - tractors).

ix. Facilitate inputs to develop cattle breeding and rearing, ensure feed availability for cattle

during off-season, availability of high yield variety (HYV) seeds of vegetables, growing and marketing off-seasonal vegetables to neighboring countries.

x. Align staff with service delivery: There are 3 agronomists working for PU but there are no

livestock specialists or veterinarians to support the livestock kit component in the agricultural programme. The technical support offered to kit recipients is a crucial part of the program and needs to be strengthened.

xi. Survey data indicate that the most productive kit components to date have been greenhouses,

livestock (cows/pigs/goats) and potatoes. Significant improvements in productivity and yield have also been recorded by beneficiaries with access to mini-tractors. Future kit design and customization should be driven by these considerations.

xii. The monitoring and follow-up components of the kit program should be expanded to provide

beneficiaries with greater support and develop a feedback mechanism to assess the success of various components of the program.

40

FOCUS GROUP DISSCUSSION WITH THE BENEFICIARIES

AT THE GRASS ROOTS LEVEL

Discussion was facilitated by the evaluator in Russian

Translated from Russian in to

English

Focus group discussion in Agubedia

Собрание бенефициантов Фаза -1

Присутствовали: -10 чел (из 13)

Обсуждали : помощь ПП, результаты деятельности,

причины неудач

- отбор бенефициантов, насколько справедливым был отбор

-присутствие «небенефицианта» программы с претензией,

что её не включили в программу. Основные проблемы, с её

слов, социально-бытовые, а не сельскохозяйственные.

- просьба со стороны большей части присутствующих о

решении хозяйственных проблем (крыши), просьба

сообщить в соответствующие инстанции или организации

Выступали бенефицианты:

- основная проблема – продовольственное обеспечение

(food security), выдача посадочного материала (конец мая) в

поздние сроки, проблема с обработкой земли, выдача мини

трактора – в конце сезона, когда пропала необходимость его

использовать, т.е. осенью (Колбая, Гулия)

Focus group discussion in Agubedia

Meeting of beneficiaries – Phase 1

No. persons present – 10 (out of 13)

Topic of discussion : help from

PU/intervention , results of activity ,

reasons for failure

-selection of beneficiaries, how

sincere (unbiased) was the selection

process,

- Presence of non-beneficiary of

program with pretences, for not

having been included in the program.

Major problems, from her perspective,

concerning social welfare as opposed

to agriculture.

- Request from the majority present to

repair household problems (roofs),

request to inform at instance to

responsible organization.

Presentation of beneficiaries

- foremost problem – food security ,

41

- Низкая Урожайность картофеля как результат

неправильно выбранного сорта картофеля и недостаточного

количества удобрений.

-замечания по поводу погодных условий (засухи)

Из 13 ( в группе 5 женщин + 7 мужчин):

- 7 хозяйств получили картофель

- 4 хозяйств получили коров

- 5 хозяйств получили цыплят

- 5 хозяйств получили поросят

Вопрос: - Улучшилось ли питание?

Ответ: - от картофеля – нет

От коров – да

-выдача помощи по приоритетам выдавалась по

2-м видам в зависимости от бюджета

Например: картофель+поросята

Картофель+телёнок

Цыплята+поросята

Вопрос: Какова прибыль от коровы?

Ответ: - Да, в виде продуктов питания (молоко, сыр,

мацони)

- В том числе и на продажу

Сусанна: поросята.

distribution of planting material (end

of May) at later dates , problem with

plaguing /processing of the fields ,

distribution of mini-tractors – at the

end of season, when there is no reason

to use it i.e – in autumns (Kolbaya,

Guliya )

- Low productivity (output) of

potatoes as a result of having chosen

the wrong variety of potato and lack

of fertilizer.

Out of 13 (in the group were 5

women , 7 men)

- 7 households received potato

professional kit

- 4 households received cow

professional kit

- 5 households received chicken

professional kit

- 5 households received pig

professional kit

Question: – Did nourishment

improved?

Answer :

– from potatoes – No

- from cows – Yes

- Distribution of help on basis of

priority (2 rations) depended on

allocated budget.

For example : potato + pigs

42

Дали 4, 1- убежал. осталось -3

Использовали в пищу –

Купили комбикорм+ к тому, что выдали

Вопрос: -Улучшилось ли питание?

Ответ: - от картофеля – нет

От коров – да

- выдача помощи по приоритетам выдавалась

по 2-м видам в зависимости от бюджета

Например: картофель+поросята

Картофель+телёнок

Цыплята+поросята

Вопрос: Какова прибыль от коровы?

Ответ: - Да, в виде продуктов питания (молоко, сыр,

мацони)

- В том числе и на продажу

Сусанна: поросята.

Дали 4, 1- убежал. осталось -3

Использовали в пищу –

Купили комбикорм+ к тому, что выдали

Очень довольна!

Манана:

Корова – 8 литров

• Сыр, творог – кроме того, что питались, ещё и продавала

potato + cow

chicks + pigs

Question: What was the gain from

cows?

Answer: Yes, in the form of food –

milk, cheese, fermented milk. Also,

for sale.

Susanna : pigs

gave 4 , runaway 1 , remaining 3

Taken as food.

Bought concentrated food as addition

to received

Question: Did nutrition/ food security

improve?

Answer : from potatoes – no

from cows – yes

- distribution of help on basis of

priority (2 rations) depended on

allocated budget

For example : potato + pigs

potato + cow

chicks + pigs

Question: What was the gain from

cows?

Answer: - Yes, in the form of food –

milk, cheese, fermented milk.

43

• От коровы 2 телёнка (остался 1 – ему 1 год, другой умер)

Очень довольна!

Дина Бигвава

Поросята – 4 шт

• Продали – нет

• Использовали – в пищу

• Помогли родственникам

Очень довольны!

1 группа – 13 человек

• Выдан 1 мотоблок, большое количество членов в группе.

• Из-за этого не успевают использовать вовремя, все члены не укладываются в агро-технические сроки

Вопрос: Кто делает ремонт?

- Всеобщим обсуждением решено – коллективно.

Пожелания бенефициариев – использование более мощного

мотоблока.

- из-за особенности почвы

(глина) проблема с

обработкой земли

Обсуждение с бенефициантами

- also , for sale

Susanna : pigs

gave 4 , runaway 1 , remaining 3

Used/cooked with food.

Bought concentrated food as addition

to received

Very glad!

Manana –

Cow - 8 liters

-Cheese, sour-cream, also, what

we ate, we also sold.

-From cow came two calves –

remaining 1 , he is a year old , the

second died)

Very glad!

Dina Bigvava

Pigs – 4

- Sold – none - Used – in food - Helped relatives

Very glad!

1 group – 13 people

- given 1 mini-tractor, large number of

people in group

- Because of this, they cannot use it in

44

time; all members of group do not

have time during the agro-technical

period.

Question: - Who conducts

maintenance?

Answer: - Unanimously decided –

collective effort

Wishes of beneficiaries – use of a

sturdier motor-block

- because of special features of

the soil (muddy) problem lies in

the cultivation of soil

Discussion with beneficiaries

Beneficiary Cостояние ДО

получения помощи от ПП

condition before

receiving help from PU

Состояние ПОСЛЕ получения помощи от ПП

Condition after receiving help from PU

This is a collective answer done on the board individually one by one

1 Ничего'

Nothing

Ничего

Nothing

2 Ничего

Nothing

Поросята, мини-трактор(хорошо, я довольна)

Pigs – mini tractor (good, am happy)

45

3 Ничего

Nothing

Мини-трактор – хорошо. Картофель – нет

mini tractor – good , potatoes - not

4 Ничего

Nothing

Трактором доволен, но не используется всеми

Happy with tractor, but it is not used By everyone

5 Ничего

Nothing

Поросята – очень довольна

Pigs – very glad

6 Ничего

Nothing

Корова – очень довольна

Cow – very gad

7 Ничего

Nothing

Картофель – не удался

Potatoes – did not succeed

Коллектив мини-трактор

Collective mini-tractor

2005 Отлично

excellent

Работает

working

2006 Хорoшо

good

Работает

working

2007 Хорошо

good

Работает

working

2008 Good condition working Просьба о выдаче

ещё одного

мотоблока

Request for

donation of

another motor-

block.

А также используются прицепы в качестве Also, the trailers as a mode for transporting

46

средства для перевозки урожая, удобрений, дров,

и т.д.

Вопрос: - Можете ли вы сами содержать

себя?

Ответ: - выживет, кто сможет, но с

большим трудом.

Вопрос: - Есть ли ещё нуждающиеся. В

чем они нуждаются?

Ответ: - В деревне очень много

нуждающихся. Они обращались за помощью

ПП, но не получили. Одна, очень нуждающая ся

просила корову (бенефициант, не включённый в

программу) в заявлении, но не получила ее и

осталась «бедной» , как и раньше

harvest, fertilizers, firewood, etc .

Question – can you sustain yourselves?

Answer – those who can, will survive, but through

much labor.

Question – are there any more people who are

needy? What do they need?

Answer – in the village there are lots of people

who are needy. They referred for help to the PU,

but availed few only. One, very needy woman

asked for a cow (beneficent not involved in the

program) in a formal request, but did not receive

one such cow and has thus remained «poor», as

before.

*****************************************************************************

2nd Focus group discussion

Собрание № 2

Состав:

группа. А – 11 чел

Группа. Б - 7 чел

Constituents :

Group A – 11 people

Group B – 7 people

11 – картофель

3 – коровы

3 – поросята

- корм

11 potatoes

3 cows

3 pigs

fodder

47

- цыплята

1 – пчёлы (4 семьи)

3 ч – цыплята

chicks

1 – bees (4 families)

3 people – chicks

Кол, единиц – мотоблок

Опрыскиватель – для лечения цитрусовых,

овощей

Мини-мельница – для помола кукурузы

Все используют, очень довольны

Картофель:

Тач – 1000

Чолокян – 400

Папба 1 – 300

Папба 2 – 450

Крия – 100 – семена 30 кг

Маркосян – 400

Тулужджян – отсутствует

Авидзба – 300

Тач – 1000

Чолокян – 400

Папба 1 – 300

Папба 2 – 450

Singular collection – motor-block

Sprayer - for curing vegetables with citric content (?)

Mini-mill – for grinding corn

Everyone utilizes, very glad!

Potatoes

Tach – 1000

Chaloky'an – 400

Papba – 1-300

Papba – 2 – 450

Kriya – 100 seeds 30 kg

Markos'yan – 400

Tuludjidjia'n – n/a

Avidzba – 300

Tach – 1000

Chaloky'an – 400

Papba – 1-300

Papba – 2 – 450

Kriya – 100 seeds 30 kg

48

Крия – 100 – семена 30 кг

Маркосян – 400

Тулужджян – отсутствует

Авидзба – 300

Из полученных 30 кг получено 100 кг, так как

небольшой участок земли.

Из 300 кг – получено 1000 кг

Причина – поздняя посадка

- особенности почвы, в разных

местах – по-разному

- выдача мини-трактора значительно

позже

У бенефициантки

Корова – 10 литров (Крия И.)

-использовали в питании молочные продукты

( сыр, мацони)

Вопрос: помогла ли вам помощь, выданная

ПП ?

- улучшилось питание ( картофель,

молочные продукты, мясо)

- в первый год выдачи мотоблока не

использовал., но в течение

следующих 2-х лет используют,

проводили ремонт.

Есть проблема!

Markos'yan – 400

Tuludjidjia'n – n/a

Avidzba – 300

From the received 30 kg , 100kgs have been

received, as there is not a large piece of land . (?)

From 300 kg – received 1000 kg

Reason – late harvest

- Characteristics of soil, in different places – different.

- distribution of mini-tractors , considerably late

Beneficiary – cows , 10 liters (Kriya I)

- used in food – milk products (cheese , matzoon)

Question – did the aid given to you by PP help you?

- better nourishment (potatoes , milk products , meat)

- during the first year , the given motor-blocks were not used, but over the next two year period , were utilized ; repair was conducted

There is a problem!

In a group of 11 people, technology is not utilized to

its maximum utility and/or at the appropriate times.

The spare parts given out with the mini tractors are

Not sturdy, and require change. In the group there

are single women, who do not know how to use the

mini tractor, and others just cannot use it.

Question – was the help afforded at the right time?

Yes, but the emergency was at time.

There are people who were not offered help, but

49

В группе 11 человек не могут использовать

технику вовремя.. Из зап.частей, которые в

мотоблоке очень не прочные, требуют замену.

В группе есть одинокие женщины, которые не

могут пользоваться мотоблоком, а некоторые

не умеют

Вопрос: вовремя ли была оказана помощь?

Да, по необходимости очень была кстати.

Есть люди, которым не была оказана помощь,

но очень нуждались. Есть бенефициантка,

которая помогла соседу, который очень

нуждался, посадочным материалом

(картофелем)

-на выданную помощь расширили своё

хозяйство. Очень довольны, благодарны.

- использовали в пищу мясо (свинину), так

как идёт вынужденное уничтожение свиного

поголовья из-за эпидемии.

needed it urgently. There is a beneficiary, who

helped her neighbor, who was desperately in need of

help, with plaguing material (potatoes) .

- From the given aid, people extended their households. Very happy, very grateful.

- Used in food, eat (pork), as there is being conducted an extensive forced eradication of pork meat due to an epidemic.

Tour of Gali business programme

10.09.07-We have visited 6 business programs in Gali town. 1) Wedding singers-GA.11 2) Car repairer-GA.21 3) Advertising center –GA.37 4) Shop-seller-GA.44 5) Baker (wedding cakes) – GA.27 6) Carpenter _GA.20

GA.11 –Akhalaia Berdia __wedding singer N: are you satisfied with the kit you received from PU? B: yes, they did such a good thing for me and my family. Thanks a lot! You have really done a great job for us.

50

N: you didn’t go to other organization for support, or to bank for some micro credit, why? B: It is expensive for me. I wouldn’t be able to pay them back. N: What is your monthly income, after getting the instruments from PU? B: Before it was 1000/2000Rbs. Now 5000/6000Rr. N: Did you leave your house, your town during the war. Where have you been at that time? B: I went to Russia. N: In future if there is some problems with the instruments what will you do? B: I will repair (I will pay for reparation). N: What is your plan for future? B: I’m planning to buy another speaker and give classes to children. N: You have to reimburse 10% of the sum PU spent for the kits you received. Do you know where that money goes for? B: To help to other poor people, for another project. N: How much was the amount of your 10%? B: 2820Rr. N: Can you grow up in your business and after some fails, if there are some, get up and continue your activity from the beginning, without foreigners support? B: Yes. GA: 21 – Jalagonia Mancho__ Car mechanic N: Are you satisfied with the kit you received from PU? M: Yes thank you very much. N: Did the kit help you in your work? Was your income increased after getting the instruments, how much it was before and how much is it now? M: Yes, these instruments helped me a lot, my income was increased definitely. If it was 1500Rr. /2000Rr. Before, it is 7000/12000Rr. N: Is it enough for you? M: Well I don’t complain.

51

N: You have to reimburse 10% of the sum PU spent for the kits you received. Do you know where that money goes for? M: To help to other poor people, for another project. N: Do you save some money for reparation of the kit? M: Yes N: How long it takes to repair one car? M: It depends on which part of the car needs reparation. N: Can you continue your activity independently, without others support? M: Yes! Comment: before giving the working instruments he had maximum 10/15 clients per month. Now, 6/7 clients per day. GA: 37 Shamugia Ruden __Advertising center No body was present during the visit of the evaluator, from the neighbor’s shop shop/owner told that they have gone for business to Mukhuri. GA: 44 Dzandzava Natela: Road side Mini- Shop (with fridge support from PU) owner, seller of different snakes and drinks. N: Are you satisfied with the kit you received from PU? Nat: Yes, I’m so thankful. Thank you very much for this support. N: Could you buy a fridge yourself? Nat: No, never. It’s too expensive for me. N: Do you earn more money now then before or less? Nat: Of course more! N: How? Nat: Now I have fresh things and cold drinks N: Where have you been, what you were doing during the war? Nat: In Zugdidi for 1 year. N: Where do you live now?

52

Nat: My house was burnt during the war; I stay with my only son in neighbors relatives. N: Which languages do you speak? (To her son) Her son: Russian, Georgian, Abkhazian, Mengrelian N: Is your shop secured? Na: It’s better secured now. It was robed some years ago. Comment: She needs security alarm for the shop. GA: 27 Lashkhia Dali Baker (wedding cakes) N: Are you satisfied with the kit you received from PU? D: Yes, I’m so thankful. Thank you. N: What is your monthly income, after getting the instruments from PU? D: Before it was 1000/2000Rr. Now more. I have more clients.

Before I had hand made oven and I was suffering. Now it’s better. To bake a cake was hard and it took so much energy. I’m so thankful. N: Can you continue this activity without any more support? D. __as I have to help my children and grand children I need some more help from you. Can you give me a meat chopping machine? I need it for Mengrelian “Ajika”? Vincent from PU : We can not give everything to one person. There are some other people who need our support too. I’m sorry for that. GA.20 Ketsbaia Aleksandr __Carpenter N: Are you satisfied with the kit you received from PU? A: Yes thank you very much. N: Do you have contract with any organization, or café? (There were aprox.15 chairs) A: No, I made them to sell. I have orders for some other things like table, moving chair… N: What is your monthly income, after getting the instruments from PU? A: I can make even 40000Rr.in a month. N: Are you alone in this business?

53

A: No we are two. N: And where is him (the other one) now? A: He has gone to the Russian market to buy some thing for this business. (To Sochi) N: What do you plan for future? A: I want to teach to young people my profession and then to involve them into this business. To enlarge the business. To work on big things with the team I’ll create. Comments by Ms. Nana, Business agent from Gali PU office: businesses in Gali are profitable. Some of

the business clients hide their monthly income. Calculations during the monitoring show that they have

much more income than they

Say.

Interview key participants in the project: staff of PU

1 Social workers Agronomist

Activity - Social quest.

- Selection of beneficiaries.

- Providing support. Monitoring.

- Marketing.

- Writing reports.

- Psychological research

- Moral and physical support

- Observation of the beneficiaries’

family life

- Discussions with the Head of

administration

- Revealing of the causes of failures

- Monitoring

- Preparation of the technical

recommendations

- Preparation of the agricultural

presentations

- Marking quality of product and seeds

- Consulting beneficiaries

54

Expected date of

implementation

- Not fixed working hours.

Sometimes from 8am to 7pm.

- Talk to beneficiaries - 1 week

- Social quest – 2 months

- Selection of beneficiaries - 10-15

daysб

- Providing support - Step by step

- Monitoring - July-August-

September

- Marketing - Up to July 2007

- Writing work report - In the end of

the program

-Jan-February - Selection of

beneficiaries

-Dec-Jan - Selection of beneficiaries

-Mart-October - providing support

- 3 stages of monitoring

- Preparation of the technical

recommendations during the year

- Preparation of the agricultural

presentations during the year

- Marking quality of product and seeds

- Consulting beneficiaries on demand or

necessity

When actually

implemented

- Always at time, as on plan. I never was responsible for delay of the work

- All plans have been done except

final monitoring and report of the

work during ECHO-III

- Fulfilled partly as per plan

If not implemented

what were the

reason

- Never happened

Evaluation in

ECHO I - ECHO II

- Yes, in all phases

- During I and II phase monitored

- No special differences

55

and ECHO III cooperative groups. I was

responsible for establishing and

control of all the work, received

information regarding all the

villages, but during the III phase I

worked only in Ast.

II. Monitoring report

Social workers Agronomist

What was monitoring plan? - To select more needed

beneficiaries

- Every kind of activity has 3

monitoring.

- The number of monitoring

are determined at the

beginning of the program.

- Daily verbal report to a

coordinator regarding

monitoring which were done

repeatedly.

- Monitoring should be done in three

stages for the observation of the

program’s results.

Actual monitoring done - Different committees

- To select most needy

beneficiaries with the elements

of motivation, hard working

and dynamism in phase I and II.

Phase III – in process

- By this time 2 monitoring were

done

56

(Final monitoring will be done

in the future).

Whether monitoring was

done as per schedule?

- Yes, always

- In the beginning of each week

we are planning the work and

working depending on this

plan.

- Of course

- Checking and the discussions

of the results were done weekly

as per coordinator’s plan.

- At time and schedule

- Most of the problems were weather

related and also were created by

difficulties for the people to get a

chance to use a mini tractor due to the

big number of the members of the

group. This problem was solved by

dividing big groups into two parts and

providing some extra mini tractors.

Whether problems identified

during monitoring period,

what steps were taken to

mitigate the problem.

Results of the interventions

in reference to

agricultural/business kit.

Technical and others

- During control new problems

are exposed and all of them can

be solved. And it is good for us

as this experience giving us a

chance to learn and develop.

- You can’t predict the problems.

It could be bad weather.

We didn’t done research

why did we get such a bad

result with potato. It could be

bad quality of seeds or we

need different kind of seeds

special for our climate. I’m

sure that we must start potato

- Weather related problems

- Difficulties for the people to get a

chance to use a mini tractor due to

the big number of the members of

the group.

- This problem was solved by dividing

big groups into two parts and

providing some extra mini tractors.

- Some technical and other

recommendations were not a

success.

57

plantation much earlier.

- Mainly technical problems: late

distribution of potato,

difficulties with purchasing of

milking cows (cost of the

milking cow is over budget )

- As the main problems are

agronomical: planting

schedules advices on

cultivation, plant treatment

and livestock purchase was

assisted by agronomists.

Whether the technical

advices were adequate or not

- In some cases not enough

- Enough

- It was done in writing and also

orally during distribution of

collective technical support

- As agriculturist I may say “Yes”, it

was enough

III Monitoring: participatory group meetings with beneficiaries

Social workers Agronomist

Whether there were

regular group meetings?

-Yes, with coordinator

- In phases I and II meetings were

held on a regular bases, during

phase III it was more self-

regulated in groups

- The meetings were held on the

managers’ demand - when it had

been planed in advance or there

were some problems to solve.

- Not regularly

58

- The discussions took place during

setting up the groups and during

the meetings, which regulated the

rules of using the collective

ownership items.

The groups normally gather if necessary to solve the showing up problems.

- In the 3d phase the meetings are

not held on a regular base, people

gather only in case of necessity to

consider new problems insoluble

independently.

Attendances of the group

meetings (%)

- 100% - Up to 80 % - Up to 80 % - Up to 80 % - Up to 80 % - Up to 80 % - Up to 80 % - 60-80%

- 80%

Topics discussed in the

group meetings?

- What had been done by that time

and what the next step was?

- The rule, regulating proportional

use of the mini tractor so that

every member of the community

could use it equally.

- Solving technical problems

- Using instructions

- Establishing a friendly

relationship among the members

of the groups

- Making a fund for the

- Using collective property item

59

maintenance

- Electing an executive person

- Solving moot points (disputable

situations)

- Breakage points solutions

- Discussing agricultural matters

Were there any

disseminations of

discussion to PU project

unit office, if disseminated

what steps were taken

- In our region two groups decided

not to use mini tractors in their

households, instead they

suggested using the bulls, and it

made the work in the

mountainous regions much easier.

At the moment they are quite

happy. So at times we solve our

problems on our own and let our

coordinators know.

- The problem was disseminated to

PU and was discussed with the

coordinators , so the decision

was taken in cooperation

-Yes, the results of the group

discussions were disseminated to

the PU meetings which took place

daily. The strategy was carried out

at the same meeting.

-All the problems were brought to

the notice of the Head of the

program and the coordinators. All

the work done in the groups was

registered in the final reports.

- Yes, the problems arose

periodically. Normally they were

solved or were discussed at the

meetings and the managers took

- Yes, they were. Any problems were

discussed at the evening meetings.

- All the problems were proclaimed

during the meeting with the

participation of the coordinators or

were registered. Answers to a

problem were recommended at the

group meetings.

60

notes of them.

IV About KITs

How far the you are satisfied with quality of kits supported by PU

Name of the

PU “Kit”

Rank (excellent, good, satisfactory, bad,

very bad)

Exsplain

Social workers Agronomist Social workers Agronomist

Cow Good

average

Good

- All kinds of the

livestock

including sheep

and goats. The

results are good.

- It’s difficult to

consider a

condition of the

livestock as a

very good one.

The budget

doesn’t allow.

Bee-keeping is in

better situation.

Sheep - Good

- Excellent

- excellent

Good

Goat - Good in all phases

- very good

Good

Pig - phase I -good,

- phase II-good,

- phase I -good,

- phase II -good,

- average

Good

61

Poultry chicken - phase I– bad

- good

---- - Because of the

epidemic

situation chicken

were not

distributed

Bulls

7

- 3 phase good

- Good

- Excellent

- good

Good

- Distributed only

in the 3d phase

Bees - Phase III -

excellent

- Good

- Good

- Good

- Good results in

all phases

Maize - All phase –

average

- Good

- good

----

Potato - 1 phase –norm,

- 2 & 3 bad

- bad, bad,

- average

- Good

- The quality of

potato was not

inspected.

- Weather

condition.

- This sort doesn’t

do for the climate

of Abkhazia.

Vegetables - Good

- Good

----

Fertilizer - Good

- Good

- Standard

- Good

62

Seed (variety?) satisfactory

Fence - Good

- Good

- Most of the

beneficiaries

would like to

have a new

collective petrol-

saw, which will

help them to work

in the garden,

clean it from the

weeds and save

time and energy

of the

beneficiaries.

Sprayer

- Good

Tools

Green house

(plastic and

carcasses)

- Good

- Very good

- Very good

- Good

- Standard

- Good

- Plastic, donated

by PU was of a

high quality

Power tiller

(mini-tractor)

- Good

- Good

- Good

- Average

- Good

- Out of the whole

distributed

quantity of the

mini tractors only

two of them

required

reparation with

our help. The

- It can’t be used

over the whole

territory.

- Not enough

money was

budgeted to buy

more powerful

63

others are in

permanent use.

one.

Trailer - good

- Good

Mills - Average

Pumped-

sprayer

- Good

Flow-hoses

Bulls

- Good

(TA)

V Future of the project

Social workers Agronomist

How do you like to

see to activities of

the future program

of PU in Abkhazia

- It would be good to have long - term

projects. Financial assistance should

be more imposing as the short-term

projects do not solve the main

problems of the beneficiaries; they are

only emergency help to survive.

- I would like to see the continuation of

the program in agriculture. Abkhazia

needs “the first aid”. Especially

Ochamchirsky region. People hope on

you. They need your help.

- The work, carried out in Abkhazia,

helped the poor people to solve their

problems, concerning agriculture. To

my mind the next step is to organize

the work in the same field with the

- Covering all the territory of Abkhazia

with

agricultural programs, stock-raising,

wine-growing, maize-growing,

sheep-breeding, citrus-growing, nuts

and tea- growing

- Long-term projects directed not only

to the development of agriculture, but

also to the development of the small

business.

- A zone of activity– covers the whole

territory of Abkhazia, as with PU’s

help there is a perspective of the

development of the listed projects

64

collective groups, providing nominal

help and giving micro-credits,

covering all the territory of Abkhazia.

- The work in Abkhazia lends a helping

hand to the poor people. It is essential

to continue work in the same regions,

including several villages in

Gudautsky region.

- Future programs for Abkhazia. The

program should cover all the regions

of Abkhazia, increasing financial

flows.

among the needed ones.

- As far as the humanitarian help is

concerned, which is given away by

PU, I would like to see either the

elements of the development in a new

phase and it seems to me, that we

have to increase our beneficiaries’

budget for that purpose, so that they

could overcome the achieved results

and improve their financial condition.

In Georgia? - Lot of Georgians who left Abkhazia

during the war returned back now to

Galskii region and we observe their

interest.

- I have no idea about their problems

- Georgia was not damaged after the

aggression. There were no military

operations in that region.

Do you like to

work with micro-

credit?

- Yes, I think that this will help to

develop small business in all

directions

- Yes, setting up mini-farms (stock-

breeding) and developing vegetable

-growing.

- The beneficiaries’ interest is my main

concern.

- Yes, it will develop a small business in

all directions.

- By all means, as I see that it is a real

help for the

Peasants.

65

How the non-

beneficiaries of the

area think about

PU’s activities?

What are their

comments about

PU?

-Some of them were not happy that we

did not include them in our programs,

saying, that there were many needy

people in their region.

- They are very happy that there is such

organization, which help their

neighbors to solve economical

problems.

- There are different opinions,

sometimes we come across with a fair

attitude and estimation. But some

people criticize the program as were

not included.

-Their attitude is full of understanding

and respect, they are very thankful to

the carried out program. The only

regret is that the economical help

causes a limited number of people.

-Most of them think positively, look

with the envy at the people getting the

economical help. The envy in a good

sense of this word.

- References are only positive.

VI Your comments

Social workers Agronomist

What are the

problems in the

working

system/areas?

- Timely problems solution

- It would be good if it would have

been a long-term program and the

budgets for the beneficiaries would

have been increased.

- Taking decisions by the coordinators

without concordance with the staff

members (in some aspects)

- The responsibilities between

agronomists and social officials are not

clearly divided

- The activity of PU is not flexible enough

- The work of PU sometimes is not so

prompt.

- In common the system is very good, but

problems frequently arise because of the

budget limitation.

- Untimely solution of the arising

problems

Any suggestions to

solve the existing

problems?

- All the problems are discussed in

common.

- Working out a common solution

-To restrict, to divide the responsibility

between an agronomist and a social

official. An agronomist should deal with

66

which will help to act properly

- Frequent visits of the coordinators to

the fields

-I started working beginning from the

first phase. With the replacement of

a coordinator changes the strategy.

- Generally the work is well

organized.

- We go to the far away arias, come

back late and miss our lunch. (That

problem hasn’t been settled yet).

- We would like our salary to be

increased.

- We could achieve better results by

re-distributing work among the

employees as it used to be in the

phase II.

the agricultural aspects not with the

sociological researches.

- The organization should solve all the

problems efficiently and it should have

a financial reserve.

- Any problem should be solved without

delay not to wait for the permission

from the coordinators). Sometimes

decisions are taken late.

- Budget increasing, introduction of long

–termed programs in various spheres.

- To see the project as a long-termed one,

as in this case the perennials could be

considered as a permanent help, which

will help to solve financial problems of

the beneficiaries.

PU, Abkhazia

With the decision makers

Monitoring report

What was the

Monitoring plan?

Veronique

3 monitoring

Vincent 1.Agriculture: 2 to 3 monitoring based on a Q

2.artisans: 3 monitoring based on Q (assess the socio-economic Impact) +other

informal

Monitoring: to establish good relationship with the beneficiaries and target the eventual

problems as soon as they appear

Pierre 2-3 monitoring forecasted by kind of kits

67

Whether monitoring

was done as

Per schedule?

Veronique

yes

Vincent yes

Pierre Globally yes

Whether problems

identified

during monitoring

period,

what steps were

taken to

Mitigate the problem.

Results of the interventions in

reference to

Agricultural/business

kit.

Technical and others.

Veronique

I know that it was decided to cancel pigs distribution because of the swine fever +

problem

of dryness for potatoes

Vincent Business: some kits were correlated.

Agro: stop distribution of some kits (pigs)

Pierre Pigs: kits were not distributed and replaced by new one because of the African Serine

Disease.

Some kits were completed (trailer for trailer, etc)

68

Whether the technical

advices

for the beneficiaries

were

Adequate or not?

Veronique

No reply

Vincent Beneficiaries said: Yes (large majority)

In my opinion? Improvement should be done

Pierre No bad feed back from beneficiarities – the technical advices, recommendations,

trainings can

Be improved on condition number of beneficiaries for agronomist decreases

Monitoring: participatory group meetings

Whether there were

regular

group

meetings with

the project

Officials?

Veronique

Yes, for collective equipment

Vincent Yes, for collective equipment

Pierre In the frame of collective equipment monitoring (3-4 per group)

Did you keep any

attendances

and minutes of the

Veronique

Monitoring data

69

group

Meetings (%).

Any records?

Give records, if any.

Vincent Yes, records, monitoring questionnaire

Pierre See collective equipment monitoring

Collective groups

Are all the collective

groups

Functioning at present?

Veronique

It seems that more or less they function

Vincent Most of them

Pierre Yes, to check with the last monitoring: some beneficiaries did not use the collective kit

this

year

How past beneficiaries are

Using the collective

professional kits

(mini-tractor) given

during the

ECHO I and

ECHO II?

Veronique

No reply

70

Vincent According to size of the group = more or less effective (in some cases),

some people not using it

Pierre No time to monitor ECHO I and ECHO II groups

Do you feel the need to reduce

the number of beneficiaries from

6-11 to 3-4 in future

probable

Project?

Veronique

Yes, according to monitoring conclusions we will decrease

the number

Vincent It’s already planned

Pierre Yes, obviously

Is there any need of

marketing

support to ensure

the price of

Agricultural products?

Veronique

I would say yes, but people need to be prepared

Vincent Depends of the products. But certainly need as assessment

Pierre Marketing does need support. However deep survey has to be led about

market –value chain projects viability

MICRO- CREDIT

71

Tagging ‘graduate’

beneficiaries

for micro- credit

with other

organizations

Or start PU’s own

micro-credit

Programme in future?

Veronique

Not yet – need to be checked +coordinated with other organizations

Vincent A training with the artisans will be organized and will aim at presenting organizations

dealing

With micro-credit. These organizations will be incited to the training

Pierre For business beneficiaries – to coordinate with others IO

No plan for the moment (own micro-credit programme)

Future of PU

How do you fore-see

the next

programme in

Abkhazia and

Georgia?

Veronique

To continue for farming and business programs because there are still needs but

certainly with

Adaptation as the context changed

Vincent PU shall have some legitimacy to work in Abkhazia and Georgia.

A lot of things have shall to Be done.

72

But the approach should change and be adapted.

We are not any more in a “emergency

situation”, but more in a “reconstruction and rehabilitation”

situation

Pierre Can remain as long as frozen conflict situation exists

Approach, however, will need to evaluate steadily

PU’s global strategy for the coming year: shall give or not to the mission in Abkha

the

mandate to implement further projects

General comments regarding PU stakeholders

(UNOMIC, UNDP, UNIFEM, WV, ICRC, and ACH)

To what extent PU involved

other stakeholders in the

implementation process of

ECHO I, II, III?

If not, to what extent should

Other organizations (e.g.

stakeholders, local

NGOs)

Be involved?

How?

Veronique

Involved concerning selection of beneficiaries. Always need more coordination but often

Depends on persons more than organizations.

PU agronomists used to organize meetings and pass information, but not always

followed by

Some organizations.

73

Vincent For artisans PU used list of beneficiaries from ICRC, World Vision

Pierre - coordination: to avoid duplication, share information - selection: according to list of beneficiaries provide by stakeholders, local and international

What do you think,

were all the

needs of the

beneficiaries

Covered?

If not, what kind of

assistance is

Appropriate?

Veronique

I’m sure that we can always do better

Vincent All – not

But we certainly improve for the majority the general socio-economical situation

Pierre - needs of human being are without limit - problems are partly solved

In your opinion,

what are the

main lessons learned

from the

work of PU in

Abkhazia in the

Last 3 years?

Veronique

As I said since my arrival I focused more on the rehab projects.

But I could say concerning

-kits (because more appropriate for beneficiaries) –

-beneficiaries = evolution as it was needed to select some outside the “most vulnerable”

ones

- (next project includes idea of “solidarity network”)

- locations = to choose some few places for better quality and less logistics problems

74

Vincent -to adapt kits to the to the real needs of the farmers and artisans

-for artisans: not to focus only on very vulnerable people

-to have time: to asses to real needs

To select the beneficiaries

Pierre No reply

Kits:

How far the project officials are satisfied with quality of kits:

Local product’s quality

(excellent/good/bad)

Foreign product’s quality

(excellent/good/bad)

Veronique

Vincent Pierre Veronique

Vincent Pierre

Cow, pigs, bees,

Chickens etc.

No reply Cow-good;

Bees good

good No reply Sheep from Western

Georgia - OK

Seeds (variety?),

fertilizer

Seeds good

Fertilizer good

good Seed good

Potato, maize seeds Maize- goodPotato - ?

Others OK

Potatoes–poor quality

Mini-tractor, trailers etc. OK for gardening

activities

Equipments for

business

good good

75

Food habit change due to intervention by PU

Before intervention of PU After intervention of PU

Food habit

Veronique

Vincent Pierre Veronique

Vincent Pierre

No reply No informationNo reply No reply No informationMore potatoes

More dairy products

Earlier vegetable harvest

KEY STAKEHOLDERS RESPONSE

To assess the impact of these projects the evaluator would like to request some local stake holders

(UNOMIC, UNDP, UNIFEM, WV, ICRC, and ACH) to give the general comments on the following

issues:

1. FROM UNOMIG

Dear Mr. Nizam,

Please find self explanatory mail bellow.

Regards

Mahbubul Alam

----- Forwarded by Mahbubul Alam/UNOMIG on 09/21/2007 01:14 PM -----

Dear Mehbub

The mail is in response to the request of Mr.Nizam. Since i do not have his address so could you be kind

to forward it to him.

With Regards,

Major

Muhammad Manzoor Alam

ADC - CMO

----- Forwarded by UNOMIG-ADC/UNOMIG on 09/20/2007 02:49 PM -----

76

UNOMIG-CIMIC/UNOMIG

09/20/2007 02:39 PM

To UNOMIG-ADC/UNOMIG@UNOMIG

cc UNOMIG-GCIMIC/UNOMIG@UNOMIG

Subject ref. the questionnaire on Premiere Urgence's impact

Dear Manzoor,

Ref. is made to your request for CIMIC to assess the impact of Premiere Urgence's (PU) projects.

Having only recently taken over the CIMIC matters in Sukhumi HQ, I can not see how I can assess it. So

I had to turn to the CIMIC officers in Gali for their assessment. (note: PU has opened a representation

office in Zugdidi only last week, so ZCIMIC can not provide any feedback.)

GCIMIC informed that also for them it is impossible to give an assessment in such detail apart from the

fact that yes, they are active in the area and their program to improve the food security and livelihood of

the vulnerable population living in Abkhazia (with the support of ECHO) one must assume did and/or

does more good than harm in the towns and villages Abkhazia.

I apologize for not being able to provide a more detailed assessment, however, if such is indeed needed

from CIMIC Branch, we may require a substantial time.

For your information and/or consideration.

Best regards,

Manfred ZITTERMANN, Major

Chief CIMIC Officer

UNOMIG HQ, SUKHUMI

+39 0831 231053 (direct call)

+39 0831 000 (through switchboard, Ext 6053)

(995 442) 72231: Sukhumi commercial mobile phone

E-mail: unomig-cimic@un.org

77

FROM UNDP

1. To what extent your organization (e.g. as one of the stakeholders) was involved in the implementation

process of PU’s projects activities?

If not, to what extent should other organizations (e.g. stakeholders, local NGOs) should be involved?

UNDP is not involved in the PU activities. UNDP and PU as well as other international organisation and NGOs are actively exchange information on various problems and issues (e.g. activities against the White web-worm) at the Working Group on Economic projects/agriculture established within the Information Centre in Sukhumi. This forum was created for coordination both planning and implementation and non duplication of possible activities in the area. See also: www.abkhazdev.info for whom doing what where information.

2. What do think, were all the needs of the beneficiaries covered?

Should PU continue to disburse agricultural and business kits in future?

If not, what kind of assistance is appropriate?

Of course, all the needs are not covered.

There are a few international orgs working currently in Abkhazia. PU has its own area of activities in Abkhazia and might extend it to communities in the other districts. Agriculture start-up kits disbursement as well as providing agriculture technical advice and business management techniques need to be continued.

3. in your opinion, what are the main lessons learned from the work of PU in Abkhazia in the last 3 years?

UNDP has established good cooperation with PU. In September 2006 UNDP was delivering the motor

cultivators and sprayers to 22 Groups formed within UNDP agriculture project. The delivery process was

accompanied by training on usage and maintenance of the equipment. ”Premiere Urgence” (PU) was

identified as the partner for conducting the required trainings. Preliminary negotiations with PU were

held and training was held by Mr. Astamur Trapsh, the PU Logistics officer together with the UNDP

Agriculture team.

FROM WV

1. To what extent your organization (e.g. as one of the stakeholders) was involved in the implementation

process of PU’s projects activities?

78

If not, to what extent should other organizations (e.g. stakeholders, local NGOs) should be involved?

World Vision coordinated with PU on Business start-up kits component, when beneficiaries from WV

projects received business start-up kits in Pervaya Bedia and in Tshiri villages.

Furthermore WV participated in a agricultural training organized by PU.

2. What do think, were all the needs of the beneficiaries covered?

Should PU continue to disburse agricultural and business kits in future?

If not, what kind of assistance is appropriate?

Yes, PU should continue to disburse agricultural and business kits in the future, because the needs for this

type of assistance are still high and they promote self-sustainable income generation activities.

3. in your opinion, what are the main lessons learned from the work of PU in Abkhazia in the last 3 years?

Don’t know.

FROM ACH

To assess the impact of these projects the evaluator would like to request some local stake holders

(UNOMIC, UNDP, UNIFEM, WV, ICRC, and ACH) to give the general comments on the following

issues:

1. To what extent your organization (e.g. as one of the stakeholders) was involved in the implementation

process of PU’s projects activities?

If not, to what extent should other organizations (e.g. stakeholders, local NGOs) should be involved?

ACH is not as such a stakeholder; therefore we are not involved in the implementation of PU projects.

Being another international organisation working in Abkhazia, we do however coordinate our activities in

terms of beneficiaries and geographical repartition in order to avoid redundancy.

79

2. What do think, were all the needs of the beneficiaries covered?

Should PU continue to disburse agricultural and business kits in future?

If not, what kind of assistance is appropriate?

ACH is not in a position to answer

3. in your opinion, what are the main lessons learned from the work of PU in Abkhazia in the last 3 years?

Ibid

FROM ICRC.

To what extent your organization (e.g. as one of the stakeholders) was involved in the implementation

process of PU’s projects activities?

ICRC and PU deal with different catogories of beneficiaries. ICRC helps vulnerable group of people who are of more than 65 years of old and of different level (level I).

PU is serving beneficiaries of level II.ACH, WV with beneficiaries of level III.

We have handed over the list of beneficiaries to PU so that they could avail the opportunities of PU’s shelter programme.

PU also bought ICRC’s beneficiaries reared cow with fair price.

At Gali, ICRC and PU at the off limit areas on mutually agreed conditions exchanged villages for the PU’s agricultural project.

Also all beneficiaries were covered by cash support.

2nd and 3 rd questions I can’t answer. Dragana Rankovic, Delegate Food Security Program, ICRC, Shukhumi.

To assess the impact of these projects the evaluator would like to request some local stake holders

(UNOMIC, UNDP, UNIFEM, WV, ICRC, and ACH) to give the general comments on the following

issues:

1. To what extent your organization (e.g. as one of the stakeholders) was involved in the implementation

process of PU’s projects activities?

If not, to what extent should other organizations (e.g. stakeholders, local NGOs) should be involved?

Our organization has been never involved in the PU’s activities.

2. What do think, were all the needs of the beneficiaries covered?

80

Should PU continue to disburse agricultural and business kits in future?

If not, what kind of assistance is appropriate?

The distribution of the agro and business kits should be continued for the most vulnerable groups of

population. For others the development activities are most appropriate.

3. in your opinion, what are the main lessons learned from the work of PU in Abkhazia in the last 3 years?

n/a.

CASE STUDY-1

HE BECAME FOR ME ABKHAZIYA

PERSONIFIED

I had already gotten ready to depart, as all of

a sudden there was an electricity failure. He

lighted a candle, and with it in his hands, he

proceeded to walk me out. His irregular

manner of walk, smiling youthful eyes forced

me to forget that he was 76 years old.

Already 76. (Or only 76? In the Caucasus,

amidst the veterans, he is a youth).

For me he became Abkhazia personified.

Strong and courageous, lost in the battle for

the freedom of his best sons, but still holding

onto his uniqueness (originality?) and belief

in Life.

We are sitting in the house of Hitsiya Huhut.

Cleanliness in the house seemingly

underlines the poverty of the inhabitants.

Sofa. Worn out linoleum. Table. An old

canteen. Coffee cups. Books. In between -

they photograph of a beautiful young person

in a solder uniform. A son. Yesterday his

CASE STUDY-1

ОН СТАЛ ДЛЯ МЕНЯ ОЛИЦЕТВОРЕНИЕМ АБХАЗИИ

Я уже собирался уходить, как вдруг ушло электричество. Он зажёг свечку, и с нею в руке пошёл провожать. Его порывистая походка, смеющиеся молодые глаза заставляли забыть, что ему 76. Уже 76. (Или всего 76? На Кавказе, среди долгожителей он – мальчишка).

Для меня он стал олицетворением Абхазии. Сильной и мужественной, потерявшей в борьбе за независимость своих лучших сыновей, но сохранившей свою самобытность и веру в Жизнь.

Мы сидим в доме Хуция Хухута. Чистота в

доме как бы подчёркивает бедность

обитателей. Диван. Потёртый линолеум.

Стол. Старенький буфет. Чашки для кофе.

Книги. Между ними – фотография красивого

молодого человека в военной форме. Сын.

Вчера приходили его друзья. Помянуть. Его,

студента исторического факультета

педагогического института, арестовали, когда

войска Грузии ворвались в Сухуми. Ему

выбили зубы, отбили почки. Через несколько

81

friends came over. To mourn. He, a student

of the historical Department in the

Pedagogical Institute, was arrested when

troops from Georgia penetrated Sukhumi.

They knocked his teeth out, ruptured his

kidneys. A few months down, he was

released and came out disabled. After slight

cure, he voluntarily left to protect his

Abkhaz. He couldn’t otherwise. 14 years ago

he passed away, dying a few days short of

Victory.

Huhut can’t cry any more. No tears. He only

murmurs and adds «If only I had

grandchildren now…» That is pain… But he

is a strong person – it’s not that easy to break

him.

I live alone. But I have all. I do everything

myself. Would you like some soup

«kharcho»? After it you shall not be able to

eat anything – it is filling. I don’t understand

when my neighbor complains that there is

nothing in his home to eat as his wife left to

visit the children. And so what? You won’t

eat now? Or will you call the neighbor-

woman when you have guests?

Guest! For people from Abkhaz that is holy.

Huhut tells us a story, an old legend :

Once upon a time, God called together

people of all nations so he could distribute

the lands and waters amongst them.

Everyone came, except the Abkhaz. The

Abkhaz had guests in his house at the time.

When the Abkhaz finally did come, God was

angered.

- Why are you so late? I gave away

all the land; only the deserts

месяцев он вышел на свободу инвалидом. Но,

слегка подлечившись, ушёл добровольцем

защищать свою Абхазию. Иначе не мог. 14

лет назад он погиб, не дожив всего лишь

несколько дней до Победы.

Хухут уже не плачет: нет слёз. Только всё

время приговаривает: «Если бы сейчас были

внуки…». Это боль… Но он сильный человек

– его не так-то легко сломать.

Я живу один. Но у меня всё есть. Я всё делаю

сам. Хотите суп «харчо»? После него уже

ничего есть не сможешь – сытно. Я не

понимаю, когда сосед жалуется, что в доме

нечего есть, так как жена уехала к детям. И

что же? Ты теперь не будешь есть? Или

позовёшь соседку, когда придёт гость?

О, Гость! Для абхазцев - это святыня. Хухут

рассказывает нам легенду:

“Однажды Бог позвал все народы, чтобы

разделить между ними земли и воды. Все

пришли, кроме абхаза. В доме абхаза в это

время был Гость. Когда же абхаз всё же

пришёл, Бог был разгневан.

- Ты почему опоздал? я раздал все

земли, остались только пустыни. Ты

пил вино?

- О, нет, мой Бог!

- Ты был с женщиной?

- О, нет, мой Бог!

- Что же тогда задержало тебя? - В моём доме был Гость. Я не мог

оставить его. Слова абхазца тронули сердце Бога, и он

82

remain. Did you waist your time

drinking wine or entertaining a

woman?

- O no, my God! - What, then, held you back? - There was a guest in my house. I

could not leave him Words of the Abkhaz touched God's heart,

and he said:

- I have in reserve a small piece of land, where there are mountains and the sun and the sea. Take this piece of Heaven and glorify with your matters your Life.

Huhut continues - this time about himself.

Friends and bread-salt – These are so

important in the life of a person! …But I

have nothing to treat my guests with.

We are sitting at the table remembering his

son, toasting to the health of the guests and

the owner of the home. And talk, and talk …

To be more precise, he talks. He missed it in

his solitary silence.

I love guests. Love guests at home. If only I

had grandchildren…

Whatever he talks about, memories return to

those frightful days: We always lived

harmoniously: both Georgians and

Abkhazians. Bread-salt was shared. How

could they?! It turned out they have rotten

hearts. They shot at us , into their neighbors.

They killed our children… And now there

stand empty houses next to us. That is bad.

People should live in houses.

But I live alone and do everything myself; I

tend the cows, and work in the gardens. Here

is my honey. He puts on the table a plate with

сказал:

- У меня есть в запасе маленький

уголок земли, где горы и солнце, и

море. Бери этот кусочек рая и

прославляй своими делами Жизнь.

Хухут продолжает, уже о себе: Друзья и хлеб-

соль –это так важно в жизни человека! А у

меня на столе-то и нет ничего!

Мы сидим, поминаем сына Хухута, пьём за

здоровье гостя и хозяина дома. И говорим,

говорим… Вернее, говорит он. Соскучился в

своём одиноком молчании.

Люблю гостей. Люблю людей в доме. Вот,

были бы внуки…

О чём бы он ни говорил, память сворачивает к

тем страшным дням:

Мы всегда жили дружно: и грузины, и

абхазцы. Хлеб-соль были общими. Как они

могли?! У них оказалось гнилое сердце. Они

стреляли в нас, в своих соседей. Они убивали

наших детей… А сейчас рядом стоят пустые

дома.. Это плохо. В доме должны жить

люди.

А я живу один и делаю всё один: и за

коровами слежу, и в саду работаю. Вот мой

мёд (он выставляет на стол тарелку с

янтарным мёдом). В этом году продал 9

литров по 200 рублей. Один литр себе

оставил. Мне на год хватит. Я люблю пчёл.

«Первая помощь»(PU) принёсла мне 3 семьи.

Я очень рад. И цыплят мне дали – 77 штук и

10 мешков комбикорма. Но цыплята начали

болеть, и ничего не помогло: ни лекарства,

которые мне дали, ни уколы. Всё напрасно.

Он улыбается. На память о них осталась

83

amber-like honey. This year he sold 9 liters

of it for 200 rubles. He kept a liter for

himself. It will be enough for me for a year. I

love bees. « Premiere Urgence’s » (PU)

brought for me 3 families (?). I’m very glad.

They gave me chicks too. 77 of them and 10

bags of mixed fodder. But the chicks began

to be ill and nothing helped; neither the

medicine which I was given, nor the

vaccinations. All in vain. He smiles. In

memory of them he has but one fence.

Now, I will touch neither chick nor potatoes

for the world... in 1997, the red cross was

distributing seeds imported from Holland.

Potatoes «exploded»: 10 kg right off the field.

Later, they found out the seeds were a hybrid

sort and they took them away. And PU

(Premiere Urgence’s) gave us seeds as well

this year, but it happened so that we had a

flood and half the harvest perished.

He doesn’t say anything else, and I imagine

him working on the potato fields, taking care

of every single plant.

So much hard labor lost! But half the harvest

succeeded, so there will be enough seeds for

the next year and I won’t have to buy

anything at the market in winter.

We also got machinery from PU (Premiere

Urgence’s). Before, we'd have to plough the

maize for 15 days, now it takes a day. This is

help, wouldn’t you say?! Beautiful!

When other say that this or that would be

better, I remind them when God was giving

out eyes, and the owl asked for eye-brows –

одна лишь ограда- сетка.

Я теперь ни цыплят, ни картошку ни за что

не трону…. В 1997 году Красный Крест

раздавал семена, привезённые из Голландии.

Картошка «взорвалась»: 10кг с куста! Но

потом выяснилось, что это какой-то гибрид

и урожай забрали.

И «Первая помощь»(PU) дала в этом году

семена, но так случилось, что у нас было

наводнение, и половина урожая погибла.

Он ничего больше не говорит, а я

представляю его, работающего на

картофельном поле, обихаживающего каждый

картофельный куст… Сколько труда пропало!

Зато половина урожая удалась, так что и на

семена на следующий год хватит, и на базаре

зимой покупать не придётся.

А ещё мы от «Первой помощи»(PU) технику

получили: мотоблок. Раньше 15 дней кукурузу

копать приходилось. А сейчас – 1 день. Это

не помощь, что ли?! Красота!

Когда другие говорят, что хорошо бы это да

то, я напоминаю им нашу притчу: Когда Бог

раздавал глаза, сова попросила ещё и брови -

Он смеётся, так заразительно!

Я всё время работаю. Не понимаю людей,

которые кофе пьют, потом чай, потом.. A

работать когда? Бездельники! Ты на мои

руки погляди (протягивает ладони – они

каменные). Я всю жизнь работаю, когда ещё

84

He laughs – so contagious !

I work all the time. I don’t understand people

who drink coffee and then tea and then...

when will they work? Idlers! Take a look at

my hands (he extends his palms to me –

they’re rock-solid). I have worked all my life,

ever since I was a little boy.

I, like everyone else went to an Abkhazi

school. Studied well. And unexpectedly Stalin

ordered: “Make Abkhazia more Georgia-

like, suppressing all Abkhasian national

features”. And then came strutting a young

new teacher and then suddenly it was not-so

Abkhazi language anymore. We burst out

laughing. And she says «Mhe te». I thought

she was talking about me. I am called

«Meheti» after all. I grabbed my school bag

and ran home. After two days (I didn’t go to

school after that day), the director of the

school came to our house (back-then it was

very strict). I hid in the cow-barn and stared:

mama yelling, looking for me. When I came

down and told mama that I was insulted

(Mhe-te), mama was laughing to the point of

tears. («mhe-ti» in Georgian language –

beasts , or something?)

This is how I began my introduction with

Georgian. I didn’t learn it much. And when

they gave me lower grades in math for not

knowing Georgian language very well – I

protested: Georgian language has no

relation to mathematics!

And so after 4th grade, I didn’t go to school

anymore. Started working. Like the grown-

мальчишкой был.

… Я пошёл, как и все, в абхазскую школу.

Хорошо учился. И вдруг приказ Сталина:»

Абхазию – огрузинить!» и вот пришла к нам в

класс молоденькая учительница и с порога

что-то не по-абхазски. Мы засмеялись. А она

«Мхе те». Я думал, что она про меня. Меня

же зовут «Мехети». Я портфель в руки и

бегом домой. Через два дня (я в школу больше

не пошёл) директор школы пришла к нам

домой (тогда с этим очень строго было. Я

спрятался в коровнике и смотрю: мать

кричит, меня ищут. А когда я спустился вниз

и сказал, что меня оскорбили (Мхе – те),

мама начала смеяться, до слёз.(«мхе-ти» по-

грузински – звери, что ли?)

Так началось моё знакомство с грузинским. Я

его не очень учил. И когда мне снижали

оценки по математике за слабое знание

грузинского – протестовал: к математике

это не имеет никакого отношения.

Так после 4-го класса я в школу больше не

пошёл. Начал работать. Как взрослый. Я и

сегодня работы не боюсь. Вот были бы внуки

Здоровье?- смеётся. Хитрые глаза искрятся. -

Я здоровье имею. К врачам никогда не

обращаюсь. И зубы сохранил. Как? Нужно не

есть сахар. Вот, были бы внуки, я бы их

научил.

А вот жена моя… Ну, где взять такие

деньги?! Нам помощь дали, Калдукова-

министр социальной защиты. Она молодец,

всё делает для нас. Но те деньги уже

кончились. А жене уколы нужны, очень

85

ups. Even today I don’t fear work. If only I

had grandkids…

You are asking about my health? – He laughs. His cunning eyes are sparkling. Thank God I am healthy. I’ve never visited

doctors. And I have even kept my own teeth!

Are you asking me how? Don’t eat sugar... If

only I had had children I would have taught

them!

And my wife... Well, where do I get such

money?! We were given aid by Kaldukova –

minister of social welfare. She's brilliant,

does everything for us. But that money

already finished. And my wife needs

vaccinations, very expensive ones; you can’t

even buy them in Abkhazia.

Every day I prepare dinner for my sick wife

and carry it to the hospital. There is nobody

else in the world to help her! Though the

doctors made a verdict that she had no so

much time left to stay with us. If only we had

grandchildren…

The war with Germans was very different. We

had projectors standing then. And planes

didn’t make as much noise: they flew, like

birds. And then the Germans started

throwing flyers: as though they were telling

us to come out onto the streets, give up.

Now the war was completely different. For

what did our people die?

Not of late, I was walking past the school and

дорогие, их даже в Абхазии купить нельзя….

Каждый день обед готовлю и в больницу

жене несу. А как же! Хотя врачи и сказали,

что долго она уже не проживёт. Вот... были

бы внуки…

Война с немцами совсем другая была. Тогда

прожекторы стояли. И звука у самолётов не

было: летели, как птицы. А потом немцы

начали сбрасывать листовки: мол, выходите

на дорогу, сдавайтесь.

Сейчас война совсем другая была. За что

наши погибли?

Недавно проходил мимо школы и услышал,

как молоденькая учительница возражала

женщине, потерявшей сына на войне: «Он

защищал себя, почему же он герой?!» Хухут

задыхается от возмущения: « Как может она

так говорить! Как может она учить наших

детей! Если бы они защищали только себя,

они бы сбежали из страны, как и многие

другие…»

В саду свисают гроздья недозревшего

винограда. Хухуд смеётся: Мы сейчас живём

не в Абхазии, в Ташкенте. Совсем жарко

стало у нас. Для винограда это плохо.

В огороде дозревают помидоры, крупные, с

мужской кулак. Скрючились огурцы. В

воскресенье дочка приезжала. Всё мне на

86

heard how a young female teacher was

arguing with a woman who lost her son to the

war «he was protecting himself, why should

he be a hero? » Throat chokes with

disturbance (?) –« how could she say such

things! How can she teach our children! If

they were protecting themselves, they would

have fled the country, as did many others»

In the garden hang not fully ripe grapes.

Huhut laughs: We now live not in Abkhazia,

but in Tashkent. Is become very hot here. It’s

bad for the grapes.

In the garden tomatoes are ripening, big, with

the feel of a man's hand. The cucumbers have

twisted. On Sunday the daughter visited.

Sealed everything for winter. We won’t be

lost!

«We won’t be lost! » - He repeated and

hurried up to enclose his cow. No time to sit.

Have to work. Have to Live.

Nizamuddin Al-Hussainy

Region. Sukhumi

Hetsiya Huhut

Village. Baslata 17 September. 2007

зиму «закрыла». Не пропадём!

«Не пропадём!» - повторил он и побежал

загонять во двор корову. Сидеть некогда.

Нужно работать. Нужно жить.

Низамуддин Аль-Хуссейни

Хеция Хухут

Район Сухуми

Дер.Баслата

17 cентября 2007г.

87

MY DREAM IS TO SEE MY CHILDREN EDUCATED

Bganba Nanuli Arasadzyx – is a “mother –

heroine”. To bring up eleven children – isn’t

a silent heroism of a woman?

Full of beauty and dignity woman tells us a

story of her life, life that is so similar to the

life of her fellow-villagers.

That is the beginning of her story:

The life was very good before the war and the birth of our children brought so much joy to us. My eldest son is 29 already. And the youngest one is only 9. That one was born after the war.

Before the war the family owned a minibus. The head of the family earned good money. But time changes. He stopped making run over the mountainous serpentine roads, leaving a heap of rusty metal in his homestead. It has become much more difficult for his family to survive.

A local administration included them in the

list of the poorest people. Everybody realized

– the family was in real need. PU “Premiere

Urgence’s” came immediately. They were

given a mini- tractor and they received 500

kg of potatoes. And further down the

arithmetic as simple as that: they sold 2 tons

of potato at 25 rubles and earned 50 000

rubles. It could be definitely better, but it is

not in one’s power to control weather. They

left about 1 ton of potato to winter:

so many people gather at table. To feed the

CASE STUDY-2

МЕЧТАЮ ВЫУЧИТЬ ДЕТЕЙ

Бганба Нанули Арасадзых – «мать-героиня».

Поднять на ноги 11 детей – это ли не

безмолвный женский подвиг?!

Красива, полная достоинства женщина

рассказывает о своей жизни, так похожей на

жизнь её односельчан.

До войны мы хорошо жили. И дети рождались в радость. Моему старшему сейчас 29 лет, а младшему – 9. Этот родился уже после войны.

До войны у семьи был микроавтобус. Глава

семьи хорошо зарабатывал. А вот когда

перестал гонять по горным серпантинам,

оставив груду металлолома во дворе, стало

намного труднее.

Администрация включила её имя в список

бенефициантов одним из первых : нуждаются.

«Первая помощь» (PU) откликнулась сразу :

им выделили мотоблок, дали 500 кг

картофеля. А дальше арифметика проста :

они продали 2 тонны по 25 руб. и заработали

50 000 рублей (Конечно, могло бы быть и

лучше, но погода нам неподвластна). Около

тонны картофеля оставили себе на зиму: вон

ртов-то сколько!! «Накормить!» - это

единственное, на что хватает сил и средств.

У них большое хозяйство – 40 кур, 2

88

family – that’s the only thing the parents

Could think about.

They have a rather big housekeeping - 40

hens and 2 pigs, cow. It used to be more pigs,

but we had to stab some of them. Meat was

salted and preserved at once. The cow, we

totally depend on, supports us – 4 liters a

day, it’s enough to cook some porridge and

to make some cheese and sore milk. They

have enough fertile earth to plant maize. By

the way, they were allowed to use common

mill absolutely free.

The hostess proudly showed us long shelves

with preserved vegetables, salted meat. All

those procurements they will keep to pass the

winter time. They can’t manage without it.

We see the barrels with a home-made wine –

its nearly 800 liters! Do you think it is too

much? If you only count all birthday parties

of the members of our big family and some

other holidays (festivities) you’ll see that we

have nothing left to sell. Our dear guests

drink everything out!

They have their own firewood, the needn’t

buy it at winter time.

We lead “Natural household” – our children

say. She smiles.

I even make clothes for the whole my family with my own hands, it can’t be the other way! My sewing machine is always at hand.

Our group got a mini tractor and we put it in our yard so that our boys could take care of it properly and it is always ready to work.

поросёнка. (Раньше больше было, но

пришлось заколоть. Мясо сразу же засолили

и законсервировали), корова. (Корова-

кормилица нас поддерживает – 4 литра

молока в день, так что , и кашу сварить, и

мацони, и сыр сделать.). Да и земли много:

сажают кукурузу. Кстати, общественной

мельницей им разрешили пользоваться

бесплатно. Она с гордостью показывает

стеллажи с «закрытыми» овощами, мясом –

запас на зиму. А как же без этого?! А вот и

бочки с домашним вином, почти 800 литров. -

Да разве это много? Посчитайте сколько у

нас дней рождения. Да и остальные

праздники.. Куда уж там продавать- гости

всё и выпивают. Дрова у них тоже свои, так

что зимой их покупать не приходится.

У нас «натуральное хозяйство» - так дети говорят. И одежду я им всегда сама шью, а как же!

Вон и швейная машинка всегда под рукою.

Мотоблок нашей группе выделили, но стоит

он у нас в хозяйстве, и мои мальчики за ним

следят, так что он всегда в рабочем

состоянии.

Да, конечно, они стали жить значительно

лучше. Поддержка. «Первой помощи» (PU)

пришла вовремя. А здесь и глава республики

Подарил многодетной семье микроавтобус

«Газель». Так что теперь заживём, да и муж

при деле будет. Так трудно быть

безработным!

Она уже давно стала бабушкой – 5 внуков от

двух старших дочерей, да и свои младшие

ещё учатся в школе… Любимица Самима

окончила школу в прошлом году. С отличием.

89

It goes without saying they have improved

their living standard greatly, owing to the

support. PU “Premiere Urgence’s” came in

time. Moreover the President Sergey Bagapsh

presented a minibus “GAZEL” to the family

with so many children. Our life will be

changed for the better, and my husband will

be occupied. Can you imagine how difficult

to be unemployed!

She became a grandmother long ago – she

has 5 grandchildren from two eldest

daughters, but her own youngest children

still attend school… Her favorite daughter –

Samima finished school last year with

honour. The trouble is that we can’t manage to send our daughter to study at the University. She has been dreaming to become a teacher!

We have started to live better, thanks God!!! But still my dream is to give my children good education, especially to my daughters. My eldest sons have missed their chance, but my youngest ones still hope… I eager to see my children well-educated to avoid sufferings which I had. The truth is that at the moment we have no enough money for that.

Bganba Nanuli

Village: Arasadzikh

19th September 2007

Но вот беда, нет денег отправить её учиться в

университет. А она так хотела стать

учительницей!

_ Мы лучше стали жить, слава Богу! Но я

мечтаю выучить детей. Особеннно дочек.

Старшие сыновья своё время упустили, а

младшие… Так хотела бы иметь

образованных детей, чтобы в жизни им не

пришлось мучиться, как мне. Да денег у нас

таких нет.

Бганба Нанули

Деревня Арасадзых

19 сентября 2007г.

90

AID BY FIRST AID “PU” WAS A STEP

TOWARD A BETTER LIFE.

We are sitting in her son’s house. And while

someone ran out to call her, we are talking

with the daughter-in-law.

While we slow chit-chat about this and that,

prepares strong Turkish coffee for us, which

today, is very popular in Caucasus. On the

table lies a cluster of black grapes. Still

covered with a fresh haze….

She is a teacher in primary school, but

doesn’t work at the moment. There isn’t any

place to, as the schools where she previously

taught were closed. And there isn’t any other

work. Perhaps it’s for the better; the kids

need looking after.

Running, short of breath, is Nunufar. She and

her son – both beneficiaries of the first aid

PU (Premiere Urgence’s) program. Right off

the threshold, she begins thanking us for the

aid given her. But then again, she almost

stumbles “People live around us, who are

very much in need of help also. Please, help

them! “

Word for word and Nulufar talks about

herself.

Her husband has passed away, leaving her

with a debt of 22 thousand rubles. Her son is

constantly unemployed; from time to time

earns on construction work.

When first aid PU (Premiere Urgence’s)

offered to participate in their own program,

CASE STUDY-3

ПОМОЩЬ «ПЕРВОЙ ПОМОЩИ» (PU)

БЫЛА СТУПЕНЬКОЙ В ЛУЧШУЮ

ЖИЗНЬ

Мы сидим в доме её сына. И пока кто-то

побежал звать её, мы разговариваем с

невесткой. Пока медленно идёт беседа о том-

о сём, готовит нам крепкий кофе по-турецки,

который сегодня очень популярен в Абхазии.

На столе вырастает горка чёрного винограда,

ещё покрытого дымкой, прямо с лозы .

– учительница начальных классов, но сейчас

не работает: негде, так как школу, где она

преподавала, закрыли. А другой работы нет.

Да, может оно и к лучшему, за ребятишками

нужен глаз да глаз.

Прибегает запыхавшаяся Нунуфар. Она и сын

– оба бенефицианты программы «Первой

Помощи» (PU).

Прямо с порога она начинает благодарить за

оказанную поддержку. Но тут же как бы

спотыкается : «Вокруг нас живут люди,

которые очень нуждаются. Пожалуйста,

помогите им!»

Слово за слово, и Нулуфар рассказывает о

себе.

Муж умер, оставив долг в 22 тыс рублей. Сын

постоянно нигде не работает, от случая к

случаю подрабатывает на стройке.

Когда «Первая Помощь» (PU) предложила

участвовать в своей программе и выделила

мотоблок и прицеп – их было 12 семей. Но,

91

and consigned them a mini tractor and the

trailer - there were 12 families.

But having conferred they decided to give

back the trailer as they had other means of

transportation. In exchange, they decided to

attain another mini-tractor. Through such

means, they formed 2 groups, 6 families in

each. Currently, her son works on one of the

mini-tractors they obtained.

In 2004, they received 300 kg of potatoes and

reaped 1500 kg. They are still using the seeds

they were given, but it would have been

better if they could change them for a

different variety.

A month back, they sold the cow (it was

difficult to milk), but it left behind 3 calves.

At the same time we received the cow, we

were given mixed fodder so that we had

something to feed them with.

- Of course, I de like it if I could get slate

and a beam for the coating of the house,

but they say that help is afforded only

once. So we have to do everything

ourselves

She breathed a heavy sigh

- Of course, we still don’t stand strong

enough on our two feet. But we have

never taken credit. Debt? But why?! I

guess ill have to employ myself in

seasonal work, gathering oranges. But

we have our own land, 21 acres (?) Do

you like our grapes? We have lots of it.

We make wine at home and ‘cha-cha’

Help from first aid PU (Premiere Urgence’s)

посовещавшись, они решили отказаться от

прицепа, так как уже были другие средства

перевозки. Взамен они решили приобрести

ещё один мини-трактор. Таким образом, они

создали 2 группы по 6 семей. На одном из

мини-тракторов и работает сейчас её сын.

В 2004 году они получили 300 кг картофеля, а

собрали 1500кг. До сих пор пользуются этими

семенами, но было бы хорошо заменить их на

другой сорт.

Месяц назад продали корову (тяжело было

доить), но остались 3 тёлочки. Одновременно

с коровой нам дали и комбикорм: так что

было, чем её кормить.

- Хотелось бы, конечно, получить

шифер и балки для покрытия дома,

но, говорят, что помощь оказывается

лишь один раз. Так что придётся всё

делать самим.

Она тяжело вздохнула.

- Конечно, мы ещё не стоим крепко на

ногах. Но мы никогда не брали

кредиты. Долг? Ну, что ж?! Придётся

наниматься на сезонную работу,

наверное, сбор мандаринов.

Но у нас и своя земля есть, 21 сотка...

Нравится наш виноград? У нас его

много. Мы и вино домашнее делаем, и

чачу.

Помощь «Первой Помощи» (PU) была

ступенькой в лучшую жизнь. Сейчас в семье

6 человек, и питаться они стали значительно

92

was a step toward a better life. We have 6

members in this family, and their diet has

become much better – meat, butter,

vegetables.

- Come visit us again after a year – we’ll

hold a banquet for the entire world!!

Nizamuddin Al-Hussainy

Buyuklyan Nunufar

Village Machara

Region Gul’ripsh 13 13th September 2007

лучше: и мясо, и масло, и овощи.

- Приходите к нам через год – устроим

пир на весь мир!

Низамуддин Аль-Хуссейни

Буюклян Нунуфар,

Дер. Мачара,

Р Pайон Гульрипш

13th сентября 2007г.

FURNITURE MASTER ALEXANDER

KETSBAYA

During the war, their large noisy home

became barren; they ran to Georgia. But a

person cannot be happy on foreign land, not

in nativity. And so they returned to work-out,

but proud of their victory Caucasus. Into

their, already empty, home

It was very difficult. Hands in the right

places. There is strength and the will to work

– but there are no means of purchasing

necessary instruments.

CASE STUDY-4

МЕБЕЛЬНЫХ ДЕЛ МАСТЕР

АЛЕКСАНДР КЕЦБАЯ

Во время войны их большой шумный дом

опустел: они бежали в Грузию. Но человек не

может быть счастлив на чужбине, вне

Родины. И они вернулись в истощенную, но

гордую своей победой Абхазию. В свой, уже

пустой, дом.

Было очень трудно. И горько. Руки на месте.

Есть сила и желание работать – нет средств

купить необходимые инструменты.

93

Help arrived in the form of (Premiere

Urgence’s) PU. The organization bought for

him cherished instruments.

And the house filled with sounds, smells of

fresh wood shavings, varnishes.

Already today he earns 20,000 rubbles per

month. He could earn even more. Makes

tables, chairs, stools. Very beautiful. People

have begun to live better. And of course, they

need furniture. Orders are already pouring in.

And yes, people do buy a good amount in

retail as well.

They work together. But Alexander Ketsbaya

is dreaming of teaching the youngsters his

profession: it’s a rich experience, and there’s

always something to share. He also wanted to

expand his business, to diversity the

assortment with the team trained by him. And

then their earnings may increase two-fold.

For the time being, he separated a room for

his workshop, in the house. In future we’ll

have to think about more appropriate place.

Besides, it is not enough space here.

Meanwhile… A saw is buzzing. A smell of a

fresh (wood) shaving reaches the most distant

corners of the village. The life is going on!

Nizamuddin Al-Hussainy

Помощь пришла в лице «Первой

помощи»(PU). Организация выделила деньги

и приобрела для него заветные инструменты.

И дом наполнился звуками, запахом свежей

стружки, лаков.

Уже сегодня он зарабатывает до 20 000

рублей в месяц. Может и больше. Делает

столы, стулья, табуреты. Очень красивые.

Люди начали лучше жить. И, конечно же,

нужна мебель. Уже начали поступать заказы.

Да и в розницу всё раскупается хорошо.

Они работают вдвоём. Но Александр Кецбая

мечтает научить молодёжь своей профессии:

опыт богатый, есть чем поделиться. Да и

бизнес хотел бы расширить, разнообразить

ассортимент с командой, им самим

подготовленной. И тогда их заработки могут

увеличиться вдвойне.

Пока он выделил под мастерскую комнату в

доме. В будущем нужно будем подумать о

более подходящем месте, да и тесновато уже.

А пока… Гудит пила. Запах свежей стружки

достигает самых отдаленных уголков

деревни. Жизнь продолжается!!

Низамуддин Аль-Хуссейни

94

Alexander Ketsbaya

City Gali

Region Gali

10th September 2007

Александр Кецбая ,

Гор.Гали

Район Гали

10 сентября 2007г

I FELT LIKE I WANTED TO LIVE AGAIN

Close you eyes. Very tight. Listen the songs of wind in the trees. Reach your hand and touch the sun's warmth. Walk through your house using only your sense of touch, try not getting caught at the edges. Wait. Don’t open your eyes. Now imagine you have to live in this darkness till the end of your life. Frightening?!

Perhaps this is the very feeling … police inspector sergeant Vanchka Tsulukhiya experienced when after an unsuccessful operation on his eyes, the doctors brought out the verdict: he won’t see! But beside him stood his family and he had enough strength to withstand.

And now… a cherished dream – to die. There is not a time when sour feelings of loneliness and insipidness do not quit his side. 4 years ago, his daughter got married in Krasnodar. And it’s already been 10 years since his wife passed away. And his son tragically died.

- Who needs me? Even God does not want

to take me.

His contemporaries are leaving this world one after the other, but he lives on. But would you even call this a life? His daughter cannot come to see him as she does not have a passport. His son-in-law comes to visit

CASE STUDY-5

МНЕ ЗАХОТЕЛОСЬ СНОВА ЖИТЬ

Закрой глаза. Очень плотно. Услышь

морской. Песню ветра в деревьях. Протяни

руки и почувствуй солнечное тепло. Пройди

на ощупь по своему дому, стараясь не

задевать углы. Подожди. Не открывай глаза.

Представь себе, что теперь в этой темноте

тебе предстоит прожить до конца жизни.

Страшно?!

Наверное, именно это чувство испытал и

участковый инспектор, сержант милиции

Ванчка Цулукия, когда, после неудачной

операции на глаза, врачи вынесли приговор:

видеть не будет! Но рядом была семья, и

хватило сил выстоять.

А сейчас … заветная мечта – умереть.

Горчайшее чувство одиночества и

никчёмности не покидает его. 4 года назад

дочка вышла замуж в Краснодаре. И уже 10

лет как умерла жена. И сын трагически погиб.

-Кому я нужен? Даже Бог не хочет

95

instead. And that’s when there's happiness in the house. He helps with the household and cleans up. Promised to fix the roof.

We are sitting in the house of Ivan (that is how they call him in the village). Through a sense of touch, he finds where the table stands, where the dishes are placed, the milk jar, plate with matsoni.

Sometimes the other elder men come to see him: they tell him the news, reminisce. And he also «goes to visit».

But a larger part of his time is spent on the cow, which he received from the « Premiere Urgence’s » (PU). Neighbors helped fence the 2 acre plot of land, and now there resides his favorite creature who helps him to survive! Literally.

His rations consist of milk, and matsoni. Neighbors bring in bread. Chewing with his toothless mouth, he dips the coarse bread in milk, smacks his lips as he eats.

- I don’t need much now. Like

children. Bread and milk. Sometimes

the neighbors bring in meat and

vegetables. This is the reason to

celebrate!

His cow gives 6 liters of milk a day, but he sells a portion of it while milking it ; the stream (jet?) sometimes misses the pail.

He says, sight can be returned, but who will give me money for the operation?

He tells us about his life , about how he waits impatiently for his son-in-law who said he would come and fix the electric heater (it will start to get colder soon)

-I am 78 years old. And I did not want to live

anymore, but when I was presented a cow,

that’s when I felt I wanted to live again.

There came a reason in my life to exist. And

then, for a completion... There’s a calf. I talk

забрать меня.

Ровесники покидают этот мир один за

другим, а он всё живёт. Да разве назовёшь это

жизнью?! Дочь не может к нему приехать, так

как у неё нет паспорта. Приезжает зять. Вот

тогда и радость в доме. Он помогает по

хозяйству, прибирает. Обещал починить

крышу.

Мы сидим в доме Ивана (так его зовут в

деревне). Он на ощупь находит стол, где

стоит посуда, кувшин молока, миска с

мацони. Торопится нас угостить (гость в доме

абхазца – святое!).

К нему иногда заходят старики: рассказать

новости, вспомнить былое. И он тоже «ходит

в гости».

Но большую часть времени занимает корова,

которую он получил от «Первой Помощи»

(PU). Соседи помогли огородить 2-

гектаровый участок земли, и теперь там его

любимица кормилица. В буквальном смысле

слова.

Его рацион состоит из молока, мацони.

Соседи приносят хлеб. Шамкая беззубым

ртом, он макает чёрствый хлеб в молоко и,

причмокивая, ест.

- Мне теперь немного нужно. Как ребёнку.

Хлеб и молоко поддерживают мои силы. А

иногда соседи овощи, мясо приносят. Вот

96

to her, and she understands me. There’s a

living soul beside me now. Nizamuddin Al-Hussainy

Vanchka Tsulukiya Village Arasadzikh Region Ochimchira 19th September 2007

тут и праздник!

Его корова даёт до 6 литров молока в день, но

часть молока пропадает во время дойки: струя

иногда не попадает в миску.

-Говорят, зрение можно возвратить, но кто

даст мне деньги на операцию?!

Он рассказывает о своей жизни, о том, что с

нетерпением ждёт зятя, который должен

приехать и починить электрообогреватель.

(скоро начнёт холодать).

- Мне 78 лет.. И я уже не хотел жить, но

когда мне подарили корову, то мне

захотелось снова жить. У меня появился

смысл жизни.. А сейчас ещё и пополнение –

тёлка.. Я с ней разговариваю, и она меня

понимает.. Вот и живая душа рядом..

Низамуддин Аль-Хуссейни

Ванчка Цулукия,

Дер.Арасадзых

Район Очимчира

19 сентября 2007г.

97

Focus Group Discussions/Interviews

Beneficiaries

98

Agricultural professional kits (Equipment)

99

Annexure A

• Population: 550,000 (1991), approximately 250,000 (2003), 85,000 (2007) • Capital: Sukhumi • Major languages: Russian, Georgian, Abkhaz • Currency: Rouble • Major religions: 60%Christianity, 40%Islam • Natural resources: Agricultural, primarily citrus fruit, tobacco, tea, timber; some coal, hydro-electric

power.

Abkhazia is a region in Caucasus. It is a de facto independent republic, with no international recognition. It is within the borders of Georgia as recognized internationally. Abkhazia is located on the eastern coast of the Black Sea, bordering the Russian Federation to the north. Within Georgia, it borders the region of Samegrelo- Zemo Svaneti to the east.Abkhazia’s independence is not recognized by any international organization or country and it is recognized as an autonomous republic of Georgia, with Sukhumi as its capital.

The international organizations such as United Nations (32 Security Council Resolutions), EC, OSCE, NATO, WTO, Council of the European Union, CIS as well as most sovereign states recognize Abkhazia as an integral part of Georgia and support its territorial integrity according to the principles of the international law. The United Nations is urging both sides to settle the dispute through diplomatic dialogue and ratifying the final status of Abkhazia in the Georgian Constitution. However, the Abkhaz de-facto government and the majority of current Abkhazia's population (excluding ethnic Georgians who still populate the Gali District and the Kodori Gorge) consider Abkhazia a sovereign country, even though it is not recognized by any party in the world. In 2005, the Georgian government offered Abkhazia high degree of autonomy and possible federal structure within borders and jurisdiction of Georgia.

Meanwhile the Russian State Duma is urging to take into consideration the appeal made by Abkhaz de facto authorities which calls for recognition of its independence, while Russian state media produce numerous materials in support of the separatist regime. During the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, Russian authorities and military supplied logistical and military aid to the separatist side. Today, Russia still maintains a strong political and military influence over the separatist rule in Abkhazia. Russia has also issued passports for the citizens of Abkhazia since 2000 (as the Abkhazian passports cannot be used for international travel) and subsequently paid retirement pensions and other monetary benefits. More than 80% of the Abkhazian population received Russian citizenship by 2006; however Abkhazians do not pay Russian taxes, vote in the presidential elections or serve in Russian Army. About 53,000 Abkhazian

100

passports have been issued as of May 2007. President Bagapsh hopes that by the end of 2007 up to 90% of the Abkhaz citizens will possess the national passports.

On October 18, 2006, the Abkhaz de facto parliament passed a resolution, calling upon Russia, international organizations, and the rest of the international community to recognize Abkhaz independence on the basis that Abkhazia possesses all the properties of an independent state. However, international organizations have confirmed their support for Georgian territorial integrity and outlined the basic principles of conflict resolution which calls for immediate return of all expelled ethnic Georgian refugees (approximately 250,000) and involvement of International Police to monitor the safety of all ethnic groups living in Abkhazia. About 60,000 Georgian refugees have spontaneously returned to Abkhazia's Gali district since 1994, but tens of thousands were displaced again when fighting resumed in the Gali district in 1998. Nevertheless from 40,000 to 60,000 refugees have returned to Gali district since 1998, including persons commuting daily across the ceasefire line and those migrating seasonally in accordance with agricultural cycles. The human rights situation remains precarious in the Georgian-populated areas of the Gali district. The United Nations and other international organizations have been fruitlessly urging the Abkhaz de facto authorities "to refrain from adopting measures incompatible with the right to return and with international human rights standards, such as discriminatory legislation and to cooperate in the establishment of a permanent international human rights office in Gali and to admit United Nations civilian police without further delay." Key officials of the Gali district are virtually all ethnic Abkhaz, though their support staffs are ethnic Georgian.

Georgia accuses the Abkhaz secessionists of having conducted a deliberate campaign of ethnic cleansing, a claim supported by the OSCE and many Western governments. The UN Security Council has, however, avoided use of the term "ethnic cleansing", but has affirmed "the unacceptability of the demographic changes resulting from the conflict"

The Republic of Abkhazia covers 3,300 square miles between the eastern shores of the Black Sea and the Crestline of the main Caucasus range; from the rivers Psou (in the North) and Ingur (In the south). To the north, Abkhazia is bordered by Russia and to the south by the Georgian provinces of Svanetia and Mingrelia. Around 74% of the territory is mountains or mountain approaches. The coastal valleys are humid and subtropical. At higher altitudes the weather ranges from moderately cold to such freezing temperatures that the snow never melts. The relatively small distance between seashore and mountains lends Abkhazia a strikingly contrasting landscape.

The area was best known by non-Abkhazia for its prime resorts for vacationers from all over the Soviet Union, as well as well as for its major cash crops of tea, tobacco and citrus fruits. There are two cities: the capital Sukhum, with a population of more than 100,000, and Tkwarchal, an industrial center. There are three urban resorts; Gagra, Gudauta, and Ochamchira; two rural spas: Pitsunda, and Novy Afon; and 575 villages.

A secessionist movement of Abkhaz ethnic minority in the region led to the declaration of independence from Georgia in 1992 and the Georgian-Abkhaz armed conflict from 1992 to 1993 which resulted in the Georgian military defeat and the mass exodus and ethnic cleansing of Georgian population from Abkhazia. In spite of the 1994 ceasefire accord and the ongoing UN-monitored CIS peacekeeping operation, the sovereignty dispute has not yet been resolved .

The Abkhazian language belongs to the northwest Caucasian family spoken by only a few other people in the world: the Abazins (or Abaza), Adyghey, Kabardians and Circassians, all of whom live in the north Caucasus. Historically these people and other related groups in the North Caucasus maintained close ties until they were divided by Soviet colonial policy.

101

The closest neighbors of the Abkhazians (unrelated linguistically or ethnically) were the Mingrelians, Svans and Georgians. After Abkhazia was incorporated into Russia in 1810, large numbers of migrants came from other parts of the empire: primarily Russians, Armenians and Jews. These settlers were also joined by Greeks fleeing religious persecution in the Ottoman Empire and Iran.

The Abkhazians are a West Caucasian people numbering about 100,000 in 1989 (Soviet census data), living chiefly on territory known under Soviet government as the Abkhazian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic within the Union Republic of Georgia. Abkhazian culture is distinctly different from that of Georgians, their nearest neighbors and related only to the other peoples in the language group- the Abazins (or Abaza), Shapsugs, Adyghey, Kabardians and Cherkess who live in the North Caucasus and belong to the Confederation of the Peoples of the Caucasus, along with other North Caucasuans, who do not have related languages, but share cultural and historical similarities. Such groups are the Ossetians, Ingush, Chechen, Balkars, Karachais, Avars, Laks, Lezghins and other Daghestani peoples.

According to Abkhazian legends, the people originated in prehistoric times on the territory they now occupy. Archeological evidence of proto-Abkhazian tribes in the Western Caucasus dates back to 4,000-3,000 BC. These tribes also lived along the Black Sea Coast when this area was under Greek, the Roman rule. Under Byzantine. s Justinian I the early Abkhazians adopted Christianity. Between the 8th and 10th centuries the Kingdom of Abkhazia marked the unification of the Abkhazians and Georgians into a strong state. In the 16th century the area came under the Ottoman Empire and bringing about the spread of Islam. In the middle of the 19th century the Abkhazians, along with other Caucasian mountain peoples, waged fierce and unequaled warfare against the Russian czarist forces. Abkhazia was ultimately annexed in 1864. As a result, around sixty per cent (60%) if the Abkhazian population immigrated to Turkey leaving whole villages and vast areas of Abkhazia vacant.

This mass exodus was of enormous consequence to the Abkhazian and other recalcitrant mountain peoples forced out of their homelands. The vacated territories were settled by Russians, Georgians, Armenians, and other ethnic groups, thus dramatically reducing the Abkhazians to a minority in their country. This had made them culturally and politically vulnerable.

The economy of Abkhazia is heavily integrated with Russia and uses the Russian ruble as its currency. Tourism is a key industry. Abkhaz de facto authorities claim that the organized tourists (mainly from Russia) numbered more than 100,000 in the last years (compared to about 200,000 in the 1990 before the war) and estimate the total number of visitors in 2006 at 1-1.5 million. Although the CIS economic sanctions imposed on Abkhazia in 1994 are still formally in force and Russia has established a visa regime with Georgia, Russian tourists don't need a visa to enter Abkhazia. Many foreign governments, however, advise its citizens against all travels to Abkhazia.

UN efforts to mediate have got nowhere. Abkhazia, turning increasingly towards Moscow, insists there can be no settlement until Georgia recognizes its independence, something which Tbilisi has sworn it will never do. There is no sign that a way out of this volatile impasse will soon be found.

102

ANNEXTURE B

TERM AGREEMENT with PREMIERE URGENCE

SERVICE AGREEMENT N°PU/ABK/07/0645/01The present contract is issued

BETWEEN

PREMIERE URGENCE (P.U), Non-Governmental Organisation under French law,

Represented by Ms Véronique MIOLLANY, Head of Mission in Abkhazia

AND

Name: Nizamuddin AL-HUSSAINY (hereafter named the CONSULTANT)

Address:

6 Green Square

Dhanmondi

Dhaka 1205

Bangladesh

Email: nizam.alhussainy@gmail.com

Tel.:

+ 88-02-86 19 162

+ 88 (0)1 725 06 79 24

For the purpose of an:

INDEPENDENT EVALUATION REPORT ON THE FOLLOWING ECHO-FUNDED

PROJECTS:a.) (ECHO/GEO/BUD/2004/01006) « Programme de relance agricole pour

l’amélioration de la sécurité alimentaire à Sukhumi-Abkhazie- GEORGIE »

b.) (ECHO/GEO/BUD/2005/01001) “Consolidation of farming activities for the reinforcement of food

security in Abkhazia-Georgia”

103

c.) (ECHO/GEO/BUD/2006/01002) “Improving Livelihoods and Food Security in Abkhazia:

Professional Kit Distribution for Vulnerable Households and Returnees”

TERMS OF REFERENCE External Evaluation of ECHO-funded projects implemented

By Première Urgence in Abkhazia, Georgia

Première Urgence (PU)

Première Urgence (www.premiere-urgence.org), ONG d'aide humanitaire internationale créée en 1992, a pour vocation de venir en aide aux populations les plus vulnérables sur des zones de conflits armés, de catastrophes naturelles et de crises oubliées. Depuis 15 ans, nous engageons des actions d'urgence et de post-urgence (programmes de distribution, réhabilitation, santé, relance agricole, sécurité alimentaire, activités génératrices de revenus…). Aujourd'hui, notre association compte 20 salariés au siège et 65 expatriés sur le terrain et plus de 1.000 salariés locaux, répartis sur 12 missions situées dans le Caucase, au Moyen-Orient, en Afrique et en Asie. Notre budget annuel s'élève à 15 millions d'euros.

Location: Georgia (Abkhazia, Georgia)

Job Description

External Evaluation of ECHO-funded projects implemented by Première Urgence in Abkhazia, Georgia Title of Current Project: Improving Livelihoods and Food Security in Abkhazia: Professional Kit Distribution for Vulnerable Households and Returnees 1) Purpose of the evaluation - To determine whether the objectives were met in and to evaluate the impact of Première Urgence's three income generation projects implemented since 2004 and financed by the European Commission's Humanitarian Office (ECHO) - To provide recommendations for future actions 2) Background The continued de-facto status of Abkhazia negatively impacts trade, which in turn hinders the economy and thus has serious repercussions on employment and the spending powers of people living in Abkhazia. Though relief assistance has ensued for over a decade, the embargo essentially prevents Abkhazia from moving to a development stage. Moreover, the development of farming activities in Abkhazia has slowed dramatically since prior to the conflict and the collapse of the Soviet Union despite a large portion of the population engaged in subsistence agriculture. The development of agriculture is vital since it enables self-employment in a country where unemployment is high. Furthermore, a gap exists within the artisan and petty trade sector in Abkhazia. Essentially, prior to the war, small businesses were prevalent both in major towns and villages in Abkhazia. Many of these artisans lost everything during the war and were unable to re-launch their businesses due to lack of start-up capital. In response to this situation, in 2004 Première Urgence launched a program to improve the food security and livelihoods of the vulnerable population living in Abkhazia with the support of ECHO. In the first two phases, Première Urgence targeted exclusively farmers; however, in the current phase, assistance to artisans and petty traders was also incorporated into the program. Phase I: "Boosting of Agricultural Activities in Sukhumi" from Oct. 04 to Sept. 05

104

This program was aimed at increasing the income and food security of 290 families in the districts of Sukhumi, Gulripsh, Ochamchira and Tkvarcheli through the distribution of agriculture kits to farming families and collective agriculture equipment to groups primarily composed of 8 farmers. Phase II: "Consolidation of Farming Activities for the Reinforcement of Food Security in Abkhazia" from Oct. 2005 – Oct. 2006 This program was aimed at increased the income and food security for 260 families in the districts of Gali, Sukhumi, Gulripsh, Ochamchira and Tkvarcheli through the distribution of individual agriculture kits and collective agriculture equipment to groups composed of about 8 farmers. PU also provided technical advice to 290 previous program beneficiaries. Eighty-five of these previous beneficiaries received additional agriculture kits to replace poultry kits affected by the "avian bird flu" epidemic. Phase III: "Improving Livelihoods and Food Security in Abkhazia: Professional Kit Distribution for Vulnerable Households and Returnees" from December 2006 to October 2007 The overall objective of the third phase is to provide food security and improved livelihoods to 550 poor families in 5 targeted districts (Sukhumi, Gulripsh, Ochamchira, Tkvarcheli and Gali) of Abkhazia. Première Urgence (PU) has several components to achieve the above objective: - Agriculture start-up kits disbursed to individual vulnerable rural farmers. The composition of kits is needs-based, and responds to the animal husbandry sector (bee-keeping, goats, cows, sheep, etc.) and the crop/garden sectors (potatoes, maize, onion, fodder, natural pesticide, etc.). In addition to kits, farmers are provided agriculture technical advice by PU local agronomists. - Equipment to Groups of Rural Farmers – groups are composed of around 8 farmers who received individual kits in this phase. Equipment includes mini-tractors/plows, animal traction plows, and motorized pump sprayers. - Agriculture working group composed of stakeholders from universities, local and international organizations, local administrations and farmer beneficiaries. The group will meet to identify technical needs and then hire international and local trainers to address needs through technical training. - Business start-up kits disbursed to individual vulnerable artisans or traders who are practicing small, weak business or who worked in business sector prior to war, but who are now unable to work due to socio-economic constraints. Beneficiaries provide a 10% partial reimbursement of kit value. - Using the funds from the 10% partial reimbursement of business kits, two community rehabilitation projects will be launched (i.e. irrigation, school, hospital, etc.). Projects will be identified in a participatory manner by the community and local administration. - Business management training for beneficiaries of the business start-up kits. Simulation business games and interactive business modules are used as tools to impart key business management techniques to beneficiaries. Total Number of Beneficiaries: Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase I) 290 Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase II) 260 Vulnerable Rural Farmers for individual and collective kits (Phase III) 430 Vulnerable Urban and Rural Artisans (Phase III)120 TOTAL 1 100 3) Scope and focus The assessment will be conducted in the districts of Abkhazia where Première Urgence works. The following are the key questions to be pursued in the evaluation. When appropriate, the questions should be answered for all components of the programs (business and agriculture). A. Program Objectives and Impact Impact - Were the selection criteria of beneficiaries transparent and appropriate? Did Première Urgence follow up these criteria? - Did the income and assets improve as a result of the program? To what extent? - Did beneficiaries improve their food security? To what extent?

105

- Was collaboration improved amongst agriculture stakeholders in Abkhazia? (Phase 3) - How did the beneficiaries perceive the programs and the activities of Première Urgence implemented? - Were the locations of intervention appropriate? Efficiency and Effectiveness - Was the type and size of the kits appropriate? - Was the organization of groups effective? - Was the distribution of equipment timely? - Was technical training appropriate for beneficiaries (agriculture and business)? - How effective and appropriate was the 10% reimbursement of the value of the business kits? (phase 3) - Was the selection of the community projects using the 10% reimbursement effective and participatory? (Phase 3) - Was the coordination with other international and local organizations effective? (Phase 3) Sustainability - Are the agricultural kits still used? Are the farms still functioning? (Phase 1 and 2) - What is the local authorities view on the success and sustainability of the programs? What is the beneficiaries’ viewpoint? - Are the collective equipment still used and shared by the beneficiaries? - How many beneficiaries from the business component apply for micro-credit loans or do they intend to do so? B. Lessons Learned and Recommendations - Were all the needs covered? Should PU continue to disburse agricultural and business kits? If not, what kind of assistance is appropriate? - Based on the findings, what are the main lessons learned? - To what extent should other organizations (eg. Local NGOs) be involved? 4) Documentation and resources provided to the consultant A number of existing sources of information should be reviewed as part of the evaluation including: - Complete Project proposal for three phases - Final reports for phase 1 and 2 - Mid-term report for phase 3 While in Abkhazia, the expert will be provided with accommodation, driver and car. 5) Methodology and Work Plan The methodology and work plan of the study will be put in place by the expert. The work plan must be discussed with Première-Urgence's two Agronomists/Program Coordinators prior to the visit. It will be presented in the final report. 6) Date and duration of the study of Mission The consultancy is expected to take place during the last 5 weeks of the current project period and is expected to start by at least September 1, 2006 7) Reports The draft report will be submitted to PU/HQ and to PU/Abkhazia by email in English 10 days after the site visit Première Urgence will submit its comments by mail 10 days after receiving the draft report The final report will be submitted 30 days after the site visit. 1 electronic copy and three paper copies will be submitted.

106

ANNEXTURE C

Evaluation work of Premiere Urgence Abkhazia/Georgia projects

On livelihoods and food security:

Tentative Work plan and Schedule of evaluator

Date: 31/08/07- 09/10/07

SL.

No

.

ACTVITY weeks

1 2 3 4

I. Arrival in Tbilisi journey to Sukhumi XXXXX

Mobilization of Resources

Review of relevant reports/studies …………………………………

……

Collection of secondary data and relevant reports -----------------------------------------

--

1.1. Interaction with Key Professionals of PU,

preparation of instruments/questionnaires

1.2 Mobilization of Support Staff of PU

Training of Supervisors/Field Staff how to conduct

survey

1.3 Technique of collection of field data and conducting

interview

-----

Establish contacts with beneficiaries

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

1.4 Inform PU AOB

1.5 Exchange views/consultation with PU

107

1.6 Talk to Head of Mission, Premiere Urgence Abkhazia/Georgia for issuance of instruction at field for access to all documents information of all the concerned staff/experts/agencies

1.7 Collect Information on kits as per the pre-designed format

1.8 Field visits in 5 Districts of Abkhazia/ 1district/day -----

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

1.9 conduct beneficiaries survey by PU staff ….. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …

1.10 Conduct household census in sample extension blocks

1.11 interaction and collection of information from stakeholders UNOMIG/UNIFEM/ICRC/WV/NGOs/Civil society members

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1.12 Collection of secondary data and relevant reports from other development partners

1.13 Review of relevant reports/studies

1.14 Case studies (2 best+2 failures) from each districts - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1.15 Review of the week- - - - -

1.16 Conceptualization of the study

1.17 Rectify any change

1.18 Designed methodology

1.19 field trip including pre-testing of questionnaire

1.20 Finalizing of the methodology including sample households

1.21 Preparation of Draft Report + = = = +

1.22 Discussion with PU regarding report

-

-

-

108

II. DATA COLLECTION XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

2.1 Data collection by enumerators = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

2.2 Supervision by field supervisors + + + + = = = = = = = = =

2.3 Monitoring the field survey works

2.4 Collection of secondary data by all concerned

sl

NO

.

ACTIVITY weeks

1 2 3 4

III. DATA ANALYSIS AND PROCESSING XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX

3.1 Identification and adoption of appropriate software and

Programming

3.2 Data Entry, Compile, Analyses and output generation

IV.

REPORTING

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX

4.1 Discussion with PU HoM regarding progress of field

works and any other business

• _

_

_

4.2 unforeseen work •

4.3 Preparation of Draft Report

4.4 Submission of Draft Final Report •

4.5 Review and comments by PU

4.6 Incorporation of comments with necessary modification

So as to finalize report

109

4.7 Submission of Final Report on 9/10/07 from

Dhaka

• • • •

ANNEXTURE D

Averages of the data: outcome of survey conducted with the beneficiaries of three phases:

Phase Type Before After

I Phase I: Nuts trees 11,06 14,76

II Phase II: Nuts trees 54,36 54,36

III Phase III: Nuts trees 11,06 14,76

I Phase I: Citrus trees 7,65 9,41

II Phase II: Citrus trees 17,77 8,36

III Phase III: Citrus trees 7,65 9,41

I Phase I: Other trees 2,24 1,65

II Phase II: Other trees 10,18 11,64

III Phase III: Other trees 2,24 1,65

110

Number per

person

Phase I: Nuts trees

Phase III: Nuts trees

Phase II: C

itrus

trees

Phase I: Other trees

Phase III: Other

trees

Before

0,00

10,00

20,00

30,00

40,00

50,00

60,00

Before

After

Unit number per person

Phase Type Before After

I Phase I: Cow 0,76 0,59

II Phase II: Cow 0,68 1,27

III Phase III: Cow 0,76 0,59

I Phase I: Pig 0,29 0,24

II Phase II: Pig 1,68 2,41

III Phase III: Pig 0,29 0,24

I Phase I: Poultry chicken 8,59 6,76

II Phase II: Poultry chicken 6,82 12,64

III Phase III: Poultry chicken 8,59 6,76

111

Ph

ase

I: C

ow

Ph

ase

I: P

ig

Ph

ase

I:

Po

ultry

ch

icke

n

Before

0,002,004,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

Before

After

Unit percentage

Phase Type Before After

I Phase I: Green House 0,06 0,12

II Phase II: Green House 0,05 0,27

III Phase III: Green House 0,06 0,12

I Phase I: Mini Tractor 0,00 0,71

II Phase II: Mini Tractor 0,14 0,45

III Phase III: Mini Tractor 0,00 0,71

I Phase I: Trailer 0,06 0,24

II Phase II: Trailer 0,14 0,36

III Phase III: Trailer 0,06 0,24

112

Phase I

:

Gre

en H

ouse

Phase I

II:

Gre

en H

ouse

Phase I

I: M

ini

Tra

cto

r

Phase I

:

Tra

iler

Phase I

II:

Tra

iler

Before

0,000,100,200,300,400,500,600,70

0,80

Before

After

Unit sqm

Phase Type Before After

I Phase I: Maize 1977,65 1895,29

II Phase II: Maize 1 909,09

1

690,91

III Phase III: Maize 1977,65 1895,29

I Phase I: Potato 105,88 41,18

II Phase II: Potato 120,45 120,45

III Phase III: Potato 105,88 41,18

I Phase I: Vegetables 428,84 462,94

II Phase II: Vegetables 293,18 320,45

III Phase III: Vegetables 428,84 462,94

113

Phase I: Maize

Phase II: M

aize

Phase III: Maize

Phase I: Potato

Phase II: Potato

Phase III: Potato

Phase I: Vegetables

Phase II: Vegetables

Phase III: Vegetables

Before

0,00200,00400,00600,00800,00

1000,001200,001400,00

1600,001800,002000,00

Before

After

Phase General Type Before After

I Animals Phase I: Cow 48 50

II Animals Phase II: Cow 15 28

III Animals Phase III: Cow 13 10

I Animals Phase I: Pig 115 127

II Animals Phase II: Pig 37 53

III Animals Phase III: Pig 5 4

I Animals Phase I: Poultry chicken 858 777

II Animals Phase II: Poultry chicken 150 278

III Animals Phase III: Poultry chicken 146 115

114

.

4815 13

115

375

858

150 146

5028 10

127

534

777

278

115

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1 000

Phase

I: C

ow

Phase

II: C

ow

Phase

III:

Cow

Phase

I: P

ig

Phase

II: P

ig

Phase

III:

Pig

Phase

I: P

oultr

y ch

icke

n

Phase

II: P

oultr

y ch

icke

n

Phase

III:

Poultr

y ch

icken

In u

nit Before

After

Phase General Type Before After

I Equipment Phase I: Curt, trailers 2 9

II Equipment Phase II: Curt, trailers 2 3

III Equipment Phase III: Curt, trailers 0 1

I Equipment Phase I: Fence 21 20

II Equipment Phase II: Fence 6 7

III Equipment Phase III: Fence 4 3

I Equipment Phase I: Fertilizer 9 9

115

II Equipment Phase II: Fertilizer 3 7

III Equipment Phase III: Fertilizer 1 1

I Equipment Phase I: Green House 1 8

II Equipment Phase II: Green House 1 6

III Equipment Phase III: Green House 1 2

I Equipment Phase I: Mini Tractor 19 54

II Equipment Phase II: Mini Tractor 3 10

III Equipment Phase III: Mini Tractor 0 12

I Equipment Phase I: Trailer 4 41

II Equipment Phase II: Trailer 3 8

III Equipment

Phase III: Traile

r 1 4

116

2 20

21

64

9

31 1 1 1

19

30

4 31

9

31

20

7

3

97

1

86

2

54

1012

41

8

4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Phase

I: C

urt, tr

ailers

Phase

II: C

urt, tr

ailers

Phase

III:

Cur

t, tra

ilers

Phase

I: F

ence

Phase

II: F

ence

Phase

III:

Fence

Phase

I: F

ertilizer

Phase

II: F

ertilizer

Phase

III:

Ferti

lizer

Phase

I: G

reen

Hou

se

Phase

II: G

reen

Hou

se

Phase

III:

Gre

en H

ouse

Phase

I: M

ini T

ract

or

Phase

II: M

ini T

ract

or

Phase

III:

Mini T

ract

or

Phase

I: T

raile

r

Phase

II: T

raile

r

Phase

III:

Trai

ler

In u

nit

Before After

Phase General Type Before After

I Plant Phase I: Maize 189 100 111 800

II Plant Phase II: Maize 42 000 37 200

III Plant Phase III: Maize 33 620 32 220

I Plant Phase I: Potato 8 940 12 880

II Plant Phase II: Potato 2 650 2 650

III Plant Phase III: Potato 1 800 700

I Plant Phase I: Vegetables 12 805 10 020

117

II Plant Phase II: Vegetables 6 450 7 050

III Plant Phase III: Vegetables 7 290 7 870

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

120 000

140 000

160 000

180 000

200 000

Phase I:

Maiz

e

Phase II

: Maize

Phase II

I: M

aize

Phase I:

Pot

ato

Phase II

: Pota

to

Phase II

I: Pota

to

Phase I:

Veg

etab

les

Phase II

: Vege

table

s

Phase II

I : Vege

table

s

In s

qm

Before

After

Phase General Type Before After

I Trees Phase I: Nuts trees 875 592

II Trees Phase II: Nuts trees 1 196 1 196

III Trees Phase III: Nuts trees 188 251

I Trees Phase I: Citrus trees 1 639 1 335

118

II Trees Phase II: Citrus trees 391 184

III Trees Phase III: Citrus trees 130 160

I Trees Phase I: Other Trees 266 280

II Trees Phase II: Other Trees 224 256

III Trees Phase III: Other Trees 38 28

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

1 400

1 600

1 800

Phase I:

Nuts

trees

Phase

II: Nuts

trees

Phase

III: Nuts

trees

Phase I:

Citrus

trees

Phase

II: Citrus

trees

Phase

III:

Citrus

trees

Phase I:

Other

Trees

Phase

II: Other

Trees

Phase

III:

Other

Trees

In u

nit

Before After

Nizamuddin Al-Hussainy

Dhaka, Bangladesh 11.10.2007