US Project Leader - Honduras Watershed Restoration Project

A review of USDA's Hurricane Mitch Participatory Watershed Restoration Project was undertaken to determine if the original project objectives were met. This basic review looked only at the objectives of Special Objective 1 (SpO1) and more specifically at how activities met the sideboards of the 4 Intermediate Results (IR) under this SpO. The review looked at the approach USDA developed in implementation of SpO1, "Damaged Rural Watersheds Rehabilitated through Strengthened Local Capacity." The components of the USDA approach were two-fold: a) actual rehabilitation or restoration work performed and b) development of community participation in developing and maintaining rehabilitation projects.

The participatory diagnostic process utilized by USDA insured that not only were project activities accomplished, but through community participation and ownership projects would be sustainable after USDA participation ended. It was found that this methodology, although time consuming, met it's intended objective. USDA worked through the University Consortium to develop and implement the participatory diagnostic component, and tapped into existing local and national non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who had long-term experience in developmental projects in the USDA project area. Additionally, USDA technical specialists (TDY) personnel were incorporated into the implementation and training segments of the project. The participatory diagnostic process, coupled with project implementation, was what drove the end results of work accomplishments. The USDA project has left behind participatory process / results within affected communities to carry on sound watershed management and hence mitigate future storm events.

There were some small shortfalls within the project implementation that the review found. These were mainly due to the lag in timely funding from Congress, creating a situation where some of the participatory diagnostic work was done later than would have been desired. This funding lag also created some implementation problems with some of the NGOs who did not have other funding sources to front the monies for the USDA projects. Once the monies arrived and the USDA coordinator was in-country, the implementation process excelled and all original expectations of the SpO1 were met.

This project showed that working with partners and collaborators under a participatory diagnostic process that USDA was able to produce in a timely manner, and meet the expectations in the original project development. The process developed for use by USDA guaranteed that once USDA leaves at the end of CY2001 that many of the initiatives developed and implemented by USDA will be taken on by local communities and in-country NGOs. The continuation and maintenance of projects is the strongest point to come out of the review. Use of USDA TDY personnel strengthened the on-the-ground project implementation, especially through direct community and NGO contacts.

The review developed recommendations that should strengthen any future projects developed by USDA in Honduras or elsewhere. The following listings are the top 10 team recommendations :

1. Maintain the participatory diagnostic model for project development.
2. Thorough analysis of NGO capacity to be utilized in the final selection of NGOs.
3. Maintain TDY support to NGOs during their project implementation.
4. Develop stronger communications systems amongst partners.
5. Maintain in-country USDA project management personnel.
6. Maintain the incorporation of a training requirement for all activity implementations.
7. Funding transfer from USDA/Washington needs to be stream-lined & strengthened.
8. USDA project leader in place at the developmental stage of the project.
9. Improve coordination and scoping of technical assistance needs for NGOs.
10. Maintain funding flexibility to allow for opportunistic driven interventions.

To see the resume of the expert associated with this case study, see the link below.